Well no, because Pandamic is not pay2win, unlike WoW.
Yes? They are both games, so they both have win conditions. That’s one of the things that defines a game - there is a challenge, and you can overcome the challenge (winning) or succumb to it (losing).
Like, what is this? How is it so utterly impossible to understand that you win when you defeat an encounter or get a piece of loot or win the black market auction house bidding contest or win an arena match? Is it just because there are more adventures to follow? What, so now we can’t win in D&D or Gloomhaven either?
I really try my best to treat various opinions as reasonable and to be arguing a case in good faith, but this one actually implodes my brain. It is unbelievable.
That it the thing. Wow does not have a win condition.
Indeed. It is unbelievable people think wow has a win condition. It requires a little brain to even understand that. Speaking about good faith, my goodness.
There doesn’t have to be anything wrong with boosting for gold in WoW.
If you want that to exist and thrive in the game, then by all means. Like Ishayo said, then that can be a totally legit part of the game.
Where the wheels come off the bus is the existence of the WoW Token, because that allows boosting for money with a technicality.
And that’s just crap. It’s awful.
Even after hundreds and hundreds of posts I cannot understand why you’re all totally fine with the game allowing players to exchange money for gold, as much as they want.
“It doesn’t matter”
“I don’t care”
“It doesn’t affect me”
“It’s not winning”
“You can just ignore it”
I cannot do anything but laugh. You think a win implies the end of the game in totality. You cannot win a round of poker either I suppose, because it is possible to play another.
Again: You think WoW lacks a win condition because your definition of winning is completely whack. There is nothing more that can possibly be said.
The term P2W means different things to different people.
Just like the term ‘casual’ is always problematic.
If we could just all agree on 1 universally accepted definition with clear parameters; we could objectively give an answer. Until then it will remain a subjective answer.
Right? A game having no win condition means that, by necessity, you will always lose. A game has an outcome, otherwise it is just play and not a game. That’s what separates the two.
And some of these differences are reasonable, and you can even argue there are different levels of victory. For example, in Heroes of Might and Magic you can both win a battle of two heroes fighting one another and win at the map by defeating all enemy heroes and taking their towns. One win requires a streak of the other type of win. There are also degrees of winning. You can have overwhelming victories (you lose near nothing or actually nothing) or pyrrhic victories (you won the battle, but you may have been set back in terms of winning the wider conflict in the game)
But that does not mean that the individual battles were not a win.
You were faced with a challenge that you could overcome (win) or succumb to (lose).
It may be a small win or an insignificant win in the grand scheme of things, but that can never mean it was not a victory.
Another example is if a pretend-war breaks out. (Let’s stay within the parameters of games, therefore play)
Each person can win in a duel against another, each battle can be won individually, and the war itself can be won. Different layers of winning, but all nevertheless wins or defeats.
This is how the word is used by pretty much everybody except for a handful of people in this thread who reject it simply because they don’t want to concede that WoW features the ability to pay to overcome a challenge.
Here’s the thing, I really do not care about boosting either for gold or for IRL cash. Remove boosting tomorrow and I won’t lose any sleep over it.
Again something I really do not care about. I have only bough tokens with gold, the game is completely playable as a F2P player (if we can call it that) and I will argue that I have way more advantage over people who spend money to buy gold to buy tokens.
I am only sharing my thoughts as to how to kill boosting because we all know Blizzard, they would sooner kill boosting than kill the WoW Token.
Because we do not care what other people have. Does someone having an extra achievement impact anyone else’s experience-no. Does someone having an extra item affect anyone else’s experience-no Does it impact their own experience- most definitely. Why should anyone care if someone is actively making their own experience worse.
I feel it’s more defeatist to worry that Bobby is “invalidating” your achievement by swiping his mom’s credit card.
For me personally the term ‘winning’ isn’t even the big hangup; because I find it quite irrelevant in a game like WoW.
But rather: I accept the definition of P2W which includes the part that you ‘can buy something with real money that other players cannot get in the game through gameplay’ (and thus giving you an unfair advantage through payment).
I think that is the important part. And WoW offers no such thing.
But of course that’s based on the definition of P2W that I accept. So yeah, we’re back at the start.
This is just a thread full of opinions. And that’s fine; but then we need to accept that no one is factually right or wrong. We just disagree; and that’s fine.
You can win a round of poker, because the round ends. You can also win a game of poker.
The difference is that you cannot win WoW, because every one sees “winning” as something different. One sees it as seeing the full story, great you won by playing normal dungeons and LFR. Someone else sees it by having all the stuff. Another one sees it as doing all the DPS/HPS.
Buying an achievement or a chance at getting an item with a weekly lockout, does not qualify as a win to a lot of us.
And what is exactly the outcome of WoW? Who won? Who lost? Or are we all just having our own fun with this game and decide what our subjective personal goals are that can change even while playing it during a season? To me every player is winning.
This “real money to ingame stuff” stuff will happen anyway because you won’t change the nature of people. So Blizz are then faced with the choice of making some money off of it or ceding it to the gold farmers.
It’s a no brainer for Blizz.
Maybe you should stop and reflect on that rather than beating people over the head with your opinion. (yes I do realise the retorts that opens me to).
I’ve not read 95% of the posts here. But I skim through and just can’t help thinking ‘so what’. Until there is a “definition” people will have different opinions. I actually see ppl that pay for gear or titles etc as proper losers. I can see where you’re coming from. I just happen not to agree. You aren’t going to change my mind. Nor I yours.
And that definition is perfectly captured by the WoW token.
Okay, so let’s grant that we are all different and that words no longer have consistent meanings. Is there any definition of a subjective idea of winning, other than ending the game at 100%, where buying gold cannot help you?
Any at all? Even for winning the 0.1% titles this applies as you may have more time to practice due to having to spend less time getting gold.
Anyone remember when Echo (I think it was?) spent $100,000 to get ahead in race to world first? Was that not pay2win? Hmm?
Any definition anyone in here has come up with except the one that is objectively impossible to achieve can benefit from spending money to get gold or battle pets or whatever it is. Every single one.
Your only option when wanting to reject that WoW is pay2win by now is to reject the notion that winning is a possibility at all, subjectively or otherwise. Just define it out of existence. Which, as I’ve mentioned, I consider to be crazy because it effectively means WoW is no longer a game at all.
Because you see them as cheaters, i.e. people who attained wins in an unfair manner.
Yes absolutely. You can have all the collectibles and all the gear and still lose in the dmg meter. Money cannot buy you skill. Some see that as the “win”, others dont.
Can’t speak for DeJa, but I share that sentiment and it’s not because I see them as cheaters. They are losers because they are paying for a sub to play the game, then they are paying for a boost to play the game less, it’s an oximoron performed by morons.
Well that’s the whole point of calling it pay2win isn’t it? The point is precisely that you pay to get rewards with less skill than you would normally have needed.
Well, it depends on whether you want to agree with the rest of the world how English works. I suppose you could simply reject everything and become completely incomprehensible if you want to and call it English regardless. Everybody would consider it laughable though, but you have that right.
Don’t be silly.
There’s lots of dictionaries. I asked you what makes THAT ONE the only correct one.
Don’t give me a non-answer like that. Show some class.
