Cosmetic Shop is P2W

Dolyem

I forgot I made this awhile ago

PenguinPaladin

Iridianny wrote: »

PenguinPaladin wrote: »

So to try and be reasonable and a bit more on actual topic.

I dont mind you opinion, that the shops bad. I share that thought.

I understand your stance against transmog, i share it.

I dont see cosmetic skins as p2w under any circumstances. And other than them being a part of the game you find important, you havnt explained to me how they give someone an upperhand over you.

I find it hard to talk with you with how standoffish you seem to be, and your unwillingness to actually discuss your points, or clearify things. Your saying, ive said it before go find it, in a forum with countless threads is in no means friendly or helpful. And after being ran in circles for a while by your arguments, reason is easily lost. But looking at your other posts in general, the forums are very hostile to you.

Im not going to say you do or do not deserve hostility, because i just glimpsed through a few posts... but the way most people here seem to phrase their thoughts under some circumstances is pretty gross. So im going to apologize on my part, but im also going to empathize, you are very standoffish, and unreasonable now, to the point its very hard to discuss things.

I thought you weren't even here for discussion just "the vibes"? I am glad we have some mutual ground, many people have agreed that selling cosmetics is "evil" even though they concede them to be a "necessary evil."
As for upperhand, I am not even sure what that means given there are multiple progression paths and ways to play a roleplaying game. A point that has been consistently ignored. I am not a super competitive person, so this idea of the upperhand doesn't really affect me nor was it my point. As I said, paying for part of the gameplay that otherwise could be achievable in game is p2w. Again, a matter of perspective that competition is what fuels you in an rpg where as for some it's roleplaying in a community, and for others it's adventuring in a fantasy world, etc.
Honestly, if people pay for max level it doesn't really affect how other individuals play the game themselves, there will always be max levels ahead of you unless you are the first... and by that point it wont matter how those who are also max level alongside you got there...
So, I think most people are bothered by that idea simply because it is paying extra to not play the game. However, really those people just play the game differently than others. They don't see questing as the game, but rather end game content. (not that I agree with pay for max level just to clarify)
& I have discussed and clarified so much, I really don't see my "unwillingness." Unless you are referring to me saying that I don't care to convince you, because that's still true. And yes, I am perhaps standoffish for the reason that I don't cower down when, as you can see, many people have been very hostile, aggressive, and sometimes just verbally abusive for me simply sharing opinions and ideas. I appreciate your apology.

Also, i got mentally exhausted with all this and took a break. Thats why i was "here for the vibes" but im still bored at work, so if there is a talk to be had im all for it.

The main problem, and probably the why people are being so unreasonable with you, is because you are being unreasonable back.

When a huge amount of people view P2W in a pvp setting, and you are trying to equate it to you advancing faster in any way shape or form, even against no opponents. This is an argument over 2 different definitions of p2w.

One is p2w vs others, and the other is p2w vs personal objectives.

Can we agree on that? Or is this still disputable?

Mag7spy

Name exactly what stats or gameplay advantage you main from a different outfit on the store, bet you can't name anything that influence combat or systems in game. Meaning there is no p2w.

As I said, paying for part of the gameplay that otherwise could be achievable in game is p2w

If they don't add it to the game than it would never be achievable, so your point on it being achievable otherwise is pointless. They could easily just have less content in the game and wrap it up. Instead they are having incentive to add more stuff for people that want it, funds that go to paying people, supporting the company, the game and ensuring the game life span.

You have already gone on record saying you will quit once you get max level and some gear since you are casual. So your subjective opinion cares about short term and not the longevity of the game.

PenguinPaladin

Mag7spy wrote: »

Name exactly what stats or gameplay advantage you main from a different outfit on the store, bet you can't name anything that influence combat or systems in game. Meaning there is no p2w.

As I said, paying for part of the gameplay that otherwise could be achievable in game is p2w

If they don't add it to the game than it would never be achievable, so your point on it being achievable otherwise is pointless. They could easily just have less content in the game and wrap it up. Instead they are having incentive to add more stuff for people that want it, funds that go to paying people, supporting the company, the game and ensuring the game life span.

You have already gone on record saying you will quit once you get max level and some gear since you are casual. So your subjective opinion cares about short term and not the longevity of the game.

To recognize they are arguing a different definition and still try and argue with your own definition is beyond pointless. You need to be focusing on agreeing on a definition, unless you just want to continue to argue in circles for no reason.

