These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Mechael
Tribal Liberation Distribution and Retail
#921 - 2012-07-21 22:22:05 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Mechael wrote:
With PLEX, for example, it's now possible for players to buy extra game time. That is, game time that never actually gets used. Every unspent PLEX is extra profit for CCP.
Not quite. Every unspent PLEX is a lingering liability in their books for services bought but not rendered. That's part of why they tried to create this big honking PLEX sink that never really took off — because it would remove all that liability and make it easier to get more funding from investors.


Hm. Maybe you know something I don't know. How is it a liability, exactly?

Whether or not you win the game matters not.  It's if you bought it.
Mechael
Tribal Liberation Distribution and Retail
#922 - 2012-07-21 22:24:03 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
So again, what advantage are you obtaining with cash that I can't just as easily obtain with ISK if I desire?


Yes, yes, we all are aware that you can purchase game time with ISK. That's not what's being questioned here, is it?

Whether or not you win the game matters not.  It's if you bought it.
Mechael
Tribal Liberation Distribution and Retail
#923 - 2012-07-21 22:28:43 UTC
The real question here, or at least the one I'm raising, is, "Can I alter gameplay in any way at all by spending real money? If so, am I okay with this?"

Whether or not you win the game matters not.  It's if you bought it.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#924 - 2012-07-21 22:30:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Mechael wrote:
Hm. Maybe you know something I don't know. How is it a liability, exactly?
Just the way I described it: it's a promise to provide a service. Until that service is provided, the promise is still around and can be called in at any point.

The best way of looking at PLEX is to see it as a call option for game time or AUR. You purchase the right to, at some unspecified time in the future, get 30d of game time or 3,500 AUR. You can then trade this option in much the same way as you can trade any other instrument, except that it has no maturity date so there's no hurry in getting it off your hands or to try to match it with some perfect cost/value equilibrium date.

Until that option is exercised, it is a liability in the books of the issuer (CCP). They cannot book it as “profit” because they do not yet know what or how much they will be forced to give you (or its current owner) when the day comes. Once it's exercised, they can either give you a byte in the database and cash in hard — they gave you absolutely nothing in real-world terms: no additional bandwidth usage, no server access, no support requirements… nothing! And as an added bonus, they could remove that ugly outstanding debt. If you called in game time, they get the normal profit: the cost of the PLEX minus however much they have to pay in server and bandwidth (and staff) to provide you with service for another 30 days. Conceivably, it might not be profitable at all because you turn out to be such an immense resource hog, but most likely, they've planned their subscription costs well enough to cover even the most outrageous server usage.
Mechael
Tribal Liberation Distribution and Retail
#925 - 2012-07-21 22:34:37 UTC
At some point, we can start asking another question that is more to the point.

Which forms of spending real money in order to have an impact on the game am I okay with?

Purchasing:
An account, so that I can play?
Multiple accounts, so that I can play with a greater impact?
An item that I can sell for in-game currency?
Time for a friend's account, so that they can impact the game as well?
In-game currency directly?
Golden ammo?
Extra inventory space?

And then, finally, we can ask, "If all of the above are obtainable through in-game means as well as real money, does this alter whether any of the above are acceptable?"

Whether or not you win the game matters not.  It's if you bought it.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#926 - 2012-07-21 22:37:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Mechael wrote:
The real question here, or at least the one I'm raising, is, "Can I alter gameplay in any way at all by spending real money? If so, am I okay with this?"


What you keep missing is the point that, if game play can be altered in the exact same way through in game means or through spending real money, it really doesn't matter. You can't gain an advantage that isn't also readily available via in game means.

Whether that advantage is an alt account, a better ship, or better equipment is irrelevant.

We are all striving to obtain advantages that our adversaries do not have... and that is a good thing.

It would only be a bad thing if my opponent could not gain that very same advantage unless he shelled out more cash to do so, and that is why most sources in the gaming community use that as the definition of Pay to Win.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Mechael
Tribal Liberation Distribution and Retail
#927 - 2012-07-21 22:38:48 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Mechael wrote:
Hm. Maybe you know something I don't know. How is it a liability, exactly?
Just the way I described it: it's a promise to provide a service. Until that service is provided, the promise is still around and can be called in at any point.

The best way of looking at PLEX is to see it as a call option for game time or AUR. You purchase the right to, at some unspecified time in the future, get 30d of game time or 3,500 AUR. You can then trade this option in much the same way as you can trade any other instrument, except that it has no maturity date so there's no hurry in getting it off your hands or to try to match it with some perfect cost/value equilibrium date.

