Forums Kongregate

Kongregate players need to learn what Pay-To-Win means page 4 (locked)

107 posts

Flag Post

lol… dude, the guy who posted the comment is playing again after I explained the failsafes.

My game also has slightly more than 2 players, so I wouldn’t really call it a 50/50 split even if he wasn’t. Maybe you need to learn how math works.

Also, good to know that you just admitted to judging games without playing them for stupid reasons:

If I read this thread knowing nothing about your game I’d think it was probably pay to win as well,

There’s multiple posts explaining exactly how it isn’t pay to win. Learn2read.

And you really ARE trying to claim that this definition supports you! lol..

PS: I think the Urban Dictionary definition could be taken as supporting either side of the debate over the definition.
Short for pay to win, in the sense that in order to ‘win’ a free to play game, such as Maplestory, you need to pay for various advantages to ‘win’ ingame.

This is almost word for word what I wrote and nothing like what you wrote… so thanks for finally seeing the light!

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Fricknmaniac:
Originally posted by delosford:

I believe he meant that your only citation is Urban Dictionary.

That’s really what you got out of this?:

But seriously, would you care to provide a citation (outside of Urban Dictionary) that agrees with your definition of pay-to-win and states that it’s a universally accepted definition?

This is a fallacious appeal to the majority, but sure, here you go:

http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/08/13/separating-free-to-play-and-pay-to-win

Right in the article title: separating F2P and P2W (case in point: they aren’t synonymous)

 
Flag Post

It’s not a fallacy when I ask you to provide documentation to support your position outside of your own words. (Going to read the article now).

 
Flag Post

And NielSenna, you really love your strawmans. Nowhere did I ever state P2W means “Pay to WIN” because I said so. Mostly I said it means that because… that’s what the words in the phrase mean. By a normal dictionary.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Fricknmaniac:

It’s not a fallacy when I ask you to provide documentation to support your position outside of your own words. (Going to read the article now).

So you think the more people say something, the more true it is?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_the_majority

Please read this link. Truth is defined by truth, not what people think truth is.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by delosford:

Also, good to know that you just admitted to judging games without playing them for stupid reasons:

“If” can refer to a hypothetical situation. Due to your high reading comprehension skills, I’m sure you know that,so you’re just deliberately misinterpreting my posts again. Please stop that and reply properly.

Besides, the majority of posts in this thread are nothing to do with whether your game is pay to win or not, we spent the time debating the definition of the term.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by saybox:

“If” can refer to a hypothetical situation. Due to your high reading comprehension skills, I’m sure you know that,so you’re just deliberately misinterpreting my posts again. Please stop that and reply properly.

Besides, the majority of posts in this thread are nothing to do with whether your game is pay to win or not, we spent the time debating the definition of the term.

Not misinterpreting anything, and again, this is because you can’t read and also think F2P means P2W and so judge any F2P game as P2W no matter what anyone says. That’s a major personality flaw not shared by normal people. You should work on it.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by delosford:

Yeah, and again, this is because you can’t read and also think F2P means P2W and so judge any F2P game as P2W no matter what anyone says. That’s a major personality flaw not shared by normal people. You should work on it.

For all the fallacies you’re claiming other people are making, that sure looks like an ad hominen to me xD

Regardless of any personality flaws I may or may not have – and I don’t believe that holding an opinion different to yours is a personality flaw – I don’t believe you’ll find any posts by me stating your game is pay to win. However, that’s partly because I didn’t play it long enough to even find what was offered for me to buy. If you’re selling an ingame advantage, then yeah, I agree with myself that that makes a game pay to win.

 
Flag Post

You don’t know what ad hominem means. Ad hominem is attempting to discredit your argument by insulting your character. Accurately describing your view that F2P = P2W and nobody can ever change your mind because that’s like… your opinion, maaaan? Not ad hominem. You didn’t even have a point that I was refuting; you kind of just stopped making any sense at all. “If” can refer to a hypothetical situation so you don’t actually think F2P = P2W? Because you just said you did.

Contradict yourself some more please.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by delosford:
Originally posted by Fricknmaniac:

It’s not a fallacy when I ask you to provide documentation to support your position outside of your own words. (Going to read the article now).

So you think the more people say something, the more true it is?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_the_majority

Please read this link. Truth is defined by truth, not what people think truth is.

Isn’t that your position… not mine?

You said that there is a universally accepted definition for pay-to-win, one that is accepted by the majority. I asked you to provide an expert, or some other source that would be objectively accepted as valid to support your definition. I didn’t ask for you to bring in a bunch of people who will provide anecdotal evidence to support your position, I just asked for an authoritative source. This is perfectly reasonable and not a logical fallacy.