Mag7spy

PenguinPaladin wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Name exactly what stats or gameplay advantage you main from a different outfit on the store, bet you can't name anything that influence combat or systems in game. Meaning there is no p2w.

As I said, paying for part of the gameplay that otherwise could be achievable in game is p2w

If they don't add it to the game than it would never be achievable, so your point on it being achievable otherwise is pointless. They could easily just have less content in the game and wrap it up. Instead they are having incentive to add more stuff for people that want it, funds that go to paying people, supporting the company, the game and ensuring the game life span.

You have already gone on record saying you will quit once you get max level and some gear since you are casual. So your subjective opinion cares about short term and not the longevity of the game.

To recognize they are arguing a different definition and still try and argue with your own definition is beyond pointless. You need to be focusing on agreeing on a definition, unless you just want to continue to argue in circles for no reason.

I get what you are trying to do, but they are still going to call it p2w, moving the guidepost isn't going to work on them there won't be a understanding. I'd love to be proven wrong but I feel they are that stubborn and will use p2w even if the context is completely wrong.

This thread would have been dead in one page if they said pay for convenience and tried to push it as that narrative. Which would be fair convenience for getting a outfit you don't need to earn but even than that would be sus.

Based on what they have said you need to earn the right item to be able to use it as a skin, though maybe that applies more to mounts than armor.

Ludullu

Iridianny wrote: »

As for upperhand, I am not even sure what that means given there are multiple progression paths and ways to play a roleplaying game. A point that has been consistently ignored.

It hasn't been though. I've addressed this somewhere in the first few pages. Most (if not all) other styles of gameplay have a direct upwards movement of progress imbedded in their very design. And for most people, being at the top of that progress is the "win" condition in their style of gameplay. So when someone pays real money to get to that win condition - they've literally paid to win.

Iridianny wrote: »

I am not a super competitive person, so this idea of the upperhand doesn't really affect me nor was it my point. As I said, paying for part of the gameplay that otherwise could be achievable in game is p2w. Again, a matter of perspective that competition is what fuels you in an rpg where as for some it's roleplaying in a community, and for others it's adventuring in a fantasy world, etc.

If you're not competitive then you're not "winning" if you achieve your goal.


And as I said before, not a single cosmetic or even gear piece prevents you from reaching your goal of RPing as someone or participating in the community. And only when you start caring about competitive side of the game, do you start comparing yourself to others on some arbitrary scale of "I'm losing and he's winning".

Iridianny wrote: »

Honestly, if people pay for max level it doesn't really affect how other individuals play the game themselves, there will always be max levels ahead of you unless you are the first... and by that point it wont matter how those who are also max level alongside you got there...
So, I think most people are bothered by that idea simply because it is paying extra to not play the game. However, really those people just play the game differently than others. They don't see questing as the game, but rather end game content.

So here's a question to you, why do you deem cosmetics p2w (where a person pays instead of playing to "win" whatever it is you'd deem winnable), while you say that reaching max level or doing smth else by Paying To Win (achieve the goal of max lvl or anything else) shouldn't affect others. Why do cosmetics affect you then? How exactly do other people stop you from reaching your own self-imposed goal?

I'm not an RPer so do please explain how exactly do cosmetics determine who/what/where/when/why I can RP. Cause to me that doesn't make any sense.

PenguinPaladin

Mag7spy wrote: »

PenguinPaladin wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Name exactly what stats or gameplay advantage you main from a different outfit on the store, bet you can't name anything that influence combat or systems in game. Meaning there is no p2w.

As I said, paying for part of the gameplay that otherwise could be achievable in game is p2w

If they don't add it to the game than it would never be achievable, so your point on it being achievable otherwise is pointless. They could easily just have less content in the game and wrap it up. Instead they are having incentive to add more stuff for people that want it, funds that go to paying people, supporting the company, the game and ensuring the game life span.

You have already gone on record saying you will quit once you get max level and some gear since you are casual. So your subjective opinion cares about short term and not the longevity of the game.

To recognize they are arguing a different definition and still try and argue with your own definition is beyond pointless. You need to be focusing on agreeing on a definition, unless you just want to continue to argue in circles for no reason.

I get what you are trying to do, but they are still going to call it p2w, moving the guidepost isn't going to work on them there won't be a understanding. I'd love to be proven wrong but I feel they are that stubborn and will use p2w even if the context is completely wrong.

This thread would have been dead in one page if they said pay for convenience and tried to push it as that narrative. Which would be fair convenience for getting a outfit you don't need to earn but even than that would be sus.

