Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Jacob Staffuer
State War Academy Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 20:52:00 -
[31] - Quote
Steel Wraith wrote:I submit to you the following:
Pay to Win: - Handing the developers $$ and receiving spawned gold/isk/whatever.
Pay for Plex: - Some guy grinds missions/incrusions/whatever for isk. - You hand the developers $$ and receive plex. - Some guy passes grinded isk to you and receives plex. - Some guy spends plex for another month of play, thus keeping his own $$ in his pocket.
Net ISK gains: None. Or a small -isk to tax. Net $$ gains: None.
Where is the Pay to Win? It's still play to win, it's just that some other player is doing the playing.
All it does is shift who pays the subscription, and encourage people to open more accounts.
This is just the "masking P2W with layers of complexity" argument. You're still handing the developers $$ and receiving spawned gold and ISK despite the cute little middleman they added.
Also: Pay to win does not preclude play to win. You can still outplay a person who bought their shiny gear with $$. This is an example of "taking the terminology too literally".
|
Micheal Dietrich
Standards and Practices
183
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 20:58:00 -
[32] - Quote
Jacob Staffuer wrote:Steel Wraith wrote:I submit to you the following:
Pay to Win: - Handing the developers $$ and receiving spawned gold/isk/whatever.
Pay for Plex: - Some guy grinds missions/incrusions/whatever for isk. - You hand the developers $$ and receive plex. - Some guy passes grinded isk to you and receives plex. - Some guy spends plex for another month of play, thus keeping his own $$ in his pocket.
Net ISK gains: None. Or a small -isk to tax. Net $$ gains: None.
Where is the Pay to Win? It's still play to win, it's just that some other player is doing the playing.
All it does is shift who pays the subscription, and encourage people to open more accounts.
This is just the "masking P2W with layers of complexity" argument. You're still handing the developers $$ and receiving spawned gold and ISK despite the cute little middleman they added. Also: Pay to win does not preclude play to win. You can still outplay a person who bought their shiny gear with $$. This is an example of "taking the terminology too literally".
The 'gold' is not spawned, that is the part that you are confusing. You purchase some game time and decide to sell it. The isk may come from a miner. The miner sells some minerals to an industrialist. The isk comes from the indy. The indy makes a product and sell it on the market to the mission runner. The isk comes from the mission runner. The Mission Runner runs his missions. The isk comes from the agent. Even if you remove the first part the isk is still in the game as it always was. |
Steel Wraith
5
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 21:01:00 -
[33] - Quote
Then we have different definitions of Pay to Win.
In my mind, Pay to Win is a design model that seeks to encourage massive amounts of microtransactions by spawning items in exclusive stores for players too stupid to realize the game they are playing is wallets online.
In your version it seems Pay to Win is any single player receiving a reward for spending cash no matter where the reward comes from? Am I way off?
Whether more isk really means in-game advantage or not is debatable, I don't want to get into that. Maybe it's unfair to players not willing to pay for others' subscriptions in order to avoid the grind, but I don't see it as having a negative impact on game design. Game-crushing Pay to Win with microt-ransactions and exclusive cash stores is the real evil, and we don't have that here. |
Prince Kobol
510
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 21:02:00 -
[34] - Quote
Jacob Staffuer wrote:Tippia wrote:Jacob Staffuer wrote:Even worse than ignorance is when people make up convoluted, ad-hoc definitions of things to fit their arguments.
Whether you by the item directly from CCP or indirectly via the middleman of a PLEX, it is still paying real money for an in-game advantage. Therefore, it is P2W. Yeah, no. That's not P2W for the simple reason that you're not buying any "win" GÇö you're trading the exact same things that everyone else already have. That's, at best, RMT or just plain old MT (but not really, since you're not converting money to items). So yes, it's pretty stupid when people make up their own ad-hoc definitions of things. Except there's just one problem: you're wrong. The first argument was: "It's not P2W because you don't actually buy the items themselves." This was debunked by explaining how you are - you're just using a middleman. Adding layers of complexity to the transaction does not change the fact that it's P2W. Now the argument is: "It's not P2W because you can only buy items available to everyone else in the game." But... that's exactly what P2W is. Buying items in the game with real life money. Whether those items are available to other players or not has no bearing on what P2W is; this is just another "made up definition". And actually in most games that offer P2W options ("item shops") you'll notice that the items in the shop are the very same items that can be gained via gameplay by everyone else. P2W offers a shortcut; instead of working for what you have in the game, you just pay for it. Hence, "pay to win". Here's a good way to determine if something is pay to win. Ask yourself "By spending this (real life) money on the game, will I gain an advantage over a player who didn't spend (real life) money on the game in this manner?" If the answer is "yes", then you've payed to win. It's cute how people who don't know anything about the gaming industry think they have the authority to come into a discussion and make definitions up about it, though. So yeah, keep talking out your ass. :)
All I can say is that you have never played a true P2W game because if you had you would realise how incrediblely wrong you are.
