Perhaps stop saying PoE is not pay to win game?

"

TheFazzo wrote:

I don't think your logic is very sound.
Stash tabs are useful especially if you have multiple characters and you play standard as well, but they are not mandatory at all.
Besides GGG has to keep the lights on someway or we wouldn't be playing this game. So you are free not to give them your hard earned cash, but they have to offer some premium content as well. It's good that this content does not have that big of an impact on gameplay.

Vodka.

Wine.

I've played some p2w games (and paid for it) back in the old days.
I can honestly say that POE isn't p2w. However, the stash tabs can be seen as an advantage to progress "faster". Although your build, stats on your gear and skills as a player seem to be the major influence on how "fast" you are.

Still It seems quite silly that most here would buy a game for 60$ or more and yet are to shy to buy some stash space on an otherwise free to play game.

Whatever you say or do, a game development company still is a company and they have to make money somehow.


If you like the game, just buy the tabs as if you would buy any other game.
If you don't, then play another game... I doubt you find any similar games with larger stashes/bank space, it's quite common in this genre.

"

gibbousmoon wrote:

"

ArtCrusade wrote:

The problem starts with people's definition of what p2w is and what's f2p and it ends with what people define by "winning". Path of Exile is a game so complex, there's many ways to play it.

This is a disingenuous argument, because the only reasonable conclusion to this set of premises is that pay2win games do not exist. After all, we all play games in different ways and for different reasons, right? Chris Roberts famously used this argument in his defense of real-money purchasable ships in Star Citizen.

"

ArtCrusade wrote:

There are many ways to play the game and for you to claim you know the real way of playing the game is bullshit. The game can be played start to finish with 4 stash tabs no questions asked. Is it inconvenient? Sure is. Impossible? No.

I stand by my pay4convenience statement. ;-)

Stand on the statement if you like, but since pay4convenience is one of the most popular forms of pay2win (as was already pointed out above, no less), you are not standing on particularly solid ground.

There is nothing wrong with the concept of pay4convenience, hence my defense of it being the base of PoE's monetization scheme. You bring up Chris Roberts but call my reasoning disingenious? Glad I can tell which is which. It's almost as if you accuse GGG of wanting to monetize their game and pay their bills, almost like a... company? How dare they!

This kind of discussion usually leads to people asking for free tabs which is just never going to happen.

"

FutureFear wrote:

I can honestly say that POE isn't p2w. However, the stash tabs can be seen as an advantage to progress "faster".

Do you people even HEAR yourselves sometimes?!

The sheer amount of doublethink it would take for me to unironically put these two sentences back to back would give me a stroke.

"

Angry_Casual wrote:

"

nutchman wrote:

I literally used the definition from merium webster to show that it is a pay to win game. How is that dishonest in any way?

Don't cut the expression. It has a specific meaning as an expression, which isn't the addition of its word separately. If you want to discuss its meaning, find its definition as a whole expression. When you are cutting it into "pay", "to" and "win" you are doing exactly what is being reproached to people that say that there's no "winning" in Path of Exile.

That is why I defined winning or did you not read that part lol.

"

ArtCrusade wrote:

"

gibbousmoon wrote:

"

ArtCrusade wrote:

The problem starts with people's definition of what p2w is and what's f2p and it ends with what people define by "winning". Path of Exile is a game so complex, there's many ways to play it.

This is a disingenuous argument, because the only reasonable conclusion to this set of premises is that pay2win games do not exist. After all, we all play games in different ways and for different reasons, right? Chris Roberts famously used this argument in his defense of real-money purchasable ships in Star Citizen.

"

ArtCrusade wrote:

There are many ways to play the game and for you to claim you know the real way of playing the game is bullshit. The game can be played start to finish with 4 stash tabs no questions asked. Is it inconvenient? Sure is. Impossible? No.

I stand by my pay4convenience statement. ;-)

Stand on the statement if you like, but since pay4convenience is one of the most popular forms of pay2win (as was already pointed out above, no less), you are not standing on particularly solid ground.

There is nothing wrong with the concept of pay4convenience, hence my defense of it being the base of PoE's monetization scheme. You bring up Chris Roberts but call my reasoning disingenious? Glad I can tell which is which. It's almost as if you accuse GGG of wanting to monetize their game and pay their bills, almost like a... company? How dare they!

This kind of discussion usually leads to people asking for free tabs which is just never going to happen.

Yes, I brought up Chris Roberts, because he used an identical argument to deny pay2win elements in his game.

