Definitely pay to win.

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by ReptilePete, Oct 11, 2016.

  1. ReptilePete

    Since unsubbing my member**** I have noticed an immediiate difference in how I can play the game. With 50% less resources, I simply cant play the game how I was previously. Result is less kills, less fun, less etc. For example I could log in, grab a scythe, fly to an enemy base, hack the v term and pull a sundy, then drop mines. Now I simply dont have the resources.
    So this is definitely pay to win, without any shadow of a doubt. Anyone who is not paying for the membership is at an obvious disadvantage. Then you will have to pay for purchases on top of this. At least in the old subscription model you only payed once, and then everyone was on an even basis.
    Either make it subscription or non subscription, not this horrible unfair hybrid monster.
    • Up x 1
  2. FateJH

    Nothing stops you from buying a Scythe, a Sunderer, and four mines, sequentially, except a failure to plan in advance and excessive resource expenditure. (The total cost of a Scythe, a Sunder, and four mines, all without needing resource ticks, is 750. 350 + 200 + 50 x 4 = 750.)

    You can also avoid the mine purchase by keeping a loadout topped-off.
    • Up x 6
  3. MasterOhh

    ESF 350 + sundy 200 = 550 nanites.
    Do you even math?

    You must be a terrible driver/pilot if you run out of resources so quickly. And maybe you should stop spamming nades if you can't afford them.
    If you've been spoiled by having an abundant amount of recources, thats your problem. 99% of all players w/o subs are getting along just fine.

    Come back an tell me about p2w if DGB starts letting you rent your weapons for a week for 1000certs or have you pay certs for repairing your tank (unless you've got the platinum repairtool for only 99.99$)
  4. FieldMarshall

    PS2 is not pay to win. You are objectively wrong.
    • Up x 6
  5. Voodoo4500

    Its "Pay to play in different ways" certainly NOT pay to win. The stock guns are more than good enough to be competitive. I own everything in the Vanu arsenal and 75% of the items are not "really" needed....it just makes the game more fun...
  6. CaptCran

    I win every time I play and I haven't paid anything towards this game. You just need the right mindset, play like you're broke @zz(in real life and in the game), and make due with what you got. It's not that tough. You've just gotten spoiled having everything supplied to you by paying for a membership. It's the same with all the apps, games, add-ons that have in game purchases. You can rush sh!z, fork out a shiz load of money, and get bored with the game super quick, or you can sit back, relax, and go with the flow knowing you didn't pay for the game and you're still having fun. Once they get the hackers toned down I might, JUST MIGHT spend the $60 you normally would pay for a game on in game content. Or just save my money for Star Citizen........ getting close. We'll see who values my money soon. I used to try and help catch hackers with videos but the lack of communication wasn't worth the time and effort.
  7. Cyropaedia

    OP should have taken advantage of the $70 for 1 year sub promo.

    To save resources just keep redeploying to your destination hex (saved you 350 Nanites). Stop cheesing with mines and C4 alreadeh (saved you 150-250 Nanites).
  8. Riksos



    Hey, did you know that the majority of things in this game cannot be purchased with Daybreak Cash?

    Let's take a Liberator:

    Buying the Tank Buster? DBC (~1000 certs)
    The Zephyr/Dalton? DBC (875 certs)
    Tailgun? (550 certs)

    What about the optics for those?
    Maybe Infrared for your Tank Buster (~250?)
    Maybe some good zoom for your belly gun (~400-500)
    And basically anything for your tail gun (~250)

    875+875+550+250+400+250 = ~3500 Certs in purchases that can be bought with DBC

    Now let's look at things that cannot be bought on that same Lib with DBC:

    Afterburner Rank 5 (~2500 certs)
    Precision Bomber Frame Rank 3 (700)
    Composite Armor (~600) (Nanite auto repair costs more than double)

    I would take note that we are ALREADY at cert cost larger than the DBC purchases, and this is BEFORE GETTING RELOAD SPEED/MAGAZINE SIZE AND AMMUNITION UPGRADES FOR ALL 3 OF THESE WEAPONS

    The same is true for infantry classes. All of the suit slots and attachments cannot be purchased with DBC.

    C4 which is one of the most complained about things in this game- cannot be purchased with DBC.

    This game is Pay-to-PROGRESS, not Pay-to-win. Everything that can be purchased with cash can be bought by any free accounts, this by definition makes it not "pay-to-win" because free players have equal access as paid users.
    • Up x 2
  9. zaspacer

    The PS2 community has a strong negative and hostile reaction to PS2 being called "P2W". DBG Mods also seem to close these types of threads.

    Part of it I think is the term "P2W" itself. It's very often regarded as a specific criteria: $ for success or powerful tools... AND without other realistically possible methods to get that success or powerful tools. Exclusive content or tools locked behind pay walls. And that means a lot of players don't view "$ for power" as P2W. Some players feel that as long as some Classes/Units remain viable for Free Players who grind a reasonable amount, but other units are locked behind a Pay Wall, it is also still not P2W. And some players feel that $ used to reduce downtime/waiting is also not P2W.

    Another part of it I think is that a lot of players don't want their own advantages or tools either given away or labeled as achieved through "non-earned" methods.

    If you were playing WoW, and there was an option to pay $ to complete a Quest and get the Quest Reward, would that make it P2W?

    If ALL unlocks in PS2 were purchaseable with $, would that make it P2W?

    Eye of the beholder.
    • Up x 3
  10. Riksos


    I thought I pretty fairly established that the game wasn't in fact "pay-to-win". The idea that free users have access to all the tools a paid user can achieve seems to undermine the idea that a paid user is conferred some advantage over the free user.

    The OP made an example of resource ticks and how he couldn't pull as many ESFs, as if while flying said ESF, the ability to pull another one while flying said ESF confers some benefit while flying.

    A surplus of resources means absolutely nothing when it comes to driving a harasser or any other vehicle, it's not as if additional nanites in the bank makes your weapons do more damage.
  11. Pat22

    I'm not sure how you blatantly wasting a ton of resources makes the game pay to win.
    Sure, you have to consider what you spend nanites on a bit more and not throw away a perfectly good fighter aircraft without having used it for anything other than transport.
  12. Moridin6

    next time take a wraith flash, cheap and easier to sneak in..

    or if you must take the scy, manage your resources better like other have said
  13. adamts01

    I think OP makes a good point, and a lot of you are changing the subject to guns or vehicle weapons, which he never mentioned. Sure you can play this game without spending a penny and be competitive, and I agree that in general it's not pay to win, but he does bring up a good example. Consider equally skilled players, the one with more consumables can be more combat effective in more situations. How much more effective is debatable, but the subscriber does have an edge. Some battles are vehicle battles, open bases, whatever, but they all need Sunderers. True, you've got to be a scrub to loose enough Sunderers to run out of nanites, but that same skilled scrub would be better off if he were paying real money. You've got to be a pretty blind white knight to say OP doesn't have a point. The only other case where I feel this game could be pay to win is buying chargers for implants. Again, the edge they give you in combat might be minuscule, but they can be an advantage and some players might not be able to keep them charged without spending real money. All in all I don't have a problem with the system, just saying OP has a point.
    • Up x 1
  14. Sinful Raevyn

    Another fine quality post from the guy who thinks infiltrators need invisibility...

    ...FriendlyPS4... is that you?!


    I suggest anyone that thinks this game is pay2win go play a korean mmo or a game by Nexon... Then you will learn the difference.



    Again, learn the difference between pay 2 win and quality of life.

    Your WOW analogy is not even relevant because that is a completely different scenario.

    I've played pay2win. I've seen what pay2win can do to a game. This game is nowhere near pay 2 win.
  15. LaughingDead

    The only disadvantage is time, resources I might agree is a bit too much since you could spam mine or birds all day long, but it's still a fair game, buying membership cuts the time down thats all.
  16. zaspacer

    I think that all fits in the section of "some players feel that $ used to reduce downtime/waiting is/isn't P2W".

    And there are all kinds of complex variations/avenues to explore under that:
    1) how much downtime/waiting (ex. to get back enough resources to spawn an ESF) for a F2P player would trigger the label P2W for the game? 5 minutes? 50 minutes? 5 hours? 5 days? 5 weeks? 5 months?
    2) do F2P players have to avoid certain "risky" engagements or types of gameplay to avoid "unreasonable" downtime? Does having to avoid that gameplay constitute P2W exclusive access to major elements (certain engagements, certain types of play) of the game?
    3) do F2P players have to maintain a certain level of success at the game to avoid unreasonable downtime? What level of success would that be (how high is the bar: can "average" players achieve it)? Is the concept of "average" player success rate relative to the success of others, and would that bar then rise if proportionally more weaker players played less?
    4) etc.

    Most everyone is going to have specific different beliefs on how much the game would need to change (at each PS2 criteria they feel is important) before they felt it was P2W. Many people will have a moving target, that will adjust as the game changes or their own experiences change, or even the more they think about and explore the topic or run the numbers.

    It's kinda like asking people at what degree of incline a slope is a cliff. Is the world's biggest sea cliff Kalaupapa, Hawaii?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalaupapa,_Hawaii
    Or is it Maujit Qaqarssuasia, Greenland?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thumbnail_(cliff)
    Or is it Mount Thor, Canada?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Thor

    Will someone's answer to that be about the degree of slope? Or will they eyeball it? Or maybe they'll decide based on national pride (or animosity) and which they want to have the title? Or maybe they have some specific expert source they defer to?
    • Up x 1
  17. zaspacer

    The difference is largely relative. It is highly subjective. Is there even an official ruling body that issues parameters and passes judgements on which games are P2W and which aren't?

    What's the difference between paying $ for a Quest Reward that requires grinding and paying $ for something in PS2 that requires grinding?

    Falling off some "cliffs" is almost certain death. Falling off other "cliffs" is almost never fatal. Does that mean that the latter is not a cliff? Who makes the call on that? Does it have to be a certain height? Does it have to be a certain degree slope? Or is it something where it's accepted that different people can make different calls on that, and we're fine with that?
  18. FateJH

    Nah, nothing formal. Just us. :p
    Is your argument that a framework of specific terminology is meaningless? or that we shouldn't respond to the OP?
    • Up x 1
  19. CNR4806

    You need to be hopelessly terrible at operating the vehicle of your choice to ever run out of resources from pulling it.

    The only thing that arguably benefits from the membership resource boost is MAX, with it being rather squishy for a 450-resource unit and medics often not doing their one job well.
  20. zaspacer

    Law of the net. :)

    "P2W" is an unofficial catch-all jargon. Where criteria need not be 100%, but merely "enough" relative to an individual's (or a group's) personal criteria. Would it benefit from some formal declaration of clear criteria by groups/individuals, even if it was varying criteria by different groups/individuals... maybe. But that's not there now.

    Should people respond to the OP? Absolutely feel free to respond to the OP. It's a fairly public forum, I am no authority here. And as for my wants, I want people to post their mind. For me personally, I greatly appreciate the culture, contribution, and almost every post by almost every member of this forum. Sure, I also want to weigh in on some issues to provide some additional sense of context or exploration that may have occurred to me. It's all good.

    I'm just pointing out that the concept of P2W is highly subjective. Both in terms of the individual player and what kind of P2W wall(s) they hit (and how much they affect them). And in terms of when the individual perceives that the "pay for power" has passed some threshold whereupon it has become akin to P2W.

    Most the people on this forum are speaking their minds and their hearts. Most are not trolling or trying to deceive. And that's great. But this issue itself is one where the ultimate conclusions are totally subjective:
    1) some number of players will identify with ReptilePete and his sentiments. Their line in the sand for PS2 being P2W will have been crossed. They will be benefit if they heed his outcry.
    2) some other number of players will find ReptilePete and his sentiments silly. Their line in the sand for PS2 being P2W will remain unbreached. They will be benefit if they discard his outcry.

    PS2 is running a "F2P model" that employs P2xyz directly in its revenue model. That xyz has both shifted and expanded over time, as has the basket of FLC. DBG is actively vending on the neutral zone buffering P2W. It is not surprising to me that their shifting models, especially in the relatively new (and changing) era of F2P models and products, are triggering different response to stimuli across different player/people types in terms of whether they have gone P2W or not, piecemeal or in full.
    • Up x 1