Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Lugia3
Emerald Inc.
634
|
Posted - 2013.11.07 21:14:00 -
[61] - Quote
Jarod Garamonde wrote:NFain wrote:Since we have dual character training and such, mind if we add plex for 2 skills to be trained at the same time? Pay2Win is bad, mmmmmmmkay?
MINE! |
Richard Ramlrez
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
25
|
Posted - 2013.11.07 21:34:00 -
[62] - Quote
How about being able to train 2 skills in the same character without PLEX?
Like the secondary trained skill would take 50% longer to finish. That way we could do train for another aspect of the game whil still training for the one we currently are devoted to. |
Carmen Electra
The Scope Gallente Federation
61
|
Posted - 2013.11.07 23:03:00 -
[63] - Quote
Jarod Garamonde wrote:NFain wrote:Since we have dual character training and such, mind if we add plex for 2 skills to be trained at the same time? Pay2Win is bad, mmmmmmmkay?
I would love to hear how EVE is not already P2W.
Good luck, you're going to need it!
|
NFain
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
29
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 02:43:00 -
[64] - Quote
Carmen Electra wrote:Jarod Garamonde wrote:NFain wrote:Since we have dual character training and such, mind if we add plex for 2 skills to be trained at the same time? Pay2Win is bad, mmmmmmmkay? I would love to hear how EVE is not already P2W. Good luck, you're going to need it!
right? Common people, who's in for twice the skills? :D |
Saeri Averes-Vith
Oxide Nation Iron Oxide.
9
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 08:32:00 -
[65] - Quote
I don't see training 2 skills as P2W or circumventing mechanics, as Tippia claimed.
But even as someone who has more ISK than SP, I would not really want to see such a system implemented as it just doesn't feel right.
There's a certain amount of pride that someone who invested a lot of patience into training his skills can wear. It would just be a nasty punch in the face for those people.
But I'm also against buying chars or having alts in the first place, so what do I know. |
Smohq Anmirorz
State War Academy Caldari State
124
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 08:49:00 -
[66] - Quote
A player creates a character and skills up the exact minimum necessary to fly a carrier, then offers to sell it on the forums.
EVE creates a character already skilled up to the exact minimum necessary to fly the exact same character. Then offers to sell it at a PLEX price equivalent to what the player is selling his for.
One 'bypasses mechanics', the other one doesn't. They both offer the buyer of the character the exact same thing, and can both be acquired by paying enough money.
The point being that buying characters is not really much different from bypassing mechanics.
Just food for thought. |
Lugalbandak
Anunnaku Industrial Corp. Northern Associates.
245
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 10:31:00 -
[67] - Quote
Mr Epeen wrote:NFain wrote:Since we have dual character training and such, mind if we add plex for 2 skills to be trained at the same time? While I wouldn't take advantage of it myself, I have no problem with it. Training all skills in only 50 years instead of 100 years is not a game breaker. Mr Epeen
haha epic +1 |
S1euth
The Graduates RAZOR Alliance
23
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 13:06:00 -
[68] - Quote
Nfain, keep up the good arguments; people see them. Some people will never change their minds because :change:
I don't think you're going far enough; why stop at 2 skills at a time? If I'm good at Eve -or- life and want to support CCPs development efforts and can afford 4 extra Plex a month; then why can't I train 5 skills at a time. These are the kind of players I want to encourage in my Eve. If they are great at Eve and can afford 4 extra Plex / month, then do to the competitive nature of the market and finite resources within, then Eve will continue to become a harsher place by creating incentives for these players. If these players are just good at life and pay for PLEX, then let them have as many opportunities as possible to support CCP. (Skill points ARE NOT winning; except for the 25 players who have been racing to the top of a "leaderboard" of most skillpoints)
Further, Eve has transformed into a 10% TIDI fest with many players simultaneously multi-boxing in fleets because, in part, years ago their was no mechanic for a person to get another skill at the same time. The addition of any reasonable game mechanic or hardware improvement with a chance of decreasing the frequency of future TIDI events should be done. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
17307
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 13:15:00 -
[69] - Quote
S1euth wrote:Nfain, keep up the good arguments; people see them. Too bad he has noneGǪ
Quote:Some people will never change their minds because :change: Plenty of people will change their minds if they can be convinced that the change is a good one. Change for its own sake is disqualified right out the gate, though.
