It's time for preleveled/preascended characters to enter the shop or be made available somehow.

"

ghoulavenger wrote:

/snip

1. Complete nonsense. That has nothing to do with currency, and I've already stated that. Your entire argument hinges on ignoring that, so it is you who wants to change the model to fit your needs--not the other way around.

2. There's no red herring about it. "Advantage" is far too vague, and you have yet to provide a definition specific enough to be useful to anyone. Under yours, someone having a bigger monitor could be an advantage. Therefore pay to win. Should GGG force everyone into 800x600 resolution? No, because it's stupid and doesn't add anything to the game or make the experience more enjoyable. In fact, they would have to release the game on console to prevent as many hardware "advantages" as they could if they were going to follow that flawed reasoning.

3. You seem to be missing the point that has been brought up dozens of times in this thread that you wouldn't be able to start a league with a level 60 character. You would still have to grind your first one. But that doesn't fit your model either, does it? Easier to purposely ignore the argument so you can distort it into something it's not.

4. I did refine what was "too far," but you intentionally ignored it. That's YOUR fault, not mine, and it only makes your argument look weaker for doing it. Beside that, it shows you don't have a functional definition or understanding of the topic.

5. It doesn't matter what currency you use, because I already said that currency was over that line.

6. It's a summary denial of your position, because yours relies on things that simply are not how you say they are. Your entire post boils down to "no u," and you have tried to accuse me of being the one not adding anything when your argument has no substance. It also adds one thing you seem to have missed: Even if you could misconstrue it into your extremely vague definition of "p2w," it would still be acceptable. It literally does not harm anyone.

The ONLY argument that has been made which is based in fact so far is that it would reduce the worth of Regret Orbs. Not a big deal. They still have plenty of other uses, and don't lose their functionality for people who have reached a high enough level that they don't want to start from 60 again. Acceptable trade off.

So I challenge you, one more time: Find a definition of "pay to win" that doesn't come to the wrong conclusion that convenience is a form of it. If you cannot, you may hold your peace.

"

Albinosaurus wrote:

"

ghoulavenger wrote:

/snip

1. Complete nonsense. That has nothing to do with currency, and I've already stated that. Your entire argument hinges on ignoring that, so it is you who wants to change the model to fit your needs--not the other way around.

Alright, I'll discount currency. How about maps, or lets go higher levels. Lets say level 95. Or build enabling uniques. You can get all of these things just by playing the game.

"

Albinosaurus wrote:

2. There's no red herring about it. "Advantage" is far too vague, and you have yet to provide a definition specific enough to be useful to anyone. Under yours, someone having a bigger monitor could be an advantage. Therefore pay to win. Should GGG force everyone into 800x600 resolution? No, because it's stupid and doesn't add anything to the game or make the experience more enjoyable. In fact, they would have to release the game on console to prevent as many hardware "advantages" as they could if they were going to follow that flawed reasoning.

You're suggesting that "advantage" is too vague without offering additional restrictions. These restrictions "CAN" be added if you feel they are necessary. It's about determining what is "too far". But the pay to win model is based on selling advantages to players. Selling a character leveled up to 60 is quite the advantage, same with stash tabs. So yeah, it's a red herring, you're discounting it merely because you don't like it, it's a form of dismissal without actually challenging it. It's called the pooh pooh fallacy, more specifically.

"

Albinosaurus wrote:

3. You seem to be missing the point that has been brought up dozens of times in this thread that you wouldn't be able to start a league with a level 60 character. You would still have to grind your first one. But that doesn't fit your model either, does it? Easier to purposely ignore the argument so you can distort it into something it's not.

What has this got to do with it? This might be a valid control on selling a character because you want people to actually experience the leveling process but it has absolutely nothing to do with anything else.

"

Albinosaurus wrote:

4. I did refine what was "too far," but you intentionally ignored it. That's YOUR fault, not mine, and it only makes your argument look weaker for doing it. Beside that, it shows you don't have a functional definition or understanding of the topic.

The closest thing I got was "cannot be obtained by other means" and here was your grand opportunity to repost, and instead of that, you criticize me. Perfect ad hominem.

"

Albinosaurus wrote:

5. It doesn't matter what currency you use, because I already said that currency was over that line.

Ah, finally something tangible. But it fits your model, so how do you reconcile that?

"

Albinosaurus wrote:

6. It's a summary denial of your position, because yours relies on things that simply are not how you say they are. Your entire post boils down to "no u," and you have tried to accuse me of being the one not adding anything when your argument has no substance. It also adds one thing you seem to have missed: Even if you could misconstrue it into your extremely vague definition of "p2w," it would still be acceptable. It literally does not harm anyone.