Instead you accuse me of a logical fallacy and link to an article which says that pay-to-win is a subset of free-to-play, which I don’t think anyone here is disputing, or at least I’M not disputing.

edit: I’m just going to stop posting in this thread. It’s become painfully obvious that the best we’re consensus we’re going to reach is that we agree to disagree. So I’m just going to disagree with you, let you disagree with me, and be done in a thread that I regret getting involved in in the first place.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by delosford:

You don’t know what ad hominem means. Ad hominem is attempting to discredit your argument by insulting your character. Accurately describing your view that F2P = P2W and nobody can ever change your mind because that’s like… your opinion, maaaan? Not ad hominem. You didn’t even have a point that I was refuting; you kind of just stopped making any sense at all. “If” can refer to a hypothetical situation so you don’t actually think F2P = P2W? Because you just said you did.

Contradict yourself some more please.

If your idea of a compliment is telling someone they have a personality flaw and they’re not like normal people, I feel sorry for your gf / bf xD Otherwise, I think it was intended as an insult, maknig it ad hominen.

Either way, referring to a personality flaw is clearly referring to my character and not my argument.

 
Flag Post
Isn’t that your position… not mine?

You said that there is a universally accepted definition for pay-to-win, one that is accepted by the majority.

Yes, but did I say it was correct BECAUSE it was accepted by the majority? No, I didn’t. The phrase is accepted to mean that because that’s what it means in standard english. You PAY in order to WIN (and just for saybox, this can mean things other than ‘win the entire game’…lol)

 
Flag Post

Either way, referring to a personality flaw is clearly referring to my character and not my argument.

Well, yeah… you had no argument. What did you want me to respond to exactly? Quibble about the possible meanings of “If”?

You see, that all depends on what the meaning of “is” is.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by delosford:
< You PAY in order to WIN (and just for saybox, this can mean things other than ‘win the entire game’…lol)

Soooo….. that would include buying an advantage over other players, which allowed you to win against them in various aspects of the game (whether its duel, level speed, or whatever else you can compete in). Which is what I said in the first place. You seem to be mixed up over your own definition of the term now.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by delosford:

And NielSenna, you really love your strawmans. Nowhere did I ever state P2W means “Pay to WIN” because I said so. Mostly I said it means that because… that’s what the words in the phrase mean. By a normal dictionary.

Oh come on. You can’t be typing this with a straight face.

Righty-ho.

Your viewpoint is based on taking specific seperate literal meanings of the three words as individual words and creating a rigid definition of the term as a whole from that. And you are of the opinion that your way is the only possible way to interpret the three words taken together, and that everyone else is therefore incorrect.

Is that correct? I’ll check before I bother to add anything else.

 
Flag Post

Guys, I think delosford has explained enough times that his game is pay to win, can we all just move on now?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by saybox:
Originally posted by delosford:
< You PAY in order to WIN (and just for saybox, this can mean things other than ‘win the entire game’…lol)

Soooo….. that would include buying an advantage over other players, which allowed you to win against them in various aspects of the game (whether its duel, level speed, or whatever else you can compete in). Which is what I said in the first place. You seem to be mixed up over your own definition of the term now.

Yeah, buying an unfair paid-only advantage over non-paying players is the definition of P2W.

Buying an item that everyone can get without paying any money is not P2W because you gain no advantage. The “advantage” you’re gaining is equivalent to having played the game slightly longer. That’s only a major advantage in a poorly-designed game.

 
Flag Post

Surely a boost to speed (of leveling, or acquiring an item) is also an advantage free players can’t get.

And it would take a bad designer to make the boost so insignificant that free players could easily get there without paying, because then why would anyone pay for it?

Perhaps you still feel on a par with other players if you spend 250 hours grinding for a super rare piece of loot, while they buy it for 5 bucks, but personally I’d feel I needed to pay if I wanted to be competitive.

Conclusion: selling boosts is still a form of pay to win in my opinion.

 
Flag Post

Oh come on. You can’t be typing this with a straight face.

Righty-ho.

Your viewpoint is based on taking specific seperate literal meanings of the three words as individual words and creating a rigid definition of the term as a whole from that. And you are of the opinion that your way is the only possible way to interpret the three words taken together, and that everyone else is therefore incorrect.

Is that correct? I’ll check before I bother to add anything else.

Actually, I am typing with a straight face. Properly-written English phrases tend to have exactly one meaning based on standard definitions and established consistent linguistic constructs. The exceptions are known as double (or triple, etc) entendres. If you disagree with this, I’m not sure how you think people manage to communicate using language.

It’s also funny that you think my line of reasoning is totally invalid… yet it independently led me to the exact same definition that both IGN and UD gives. The fact that I came to the same conclusion independently using reasoning based on facts is what makes me correct; not the fact that people agree with me.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by saybox:

Surely a boost to speed (of leveling, or acquiring an item) is also an advantage free players can’t get.

And it would take a bad designer to make the boost so insignificant that free players could easily get there without paying, because then why would anyone pay for it?

