These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Pay to win

First post
Author
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#761 - 2012-07-21 18:57:33 UTC
Just to point out the obvious, pretty much everyone is moving on to more interesting threads (or at least better troll threads)... although Tip may want to humiliate you a bit longer for general purposes.

Try to avoid bumping your own thread to keep it on the main page... it's frowned on and more than a bit sad.

Later.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

EpicFailTroll
Doomheim
#762 - 2012-07-21 19:02:35 UTC  |  Edited by: EpicFailTroll
Tippia wrote:
EpicFailTroll wrote:
It's all there
…all of which can be done without the use of alts.

By their very nature, there is nothing that can be done by an alt that cannot be done through other means. Alts are not magic pixie being imbued with arcane and mystical powers. They are just other characters. They can do what other characters can do. Other characters can be had without using alts. Your entire premise falls apart by virtue of being based on something that inherently provides no special advantage. You really should have picked something different if you wanted to complain about unassailable advantages…


Unfortunately, many tasks are alt-territory only, for obvious reasons, as explained in the link.

What when the solo, alt-less player, has no access to ingame help from other players? He is at a disadvantage vs. the alt-funding solo one, this is what is discussed in it.

Tippia wrote:
Quote:
Options aren't equal
True. The alt option is often far less efficient than the other options. This, like the answers to the rest of your questions, has already been posted numerous times.


But for the solo player -and corp officers-, alts are pretty much mandatory. As explained in the link.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#763 - 2012-07-21 19:05:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
EpicFailTroll wrote:
Unfortunately, many tasks are alt-territory only
…such as? Please list them. Please provide examples of advantages that can only be had by paying for them.

Quote:
What when the solo, alt-less player, has no access to ingame help from other players? this is what is discussed in it.
What you're discussing is having an advantage over not having an advantage. That has nothing to do with alts or P2W. It is completely off-topic. It's also a meaningless platitude and isn't even a problem to begin with.

Quote:
But for the solo player -and corp officers-, alts are pretty much mandatory.
…but don't provide any advantage that cannot be had in some other way.
EpicFailTroll
Doomheim
#764 - 2012-07-21 19:10:37 UTC  |  Edited by: EpicFailTroll
Tippia wrote:
EpicFailTroll wrote:
Unfortunately, many tasks are alt-territory only
…such as? Please list them. Please provide examples of advantages that can only be had by paying for them.


Absolutely. Though the issue is more complicated than just "paying to win", since it has to do with alts, first and foremost.

Some advantages cannot be had without alts. Alts are linked to P2W, in a complex relation, and you don't address it at all.

Tippia wrote:
What you're discussing is having an advantage over not having an advantage. That has nothing to do with alts or P2W. It is completely off-topic. It's also a meaningless platitude and isn't even a problem to begin with.


But it has everything to do with alts (and is therefore linked to P2W): what when the solo, alt-less player, has no access to ingame help from other players? He is at a disadvantage vs. the alt-funding solo one, this is what is discussed in it.

RL player vs. RL player, playfield is not even, because of alt metagaming.


Tippia wrote:
Quote:
But for the solo player -and corp officers-, alts are pretty much mandatory.
…but don't provide any advantage that cannot be had in some other way.


Oh but they do
Mechael
Tribal Liberation Distribution and Retail
#765 - 2012-07-21 19:10:48 UTC
Cpt Gobla wrote:
If making it easier is wrong then we should indeed remove alts and plexes from the game.
But we should also put in an hour playtime limit, so that those with more free time can't have an easier time either.
And a skill point limit so that those who've played since release can't have an easier time.
And program in random disconnects no matter your connection, so that those with better ISPs also don't have an easier time.

In fact we should probably just replace the entire game with one big button. If you press that button you win.
And, so as not to give an unfair advantage to people with better mouses, the game will actually press that button for you.


