Quote Originally Posted by Zojha View Post
Why would beating an entirely optional piece of content be "Winning"?

Or differently put, if beating Savage easier was "Winning", wouldn't getting a higher score in the Fashion Report be as well? Both are optional pieces of content. Both can be beaten without paying. Both are non-competitive, as beating it has no impact on other players trying it.

If getting a paid advantage in Savage was "Pay to Win", therefore the dyes they sell would also be "Pay to Win", as those frequently give an advantage in the Fashion report.

And while that may sound absurd, it's a consequence of people not giving a clear definition of P2W and relying on examples and nebulous implied definitions that often contain double standards to boot. It's why I find the entire P2W debate both funny and pointless.
You have to view "winning" within the context of each particular game. The end goals in XIV will be different from the goals in GW2, which are different from the end-game goals in EVE, etc.

XIV endgame seems to be a mix of collecting mass amounts of gil, glamour, raid drops, bragging rights (first clears, savage clears, potd solo, look at my shiny item!, etc). Buying additional retainers, unless used 100% for storage only, lets you generate a generous amount of additional gil via ventures and additional market space. You are buying the advantage over people who stick with the stock retainers. That gil can then be used to buy clears, buy drops, buy top-level gear, afford all the millions in materia you're bound to spend, build your empire, put back into your crafting, whatever your end-game goal is - it's going to fund it.

I would say that the advantage you buy in XIV is far less extreme than in other games, but you are still buying an advantage over people. To me, this is what P2W would entail.