Um... That's literally what I already said, however, in the very post you quoted. The argument is disingenuous regardless of whose mouth it comes out of.

Also, you don't seem to have your argument straight:

If you want to say that there is nothing wrong with X, when X is already the most popular form of pay2win, then that's fine. But saying that there is nothing wrong with pay2win elements in PoE is not remotely similar to saying that PoE contains no pay2win elements.

Your argument above suggests you are saying the latter, but your argument in this post suggest you are saying the former, as if they were the same thing.

"

ARealLifeCaribbeanPirate wrote:

"

FutureFear wrote:

I can honestly say that POE isn't p2w. However, the stash tabs can be seen as an advantage to progress "faster".

Do you people even HEAR yourselves sometimes?!

The sheer amount of doublethink it would take for me to unironically put these two sentences back to back would give me a stroke.

Agreed hahaha

I've been getting a good laugh out of this thread.

"

gibbousmoon wrote:

wouldn't it be more productive for us to consider why pay2win is objectionable, and then ask whether those objections hold true for PoE?

First, before I get to the quoted question, allow me to thank you for the beautiful post this quote comes from.

Now onto that question: the main reason why people don't like p2w is NOT because they're unwilling to pay for gaming experiences, but because they don't like to be asked for money in a rude or obnoxious way. As a thought experiment, imagine if an internet service provider would cut off your internet service if you didn't pay your bill on time, but they also refused to send you a bill or any other indication of when the service would be disconnected for non-payment. It would be extremely frustrating finding out after your service was already turned off that you've hit a paywall, wouldn't it?

Well, the earliest fumblings at f2p-p2w monetization suffered greatly from this tendency to create a horrible customer experience when asking for their money. It didn't come off as friendly, it came off as sudden, and it made gamers utterly furious. That's how p2w got such a bad name and how the label became a pejorative.

But again, customers don't necessarily mind paying for services, as long as the delivery is right. If that ISP sends a bill, as well as a reminder mailing warning about pending disconnection, as well as a text message reminder to pay... people accept that. HOW the demand for payment is communicated to the customer determines their satisfaction.

The reason why PoE's P2W is exceptionally smooth is that it, by its nature, introduces itself to the player not as an inherent function of farming, but as a function of trading — specifically, of selling. Players become aware of the option when they begin looking into how to use a non-combat game system to accelerate their advancement. Not only is this fairly meta, but it normally only occurs to players who are enjoying the combat section of the game and looking for ways to branch out. And it doesn't practically stop the method of progression they'd been using preciously — it opens up a new and optional system, selling items.

That is smooth. And what is true about hard drinks is also true about getting your customers to pay you for your work.

I don't think p2w STILL deserves the negative connotation it has. It certainly deserved it in the past, back when the options for gaming monetization were still being explored and the experiments in it often unmitigated disasters. But outside of a few idiotic and/or avaricious developers, the game industry is smarter now. And in all seriousness, GGG probably had something to do with that. Other developers took notice and made their own methods smoother.

still p2w as fuck tho

"

ARealLifeCaribbeanPirate wrote:

"

FutureFear wrote:

I can honestly say that POE isn't p2w. However, the stash tabs can be seen as an advantage to progress "faster".

Do you people even HEAR yourselves sometimes?!

The sheer amount of doublethink it would take for me to unironically put these two sentences back to back would give me a stroke.

You've also had excellent posts this thread, lol

It's an old meme, but it definitely checks out. ;)

That's a good addition, Scrotie, though I wouldn't place trade at the very foundation of a "GGG includes pay2win elements" argument, since balance and QoL decisions affect SSF as well.

An SSF player does not have to play for very long to realize that, currency stack sizes and current state of shard bloat being what they are, playing with four stash tabs is a miserable experience for the customary (and, arguably, intended) playstyle.

"

gibbousmoon wrote:

I wouldn't place trade at the very foundation of a "GGG includes pay2win elements" argument, since balance and QoL decisions affect SSF as well.

An SSF player does not have to play for very long to realize that, currency stack sizes and current state of shard bloat being what they are, playing with four stash tabs is a miserable experience for the customary (and, arguably, intended) playstyle.

SSF has changed with time, so this might be true now. I know back in the day that, unless you wanted to trade away items, 4 tabs would last you at least to a few map tiers into the endgame, which was functionally good enough. It is quite possible that shard bloat over time is making the new player P2W experience considerably less smooth, but I don't think GGG is as concerned with that new player experience as they are with giving existing players more reason to get more tabs — and that is pretty nakedly what shard bloat does.