Stop with the pay to win advanages for retainers, suggestions on fixes

[Bourne_Endeavor]

Can we not reach to sensationalism? Pay to Win requires a win state. Considering gil is little more than a novelty achievement, this does not constitute Pay to Win. Is it scummy? Absolutely. Does it feel incredibly deceitful after their persistent whining about server limitations? Definitely. Do they deserve the overwhelming negative response? Yes. But is it Pay to Win? In my opinion, no.

So what is our solution? Don't purchase the premium feature. It's really that simple. Protest not only worth words on a forum but with your wallet. Our feedback certainly helps, but only if we're not paying into this trite. All throwing around Pay to Win accomplishes is giving them an out: "Oh, they're just exaggerating!" They cannot make that claim if barely anyone buys into a feature they spent ages working on.

[Ameela]

Pay to Win requires a win state. Considering gil is little more than a novelty achievement, this does not constitute Pay to Win.

Gil does allow you to buy gear, which is BiS for crafters and gatherer's and gives you a way to quickly gear up alt classes.
It's not pay to win but making it easier to obtain gil is hardly an insignificant advantage over other players.

[MomomiMomi]

Pay to Win requires a win state.

This is completely untrue. Pay to Win is not a literal term. If you wanted it to be literal, you would need to change the term to Pay for Advantage.

Even if you wanted to use the term in the case of winning, such as in PvP, Pay to Win does not require that you actually win. It simply requires that you have an advantage over the non-payer that they can't achieve without paying.

[Remedi]

This is completely untrue. Pay to Win is not a literal term. If you wanted it to be literal, you would need to change the term to Pay for Advantage.

Even if you wanted to use the term in the case of winning, such as in PvP, Pay to Win does not require that you actually win. It simply requires that you have an advantage over the non-payer that they can't achieve without paying.

When they'll shut down our argument by saying that we are wrong because they are not selling us power what will you say?

The app is Terrible because it's a QOL kept away by a paywall which is not directly a pay to win. We don't need for the company to have an easy argument to use against us, we need for them to understand that this premium currency or boost will not be acceptable for ANY REASONS

[polyphonica]

When they'll shut down our argument by saying that we are wrong because they are not selling us power what will you say?

The app is Terrible because it's a QOL kept away by a paywall which is not directly a pay to win. We don't need for the company to have an easy argument to use against us, we need for them to understand that this premium currency or boost will not be acceptable for ANY REASONS

I think you're right that it's better to avoid "pay-to-win" in this discussion, and just focus on the IAP scheme.

The "pay-to-win" debate is an abyss even more bottomless than the one surrounding Ishgard and ultimately proves nothing. If they didn't sell retainers (or didn't use them to interact with the marketboard), people could just create more characters to get more retainers/market access, and when they run of out of characters, they could just create more service accounts and buy more subscriptions. (You can friend characters across service accounts, trade between them, have two windows open at once... etc.) So it quickly degrades into this debate about the semantics of mechanics, and how "convenient" or "easy" they make it for those willing to pay. And at the end of the day, someone's time/availability is much more critical here anyway.

So yeah, the debate really needs to center on the payment scheme/structure for the app.

[MomomiMomi]

When they'll shut down our argument by saying that we are wrong because they are not selling us power what will you say?

The app is Terrible because it's a QOL kept away by a paywall which is not directly a pay to win. We don't need for the company to have an easy argument to use against us, we need for them to understand that this premium currency or boost will not be acceptable for ANY REASONS

I did not make any argument for anything in this game being pay to win in that post. I simply stated that saying pay to win requires "winning" is wrong. Also, this thread's major subject is Retainers, not the app, which seem to have gone completely over everyone's head.

However, yes, I would agree with the OP about retainers in particular. They allow for a vastly increased selling power, which is a highly competitive part of the game. It makes it more difficult for those who don't have the increased amount of retainers to compete, therefore negatively impacting their experience.

[Remedi]

I did not make any argument for anything in this game being pay to win in that post. I simply stated that saying pay to win requires "winning" is wrong. Also, this thread's major subject is Retainers, not the app, which seem to have gone completely over everyone's head.

However, yes, I would agree with the OP about retainers in particular. They allow for a vastly increased selling power, which is a highly competitive part of the game. It makes it more difficult for those who don't have the increased amount of retainers to compete, therefore negatively impacting their experience.

While I would agree on that, the retort that you'll probably get is that the game is focused on combat content and those extra retainers don't really give you an advantage in that.
That's why i say that our point needs to be fool-proof
If we have any opening they will use it against us

[Reynhart]

It makes it more difficult for those who don't have the increased amount of retainers to compete, therefore negatively impacting their experience.

So I guess you consider Standard and Legacy accounts pay to win compared to Entry accounts, right ?