You assume that those people need to farm as much gil as humanly possible, like the gil farmers do. In reality that's completely false, as all they need to farm is what they need to get their monthly item. The influence on the market is negligible, and comparing them to "chinese workshop farmers" is an extremization that voids your argument of any validity.
Actually, having been a game writer for 15 years and having discussed this kind of topic a ton of times with developers, industry professionals and other writers alike, yeah, I have a very clear idea of what "pay to win" means.And you really are ignoring or dont get the pay to win meaning. If you can pay to play better, it is a pay to win system. If you can use real money to get ahead, it is a pay to win system. This idea IS a pay to win system.
According to your overly simplistic definition *every* MMORPG can be defined pay to win one way or another. Including FFXIV 1.0. Of course, that's not the case.
My definition is the definition widely accepted by the industry, and as such the only one that counts, unless you're in the business of calling things with the wrong name for shock value.
It is amusing, though, to see how many people still apply the concept inappropriately to games in which paying doesn't give any sizable advantage over those that don't pay.
You misinterpreted it (probably intentionally).Also in your own words you have labeled this system pay to win. "While some people's buying power will increase, some other's will decrease". This is not acceptable.
People whose buying power increases - Those that sell PLEX/Chronoscrolls, because they have more gold.
People whose buying power decreases - Those that buy PLEX/Chronoscrolls, because they have less gold.
Everyone else is unaffected, because, inflation-wise the other two categories cancel each other out.
Again. You're making up theories that conflict with economical theory, and that have already been proven wrong by reality in two distinct games.