So your definition of pay to win is something that harms people? Well by that definition we cannot know what pay to win is, until people start complaining about it. They already are complaining about this suggestion.

"

Albinosaurus wrote:

The ONLY argument that has been made which is based in fact so far is that it would reduce the worth of Regret Orbs. Not a big deal. They still have plenty of other uses, and don't lose their functionality for people who have reached a high enough level that they don't want to start from 60 again. Acceptable trade off.

Not even a part of my argument, nor do I find it particularly relevant to a pay to win discussion.

"

Albinosaurus wrote:

So I challenge you, one more time: Find a definition of "pay to win" that doesn't come to the wrong conclusion that convenience is a form of it. If you cannot, you may hold your peace.

I already offered my definition, you don't like it and have rejected it. Suggesting that I repeat my defition ad infinitum just wastes both of our time. But if you insist, the definition is once again:

The sale of anything that offers a clear advantage, (with extra detail, and actually within one of my posts already on page 5 if you don't believe me)
such as:
1. Items -- currency, equipment, maps, etc.
2. Pay wall content -- like if GGG charged you to enter the labyrinth, acceptable under the subscription model in some cases (e.g. selling expansions), not so much in a free to play model
3. Anything that affects the competitive nature of the game, such as experience, stash tabs, etc.

I'm not sure if you just have poor reading comprehension or if you're trying to troll. I stopped reading your post half way down because I got tired of you repeating the same shit that was already discussed and shot down, and you have yet to address my challenge. I'm really not interested in anything else you have to say until you can meet it or concede the point.

Either way, the point is simple: Level 60, Act 1 Merc was chosen because this is where the game actually "begins" for most people who want to experience a character and not just farm maps non-stop. It doesn't give any end-game advantages. It doesn't have any truly negative consequences, isn't actual p2w, and would make many players very happy.

"

Albinosaurus wrote:

I'm not sure if you just have poor reading comprehension or if you're trying to troll. I stopped reading your post half way down because I got tired of you repeating the same shit that was already discussed and shot down, and you have yet to address my challenge. I'm really not interested in anything else you have to say until you can meet it or concede the point.

Either way, the point is simple: Level 60, Act 1 Merc was chosen because this is where the game actually "begins" for most people who want to experience a character and not just farm maps non-stop. It doesn't give any end-game advantages. It doesn't have any truly negative consequences, isn't actual p2w, and would make many players very happy.

And improve GGG money stream, which means more enhancements/improvements/PoE2/etc

"

Albinosaurus wrote:

I'm not sure if you just have poor reading comprehension or if you're trying to troll. I stopped reading your post half way down because I got tired of you repeating the same shit that was already discussed and shot down, and you have yet to address my challenge. I'm really not interested in anything else you have to say until you can meet it or concede the point.

Considering we have a differing opinion of what pay to win is, I think the argument can go on forever. Which means your challenge is, well impossible because you won't like it. Which is the crux of the problem, you want to like my answer rather than actually have an answer. Proof:

"

Albinosaurus wrote:

Find a definition of "pay to win" that doesn't come to the wrong conclusion that convenience is a form of it.

You're defining what the argument must be.

"

Albinosaurus wrote:

Either way, the point is simple: Level 60, Act 1 Merc was chosen because this is where the game actually "begins" for most people who want to experience a character and not just farm maps non-stop. It doesn't give any end-game advantages. It doesn't have any truly negative consequences, isn't actual p2w, and would make many players very happy.

Negative consequences? Sure, I can think of a couple right away.
1. It incentivizes GGG not to make the early game more enjoyable.
2. Lower level characters are less likely to group because there aren't as many people actually playing the lower levels.

Isn't pay to win? Well not by your definition but certainly is by mine.

Would make many players happy is true of most pay to win concepts, pay to win is a very effective model. But it does turn off the broader audiences when it is to high degrees. So you're going to have people upset with it too, as evidenced by this thread.

Note, I don't really feel strongly about it one way or the other. Just that it is pay to win.

The rest of your post is nonsense, but I'll address this:

"

1. It incentivizes GGG not to make the early game more enjoyable.
2. Lower level characters are less likely to group because there aren't as many people actually playing the lower levels.

1. There's really nothing they can do for this. As long as we are stuck repeating the same game twice before it actually starts, people are just going to rush through as much as they can, skip whatever they can, and otherwise ignore the content--because it's boring, repetitive, and unrewarding even from a gameplay perspective. The only solution I see is to remove the difficulties and adjust the level and power scaling appropriately.