|
Graic Gabtar
The Lemon Party
70
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 21:02:00 -
[35] - Quote
OP, it's all OK mate.
It balances out because minerals are FREE! EVE shall be purged by fire - please Gods let them ALL burn in Jita. |
Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
95
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 21:02:00 -
[36] - Quote
Jacob Staffuer wrote:
This is just the "masking P2W with layers of complexity" argument. You're still handing the developers $$ and receiving spawned gold and ISK despite the cute little middleman they added.
Also: Pay to win does not preclude play to win. You can still outplay a person who bought their shiny gear with $$. This is an example of "taking the terminology too literally".
I dare you to try this. I could use another guy who plans to "outplay me" while I get a 1.2 B tengu kill that drops 600m worth of loot. Not only are you paying to lose but you are paying me to win. Thanks. |
Jacob Staffuer
State War Academy Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 21:09:00 -
[37] - Quote
Prince Kobol wrote:Jacob Staffuer wrote:Tippia wrote:Jacob Staffuer wrote:Even worse than ignorance is when people make up convoluted, ad-hoc definitions of things to fit their arguments.
Whether you by the item directly from CCP or indirectly via the middleman of a PLEX, it is still paying real money for an in-game advantage. Therefore, it is P2W. Yeah, no. That's not P2W for the simple reason that you're not buying any "win" GÇö you're trading the exact same things that everyone else already have. That's, at best, RMT or just plain old MT (but not really, since you're not converting money to items). So yes, it's pretty stupid when people make up their own ad-hoc definitions of things. Except there's just one problem: you're wrong. The first argument was: "It's not P2W because you don't actually buy the items themselves." This was debunked by explaining how you are - you're just using a middleman. Adding layers of complexity to the transaction does not change the fact that it's P2W. Now the argument is: "It's not P2W because you can only buy items available to everyone else in the game." But... that's exactly what P2W is. Buying items in the game with real life money. Whether those items are available to other players or not has no bearing on what P2W is; this is just another "made up definition". And actually in most games that offer P2W options ("item shops") you'll notice that the items in the shop are the very same items that can be gained via gameplay by everyone else. P2W offers a shortcut; instead of working for what you have in the game, you just pay for it. Hence, "pay to win". Here's a good way to determine if something is pay to win. Ask yourself "By spending this (real life) money on the game, will I gain an advantage over a player who didn't spend (real life) money on the game in this manner?" If the answer is "yes", then you've payed to win. It's cute how people who don't know anything about the gaming industry think they have the authority to come into a discussion and make definitions up about it, though. So yeah, keep talking out your ass. :) All I can say is that you have never played a true P2W game because if you had you would realise how incrediblely wrong you are.
All I can say is that you have never played a true P2W game because if you had you would realize how incredibly correct I am.
(See, I can do that too.) |
Virgil Travis
GWA Corp
78
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 21:11:00 -
[38] - Quote
Jacob Staffuer wrote:Tippia wrote:Jacob Staffuer wrote:Even worse than ignorance is when people make up convoluted, ad-hoc definitions of things to fit their arguments.