Until that option is exercised, it is a liability in the books of the issuer (CCP). They cannot book it as “profit” because they do not yet know what or how much they will be forced to give you (or its current owner) when the day comes. Once it's exercised, they can either give you a byte in the database and cash in hard — they gave you absolutely nothing in real-world terms: no additional bandwidth usage, no server access, no support requirements… nothing! And as an added bonus, they could remove that ugly outstanding debt. If you called in game time, they get the normal profit: the cost of the PLEX minus however much they have to pay in server and bandwidth (and staff) to provide you with service for another 30 days. Conceivably, it might not be profitable at all because you turn out to be such an immense resource hog, but most likely, they've planned their subscription costs well enough to cover even the most outrageous server usage.


Maybe I'm just dense, but I still don't see how it's a liability. You pay CCP for a PLEX. Most likely from here. PLEX is described as:

"What is PLEX?

PLEX is short for 30 Day Concord Pilot License Extension. It's an in-game item that can be used to pay for your subscription without using more traditional payment methods.

By using PLEX, you can pay for your game time simply by playing the game. You can buy PLEX through our Account Management site or you can buy PLEX with in-game ISK.

Because PLEX is an in-game item you can also make in-game profit for yourself by buying and selling it on the market."

Once you've bought the PLEX, haven't the services been rendered whether or not the PLEX is ever actually activated? I mean, it's an in-game item. You purchased it, and now you have it. Whether or not you want to use it is entirely up to you at that point and has nothing to do with CCP apart from being data stored on their servers, is it not?

Whether or not you win the game matters not.  It's if you bought it.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#928 - 2012-07-21 22:40:11 UTC
EpicFailTroll wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

Good luck locking down 50 systems with from 2 to 5 gates each using alts on all of themLol


Which part of key gates don't you understand?

Do you need to watch every irrelevant, less-travelled gates?

Do you need to watch 50 systems just to have safety in a few?




If you want a good intel system then yes to all the above.
Mechael
Tribal Liberation Distribution and Retail
#929 - 2012-07-21 22:41:00 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
Mechael wrote:
The real question here, or at least the one I'm raising, is, "Can I alter gameplay in any way at all by spending real money? If so, am I okay with this?"


What you keep missing is the point that, if game play can be altered in the exact same way through in game means or through spending real money, it really doesn't matter. You can't gain an advantage that isn't also readily available via in game means.

Whether that advantage is an alt account, a better ship, or better equipment is irrelevant.

We are all striving to obtain advantages that our adversaries do not have... and that is a good thing.

It would only be a bad thing if my opponent could not gain that very same advantage unless he shelled out more cash to do so, and that is why most sources in the gaming community use that as the definition of Pay to Win.


Your answer seems to be that you are okay with any amount of spending real money to alter the game, so long as it can all be altered in the same ways via purely in-game methods as well.

My answer is that I am not okay with that.

Whether or not you win the game matters not.  It's if you bought it.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#930 - 2012-07-21 22:54:16 UTC
Mechael wrote:
At some point, we can start asking another question that is more to the point.

Which forms of spending real money in order to have an impact on the game am I okay with?

Purchasing:
An account, so that I can play?
Multiple accounts, so that I can play with a greater impact?
An item that I can sell for in-game currency?
Time for a friend's account, so that they can impact the game as well?
In-game currency directly?
Golden ammo?
Extra inventory space?

And then, finally, we can ask, "If all of the above are obtainable through in-game means as well as real money, does this alter whether any of the above are acceptable?"


Lets look at this one by one then.

An account so that you can play.
I think we are all okay with this, whether you spend real money or imaginary money to do so. We all have the same options.

Multiple accounts, so that I can have a greater impact.
Since this option is open to everyone, regardless of whether they spend real or imaginary cash to do so, no problem.

An item that I can sell for in game currency.
Sure, as long as anybody can obtain that item with imaginary money as well.

Time for a friends account..
Whether paid for with real cash, or imaginary cash, the more players the better no matter who pays for it.

In game currency directly.
We don't have that in EVE. You can purchase game time (and sell it to another player for imaginary money that they earned). You can also spend time (and/or perhaps a bit of brain power) and earn that same imaginary money in game.

Golden Ammo.
We don't have superior ammo that is only available for real money. The closest we have to that is faction or T2 ammo, which is available for imaginary money.

Extra inventory space.
I'm assuming you aren't talking about cargo expanders and the like, which we have had since day one. As long as this extra inventory space is available for imaginary money as well I don't see a problem (or a need for that matter).


