And that’s a moot argument because the general situation of multiboxers (“solo” questing in the open world with multiple characters) isn’t severe enough for the power difference to be necessary, but is noticeable when comparing a single player to 3 just spamming AoE.
When you have to start reaching for situations that people don’t even really care about when they talk about multiboxers, it ceases to be a very compelling discussion.
Which gives the power of a group to a single group leader. How is this NOT pay to win again?
Which gives the power of a raid to a single raid leader. How is this NOT pay to win again?
Which gives the power of multiple raids to a single live streamer. How is this NOT pay to win again?
Do you see how your argument doesn’t hold up? Do you see that no matter what argument you use, the same can be said of other play styles… Raid leaders, Guild leaders, live streamers. You can say the exact same thing about them so the argument doesn’t hold up because anyone that is in command of a raid such as a guild leader or raid leader or a live streamer that play differently still have the power over that group. All of the accounts were paid for in WoW Classic. So if you state that multiboxers are pay-to-win, you’re claiming that all play styles that have a group or a raid of players is pay-to-win which doesn’t make any sense.
After admitting it’s pay to win and then losing the argument you decide to change your mind. /shrug what ever. You’re paying extra money to make the game easier and to gain a significant advantage in the game. It’s the very definition of pay to win.
You literally have the power of 5 combined characters for one sole player. How are you not getting that this is a huge advantage?
Because in all of those situations none of those players are paying extra monthly fees to Blizzard in order to do what you’ve outlined?
If you had to pay $10 to Blizzard to be able to start a group or raid, your argument would make more sense.
They’re not paying for it
They’re not paying for it.
So you’re stating that all forms of grouping are pay-to-win because you didn’t differentiate between the different play styles and how they aren’t pay-to-win. Your claim is that because the multiboxer controls the team that it’s pay-to-win, but there are many different play styles such as a raid leader, guild leader, people that form groups that ask for dungeon runs, etc. Or live streamers, they do the same thing, the all control more than one account by directing others to do what they want them to do.
I’m not paying anything extra to Blizzard either. No multiboxer is. Everyone in all situations pays for the account. Whether it’s multiboxed or not. So you don’t have an argument. You think you do but you don’t.
By the way at first we were on the subject of unfairness which was proven to be inaccurate because all groups are unfair to one person.
Then we discussed PvP and PvE as a comparison from multiboxing to full groups.
Now you want to change the subject to pay-to-win but you haven’t justified anything differently in how the multiboxer is any different to a group of players. They all pay for the accounts.
In order to multibox I need multiple completely separate accounts in order to do so. That’s an extra $15/month per account I want to use. You can’t log on to your same account multiple times dude…
No, just the forms of grouping that people pay for are pay to win. If you don’t pay for it, it’s not pay to win.
In order to form a group, each account needs separately accounts in order to do so.
Do you see how when you apply the same argument to a group that it doesn’t hold up?
Everyone plays and pays for the accounts they play. That’s how the system works. It’s a subscription based game.
if your follow up is “it varies from person to person” rather than accepting factually flat statements, then "it’s pay to win’ is also false for some.
i was agreeing with your argument that it offers advantage without feeling that i’d win anything if i were to do it.
you double standarded it so I’m doing the same.
your move.
We are talking about the power wielded by a single player, not groups of players all playing single characters.
Your mental gymnastics are asinine.
And the difference there is each person is paying their own subscription fee, as opposed to one person paying for multiple fees on their own.
Do you see how making an argument for something when you don’t even know how it actually works is a bad idea?
no, you’re a dishonest debater so I’m not interested in debating with you.
Ahh ok so you’re saying it’s pay-to-win only when a multiboxer pays for the accounts, not when players that don’t multibox pays for their accounts. See? Your arguing against something you don’t like only when a multiboxer does it. Not when people do it that don’t multibox.
i guess i’ll take this double-U then…
The only way your argument is true is if you can find several other people to group with you. Everytime you log on. That never fall behind in level. That let you have all the drops. That let you gather herbs, skin, mine. That will always be there to help with the easiest quests to the hardest quests. That will help you farm cloth and never take any for them self.
You’re paying for in game slaves. No one could ever find a group like that in the game for free.
Here we go, insults and name calling because you can’t explain how it’s different when a group leader directs a team in a dungeon how that is any different when it comes to pay-to-win. If your argument is on pay-to-win, let’s stay with that argument and not change to some other subject such as play style for now shall we? We’ll stay with the subject you want to discuss which is how multiboxing is pay-to-win but groups that aren’t multiboxed are not pay-to-win. I disagree because all of the accounts involved are paid for and Blizzard makes the money regardless. So when you make the argument that a multiboxer has the power of a group then so does a group leader. So how is that different when it comes to the pay-to-win argument? Answer: It’s not. Your arguing that a group is pay-to-win onlly when it’s multiboxed yet a group that isn’t multiboxed is not pay-to-win but your argument doesn’t hold up. The reason is because there is still a group leader, a raid leader, a guild leader or someone in terms of the size of the party in charge of what the party does. That leader has the control over whether the party fails or succeeds based on his experience so the pay-to-win argument doesn’t show any difference in terms of the accounts because they’re all still paid for.
So now you’re wanting to change the subject from the pay-to-win argument to … … play style… We can change to that argument but we must be in agreement that we’ve moved on and that you’ve agreed that multiboxing is not any more pay-to-win than any other group of players playing in any MMORPG. Then we can move on to discussing play style. Agreed? or do you still have reservations that multiboxing is pay-to-win and that groups of players are not?