>>320715005
i can't think of any

>>320715005
Dota 2 used to.

You could buy XP boots in the store.
But XP did nothing but increase an arbitrary level, and every level you got a random cosmetic item.

That pic is bait. With that logic team fortress 2 is pay to win, having more guns doesn't mean you're going to be better and neither does xp boosts inherently it depends on the system. You need to be objectively better in a way you can only reasonably get through paying money.

>>320715231
pay 2 win basically means pay 2 improve gameplay

>>320715231
You're taking the "win" part of pay2win too literally.

If a game awards cosmetics for winning, but cosmetics are also in the cash shop, I consider that pay 2 win. Basically, fuck cash shops or at least be honest about what they are. Games like WoW and FFXIV have no business having them.

Counter Strike
Quake
Unreal Tournament
the list goes on

>>320715345
>If a game awards cosmetics for winning, but cosmetics are also in the cash shop, I consider that pay 2 win.
How so?

>>320715419
That fits the list fine.

Pay to win is really easy to define.
Assume there is two players who are perfectly equal in all ways (equal skill, knowledge of game, time invested etc...) but one has put money into the game while the other has not. If the player who payed money is more likely to win between them, then the game is pay to win garbage.

>>320715005
I think it makes more sense to regard p2w on a sliding scale. Games were you can straight-up get a damage boost from paying is certainly worse than games where you can unlock cosmetic stuff earlier if you spend cash.