Based on what they have said you need to earn the right item to be able to use it as a skin, though maybe that applies more to mounts than armor.

Its not just to "move the goal post"

The base of this argument is the terminology. If you dont confront the terminology then there is no argument to be had.

Where we are now it is just yelling opinions at eachother, and ignoring the other person because they arent yelling about what im yelling about.

Mag7spy

Even then you not using the shop allows everyone to see you and your character armor progression. What they wear has no effect on yourself as far as the visual go they are simply wearing what they want.

PenguinPaladin

Mag7spy wrote: »

Even then you not using the shop allows everyone to see you and your character armor progression. What they wear has no effect on yourself as far as the visual go they are simply wearing what they want.

Yes but for their point of veiw, looking good is something they spend time and effort on, so for you to just buy it isnt fair.

Iridianny

I think something you are all not understanding is personal progression and progression in a competitive standpoint can both be winning to people. Winning can be defined as ": to obtain by work : EARN"
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/win
To me, personal progression is more important. Therefore, cosmetic collection or perhaps visual desires that represent an achieved persona for my character are limited by a pay wall (for this example given the cosmetic I want is in the shop and unachievable in game.)

Ludullu

I'll never forgive neither Merriam nor Webster for this!!

Iridianny wrote: »

To me, personal progression is more important. Therefore, cosmetic collection or perhaps visual desires that represent an achieved persona for my character are limited by a pay wall (for this example given the cosmetic I want is in the shop and unachievable in game.)

So in the case of literally no shop cosmetics ever appealing to your (or your social circle's) RP preferences - would you considering cosmetic store to not be a p2w feature? Cause at that point there'd be no win-state in there for you.

And as we've all shown in these past 7 pages, ain't nobody else cares about that shit.

Ludullu

NiKr wrote: »

I'll never forgive neither Merriam nor Webster for this!!.

Oh wait! I found an amazing loophole! I do not care about what Merriam-Webster says for everyone has their own definition of "win" and to me it's the same as Oxford's one, where you need to win against someone in order to call something a win. Hah! Discussion loopholes ftw

Mag7spy

Iridianny wrote: »

I think something you are all not understanding is personal progression and progression in a competitive standpoint can both be winning to people. Winning can be defined as ": to obtain by work : EARN"
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/win
To me, personal progression is more important. Therefore, cosmetic collection or perhaps visual desires that represent an achieved persona for my character are limited by a pay wall (for this example given the cosmetic I want is in the shop and unachievable in game.)

You not being able to earn a cosmetic does not mean it is pay to win that is now how the term is defined. The cosmetic has no relation into being earned there is no reward or challenge to show you gain it by winning / overcoming a obstacle. It was simply bought not won, hence that can not be pay 2 win even by your own definition.

If you want to argue there can be more things in the game if they don't have a cosmetic shop that can be earned that is a different discussion all together. A think unless you are in the industry and know all the numbers people are mostly just speaking from bias at that point on what they think is the best vrs reality.

Samson1

JamesSunderland wrote: »

Do you understand that your thread holds no real value at all? @Iridianny

I'm afraid you might come to realise that the premise of your thread requires you to wear a cosmetic P2W set consisting of a huge pair of shoes, a colorful wig, and a red round nose to be properly discussed.

I think saying that the OP's thread "holds no real value" is a little disingenuous. If it truly holds no value, the thread would not have close to 200 replies in a couple days.

Visual progression is very important for many people that delve into MMOs. For others, visual progression isn't as important... and that's okay as well! We all have our opinions. If this topic has been talked about numerous times and no one actually cares about cosmetics being "P2W"... just let these type of threads/topics die. But clearly this is an important issue for some and I think is worth engaging in conversation (no matter how many times it has been brought up).

Iridianny

NiKr wrote: »

I'll never forgive neither Merriam nor Webster for this!!

Iridianny wrote: »

To me, personal progression is more important. Therefore, cosmetic collection or perhaps visual desires that represent an achieved persona for my character are limited by a pay wall (for this example given the cosmetic I want is in the shop and unachievable in game.)

So in the case of literally no shop cosmetics ever appealing to your (or your social circle's) RP preferences - would you considering cosmetic store to not be a p2w feature?

No, it’s still pay to win regardless if I like the cosmetics or not because there is surely someone who does and it’s the principle of me potentially wanting them for the reason I mention before.

