The advantage is not insurmountable, no, but there is no skirting around the fact that it is (at its very core) an advantage. You could pay $10,000 for your son’s soccer team to start the game with a 1-0 lead. Insurmountable? No, but still a pay to win feature.
My argument was never about how insufferable leveling is. There is many kinds of people some find it enjoyable some don’t. But for those that don’t enjoy leveling, I suppose it isn’t fair to those that don’t pay vs those that do.
That analogy fails because hitting level 70 is not a win condition in WoW.
Nor does the boosted character actually do anything to make it harder for the non boosted character to hit level 70. The boosted character will have what 1 or two more raid lock outs? A few more profession cool downs maybe? That is a margin of error given how different people’s play styles are.
Where’s the “advantage”?
False equivalency. Unless you’re insinuating that hitting level 70 is “winning” the BC Game…then us 60s have the higher “advantage”, here for being 2 levels ahead and not the level 58s.
Here’s what I don’t understand about your argument. Say those who don’t like leveling pay for the 58 boost…they still have to level through Outlands in order to reach level 70. I think what you mean to say is leveling alone. While the main party is in Outlands, it’s OK to level out in Outlands, 'cause that’s where there’s “the most people”.
Now you are just trolling.
Or maybe not? 
If you are happy thinking the money you spend goes to feeding the families of blizzard employees then I wont break your bubble.
I don’t even know if I can, it’s a pretty strong bubble you have around you after all.
That analogy does not work. For one, what my character is doing is not directly opposing or in competition with what your character is doing. We are not two sides of the same game on an isolated playing field where me scoring means you did not and brings me a step closer to beating you.
We are two independant players, working in parallel and me scoring does not prevent you from also scoring at the exact same time.
Plus a boosted player does not start ahead of you, to use your analogy, it would be like paying $10,000 for your son’s soccer team to start with a 2 point deficit.
I’m not. I said it could be possible, not that it is. I’m not discrediting that Blizz will be paying their employees more, less or remain the same. I have no information on that one way or another.
Cool.
I’ll take that as a compliment 'cause you used the word “strong” 
The point isn’t to argue about how much of an advantage it is. You yourself acknowledge that the advantage would be what, 1-2 week raid lockout and other things that will be irrelevant, etc. It’s an advantage, period. A very small one. I’m not bothered by the advantage because like you, I also think it is miniscule enough to be ignored but I’m not going to pretend it’s not pay to win. My original reply to the person’s message was pointing out the fact he was insulting people who claimed it is pay to win. Just call it what it is. It provides an advantage. It’s pay to win. -_-
While I am against the instant 58 boost in general, it is not because of any pay to win reason. I mostly am against it since it will provide a horribly low barrier of entry for botting. We will see more bots than we’ve ever seen before and it will likely increase bots utilization hacking as well (fly, teleport, etc.).
Winning in soccer is directly related to how many goals you score.
You don’t hit level 70 in world of Warcraft and win the game
You definitely don’t win world of Warcraft by hitting level 58
For it to be pay to win it would require that someone who didn’t boost could never reasonably achieve what someone who took the boost did.
And as you just said any potential advantage is extremely minor. Especially given that most people will be walking into Outlands with geared 60’s. Yet noone talks about how that will impact the poor level 1’s…
Yeah, I’m making the same argument. That the 60s have way more advantages than any 58s.
I just don’t understand what’s so hard about calling it what it is? The severity of the feature does not change what it inherently is at its most fundamental level.
The problem is that it’s not, though. Those of who played Classic prior to BC’s release HAVE the higher advantage than any boosted 58 can dream of. Just ask the ones advocating for “fresh” BC Servers with no transfers. They’ll tell you, too.
/shrug I guess i just live in a more nuanced world where details matter.
By trying to claim it’s p2w you are lumping it into a huge amount of horrible mechanics that the boost just isn’t.
Also, you’ve narrowed the definition of pay to win to exclude features providing “minor” advantages which now suits your argument since you don’t see paying for minor advantages as pay to win.
The biggest issue I see from the anti-boosters is for some reason they perceive winning the game as being level 58 or being first to do something.
Since they hit level 58 first they’re winning or since they can now hit level 70 1st they’re winning.
In reality though in this game doing something first doesn’t mean you won there’s really no winning the game you experience the game and have fun and everybody does it differently.
You beating the first raid tier doesn’t mean you won the game. And you being the first to do so still doesn’t mean you won the game.
It’s just a perceived notion of winning because you did something first. This isn’t a racing game.
Yes you’re right. Those that have already put in the effort to get to 60 and prepare themselves are ahead of the insta 58 boosters. Noone is arguing that. But the effort was still there regardless of whether it has already happened vs a scenario with two new players.
I clarified that the term P2W was specifically coined to refer to things that become mandatory rather than optional, usually in F2P games.
Boosts simply do not qualify.
Like I said in a previous reply, my gripe with the boosting is not about “winning”, just the unintended consequences that I believe will negatively influence the game (bot side effects and whatnot).
While the definition you provide is good, it becomes subjective to what is classified as mandatory vs optional. Blizz could offer +300 to a profession for $20, or exalted rep for $40. Some may consider both mandatory purchases given the time needed for either, but others may not. Leveling a profession to 300 is far easier than leveling to 58. Is it not?
Right and that’s my point you have to look at what is actually being offered rather than just labeling everything P2W and picking up a pitch fork.
For example if blizzard was releasing fresh servers but offered boosts on them I would have a different opinion about that than I do about boosts on existing servers.