Quote:Further, Eve has transformed into a 10% TIDI fest with many players simultaneously multi-boxing in fleets because, in part, years ago their was no mechanic for a person to get another skill at the same time. The addition of any reasonable game mechanic or hardware improvement with a chance of decreasing the frequency of future TIDI events should be done. By GÇ£years agoGÇ¥, I presume that you mean GÇ£nowGÇ¥ since nothing has changed on that front. I'd also like to hear your reasoning why making it possible to learn stuff twice as fast would somehow make it less valuable to multi-box a fleet.
|
Smohq Anmirorz
State War Academy Caldari State
124
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 13:58:00 -
[70] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Smohq Anmirorz wrote:One 'bypasses mechanics', the other one doesn't. They both offer the buyer of the character the exact same thing, and can both be acquired by paying enough money.
The point being that buying characters is not really much different from bypassing mechanics. No. Only one can be acquired by paying enough money. The other can only be acquired if someone has actually spent time. The the difference between bypassing the mechanics and not doing is is immense.
No, it is not immense, it is trivial. It is the exact same outcome for the player acquiring the high-SP character. They pay money, they jump ahead to higher-level content. That is the essence of pay-to-win: acquiring a higher-skilled character by paying money. |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
17307
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 14:08:00 -
[71] - Quote
Smohq Anmirorz wrote:No, it is not immense, it is trivial. Being able to bypass mechanics is not a trivial difference from not being able to do so. Being able to skip years worth of time is not a trivial difference from not being able to do so.
Quote:It is the exact same outcome for the player acquiring the high-SP character. GǪbut that's not the only point of measure. In fact, that's the least relevant point of measure. The part that matters is the character creation. Doing it in the time it takes to create a character is very different than being able to conjure one up at will. The outcome for the game is not even remotely the same: in one case, it takes two or three years for a high-SP character to come into existence, which keeps them in short supply; in the other case, it takes two or three seconds, which means the mechanics to keep that supply balanced have been bypassed.
The outcome for the player acquiring the character is also different: in one case, he can only pick what's on offer GÇö what others have spent years developing GÇö and if nothing suitable is available, then he's stuck. In the other case, anything you wish is at your immediate disposal no matter how obscure.
Quote:That is the essence of pay-to-win: acquiring a higher-skilled character by paying money. No. The essence of pay-to-win is that, by paying, you get an advantage you wouldn't have without paying. Being able to conjure up vast piles of SP out of nowhere is a significant advantage over having to wait the time it takes for the SP to accumulate naturally. |
Smohq Anmirorz
State War Academy Caldari State
125
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 14:32:00 -
[72] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Being able to bypass mechanics is not a trivial difference from not being able to do so. Being able to skip years worth of time is not a trivial difference from not being able to do so.
Paying money to acquire a character that took years to build is skipping the mechanic of time. You pay money, you skip time.
Quote:GǪbut that's not the only point of measure. In fact, that's the least relevant point of measure. The part that matters is the character creation. Doing it in the time it takes to create a character is very different than being able to conjure one up at will. The outcome for the game is not even remotely the same: in one case, it takes two or three years for a high-SP character to come into existence, which keeps them in short supply; in the other case, it takes two or three seconds, which means the mechanics to keep that supply balanced have been bypassed.
The outcome for the player acquiring the character is also different: in one case, he can only pick what's on offer GÇö what others have spent years developing GÇö and if nothing suitable is available, then he's stuck. In the other case, anything you wish is at your immediate disposal no matter how obscure.
The most relevant point of measure is someone who started playing today can have a character with advanced skills. Where it came from is irrelevant to the fact that pay=win.
Quote:That is the essence of pay-to-win: acquiring a higher-skilled character by paying money.
Quote:No. The essence of pay-to-win is that, by paying, you get an advantage you wouldn't have without paying. Being able to conjure up vast piles of SP out of nowhere is a significant advantage over having to wait the time it takes for the SP to accumulate naturally.
If you are a new player and you pay money to acquire a high-SP character, there was no waiting involved. You don't care where it came from, only that you paid money to get an advanced character. Whether someone else trained it or it is conjured out of thin air makes no difference whatsoever to the person paying the money. That is pay-to-win. |
Smohq Anmirorz
State War Academy Caldari State
125
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 14:41:00 -
[73] - Quote
Tippia wrote: The outcome for the game is not even remotely the same: in one case, it takes two or three years for a high-SP character to come into existence, which keeps them in short supply; in the other case, it takes two or three seconds, which means the mechanics to keep that supply balanced have been bypassed.