Perhaps you still feel on a par with other players if you spend 250 hours grinding for a super rare piece of loot, while they buy it for 5 bucks, but personally I’d feel I needed to pay if I wanted to be competitive.

Conclusion: selling boosts is still a form of pay to win in my opinion.

Free players can get the same “advantage” by having started the game earlier or playing more frequently.

And yes, you are correct that some P2W games pretend to be F2P by eliminating the ability for free players to compete in any way under any circumstances or time scales. This is just disingenuous game design and doesn’t describe the majority of advancement micropurchases or boosts in popular F2P games.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by delosford:

And yes, you are correct that some P2W games pretend to be F2P by eliminating the ability for free players to compete in any way under any circumstances or time scales. This is just disingenuous game design and doesn’t describe the majority of advancement micropurchases or boosts in popular F2P games.

Really? You have a few examples of Kong MMOs where free players have an equal ability to compete with players who buy boosts etc?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by saybox:
Originally posted by delosford:

And yes, you are correct that some P2W games pretend to be F2P by eliminating the ability for free players to compete in any way under any circumstances or time scales. This is just disingenuous game design and doesn’t describe the majority of advancement micropurchases or boosts in popular F2P games.

Really? You have a few examples of Kong MMOs where free players have an equal ability to compete with players who buy boosts etc?

Yeah, Clout: The Game. Maybe you’ve heard of it?

Can’t really vouch for most of the others as I haven’t played them. Or many kongregate games in general. I heard about the site from a player of my game on Facebook. I played the shit out of MMOs back in the days of UO and pre-expansion WoW and such… but I don’t really do so anymore and thus haven’t played most modern ones. I can say that the vast majority of micropurchase FPS games I’ve played allow non-paying players legitimate rates of advancement to unlock the same gear. Christ, RO2 doesn’t have micropurchases and it’s more of a grind to level shit than any F2P FPS I’ve played.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by delosford:

Yeah, Clout: The Game. Maybe you’ve heard of it?

Can’t really vouch for most of the others as I haven’t played them. I played the shit out of MMOs back in the days of UO and pre-expansion WoW and such… but I don’t really do so anymore and thus haven’t played most modern ones. I can say that the vast majority of micropurchase FPS games I’ve played allow non-paying players legitimate rates of advancement to unlock the same gear.

So you don’t actually have any examples then. UO and WoW aren’t on Kong, or even free to play so I don’t know how they’re relevant.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by delosford:

Oh come on. You can’t be typing this with a straight face.

Righty-ho.

Your viewpoint is based on taking specific seperate literal meanings of the three words as individual words and creating a rigid definition of the term as a whole from that. And you are of the opinion that your way is the only possible way to interpret the three words taken together, and that everyone else is therefore incorrect.

Is that correct? I’ll check before I bother to add anything else.

Actually, I am typing with a straight face. Properly-written English phrases tend to have exactly one meaning based on standard definitions and established consistent linguistic constructs. The exceptions are known as double (or triple, etc) entendres. If you disagree with this, I’m not sure how you think people manage to communicate using language.

Because kicking the bucket means you’re kicking an actual bucket. I’ll assume you said ‘yes’ to what I wrote, and also assume you’re familiar with idioms.

The overwhelming majority of people use ‘pay-to-win’ as an idiom, whether they’re aware of what an idiom is or not. They (and I, often) use ‘pay-to-win’ as a way of saying ‘pay to acquire an advantage’. No one here believes that paying means you automatically win, which is what the three words literally mean.

You’re taking the literal meaning, while everyone else is taking the commonly-used figurative meaning. Two groups with different definitions of the same three words. You are right with your definition, and everyone else is right with theirs.

Does that make sense?

 
Flag Post

Because kicking the bucket means you’re kicking an actual bucket. I’ll assume you said ‘yes’ to what I wrote, and also assume you’re familiar with idioms.

The overwhelming majority of people use ‘pay-to-win’ as an idiom, whether they’re aware of what an idiom is or not. They (and I, often) use ‘pay-to-win’ as a way of saying ‘pay to acquire an advantage’. No one here believes that paying means you automatically win, which is what the three words literally mean.

You’re taking the literal meaning, while everyone else is taking the commonly-used figurative meaning. Two groups with different definitions of the same three words. You are right with your definition, and everyone else is right with theirs.

Does that make sense?

Lol. Now you’re reaching like crazy. I already mentioned double entendres, and euphemisms are pretty damn close to the same thing. And sorry, but the most commonly-used meaning is my given definition. I’ve proven this with UD and various other sources now. This is not a matter of opinion, and we are not going to “Agree to disagree”. You are simply incorrect based on available facts.

Please read this article, because you are apparently unaware of the fact that actual Pay To Win games exist:

http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/08/13/separating-free-to-play-and-pay-to-win

Pay to Win… means PAY TO WIN. Yes, only REALLY BAD GAMES are pay to win. That’s why you shouldn’t go around branding games P2W just because a developer had the gall to try and monetize their game.