It's not the "making the game easier" part that's wrong. It's the "making the game easier for real money" part that's wrong. You know, pay to win. Spending real money for an advantage in the game. RMT. Microtransactions. Etc. It's that element that allows these sorts of games to be free to play. It's also that element that causes a huge quality nosedive.

Whether or not you win the game matters not.  It's if you bought it.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#766 - 2012-07-21 19:19:17 UTC
EpicFailTroll wrote:
No. I asked you to list things that can only be done with alts. Preferably a point list. i also asked you to provide an example of an advantage that can only be had by paying for it, even though we've already established that none exist (I'm only asking again because you seem to have contradicted yourself and are now changing your mind to say that there is, but you haven't shown any). Now, it could just be my eyesight or it could be your incoherent rambling writing style, but I cannot see anything in that link that offers either of those.

A lot is said about alts, but nothing that stands out as being alt-only.

Quote:
But it has everything to do with alts
No, because what you're describing is choosing to to make use of the array of advantages available to you and choosing not to do so. Alts is just one option in that array. You could 1:1 substitute your every mention of alts with “friends” or “better ship” or “better skills/skillz” and have the exact same argument. Alts is pretty much completely irrelevant to that discussion of choosing vs. not choosing.

Quote:
Oh but they do
Can you list any of those advantages? Preferably in a point list. Nothing in that link stands out as being something that can only be done by alts.
Mechael
Tribal Liberation Distribution and Retail
#767 - 2012-07-21 19:21:07 UTC
Beekeeper Bob wrote:
Can't believe this conversation is still going.

The game has been pay to win for years.
You can take cash, and convert it to isk, and buy anything, including alts with it.
You can run multiple accounts off the same keyboard and have them respond identically.

This all means that cash can give you an advantage over other players....Pay2Win.....Cool

/End Discussion




It really is that simple.

Whether or not you win the game matters not.  It's if you bought it.

Mechael
Tribal Liberation Distribution and Retail
#768 - 2012-07-21 19:25:27 UTC
Tippia wrote:
EpicFailTroll wrote:
No. I asked you to list things that can only be done with alts. Preferably a point list. i also asked you to provide an example of an advantage that can only be had by paying for it, even though we've already established that none exist (I'm only asking again because you seem to have contradicted yourself and are now changing your mind to say that there is, but you haven't shown any). Now, it could just be my eyesight or it could be your incoherent rambling writing style, but I cannot see anything in that link that offers either of those.

A lot is said about alts, but nothing that stands out as being alt-only.

Quote:
But it has everything to do with alts
No, because what you're describing is choosing to to make use of the array of advantages available to you and choosing not to do so. Alts is just one option in that array. You could 1:1 substitute your every mention of alts with “friends” or “better ship” or “better skills/skillz” and have the exact same argument. Alts is pretty much completely irrelevant to that discussion of choosing vs. not choosing.

Quote:
Oh but they do
Can you list any of those advantages? Preferably in a point list. Nothing in that link stands out as being something that can only be done by alts.


I listed a bunch of stuff that is alt-only a few pages back. Did you miss that? Not that it has any bearing at all on anything that is pertinent to the discussion. It doesn't matter whether an ammo type is unique. It does matter whether or not /any/ ammo can be obtained for real money.

Whether or not you win the game matters not.  It's if you bought it.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#769 - 2012-07-21 19:29:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Mechael wrote:
It really is that simple.
Too bad that what he said was entirely incorrect.

Quote:
I listed a bunch of stuff that is alt-only a few pages back
Entirely possible. Link?
EpicFailTroll
Doomheim
#770 - 2012-07-21 19:33:20 UTC  |  Edited by: EpicFailTroll
Tippia wrote:
EpicFailTroll wrote:
No. I asked you to list things that can only be done with alts. Preferably a point list. i also asked you to provide an example of an advantage that can only be had by paying for it, even though we've already established that none exist (I'm only asking again because you seem to have contradicted yourself and are now changing your mind to say that there is, but you haven't shown any). Now, it could just be my eyesight or it could be your incoherent rambling writing style, but I cannot see anything in that link that offers either of those.