Whether you by the item directly from CCP or indirectly via the middleman of a PLEX, it is still paying real money for an in-game advantage. Therefore, it is P2W. Yeah, no. That's not P2W for the simple reason that you're not buying any "win" GÇö you're trading the exact same things that everyone else already have. That's, at best, RMT or just plain old MT (but not really, since you're not converting money to items). So yes, it's pretty stupid when people make up their own ad-hoc definitions of things. Except there's just one problem: you're wrong. The first argument was: "It's not P2W because you don't actually buy the items themselves." This was debunked by explaining how you are - you're just using a middleman. Adding layers of complexity to the transaction does not change the fact that it's P2W. Now the argument is: "It's not P2W because you can only buy items available to everyone else in the game." But... that's exactly what P2W is. Buying items in the game with real life money. Whether those items are available to other players or not has no bearing on what P2W is; this is just another "made up definition". And actually in most games that offer P2W options ("item shops") you'll notice that the items in the shop are the very same items that can be gained via gameplay by everyone else. P2W offers a shortcut; instead of working for what you have in the game, you just pay for it. Hence, "pay to win". Here's a good way to determine if something is pay to win. Ask yourself "By spending this (real life) money on the game, will I gain an advantage over a player who didn't spend (real life) money on the game in this manner?" If the answer is "yes", then you've payed to win. It's cute how people who don't know anything about the gaming industry think they have the authority to come into a discussion and make definitions up about it, though. So yeah, keep talking out your ass. :)
Please be quiet when the adults are talking.
Roses are red. Bacon is also red. Poems are hard. Bacon. |
Jacob Staffuer
State War Academy Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 21:11:00 -
[39] - Quote
Vaal Erit wrote:Jacob Staffuer wrote:
This is just the "masking P2W with layers of complexity" argument. You're still handing the developers $$ and receiving spawned gold and ISK despite the cute little middleman they added.
Also: Pay to win does not preclude play to win. You can still outplay a person who bought their shiny gear with $$. This is an example of "taking the terminology too literally".
I dare you to try this. I could use another guy who plans to "outplay me" while I get a 1.2 B tengu kill that drops 600m worth of loot. Not only are you paying to lose but you are paying me to win. Thanks.
You're missing the point entirely but cool let's play "make stuff up" only let's spin it another way:
One character has been playing for years. He is flying a Rifter. Another character has only been playing for a couple of months, and he purchased his Hurricane through PLEX transactions. The two meet up in a lonely asteroid field...
See, I can make up stuff to support my argument, too.
|
Micheal Dietrich
Standards and Practices
184
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 21:13:00 -
[40] - Quote
Just out of curiosity, other than a physical show of hands, how can you tell if someone out there is using Plex to play? Is it their faction fit ship? Is it a fully stocked station? |
|
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
1443
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 21:13:00 -
[41] - Quote
Jacob Staffuer wrote:Steel Wraith wrote:I submit to you the following:
Pay to Win: - Handing the developers $$ and receiving spawned gold/isk/whatever.
Pay for Plex: - Some guy grinds missions/incrusions/whatever for isk. - You hand the developers $$ and receive plex. - Some guy passes grinded isk to you and receives plex. - Some guy spends plex for another month of play, thus keeping his own $$ in his pocket.
Net ISK gains: None. Or a small -isk to tax. Net $$ gains: None.
Where is the Pay to Win? It's still play to win, it's just that some other player is doing the playing.
All it does is shift who pays the subscription, and encourage people to open more accounts.
This is just the "masking P2W with layers of complexity" argument. You're still handing the developers $$ and receiving spawned gold and ISK despite the cute little middleman they added. Also: Pay to win does not preclude play to win. You can still outplay a person who bought their shiny gear with $$. This is an example of "taking the terminology too literally".
Jaboc, an example of Pay to Win would be the more powerful gold ammo only available for cash in WOT. Another, but different example from the same game are the available only for gold Premium tanks, as they have a much higher in game currency potential.
Niether of these items are obtainable by the rest of the players unless they pay real currency for them, and both give a significant advantage in game.
Anything other than this type of item YOU are lumping under the self proclaimed Pay to Win tag are in fact NOT Pay to Win. They simply have more than one way to obtain the same item, with no restrictions on who can or cannot obtain the item. Pay TO WIN by definition indicates that if you pay cash you can obtain an advantage that people who do not pay cash can not obtain.
This does not apply to EVE.
Perhaps YOU should stop imposing your purposely vague definitions, which make literally NO sense, on terms simply to try and make a nonsensical point. The worst term you could possibly use to describe PLEX use in EVE would be Pay to Save Time... and I think most of us can live with that quite happily. When I check troll in the dictionary, it has a photo shopped picture of you standing somewhere in the vicinity of a point.
Also, I can kill you with my brain. |
Jacob Staffuer
State War Academy Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 21:15:00 -
[42] - Quote
Steel Wraith wrote:Then we have different definitions of Pay to Win.
In my mind, Pay to Win is a design model that seeks to encourage massive amounts of microtransactions by spawning items in exclusive stores for players too stupid to realize the game they are playing is wallets online.