Both of those outcomes are pay-to-win. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
17308
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 14:52:00 -
[74] - Quote
Smohq Anmirorz wrote:Paying money to acquire a character that took years to build is skipping the mechanic of time. You notice how, in your own description, you prove that no time is skipped, I hopeGǪ
Quote:The most relevant point of measure is someone who started playing today can have a character with advanced skills. No, because there's nothing in that process that describes what GÇö in anything GÇö has happened to the overall game. Since that point of measure is completely devoid of any such information, it is completely irrelevant.
In one case, the game contained 100 characters with advanced skills yesterday, and today, that number is still 100, even though all of those characters were bought through the bazaar. In the other case, the game contained 100 characters with advanced skills yesterday, and today, that number is suddenly 200, because instead of buying those characters on the bazaar, the prospective buyers instead created them out of thin air.
Quote:If you are a new player and you pay money to acquire a high-SP character, there was no waiting involved. GǪand as mentioned, the individual player perspective is irrelevant. What matters is the game ecology and the fact that, in one case, the game mechanics that regulate that ecology were working as normal whereas in the other case, they were skipped over completely.
Quote:Both of those outcomes are pay-to-win. Only one of them offers an advantage for money that can't be had without money, so no. |
Daisai
Daisai Investments.
174
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 14:53:00 -
[75] - Quote
Jarod Garamonde wrote:NFain wrote:Since we have dual character training and such, mind if we add plex for 2 skills to be trained at the same time? Pay2Win is bad, mmmmmmmkay?
Buy plex change it to isk on the market. Buy a character and a ship with officer mods.
Pay to win. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
17308
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 14:55:00 -
[76] - Quote
Daisai wrote:Buy plex change it to isk on the market. Buy a character and a ship with officer mods.
Pay to win. History has shown that what you're describing is more correctly labelled as pay to lose. |
Smohq Anmirorz
State War Academy Caldari State
125
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 15:05:00 -
[77] - Quote
Tippia wrote:GǪand as mentioned, the individual player perspective is irrelevant. What matters is the game ecology and the fact that, in one case, the game mechanics that regulate that ecology were working as normal whereas in the other case, they were skipped over completely.
Here is the error in your argument. "Game ecology", as you call it, has nothing to do with whether it is pay-to-win or not. The individual player perspective is the ONLY thing that is relevant. If you can pay money to acquire an advanced character, the game is pay-to-win. Period. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
17309
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 15:10:00 -
[78] - Quote
Smohq Anmirorz wrote:Here is the error in your argument. "Game ecology", as you call it, has nothing to do with whether it is pay-to-win or not. Good thing that that's not my argument then.
It's pay-to-win because you can pay to ignore game mechanics.
Quote:The individual player perspective is the ONLY thing that is relevant. No. It's not relevant for determining whether it's pay-to-win nor for determining what has happened to the game.
Quote:If you can pay money to acquire an advanced character, the game is pay-to-win. Not really, no, since paying doesn't provide you with any kind of advantage that can't be had without paying for it. Going by your definition, being subscribed is pay-to-win, which is obviously absurd. |
Smohq Anmirorz
State War Academy Caldari State
125
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 15:19:00 -
[79] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Smohq Anmirorz wrote:Here is the error in your argument. "Game ecology", as you call it, has nothing to do with whether it is pay-to-win or not. Good thing that that's not my argument then. It's pay-to-win because you can pay to ignore game mechanics. Quote:The individual player perspective is the ONLY thing that is relevant. No. It's not relevant for determining whether it's pay-to-win nor for determining what has happened to the game. Quote:If you can pay money to acquire an advanced character, the game is pay-to-win. Not really, no, since paying doesn't provide you with any kind of advantage that can't be had without paying for it. Going by your definition, being subscribed is pay-to-win, which is obviously absurd.
Being able to come to the game today and acquire a high-SP with nothing more than money is skipping the mechanic of time. That new player, with nothing more than money, was able to acquire what he should not have been able to in a game that is not pay-to-win. All pay-to-win games are allowing you to skip at least some measure of time.
And saying that my definition would make being subscribed pay-to-win is just being disingenous. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
17310
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 15:28:00 -
[80] - Quote
Smohq Anmirorz wrote:Being able to come to the game today and acquire a high-SP with nothing more than money is skipping the mechanic of time. GǪexcept that no time is being skipped since that character has been built up over many months and years.
Quote:That new player, with nothing more than money, was able to acquire what he should not have been able to in a game that is not pay-to-win. All pay-to-win games are allowing you to skip at least some measure of time. GǪand EVE does not, since everything you can pay for has to be produced using the normal time-consuming processes.