A lot is said about alts, but nothing that stands out as being alt-only.

"You can assign them to tasks you couldn't realistically ask of a fellow corpmate, such as, be a static scout in a key system, grind money for you in afk lvl4 missions, semi-afk haul through Empire."

"The portion (tiny, probably) of the playerbase that would rather roleplay a single character does not have access to the same convenience, since, as has been said above, you will not realistically ask someone else to afk grind missions for you, for example."

"After all, this is a roleplaying game, and players should be allowed to play a single role, should they choose to, and not be at a severe disadvantage versus those who choose to play several at once.
Those disadvantages being, for example, unability to scout reliably, to grind isk in afk manners while doing something else,to semi-afk haul, to safely shop if you're a pirate, etc..."

"Ingame means could be developed for most of those: traffic info for Empire gates, Interbus hauling, black market haulers shopping for you in Empire... the afk isk grind would remain, though, which would only enhance the P2W issue."


Tippia wrote:
Quote:
But it has everything to do with alts
No, because what you're describing is choosing to to make use of the array of advantages available to you and choosing not to do so. Alts is just one option in that array. You could 1:1 substitute your every mention of alts with “friends” or “better ship” or “better skills/skillz” and have the exact same argument. Alts is pretty much completely irrelevant to that discussion of choosing vs. not choosing.

Given equal numbers of equally skilled players on each side, which side will win, the one using alts, or the one without?

Do skill and equipment, given equal numbers of equally skilled players on each side, one with alts, one without, successfully trump or at least give the same advantage as offgrid boosting alts, falcon alts, static scout alts?


Tippia wrote:
Can you list any of those advantages? Preferably in a point list. Nothing in that link stands out as being something that can only be done by alts.


See above. You're gonna argue that any player can be a static scout. Then why corps use alts for this task?

Would they rather spend isk or fees, than ask for a corpie to do it?
Mechael
Tribal Liberation Distribution and Retail
#771 - 2012-07-21 19:38:42 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Mechael wrote:
It really is that simple.
Too bad that what he said was entirely incorrect.

Quote:
I listed a bunch of stuff that is alt-only a few pages back
Entirely possible. Link?


It's not wrong at all. You spend money ... you get stuff in game that helps you out. That's really as simple as it is.

And nah, I'm not gonna be assed to go dig it up. I was curious why you hadn't thrown out the, "but you can do all that with other players, too!" argument at it already (which you really can't.) Players do not equal alts (or alternate accounts, to satisfy Ranger1's pet peeve.) They provide a very different set of advantages and disadvantages than friends do. I won't bother digging up what I already wrote, though, as I'm fairly certain the reply will just be the same old canned response that apparently springs from a lack of observation skills.

If you refuse to see what's patently obvious, I can't help you and there's no point talking about it anymore. Of course, you're likely thinking the same thing about me. Either way, it has absolutely no bearing on whether or not alts are a p2w mechanic, because a p2w mechanic really is as simple as getting something of value in-game for real money.

Whether or not you win the game matters not.  It's if you bought it.

Doc Severide
Doomheim
#772 - 2012-07-21 19:40:52 UTC
Not this stupid topic AGAIN.... How in the hell is having an alt payng to win???

(No I'm not really asking)...
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#773 - 2012-07-21 19:44:06 UTC
EpicFailTroll wrote:
1. "You can assign them to tasks …"

2. "The portion (tiny, probably) of the playerbase that would rather roleplay …"

3. "After all, this is a roleplaying game, and players should be allowed to play a single role …"

4. "Ingame means could be developed for most of those…"
Ok.