Again, items being available for cash are not an issue... as long as they are available for imaginary money as well.

It's called having a variety of payment options, which is a good thing as long as it doesn't give you an advantage that can not be obtained just as easily via other means.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
DrSmegma
Smegma United
#931 - 2012-07-21 22:54:34 UTC
Okay.

If Eve isn't pay-to-win because you can play for the same achievements, then it isn't play-to-win either because you can pay for the same achievements.

Unless you want to deny the existence of any achievements in Eve at all, I suggest the following:

EVE Online is hereby declared PayOrPlayToWin <- Your mind has been blown by DrSmegma again.

You can thank me via evemails, likes, or some ISK.

Eve too complicated? Try Astrum Regatta.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#932 - 2012-07-21 22:56:27 UTC
Mechael wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
Mechael wrote:
The real question here, or at least the one I'm raising, is, "Can I alter gameplay in any way at all by spending real money? If so, am I okay with this?"


What you keep missing is the point that, if game play can be altered in the exact same way through in game means or through spending real money, it really doesn't matter. You can't gain an advantage that isn't also readily available via in game means.

Whether that advantage is an alt account, a better ship, or better equipment is irrelevant.

We are all striving to obtain advantages that our adversaries do not have... and that is a good thing.

It would only be a bad thing if my opponent could not gain that very same advantage unless he shelled out more cash to do so, and that is why most sources in the gaming community use that as the definition of Pay to Win.


Your answer seems to be that you are okay with any amount of spending real money to alter the game, so long as it can all be altered in the same ways via purely in-game methods as well.

My answer is that I am not okay with that.


Which leads us back to the fact that if you can obtain the exact same advantage either way, it's not really an advantage at all. It is an option.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#933 - 2012-07-21 22:57:59 UTC
DrSmegma wrote:
Okay.

If Eve isn't pay-to-win because you can play for the same achievements, then it isn't play-to-win either because you can pay for the same achievements.

Unless you want to deny the existence of any achievements in Eve at all, I suggest the following:

EVE Online is hereby declared PayOrPlayToWin <- Your mind has been blown by DrSmegma again.

You can thank me via evemails, likes, or some ISK.

Thats what EVE has always been (once PLEX was introduced).

You have a choice, and neither choice is better overall. They both have ups and downs.

Also, EVE only has the achievements you give it. Thankfully.
Mechael
Tribal Liberation Distribution and Retail
#934 - 2012-07-21 22:59:03 UTC
DrSmegma wrote:
Okay.

If Eve isn't pay-to-win because you can play for the same achievements, then it isn't play-to-win either because you can pay for the same achievements.

Unless you want to deny the existence of any achievements in Eve at all, I suggest the following:

EVE Online is hereby declared PayOrPlayToWin <- Your mind has been blown by DrSmegma again.

You can thank me via evemails, likes, or some ISK.


Well done, sir. That about sums it up.

Whether or not you win the game matters not.  It's if you bought it.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#935 - 2012-07-21 22:59:04 UTC
Mechael wrote:
Maybe I'm just dense, but I still don't see how it's a liability.
Liability.

Quote:
Once you've bought the PLEX, haven't the services been rendered whether or not the PLEX is ever actually activated?
No. The purchase has been completed, but the actual service that the PLEX represents (30d game time or 3,500 AUR) has not been delivered yet. If you buy directly, the store and the service provider are the same, so you're doing two separate deals with them: one where you get PLEX for cash, and another where they promise to trade in your PLEX for [whatever]. It's that second transaction that is the liability.

It's perhaps clearer if you look at it through the lens of buying ETCs. You pay BattleClinic or Shatter Crystal cash, they give you an ETC code. Deal done. You now take your ETC code and create a promise from CCP to give you game time/AUR at some point… that deal isn't completed until you've been given the game time/AUR. You can trade this promise like any other call option and have CCP owe someone else the same thing, but that's just it: the service is still owed.
Mechael
Tribal Liberation Distribution and Retail
#936 - 2012-07-21 23:00:29 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
Mechael wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
Mechael wrote:
The real question here, or at least the one I'm raising, is, "Can I alter gameplay in any way at all by spending real money? If so, am I okay with this?"


What you keep missing is the point that, if game play can be altered in the exact same way through in game means or through spending real money, it really doesn't matter. You can't gain an advantage that isn't also readily available via in game means.

Whether that advantage is an alt account, a better ship, or better equipment is irrelevant.

We are all striving to obtain advantages that our adversaries do not have... and that is a good thing.