In your version it seems Pay to Win is any single player receiving a reward for spending cash no matter where the reward comes from? Am I way off?
Whether more isk really means in-game advantage or not is debatable, I don't want to get into that. Maybe it's unfair to players not willing to pay for others' subscriptions in order to avoid the grind, but I don't see it as having a negative impact on game design. Game-crushing Pay to Win with microt-ransactions and exclusive cash stores is the real evil, and we don't have that here.
Here's a question:
What's the difference between someone who buys ISK from another player for $$ vs a player who buys PLEX with $$ and sells it to another player for ISK? Excluding the entire "CCP doesn't like that because they want their slice of the pie, too."
??
|
Micheal Dietrich
Standards and Practices
184
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 21:17:00 -
[43] - Quote
I think he's purposely avoiding my questions now.
Edit: To answer your question, RMT is buying straight up isk. Plex is buying account time. But they have created it so that you may sell that account time or use it on your own however you like. |
Jacob Staffuer
State War Academy Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 21:18:00 -
[44] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:Jacob Staffuer wrote:Steel Wraith wrote:I submit to you the following:
Pay to Win: - Handing the developers $$ and receiving spawned gold/isk/whatever.
Pay for Plex: - Some guy grinds missions/incrusions/whatever for isk. - You hand the developers $$ and receive plex. - Some guy passes grinded isk to you and receives plex. - Some guy spends plex for another month of play, thus keeping his own $$ in his pocket.
Net ISK gains: None. Or a small -isk to tax. Net $$ gains: None.
Where is the Pay to Win? It's still play to win, it's just that some other player is doing the playing.
All it does is shift who pays the subscription, and encourage people to open more accounts.
This is just the "masking P2W with layers of complexity" argument. You're still handing the developers $$ and receiving spawned gold and ISK despite the cute little middleman they added. Also: Pay to win does not preclude play to win. You can still outplay a person who bought their shiny gear with $$. This is an example of "taking the terminology too literally". Jaboc, an example of Pay to Win would be the more powerful gold ammo only available for cash in WOT. Another, but different example from the same game are the available only for gold Premium tanks, as they have a much higher in game currency potential. Niether of these items are obtainable by the rest of the players unless they pay real currency for them, and both give a significant advantage in game. Anything other than this type of item YOU are lumping under the self proclaimed Pay to Win tag are in fact NOT Pay to Win. They simply have more than one way to obtain the same item, with no restrictions on who can or cannot obtain the item. Pay TO WIN by definition indicates that if you pay cash you can obtain an advantage that people who do not pay cash can not obtain. This does not apply to EVE. Perhaps YOU should stop imposing your purposely vague definitions, which make literally NO sense, on terms simply to try and make a nonsensical point. The worst term you could possibly use to describe PLEX use in EVE would be Pay to Save Time... and I think most of us can live with that quite happily.
Obviously your made up definitions of P2W (based on one paltry example - lol) are correct because you put the word "fact" in CAPITAL LETTERS.
In case you're confused: I was being sarcastic, and you're an idiot. |
Herping yourDerp
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
458
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 21:19:00 -
[45] - Quote
Jacob Staffuer wrote:Vanir Tsero wrote:You clearly don't understand what "Pay to Win" actually is.
Pay To Win is where you pay real money for ships that are not obtainable in game with Isk.
For Example:
If CCP Sold a Tech 4 Battlecruiser for $25.00 That is considered Pay to Win. If CCP Sold Tech 3 Ammo for $15.00 for a count of 5,000 That is considered Pay To Win.
If CCP Sold an In-Game item for $20.00 that can be traded in game for in-game currency... That is NOT Pay To Win. Why? Because it gives noone an advantage. The 600,000,000 ISK I got from selling the Plex on the market, 7,000 other players just made by running Incursions for a few hours.
Your ignorance bothers me for some reason. :( hi i have no brains and then make stuff up to try and sound smart.
actually plex ISN't pay to win because basically all you are doing is selling someone else game time for isk. any other item though would be pay 2 win ( exception to vanity items) because even if CCP sold titans for $ it messes with the market plex is just an item representative of 30 days of game time, it has no other purpose... heck for a while iirc you couldn't undock with them in cargo. also the in game advantage is that of isk only, and it fluctuates based on supply and demand as with any item that can be farmed in game.
|
Herping yourDerp
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
458
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 21:20:00 -
[46] - Quote
oh i get it, jacop got his isk taken away. |
Jacob Staffuer
State War Academy Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 21:21:00 -
[47] - Quote
Herping yourDerp wrote:Jacob Staffuer wrote:Vanir Tsero wrote:You clearly don't understand what "Pay to Win" actually is.