1. You can do these using other people just fine. Whether you choose to or not is a different matter. It is not something that can only be done with alts. For money, there are other options than L4s that requires less activity, so you don't need alts for that either. You might need alts for L4s specifically, but the goal is the ISK, not the missions, and you can get the ISK through other means (if the L4s were the goal, then you'd do them with your main).

2 and 3. These are invalid entries. You are not describing tasks that can only be done with alts. You are just referring back to the previous list.

4. This is also an invalid entry. You are listing new mechanics, not tasks that can only be done with an alt.

So that leaves a single point, which does not satisfy the requirement: alts are not required for any of those tasks.

Quote:
Given equal numbers of equally skilled players
…you're back to comparing option 1 with option 2 and ignoring option 3. You're describing a choice not to get advantages to the choice of doing so. Again, this has nothing to do with alts — alts could be substituted for any of the other options without altering the issue.

Quote:
See above.
See above. Nothing of what's listed is limited to being done with alts.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#774 - 2012-07-21 19:45:25 UTC
Mechael wrote:
It's not wrong at all. You spend money ... you get stuff in game that helps you out. That's really as simple as it is.
…and it doesn't give you any advantage that cannot be had without paying for it. That's simply the way it is. Since paying doesn't provide any special advantage, it's not P2W.
Mechael
Tribal Liberation Distribution and Retail
#775 - 2012-07-21 19:47:47 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Mechael wrote:
It's not wrong at all. You spend money ... you get stuff in game that helps you out. That's really as simple as it is.
…and it doesn't give you any advantage that cannot be had without paying for it. That's simply the way it is. Since paying doesn't provide any special advantage, it's not P2W.


Paying provides an advantage. How can you not see that? I pay the man ... I get stuff in game. Pay ... advantage. Simple.

Whether it's something unique or not is totally besides the point. The point is that real world money is being used to alter the balance of the game.

Whether or not you win the game matters not.  It's if you bought it.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#776 - 2012-07-21 19:51:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Mechael wrote:
Paying provides an advantage. How can you not see that?
Because the same advantage can be had without paying for it.
Using real money doesn't alter the balance any more than just playing the game does.
Mechael
Tribal Liberation Distribution and Retail
#777 - 2012-07-21 19:51:57 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Mechael wrote:
Paying provides an advantage. How can you not see that?
Because the same advantage can be had without paying for it.


And yet paying still does provide an advantage. Now all of a sudden part of the balancing equation includes people spending real money as a means of tipping the scales in their favor. Whether it's a unique advantage or not, it's still an advantage.

Whether or not you win the game matters not.  It's if you bought it.

EpicFailTroll
Doomheim
#778 - 2012-07-21 19:52:20 UTC  |  Edited by: EpicFailTroll
Tippia wrote:

1. You can do these using other people just fine. Whether you choose to or not is a different matter. It is not something that can only be done with alts. For money, there are other options than L4s that requires less activity, so you don't need alts for that either. You might need alts for L4s specifically, but the goal is the ISK, not the missions, and you can get the ISK through other means (if the L4s were the goal, then you'd do them with your main).

2 and 3. These are invalid entries. You are not describing tasks that can only be done with alts. You are just referring back to the previous list.

4. This is also an invalid entry. You are listing new mechanics, not tasks that can only be done with an alt.

So that leaves a single point, which does not satisfy the requirement: alts are not required for any of those tasks.

I'm just going to copy/paste, and bold the points where complexity enters, and where you pretend things are available when realistically, they aren't

"You can assign them to tasks you couldn't realistically ask of a fellow corpmate, such as, be a static scout in a key system, grind money for you in afk lvl4 missions, semi-afk haul through Empire."

"The portion (tiny, probably) of the playerbase that would rather roleplay a single character does not have access to the same convenience, since, as has been said above, you will not realistically ask someone else to afk grind missions for you, for example."

"After all, this is a roleplaying game, and players should be allowed to play a single role, should they choose to, and not be at a severe disadvantage versus those who choose to play several at once.
Those disadvantages being, for example, unability to scout reliably, to grind isk in afk manners while doing something else,to semi-afk haul, to safely shop whenever you want if you're a pirate, etc..."