It would only be a bad thing if my opponent could not gain that very same advantage unless he shelled out more cash to do so, and that is why most sources in the gaming community use that as the definition of Pay to Win.


Your answer seems to be that you are okay with any amount of spending real money to alter the game, so long as it can all be altered in the same ways via purely in-game methods as well.

My answer is that I am not okay with that.


Which leads us back to the fact that if you can obtain the exact same advantage either way, it's not really an advantage at all. It is an option.


Which is still irrelevant to the topic, from my perspective. Which is why I have such a hard stance against spending real money to alter the game.

Whether or not you win the game matters not.  It's if you bought it.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#937 - 2012-07-21 23:02:54 UTC
Mechael wrote:
DrSmegma wrote:
Okay.

If Eve isn't pay-to-win because you can play for the same achievements, then it isn't play-to-win either because you can pay for the same achievements.

Unless you want to deny the existence of any achievements in Eve at all, I suggest the following:

EVE Online is hereby declared PayOrPlayToWin <- Your mind has been blown by DrSmegma again.

You can thank me via evemails, likes, or some ISK.


Well done, sir. That about sums it up.

Fairly eloquent actually... as long as you realize that the "Pay or Play" part means that no advantage has been give either way in the "To Win" part. Blink

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#938 - 2012-07-21 23:04:38 UTC
Mechael wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
Mechael wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
Mechael wrote:
The real question here, or at least the one I'm raising, is, "Can I alter gameplay in any way at all by spending real money? If so, am I okay with this?"


What you keep missing is the point that, if game play can be altered in the exact same way through in game means or through spending real money, it really doesn't matter. You can't gain an advantage that isn't also readily available via in game means.

Whether that advantage is an alt account, a better ship, or better equipment is irrelevant.

We are all striving to obtain advantages that our adversaries do not have... and that is a good thing.

It would only be a bad thing if my opponent could not gain that very same advantage unless he shelled out more cash to do so, and that is why most sources in the gaming community use that as the definition of Pay to Win.


Your answer seems to be that you are okay with any amount of spending real money to alter the game, so long as it can all be altered in the same ways via purely in-game methods as well.

My answer is that I am not okay with that.


Which leads us back to the fact that if you can obtain the exact same advantage either way, it's not really an advantage at all. It is an option.


Which is still irrelevant to the topic, from my perspective. Which is why I have such a hard stance against spending real money to alter the game.


If no unfair advantage has been given and is therefore irrelevant as you just stated, then I'm sorry but your stance on the subject seems to be a bit absurd.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Mechael
Tribal Liberation Distribution and Retail
#939 - 2012-07-21 23:07:51 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Mechael wrote:
Maybe I'm just dense, but I still don't see how it's a liability.
Liability.

Quote:
Once you've bought the PLEX, haven't the services been rendered whether or not the PLEX is ever actually activated?
No. The purchase has been completed, but the actual service that the PLEX represents (30d game time or 3,500 AUR) has not been delivered yet. If you buy directly, the store and the service provider are the same, so you're doing two separate deals with them: one where you get PLEX for cash, and another where they promise to trade in your PLEX for [whatever]. It's that second transaction that is the liability.

It's perhaps clearer if you look at it through the lens of buying ETCs. You pay BattleClinic or Shatter Crystal cash, they give you an ETC code. Deal done. You now take your ETC code and create a promise from CCP to give you game time/AUR at some point… that deal isn't completed until you've been given the game time/AUR. You can trade this promise like any other call option and have CCP owe someone else the same thing, but that's just it: the service is still owed.


Interesting. But isn't the only liability at this point that CCP could go belly up as a company and have to shut EVE down? In such a case, any PLEX that have not been fully spent (all 30 days) as well as any extra game time received from more traditional means would be unable to be payed by CCP. The thing is, at that point, CCP has already gone belly up and the person who purchased game time from them (again, whether through PLEX or, say, a year long sub) is just SoL. So it's really not much of a liability, is it? I could be wrong here, as I'm not familiar with the ins and outs of corporate law in Iceland, and whether or not someone in CCP would be held responsible for compensating these unfortunate players in the event of CCP dissolving (as would be the case, say, in the U.S. if the business were a sole-propriety, to the best of my knowledge.)

Whether or not you win the game matters not.  It's if you bought it.
Mechael
Tribal Liberation Distribution and Retail
#940 - 2012-07-21 23:09:53 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
If no unfair advantage has been given and is therefore irrelevant as you just stated, then I'm sorry but your stance on the subject seems to be a bit absurd.


Your stance seems absurd to me. The more real money effects EVE, the less interest I have in it.

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