Cosmetic Shop is P2W

We have not received permission from CROW3 to share the quoted post.

Oh, if that's what Azherae means, then I know full well what shit system it is and I'd definitely disagree had countless L2 servers with similar systems for buffs and even gear (especially in the later updates). Though I mainly only hate that in mmos. Been playing Genshin for 2 years now and love the absolute hell out of it and have no issues with its Gacha system, even though it's the stingiest fucking gacha out there.

NiKr wrote: »

We have not received permission from CROW3 to share the quoted post.

Oh, if that's what Azherae means, then I know full well what shit system it is and I'd definitely disagree had countless L2 servers with similar systems for buffs and even gear (especially in the later updates). Though I mainly only hate that in mmos. Been playing Genshin for 2 years now and love the absolute hell out of it and have no issues with its Gacha system, even though it's the stingiest fucking gacha out there.

No, Gacha is definitely just Gacha. I don't know what the correct term is so I'll just briefly describe it.

Player A spends 15$ a month and gets to play the 'base game'.
Player B spends 25$ a month and gets 5 Bonus Chances to do Dungeons (This is also an option in NWO or was when I cared enough to pay attention) and maybe... let's go all the way to Ashes... a selection of 1 Cosmetic a month.

At the end of the month if unused, Player B's stuff does not roll over. They can't stockpile it. There is no other way to buy stuff from the studio. You either pay Sub A, Sub B (let's assume there's a middle where you get the Cosmetic but no Bonus Chances or vice Versa) or Sub C to get both.

Player A knows what they are paying for. They know exactly 'how far' Player B is 'ahead' of them. Maybe they care, maybe they don't.

I'm saying that IF there must be an additional income for a studio through MicroTransactions, I want this kind. No player can just 'Throw massive cash at the problem', everyone has the same capacity to drip-feed cash into the system.

Call it 'Time Gated P2W', 'added sub' P2W, whatever. I'm hoping for something like this in TL for example, similar to BDO's Value Pack. Now, I don't like BDO's Value Pack because BDO itself sucks, but it's basically the equivalent of 'pay the sub fee, get some faster leveling and more storage'.

I'm aware that this is usually a highly controversial position, as it makes people think 'You're taking away things I could use in order to make me then pay for them'. And y'know what? Yes. That's what that is. Servers ain't free and neither are Testers/Boss Mechanics Devs.

Azherae wrote: »

I'm saying that IF there must be an additional income for a studio through MicroTransactions, I want this kind. No player can just 'Throw massive cash at the problem', everyone has the same capacity to drip-feed cash into the system. Call it 'Time Gated P2W', 'added sub' P2W, whatever.

Ah, I see. Yeah, if we try to account for the wholest definition of "p2w", I'd probably go with this too, cause this just seems like a p4c 2.0. Yes, the person that pays more than you gets a bit further in the game because of that, but they're not completely demolishing you by being an absolute whale.

I'd say Genshin's "sub" ($15) is similar to this, except it's in a f2p game so it's even more fair (if you can even call it that).

We have not received permission from PenguinPaladin to share the quoted post.

And in turn, this depends on the game and what the playerbase and devs feel the game 'is about'.

If anyone told me that Cosmetic skins in Elite Dangerous for your ships was P2W I would have to give that person a good long look because one's RP (if any) in that game does not rely on which cool pearlescent or snake-pattern paintjob your ship has.

But a relatively heavy (or strong option) RolePlaying game, built on Synergy and supposedly based off a PathFinder campaign, with an explicit intent to 'have people want to have one of each Archetype in a group'?

MMOs are social games but not everyone comes into them with a social group already. If your 'standing' in a social group can be affected by the appearance of your gear, there's something there. My question to you would therefore be...

Do you just not care if you 'wanting to be the cool Desert Trader of the impromptu roleplay group that appears to be forming in your Node' is hindered because you didn't buy the cosmetic that makes you look more like the cool Desert Trader but someone else did?

If you don't care, then it's all good. Similarly, I don't care if a player pays an extra $7 a month to get two more chances at opening the Tower Gate without having to run the prerequisite Quest that I have to do.

We have not received permission from PenguinPaladin to share the quoted post.

I will be genuinely upset if it turns out that anyone working full time at Intrepid is making $50,000 a year.

We have not received permission from PenguinPaladin to share the quoted post.

idk I'm not discussing values.

The situation outlined is one where Cosmetics are P2W.

Those situations are not necessarily uncommon in some circles.

I don't think the definition of P2W used by Steven is meant to address RolePlaying at all. Hence 'disingenuously correct'.

In other words:

"Cosmetic shops are P2W"
"Yeah and?"
"Steven said no P2W in this game!"
"That's not what he meant tho."
"It's still P2W!"
"Ok, so Ashes has P2W for roleplayers."

For me this is where the conversation ends. If it ends here for you too, then sounds like you're comfortable and Iridianny is not.

If you feel the need to dispute specifically the first line (which you said you don't) then lots of discussion happens, but the 'opponent' will never budge because... I mean, they're right... from their perspective, they're just not right from Steven's. And that was Iridianny's point.

If you say the game is roleplay heavy and intended to be so, then the outlined situation becomes possible. Similar to how if two people are competing in Crafting in a game and one of them can 'buy a chance to fight a Boss for a Recipe Drop', we don't get to say 'Well you're not paying for Crafting so it's not P2W relative to crafting'.

Roleplayer Hierarchy is serious business. No sarc here.

We have not received permission from CROW3 to share the quoted post.

Well, you can always discuss it with me but if you do, bear in mind that I'm going along with the definition of 'Win' as 'Got to have an experience you wanted in a space where there was competition for the spot'. I hope we can agree that a situation where what you are able to pay for is RARE does not disqualify it from being P2W.

We have not received permission from PenguinPaladin to share the quoted post.

Ok, so it is. @Iridianny I'm probably not interested enough in this to continue either for the moment. You have my 'help' for what it's worth, in the definition department. It's all yours.

(just remember that I don't actually care about the outcome of this, as seen above)

We have not received permission from Mag7spy to share the quoted post.

Say what now?

I can definitely believe that you've never experienced this, if you tell me so. But I can also assure you that it does happen. If you're absolutely convinced that this never happened, even when people were playing just MUDs...

If you think this can't happen in Roblox...

Then I won't say anything, but I'll repeat it again for those capable of believing it.

Roleplayer Hierarchy is serious business. Some 'storylines' do NOT work with 'more than one person trying to be the same character slot', and when that happens, it is INDEED the better RolePlayer or better fit (sometimes this means 'most visually obvious to others outside the main RP group) that gets the slot.

We have not received permission from Iridianny to share the quoted post.

I am glad to hear that, since whatever prior interaction I've had with you on this forum resulted in you getting onto my ignore list, and if it was for the usual 'let me avoid this person for the sake of the forums' reason, I'd probably remember it.

Best not to assume we're aligned on anything though, even though I appreciate your ability to in turn, appreciate ... 'consistent perspective', perhaps?

Note that I mention this for the usual reason. If you are on my ignore list, using the @ function does not send me a message and I cannot be summoned. This is the only reason I generally bring this up, you get additional context because I figure that just saying that and not why might be rude.

We have not received permission from PenguinPaladin to share the quoted post.

99%. Take it or leave it.