"Ingame means could be developed for most of those: traffic info for Empire gates, Interbus hauling, black market haulers shopping for you in Empire... the afk isk grind would remain, though, which would only enhance the P2W issue."

Tippia wrote:
Quote:
Given equal numbers of equally skilled players
…you're back to comparing option 1 with option 2 and ignoring option 3. You're describing a choice not to get advantages to the choice of doing so. Again, this has nothing to do with alts — alts could be substituted for any of the other options without altering the issue.


But they can't, because given equal numbers of equally skilled players on each side, which side will win, the one using alts, or the one without?

Do skill and equipment, given equal numbers of equally skilled players on each side, one with alts, one without, successfully trump or at least give the same advantage as offgrid boosting alts, falcon alts, static scout alts?



Tippia wrote:
Quote:
See above.
See above. Nothing of what's listed is limited to being done with alts.


See above. Complexity, your head etc
Skex Relbore
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#779 - 2012-07-21 19:53:49 UTC
OMG there is so much stupid in this thread.

No Plex are not and never have been PTW. Pay to win mean specifically to spend Real life money to have the game maker spawn **** into existence that would exist otherwise.

Everything involved in the Plex system (well except for Arum which is why we had a massive riot last yer) is generated in game via game mechanics. If you buy a plex it doesn't automatically convert into ISK, You have to sell it to someone who generated their isk using existing game mechanics.


Here's a way to think about it , Imaging you have a buddy who plays EVE. He doesn't have a lot of money but he does have a lot of free time while you may have plenty of money but you lack free time, So you and your buddy come to an arrangement where You pay for his account while he gives you a portion of the isk he earns while you are at work so that when you are able to get online you don't have to spend your limited time grinding isk.

Plex just abstracts that so that you can reach such an arrangement with complete strangers.

Another important difference between P2W and the plex system is their purpose in existence. Plex was introduced originally to combat the problem of 3rd party RMT while P2W is implemented specifically to generate additional revenue for the company, Consider the difference between the plex for isk system and the Plex for Aurum systems.

In the case of a plex for isk, Until such time as someone applies the time in that plex to an account that plex actually represents a liability on CCP's balance book. Because eventually that plex will be used by someone to pay their subscription fee for a month. Their price is also determined by the supply and demand. Notice that in no part of the process of trading for Plex does anyone bypass the in game mechanics for generating isk or acquiring the items said isk can buy.

Contast this with the Plex for Aurum system where if you convert a plex to Aurum CCP does magic an item into existence (Aurum) as well as all the items in the form of our character customization (outfits and monocles)

See the difference? The normal mechanics of the game are not bypassed by the plex system.

Character sales work the same. If you decide you want to buy a Titan pilot you can't just spec one out and have one poof into existence you have to find one that someone spent the time training and hope that it matches your specifications. If you want an Avatar pilot but the only thing for sale is a Erubus pilot you are **** out of luck.

The reason Plex is not Pay to Win is because everything involved in the transaction are things acquirable via normal game play that is available to all subscribers evenly. This is unlike Freemium games such are WOT where the expenditure of real life cash buys objects and abilities that can not be obtained via normal game play.

Plex is also limited by the in-game market, If that theoretical rich kid decided to drop 100 grand on plex to outfit his alliance the very act of doing so would reduce the isk value of those plex as the demand for plex wouldn't have changed while there would then be a surplus of supply.

And no having alts is not pay to win either whether they are spies or boosters or any other purpose because they don't represent something that can only be purchased with RL cash, because anything that can be done by an alt is something that could be accomplished by a another player.

EpicFailTroll
Doomheim
#780 - 2012-07-21 19:57:45 UTC
Skex, you need a dose of cool

But I'll agree that EvE is F2P