Quote:And saying that my definition would make being subscribed pay-to-win is just being disingenous. Any disingenuousness you're seeing is the result of your definition.
By paying for a subscription, I can acquire an advanced character. By your definition, this is pay-to-win. It is also very silly, which is why I reject that definition and offer one that actually distinguishes between those who pay and those who do not (specifically that those who pay get advantages that can't be had by those who don't pay). |
|
Smohq Anmirorz
State War Academy Caldari State
126
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 15:46:00 -
[81] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Smohq Anmirorz wrote:Being able to come to the game today and acquire a high-SP with nothing more than money is skipping the mechanic of time. GǪexcept that no time is being skipped since that character has been built up over many months and years. Quote:That new player, with nothing more than money, was able to acquire what he should not have been able to in a game that is not pay-to-win. All pay-to-win games are allowing you to skip at least some measure of time. GǪand EVE does not, since everything you can pay for has to be produced using the normal time-consuming processes. Quote:And saying that my definition would make being subscribed pay-to-win is just being disingenous. Any disingenuousness you're seeing is the result of your definition. By paying for a subscription, I can acquire an advanced character. By your definition, this is pay-to-win. It is also very silly, which is why I reject that definition and offer one that actually distinguishes between those who pay and those who do not (specifically that those who pay get advantages that can't be had by those who don't pay).
Time is being skipped. The player who bought that advanced character did not spend any time on it. Just money. That player skipped the time mechanic by using money. EVE does let you skip the time mechanic by letting someone else do it for you.
You're just using a very narrow definition of pay-to-win, saying that in a pay-to-win game ONLY those that pay are going to win.
And you are not "rejecting a definition", you are twisting words around. Pay-to-win does not include subscription rates, no one ever has argued that, and to pretend that my argument is the first to do so is disingenuous.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
17311
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 16:06:00 -
[82] - Quote
Smohq Anmirorz wrote:Time is being skipped. No. Just because you didn't spend the time doesn't mean the time was not spent. The character had to be built over the same period of time as every other character in the game GÇö at no point was any time skipped (in fact, a lot of time was probably wasted in the process).
Quote:You're just using a very narrow definition of pay-to-win, saying that in a pay-to-win game ONLY those that pay are going to win. GǪexcept, of course, that that's not my definition or what I'm saying. My definition hinges on distinguishing between those who pay and those who do not, and on what you get for your money: those who pay get advantages the non-payers do not.
Your definition does not offer any such distinction between payers and non-payers, or any distinction between the winners and non-winners since everyone get the same regardles. This is why it fails completely to capture the sense of GÇ£pay to winGÇ¥: because both paying and winning is devoid of any meaning.
Quote:And you are not "rejecting a definition", you are twisting words around. No, I am indeed rejecting your definition because, if we look at what you're actually saying GÇö no word-twisting needed GÇö it leads to the absurd conclusion that subscriptions count as P2W. |
Tyrantus
Viziam Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 16:16:00 -
[83] - Quote
Dual skill training would make the character bazaar mostly irrelevant as most buy because they don't want to fund a second account to train up alts and for the convenience.
Go figure about why certain players would be wildly resistant against this idea. |
Merida DunBrogh
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 16:49:00 -
[84] - Quote
Jarod Garamonde wrote:NFain wrote:Since we have dual character training and such, mind if we add plex for 2 skills to be trained at the same time? Pay2Win is bad, mmmmmmmkay?
^Read that. Read it real good and realize how bad your idea is.
Buying a character from the Character Bazaar, or dual/triple character training, is VERY different from buying SP directly. |
Smohq Anmirorz
State War Academy Caldari State
127
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 16:53:00 -
[85] - Quote
Tippia wrote:No, I am indeed rejecting your definition because, if we look at what you're actually saying GÇö no word-twisting needed GÇö it leads to the absurd conclusion that subscriptions count as P2W.
No, you are making my argument sound overly-broad and attacking that. No one has ever suggested that the normal subscription rate that everyone pays makes that game pay-to-win. For you to suggest that I am the first is either you being disingenous or a lack of reading comprehension. I donGÇÖt need to state something so obvious as GÇ£payment beyond the normal subscription rateGÇ¥, everyone understands that that what is meant.
Smohq Anmirorz wrote:You're just using a very narrow definition of pay-to-win, saying that in a pay-to-win game ONLY those that pay are going to win .