2. I can't remember ever grouping with people I didn't directly invite to the game via real life or TeamSpeak friends. I don't even hear much about people doing this in the first place, and the few postings on the event board are generally just Dry Lake farm. I'll grant that it will have the effect you say it does, but I just don't see it having any real meaningful change to the game since they don't generally group anyway. As far as I can tell, the majority of the player base treats this as a single player game with multiplayer trading--p2w or otherwise, starting at 60 doesn't really affect anyone else.

"

Albinosaurus wrote:

The rest of your post is nonsense, but I'll address this:

More pooh pooh?

"

Albinosaurus wrote:

"

1. It incentivizes GGG not to make the early game more enjoyable.
2. Lower level characters are less likely to group because there aren't as many people actually playing the lower levels.

1. There's really nothing they can do for this. As long as we are stuck repeating the same game twice before it actually starts, people are just going to rush through as much as they can, skip whatever they can, and otherwise ignore the content--because it's boring, repetitive, and unrewarding even from a gameplay perspective. The only solution I see is to remove the difficulties and adjust the level and power scaling appropriately.

Sure they can. They can smooth out the progression, make leveling uniques more common, offer actual rewards for being in the lower difficulties, like higher divination card drop rates. Will they fix the actual problem of having to play through the game three times though, eh, maybe not.

"

Albinosaurus wrote:

2. I can't remember ever grouping with people I didn't directly invite to the game via real life or TeamSpeak friends. I don't even hear much about people doing this in the first place, and the few postings on the event board are generally just Dry Lake farm. I'll grant that it will have the effect you say it does, but I just don't see it having any real meaningful change to the game since they don't generally group anyway. As far as I can tell, the majority of the player base treats this as a single player game with multiplayer trading--p2w or otherwise, starting at 60 doesn't really affect anyone else.

Maybe, maybe not. I don't have the experience to say otherwise or statistics in front of me. I generally only play my marauder anyway. I haven't done the leveling progression in a long time, so it is mostly a logical problem. If some people are skipping content of the game, it follows that in that content grouping becomes less likely. What I do know from watching streams and such, is that hardcore does offer carry services. These groups are essentially groups for a specific goal, like taking down Malachai. I've done a carry or two myself back in the day.

"

Albinosaurus wrote:

I'm not sure if you just have poor reading comprehension or if you're trying to troll. I stopped reading your post half way down because I got tired of you repeating the same shit that was already discussed and shot down, and you have yet to address my challenge. I'm really not interested in anything else you have to say until you can meet it or concede the point.

Either way, the point is simple: Level 60, Act 1 Merc was chosen because this is where the game actually "begins" for most people who want to experience a character and not just farm maps non-stop. It doesn't give any end-game advantages. It doesn't have any truly negative consequences, isn't actual p2w, and would make many players very happy.

Actually, an argument can be made that you would be at somewhat of a disadvantage by buying your second character and starting it in merc act 1 because you have given up all the currency drops and sales you would have made leveling through the first two difficulties. Usually, by the time my toons hit merc act 1 I have (depending on rng) between 20 and 30 or so chaos worth of currency alone. that it discounting any lucky unique drops.

Wow, a lot of semantics arguments here and a healthy dose of mudslinging. IMO, a lot of that is missing the point (but could have been fun to write and think about, so ironically not pointless). The point is: How likely is it that GGG would add this option? What are their ideas of "end-game advantage," "pay to win," and "truly negative consequences?"

Based on old old developer manifestos / faqs and how I've seen GGG conduct its affairs, I don't see it happening. Chris's statement about target audiences (forgot exact numbers, but apparently Chris felt it was important to say something like 90% of all players never reach Maps), development manifestos about race balance showing 1-60 as a part of the core game, and general commitment to established values (Mark_GGG even started a mechanics thread for goodness sake), all make a strong case against pay for levels.

On the other hand, adding currency tabs and public trading functionality to paying players only does indicate a shift towards more monetization. So, I wouldn't say pay for levels is impossible.

"

Xtorma wrote:

Actually, an argument can be made that you would be at somewhat of a disadvantage by buying your second character and starting it in merc act 1 because you have given up all the currency drops and sales you would have made leveling through the first two difficulties. Usually, by the time my toons hit merc act 1 I have (depending on rng) between 20 and 30 or so chaos worth of currency alone. that it discounting any lucky unique drops.

In the same amount of time spent leveling a character, I can spend that in end game maps, making the same 20-30 chaos, if not more because of vendor recipes, clear speed etc. It holds as a disadvantage on your first character, but on your second, I don't see it. But I think the advantage on your first character would outweigh the disadvantage, because the extra passives will make it easy to farm in lower level areas for better gear quite a bit faster -- and you don't need the best gear to farm twilight strand/ledge in merciless, to get more level appropriate stuff. Pack density at that point would also allow for much faster farming of currency.