Who is Optional – A Question of Consumer Value

[Shougun]

That's just it. If SE decided that the game was taking a new direction with heavensward and, for example, that saucer was to be the main focus with minigames, ranking systems, tournaments and such and leave the PvE as kinda a side content, then they very well could sell raid gear or raids themselves in shop and it wouldn't be p2w if the game did seriously do an about face.

Don't confuse this position with me 'liking' that idea. If the game changes direction to something I don't like then I'm free to find a game that is more in line with my interests. Similarly if the only reason you play is to collect mounts, you might want to take a serious look if this is the right game for you. Just like if you are a PvP fanatic you may want to consider a more pvp focused game. If you live farming/growing this games gardening may not be enough for you. This game doesn't have a huge focus on those activities. That's not being rude, that's just common sense. If you are super serious and centralize your gameplay around 1 element, maybe you should find a game that also focuses on that element.

Nah I wasn't saying anything other than a test to your statement and honestly you followed through . I think what makes this conversation both fun and nearly impossible (imo) to make traction on is that definitions are both a public and private thing, we try to fix language but it is not fixed.

I could agree that a company would see this as a situation "we have a farming simulator with some side fluff combat, we sell that fluff combat on the shop - it is called farming 2016 not arena 2016 for a reason". I would also say that a player can argue that the game was selling a win (in /their/ perspective) since language isn't fixed* and the company has no right to fix it**. *Laws try the upmost to be fixed but are also not, job lingo is best to try to be static too but also is not technically always static. **Inside the game the devs have more power like "water lights things on fire" they could do that, but outside the game things like opinions and feelings are not within a dev's power - like what is winning in Minecraft? I'd say at least while it was indie, that the dev didn't set that definition as much as players made their own.

Maybe my linguistic teacher has got me by my tail, I'd rather get a meaning than attempt the impossible and fix an opinion based definition/structure.

In the end, like you said (with my reword ) the meaning will (should) speak the loudest and players will decide if the game is for them. If they see the shop as p2w they will probably get away from it, even if the devs disagree that is is not in fact p2w (whether they're being honest and trying to show that isn't how they want their game perceived because " " or whether malicious intent to calm the masses while making the green).