Iridianny

Mag7spy wrote: »

Iridianny wrote: »

I think something you are all not understanding is personal progression and progression in a competitive standpoint can both be winning to people. Winning can be defined as ": to obtain by work : EARN"
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/win
To me, personal progression is more important. Therefore, cosmetic collection or perhaps visual desires that represent an achieved persona for my character are limited by a pay wall (for this example given the cosmetic I want is in the shop and unachievable in game.)

You not being able to earn a cosmetic does not mean it is pay to win that is now how the term is defined. The cosmetic has no relation into being earned there is no reward or challenge to show you gain it by winning / overcoming a obstacle. It was simply bought not won, hence that can not be pay 2 win even by your own definition.

Yes, I understand the perspective that if it's in the shop, it's not achievable in game… but that is the issue when there are other cosmetics to earn in game. If a potion to give you a super buff is in the shop and not in the game, but there's other different potions in the game, doesn't change the fact that that potion is in there is pay to win.

Iridianny

Samson wrote: »

JamesSunderland wrote: »

Do you understand that your thread holds no real value at all? @Iridianny

I'm afraid you might come to realise that the premise of your thread requires you to wear a cosmetic P2W set consisting of a huge pair of shoes, a colorful wig, and a red round nose to be properly discussed.

I think saying that the OP's thread "holds no real value" is a little disingenuous. If it truly holds no value, the thread would not have close to 200 replies in a couple days.

Visual progression is very important for many people that delve into MMOs. For others, visual progression isn't as important... and that's okay as well! We all have our opinions. If this topic has been talked about numerous times and no one actually cares about cosmetics being "P2W"... just let these type of threads/topics die. But clearly this is an important issue for some and I think is worth engaging in conversation (no matter how many times it has been brought up).

Iridianny

NiKr wrote: »

NiKr wrote: »

I'll never forgive neither Merriam nor Webster for this!!.

Oh wait! I found an amazing loophole! I do not care about what Merriam-Webster says for everyone has their own definition of "win" and to me it's the same as Oxford's one, where you need to win against someone in order to call something a win. Hah! Discussion loopholes ftw

Yourself is someone, but if you only accept the competitive definition you do you. I accept both.

CROW3

Iridianny wrote: »

If a potion to give you a super buff is in the shop and not in the game, but there's other different potions in the game, doesn't change the fact that that potion is in there is pay to win.

Except that if that potion has any performance-related modifiers it is explicitly not in the shop because of the generally agreed upon definition of P2W is being honored by Intrepid. If that potion made you appear like Keith Richards for an hour, it does not meet the generally agreed upon definition of P2W (even if it's your dream to have that costume for a short period of time), and therefore isn't P2W.

Mag7spy

Samson wrote: »

JamesSunderland wrote: »

Do you understand that your thread holds no real value at all? @Iridianny

I'm afraid you might come to realise that the premise of your thread requires you to wear a cosmetic P2W set consisting of a huge pair of shoes, a colorful wig, and a red round nose to be properly discussed.

I think saying that the OP's thread "holds no real value" is a little disingenuous. If it truly holds no value, the thread would not have close to 200 replies in a couple days.

Visual progression is very important for many people that delve into MMOs. For others, visual progression isn't as important... and that's okay as well! We all have our opinions. If this topic has been talked about numerous times and no one actually cares about cosmetics being "P2W"... just let these type of threads/topics die. But clearly this is an important issue for some and I think is worth engaging in conversation (no matter how many times it has been brought up).

That is because regulars will reply to anything when there is time. Also there is visual progression in the game we have said this multiple times. A title saying cosmetic shop is pay to win is click bait as we all know what actual pay to win is and is disingenuous as it gives new people the wrong understanding of the game that might not know that much. Its value is to use the most toxic mmo thing they can use to try to force their way into something they want people to believe. So id agree it doesn't have value unless you are counting being toxic as being value.


Cosmetic Shop is P2W
vrs
Cosmetic shop hampers visual progression and is akin to pay for convenience

One title meant to be more toxic for clicks, another that is a much more fair title akin to the discussion.

Noaani

Iridianny wrote: »

If you can find one I missed, I will respond to it. If someone says "that's garbage!" or "no" then there's not much I can say in response to those... Most posts completely ignore my original point or any points I've made that winning is subjective in a role playing game with multiple progression paths.

My first post in this thread was in relation to this.

Winning is not subjective at all, it is objective by definition.

If you want to claim you are addressing all points being bought up, address this point please.

I'll quote the post in question so you dont have to go looking for it (note: this is what you do if you have addressed something that is then asked again by another poster).

Noaani wrote: »

Iridianny wrote: »

“Winning” in an mmo with numerous progression routes, is quite subjective.

I got this far through the thread, and was sick of the level of misinformation already.

Winning is not subjective. It cant be.

In order to win, there needs to be a clear goal, defined by someone that isnt you.

You can set your own goals, that's fine. However, achieving them is not winning, it is simply achieving a goal.

Winning in Ashes if creation is not an overarching concept. You do not win the game.

Rather, you win small portions of the game. This may be a fight with another player, a mob, or successfully crafting an item.

These are all activities with a clear objective set by Intrepid, and as such are things you can win at.

Nothing at all in the games cash shop can assist you at all in winning in any of these situations, and as such the cash shop is simply not pay to win.

This is not a subjective matter, it is purely objective. That is because winning is purely objective.

Achieving a personal goal is subjective.

Now, if you want to say the cash shop p2aypsg (pay to achieve your personal subjective goals), you may have a valid discussion.

However, claiming that the concept of winning is subjective is just blatantly incorrect. Starting a thread off with this claim just makes tour point irrelevant from the get go.

So yeah, since you have claimed that you are addressing all points made, and since this is a point made to address your actual base complaint, I look forward to your reply.

Iridianny

CROW3 wrote: »

Iridianny wrote: »

If a potion to give you a super buff is in the shop and not in the game, but there's other different potions in the game, doesn't change the fact that that potion is in there is pay to win.

Except that if that potion has any performance-related modifiers it is explicitly not in the shop because of the generally agreed upon definition of P2W is being honored by Intrepid. If that potion made you appear like Keith Richards for an hour, it does not meet the generally agreed upon definition of P2W (even if it's your dream to have that costume for a short period of time), and therefore isn't P2W.

XD & “performance” is subjective as I’ve discussed there are multiple progression paths and multiple types of players. Visual progression is a real way of playing a role playing game whether you like it or not. I understand intrepid said no p2w, that’s why I made this post to show how cosmetic shop can be interpreted as p2w for many people when, like I said, visual progression is winning when winning can be a personal achievement and not every aspect of the role playing game is competitive pvp nor is it the sole focus.

Dolyem

Just ganna say it again. Cosmetics arent a factor in gameplay. They do not aid you in defeating or overcoming any mechanics of gameplay. Therefore they do not provide a "win" factor in the games design. Your personal goals outside of the games design do not factor into the equation of if a game is P2W or not, it is determined by whether or not you can win the games gameplay designs by paying with RMTs.

Dygz

NiKr wrote: »

I'd assume @Dygz could see her pov much better than any of us cause I think he's quite deep in RP too. He might not agree with her views on the matter, but I'd assume he at least understands where she's coming from.

I am fashion over function. I will pass over better stats until gear that fits my character's appearance is available.
I don't really see much difference between paying for cosmetics and P2W and P4 Convenience.
All of those will have me paying extra for stuff I want, but...

I don't know how people are winning anything with cosmetics.
Cosmetics help me look the way I want my characters to look. I'm not losing if I don't look the way I wish to look. I'm not really winning anything to look the way I wish to look.
There is no appearance competition that I'm aware of. Cosmetics do not provide any advantage that I'm aware of.

So... no... I think I don't really understand how paying for cosmetics helps a player win anything.

Mag7spy

Iridianny wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Iridianny wrote: »

I think something you are all not understanding is personal progression and progression in a competitive standpoint can both be winning to people. Winning can be defined as ": to obtain by work : EARN"
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/win
To me, personal progression is more important. Therefore, cosmetic collection or perhaps visual desires that represent an achieved persona for my character are limited by a pay wall (for this example given the cosmetic I want is in the shop and unachievable in game.)

You not being able to earn a cosmetic does not mean it is pay to win that is now how the term is defined. The cosmetic has no relation into being earned there is no reward or challenge to show you gain it by winning / overcoming a obstacle. It was simply bought not won, hence that can not be pay 2 win even by your own definition.

Yes, I understand the perspective that if it's in the shop, it's not achievable in game… but that is the issue when there are other cosmetics to earn in game. If a potion to give you a super buff is in the shop and not in the game, but there's other different potions in the game, doesn't change the fact that that potion is in there is pay to win.

You have things in a game to earn you are correct, things on the shop are not earnable by playing the game and is clear you spent money on it and so again its not something you won but something you bought. You should be happy there is stuff to earn in game that is done for people like you to enjoy playing and have your visual progression without spending more than just your sub. A buff and a cosmetic don't relate one allows you to more effectively do content, the other does not change content at all.

Effectively by saying this is pay to win you are active making people disagree with you than understanding your view point since you decided to use a buzzword. If you want to make a difference you need to do it honestly, if you feel you can't because not enough people will agree with you there is not much you can do about it. But going about in a way yelling p2w won't have a proper discussion which means less people will hear it, which means less impact.

Iridianny

@Noaani

https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/home/leaving?allowTrusted=1&target=https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/win
Winning is subjective when it’s a personal achievement of earning something.

“Winning in Ashes if creation is not an overarching concept. You do not win the game.

Rather, you win small portions of the game. This may be a fight with another player, a mob, or successfully crafting an item.”… or earning a cosmetic.
I think we agree more than disagree.

Iridianny

@Mag7spy Define what this game’s “content” is. I shared my definition in the original post. The game is a role playing game and the content is the experience your character has and that includes their visual progression.

PenguinPaladin

Dygz wrote: »

NiKr wrote: »

I'd assume @Dygz could see her pov much better than any of us cause I think he's quite deep in RP too. He might not agree with her views on the matter, but I'd assume he at least understands where she's coming from.

I am fashion over function. I will pass over better stats until gear that fits my character's appearance is available.
I don't really see much difference between paying for cosmetics and P2W and P4 Convenience.
All of those will have me paying extra for stuff I want, but...

I don't know how people are winning anything with cosmetics.
Cosmetics help me look the way I want my characters to look. I'm not losing if I don't look the way I wish to look. I'm not really winning anything to look the way I wish to look.
There is no appearance competition that I'm aware of. Cosmetics do not provide any advantage that I'm aware of.

So... no... I think I don't really understand how paying for cosmetics helps a player win anything.

I always knew i liked dygz. There were times i struggled with the thought sure..... but i always knew.

Ludullu

Samson wrote: »

I think saying that the OP's thread "holds no real value" is a little disingenuous. If it truly holds no value, the thread would not have close to 200 replies in a couple days.

If this topic has been talked about numerous times and no one actually cares about cosmetics being "P2W"... just let these type of threads/topics die. But clearly this is an important issue for some and I think is worth engaging in conversation (no matter how many times it has been brought up).

Nah, people just like to argue pointless shit cause everyone's bored If people didn't like arguing we all could've just disagreed with Iridianny and moved on, but alas we're a very argumentative bunch.

Iridianny wrote: »

No, it’s still pay to win regardless if I like the cosmetics or not because there is surely someone who does and it’s the principle of me potentially wanting them for the reason I mention before.

I mean, at this point you're just against the potentiality of things. And imo that's as bad of a take as saying that Ashes will definitely become a p2w game just because all the other games have become one. Is that possible? Of course. Is there a point of arguing about that before it actually happens? I'm not so sure, because I don't think you're Don Quixote.

Just say that you hate pre-order fomo cosmetic sales and most people here would agree with you, just because it is a rather shifty practice. But when you're trying to argue that potentially the cosmetics store will stand in your (or someone else's) way of RPing as some random character - that's the kind of thing that gets all the argumentative people on a forum to gang up on you.

And I would still like you to explain how exactly do store cosmetics prevent you from RPing as any given character. Or about whether you see store cosmetics as p2w if Intrepid explicitly states they're not.

Those two questions address the "cosmetic collection" and the "visual desires that represent an achieved persona" parts of your argument. Because if you want the absolute full collection of all cosmetics in the game - you've already lost and it'll be impossible to achieve. Otherwise Intrepid's list would become the win-state for your preferred gameplay.

And if it's now purely about the visual desire for some look, then we can completely divorce the RP part of the argument because I do not see how cosmetics prevent RP from happening.

And if we have both the collection and the RP part of the argument cleared, we're just left with a purely distilled and unsubstantiated opinion of "I don't like cosmetic shops". At which point, I'm sure, we could all agree with each other and go smell flowers under rainbows, because we all would love to live in a perfect world where cash shops don't exist in mmos. But, sadly, we live in the reality.

Iridianny

@Dygz in response, an earlier post…

Iridianny wrote: »

I think something you are all not understanding is personal progression and progression in a competitive standpoint can both be winning to people. Winning can be defined as ": to obtain by work : EARN"
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/win
To me, personal progression is more important. Therefore, cosmetic collection or perhaps visual desires that represent an achieved persona for my character are limited by a pay wall (for this example given the cosmetic I want is in the shop and unachievable in game.)