Pay To Win is where you pay real money for ships that are not obtainable in game with Isk.
For Example:
If CCP Sold a Tech 4 Battlecruiser for $25.00 That is considered Pay to Win. If CCP Sold Tech 3 Ammo for $15.00 for a count of 5,000 That is considered Pay To Win.
If CCP Sold an In-Game item for $20.00 that can be traded in game for in-game currency... That is NOT Pay To Win. Why? Because it gives noone an advantage. The 600,000,000 ISK I got from selling the Plex on the market, 7,000 other players just made by running Incursions for a few hours.
Your ignorance bothers me for some reason. :( hi i have no brains and then make stuff up to try and sound smart. actually plex ISN't pay to win because basically all you are doing is selling someone else game time for isk. any other item though would be pay 2 win ( exception to vanity items) because even if CCP sold titans for $ it messes with the market plex is just an item representative of 30 days of game time, it has no other purpose... heck for a while iirc you couldn't undock with them in cargo. also the in game advantage is that of isk only, and it fluctuates based on supply and demand as with any item that can be farmed in game.
Oh I see what happened, your mom cheated on you. |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
1443
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 21:22:00 -
[48] - Quote
Jacob Staffuer wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:Jacob Staffuer wrote:Steel Wraith wrote:I submit to you the following:
Pay to Win: - Handing the developers $$ and receiving spawned gold/isk/whatever.
Pay for Plex: - Some guy grinds missions/incrusions/whatever for isk. - You hand the developers $$ and receive plex. - Some guy passes grinded isk to you and receives plex. - Some guy spends plex for another month of play, thus keeping his own $$ in his pocket.
Net ISK gains: None. Or a small -isk to tax. Net $$ gains: None.
Where is the Pay to Win? It's still play to win, it's just that some other player is doing the playing.
All it does is shift who pays the subscription, and encourage people to open more accounts.
This is just the "masking P2W with layers of complexity" argument. You're still handing the developers $$ and receiving spawned gold and ISK despite the cute little middleman they added. Also: Pay to win does not preclude play to win. You can still outplay a person who bought their shiny gear with $$. This is an example of "taking the terminology too literally". Jaboc, an example of Pay to Win would be the more powerful gold ammo only available for cash in WOT. Another, but different example from the same game are the available only for gold Premium tanks, as they have a much higher in game currency potential. Niether of these items are obtainable by the rest of the players unless they pay real currency for them, and both give a significant advantage in game. Anything other than this type of item YOU are lumping under the self proclaimed Pay to Win tag are in fact NOT Pay to Win. They simply have more than one way to obtain the same item, with no restrictions on who can or cannot obtain the item. Pay TO WIN by definition indicates that if you pay cash you can obtain an advantage that people who do not pay cash can not obtain. This does not apply to EVE. Perhaps YOU should stop imposing your purposely vague definitions, which make literally NO sense, on terms simply to try and make a nonsensical point. The worst term you could possibly use to describe PLEX use in EVE would be Pay to Save Time... and I think most of us can live with that quite happily. Obviously your made up definitions of P2W (based on one paltry example - lol) are correct because you put the word "fact" in CAPITAL LETTERS. In case you're confused: I was being sarcastic, and you're an idiot.
Ahhh, for a moment I thought you were serious. Now I realize you are simply a troll.
Well actually, we all knew you were trolling, but it was fun watching to do the dance for our amusement.
Are we done with this guy yet, or do you guys want to let him caper about a bit longer?
When I check troll in the dictionary, it has a photo shopped picture of you standing somewhere in the vicinity of a point.
Also, I can kill you with my brain. |
Jacob Staffuer
State War Academy Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 21:23:00 -
[49] - Quote
INB4 "no ur wrong because FACT: *insertmadeupfact*" |
THE L0CK
Denying You Access
161
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 21:23:00 -
[50] - Quote
Jacob Staffuer wrote:Oh I get it, your cousin cheated on you.