Tippia wrote: except, of course, that that's not my definition or what I'm saying. My definition hinges on distinguishing between those who pay and those who do not, and on what you get for your money: those who pay get advantages the non-payers do not. . You say that thatGÇÖs not your definition, then go on to define it as exactly that. GÇ£those who pay get advantages the non-payers do not.GÇ¥ And, again, IGÇÖm saying that is a very narrow definition of GÇÿpay-to-winGÇÖ, covering only the most obvious case. My definition would certainly cover that, but would also cover those who pay extra to get advantages in the game at a much greater rate than those who do not pay extra. Which EVE clearly lets you do.
HereGÇÖs where we differ: Player A joins the game on 11/8/2013, pays the subscription rate, starts training his character and running missions. It takes him a long time to make much progress in the game. He can hardly even fit a ship properly. He has a hard time killing NPCs, is at a big disadvantage in PVP, and canGÇÖt make much money on the market.
Player B joins the game on 11/8/2013, pays the subscription rate, then buys enough PLEX with his real money to get himself a character with 50 million SP and 10 billion ISK. Depending on what type of character he decided to buy, he now has options to do all the things that player A can only dream about for a good long time: effective pvp, start a corporation and set up a POS, do lvl 4GÇÖs, set up PIGǪwhatever he wants to do.
You say that that is not pay-to-win. I say it is.
|
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
3191
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 16:58:00 -
[86] - Quote
It used to be that there were no remaps and everyone had an episode when it was suggested that they might be a good thing. It also used to be that there was no dual character training and the threadnaughts were epic saying why it was a bad idea.
Now we have everyone in a tizzy saying why dual speed training is the end of the world.
Here's what I think. If CCP feels it will add/retain more players, they will do it. Period.
Mr Epeen |
destiny2
Perkone Caldari State
251
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 17:04:00 -
[87] - Quote
Laserak wrote:Why dont you sell that plex and buy a character with the skills you want/need.
shhh little goonie, let him get what he wants, cause then when he is out all along in something shiney you lil goonies can KILL IT! |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
17312
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 17:12:00 -
[88] - Quote
Smohq Anmirorz wrote:No, you are making my argument sound overly-broad and attacking that. I'm using your definition as-is: that GÇ£If you can pay money to acquire an advanced character, the game is pay-to-win.GÇ¥ By paying money to CCP (through my subscription), I can acquire an advanced character. By your definition, this is P2W.
Quote:You say that thatGÇÖs not your definition, then go on to define it as exactly that. No. Where in GÇ£those who pay get advantages the non-payers do notGÇ¥ does it say that only those why pay are going to win? Hint: nowhere. I'm using this definition because it covers what the term actually entails in a very broad way and it is not tied to any specific mechanic or payment scheme. Your definition does not cover the vast majority of P2W implementations out there; mine does.
For instance, yours does not cover the idea of gold ammo, of spawning goods, of skipping any kind of mechanic other than character progression. It is ridiculously narrow and at the same time fails to distinguish between any of the parts that makes it actual P2W.
Quote:You say that that is not pay-to-win. I say it is. GǪand the reason is because no advantage was bought that could not be had through other means, as proven by the fact that the advantage in question was already present in the game GÇö otherwise, it could not have been bought.
Again, the individual is irrelevant; the means of producing the supposed GÇ£winGÇ¥ (which I label in the broader term of GÇ£an advantageGÇ¥) is all that matters.
|
Carmen Electra
The Scope Gallente Federation
73
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 17:30:00 -
[89] - Quote
I was going to post a rebuttal to all this. But then I saw this: http://www.systemcomic.com/2011/08/03/so-youre-mad-about-something-on-the-internet/ |
Smohq Anmirorz
State War Academy Caldari State
127
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 17:35:00 -
[90] - Quote
Tippia wrote:and the reason is because no advantage was bought that could not be had through other means, as proven by the fact that the advantage in question was already present in the game GÇö otherwise, it could not have been bought.
Again, the individual is irrelevant; the means of producing the supposed GÇ£winGÇ¥ (which I label in the broader term of GÇ£an advantageGÇ¥) is all that matters.
Yes, I understand your narrow definition of pay-to-win. You think that if an advantage is in the game and can be acquired by anyone, then that game is not pay to win. I say that if an advantage is in the game and can be bought by money, that game is pay to win. I understand your argument and reject it as too narrow. While you donGÇÖt seem to be able to comprehend any other definition of pay-to-win than what you believe it to be.
So, again, the means by which the GÇ£winGÇ¥ is produced irrelevant, how the individual acquired it is only what is relevant. The individual acquired it not by logging on and playing the game but by paying money and having it transferred to his character.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |