I'm not liking this P2W then P2P model.

Spend money on your character to get the useful stuff, then you cannot play because the queue is like 3 hours long and doesn't budge (I'm guessing it is now broken or something), so you have to subscribe to beat the queue.......

Making purchases not account wide is the dumbest thing and only 3 characters :\

The queues are kinda broken, that's probably why it's taking so long.
IAnd the game is not p2w... just not really worth it. But if you're going for cosmetics, they look kinda awesome.

How is it P2W? I thought you could use certs to buy all of the items (not sure about cosmetics).

lol all the starter weapon are good enough to be honest

the game isnt P2W, its P2BL=pay to be lazy, nobody has a great advantage over you, if you know how not to be a complete moron and think this is CoD

If you can buy weapons straight away to give you an edge it is P2W, doesn't matter if you can unlock them. A non P2W wud be only buying cosmetic stuff, however that doesn't happen in PS2.

How many times do you need to be told you're wrong? There are threads all over explaining what P2W is, and this is not it.

That is not the definition of P2W.

Pay to win means there are more powerful items in the game that can only be gotten by paying for them with real money.

Yep ... your wrong.
I paid for all sorts of stuff ... and I still can't win.
I'm still crap ... just in a better suit.
lol

I like how people keep trying to tack a definition to an extremely vague phrase. There was a game a while back that had people spouting the same ******** all the way up until the final nail went into the coffin, though I can't remember the name.


Either way, the ******** definition that is being thrown around is completely out of context. The notion that pay2win only applies if you cannot buy something with in game currency is built around games where you have the choice to go play PvE and catch up with them.

All of that goes out the window for games like planetside that lack any secondary means to grind.

Make up a new term then. Pay to get some stuff early P2GSSE? Pay some money to avoid grinding for everything PSM2AGFE?

Whatever you wish to use we will go with it. P2W already has a definition. It does not fit with what you are trying to make it fit with. That is all we are trying to tell you. So be a pioneer and coin a new phrase and assign it your own definition. A lot easier than trying to corrupt the the term we already know the definition of, and I bet it will be a lot less confusing.

The game isn't P2W by far BUT I still think cert costs are just a bit high, they raised them so dramatically, Nova(VS Shotgun) was 480 certs in the beta now its 1000 Certs(Wtf is that) It's pretty bogus but its surely not P2W.

again, if you think this game is P2W, please go play combat arms for a month.

then come back and realize how wrong you are
Provided you haven't committed suicide by that point.

No.
Pay 2 win - A system where players win because they paid real money.

Anything else and the desired effect will not be met.

Yes, another game where players win because they paid money, pay 2 win. Hitler may have killed many more than jack the ripper, but they are both murderers.

fail post OP, this game is not pay 2 win.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AllegedlyFreeGame
it's already been very well defined. and hey look, they even have a line in there about planetside 2...about how it doesn't fit the P2W term.

Good luck with that. Personally I think making a new term that fits your definition would be easier than convincing the millions of people that know the current definition of P2W, to support a new definition.. but, what do I know. If you post enough in thousands of games over the next 10 years or so.. it could very well happen. Stranger things have...

It's truly disheartening after seeing all the staff p i s s on about how the game wouldn't be "pay-to-win" in all their "gamer-critic" previews of the game, and when they release it - it is pay-to-win.

Peter Molyneux.

If looking different is P2W then yes.

They were probably going by the definition is all. They did not know these new definitions people are trying to use. Hard to fault them for it.