Yeah he mad. Do you smell what the Lock's cooking? |
|
Jacob Staffuer
State War Academy Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 21:24:00 -
[51] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:Loses argument. Uses "you're just at roll" line. Fails.
|
Jacob Staffuer
State War Academy Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 21:25:00 -
[52] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:My logic is inferior. I'll just say condescending things instead.
|
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
1443
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 21:33:00 -
[53] - Quote
Urban Dictionary
1. pay-to-win Games that let you buy better gear or allow you to make better items then everyone else at a faster rate and then makes the game largely unbalanced even for people who have skill in the game without paying. Dude, you've spent like 400 bucks on this game so you can beat everyone who hasn't spent any money. Pay-to-win noob! Ranger 1 win's and humiliates the simpleton. When I check troll in the dictionary, it has a photo shopped picture of you standing somewhere in the vicinity of a point.
Also, I can kill you with my brain. |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
1443
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 21:36:00 -
[54] - Quote
THE L0CK wrote:Jacob Staffuer wrote:Oh I get it, your cousin cheated on you. Yeah he mad.
He be triple post mad. When I check troll in the dictionary, it has a photo shopped picture of you standing somewhere in the vicinity of a point.
Also, I can kill you with my brain. |
Jacob Staffuer
State War Academy Caldari State
25
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 21:43:00 -
[55] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:Urban Dictionary
1. pay-to-win Games that let you buy better gear or allow you to make better items then everyone else at a faster rate and then makes the game largely unbalanced even for people who have skill in the game without paying.
I highlighted an important part that your tiny mind conveniently glossed over.
(also: lol@urbandictionary, because using someone else's made up definition to support your made up definition is double-fail)
|
THE L0CK
Denying You Access
162
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 21:46:00 -
[56] - Quote
Jacob Staffuer wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:Urban Dictionary
1. pay-to-win Games that let you buy better gear or allow you to make better items then everyone else at a faster rate and then makes the game largely unbalanced even for people who have skill in the game without paying. I highlighted an important part that your tiny mind conveniently glossed over. (also: lol@urbandictionary, because using someone else's made up definition to support your made up definition is double-fail)
Fixed Do you smell what the Lock's cooking? |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
1443
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 21:48:00 -
[57] - Quote
Jacob Staffuer wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:Urban Dictionary
1. pay-to-win Games that let you buy better gear or allow you to make better items then everyone else at a faster rate and then makes the game largely unbalanced even for people who have skill in the game without paying. I highlighted an important part that your tiny mind conveniently glossed over. (also: lol@urbandictionary, because using someone else's made up definition to support your made up definition is double-fail)
It's a commonly used slang phrase, which Urban Dictionary collects into a central repository.
So, tell me, what items can you obtain in EVE that are better than those that do not pay cash directly. By the way, many players (myself included) can easily generate the ISK to pay for any ingame items you would care to name faster than you can earn the money to pay for them with cash.
We can put that to the test any time you like.
But yes, back to the point, what BETTER items can you obtain than I? When I check troll in the dictionary, it has a photo shopped picture of you standing somewhere in the vicinity of a point.
Also, I can kill you with my brain. |
Steel Wraith
5
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 21:54:00 -
[58] - Quote
Jacob Staffuer wrote:
Here's a question:
What's the difference between someone who buys ISK from another player for $$ vs a player who buys PLEX with $$ and sells it to another player for ISK? Excluding the entire "CCP doesn't like that because they want their slice of the pie, too."
??
Okay I'll bite. Buying plex is a one-way transaction of $$ to isk as far as real currency is concerned and flows to CCP.
RMTing (obviously what you are getting at), however, is against the EULA/TOS and involves a very similar mechanic of receiving isk that someone has grinded for cash. But in this case the cash flows directly to a player. In other words, a player is now doing the reverse transaction to buying plex and is receiving real world cash for isk.
This means there is a real incentive for some people to play the game, or bot, solely to generate isk and convert to real world cash. With plex, however, you can only really get $10-$15 per month "back" in subscription fees per account that you are playing. The Plex system only incentivizes grinding to pay for your subscription and pvp or for your station full of faction fit bling tengus.
Parting shot: Your argument is becoming the convoluted one.
|
Minabunny
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
55
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 21:56:00 -
[59] - Quote
Plex is hardly 'pay to win'. It's good for the players and it's good business for CCP. there is no need to remove it. |
DonHel
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 21:59:00 -
[60] - Quote
Once there was a time before plex, that people met on a place on these forums called the game time bazaarr or some crap.. which is still there.. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |