Is it just me or certain games manage to get away with practices that are deemed p2w when done by other games?

I was watching a YT video about guild wars 2, and something that struck me was when the content creater defended GW2 as non pay to win by saying "sure, you can buy legendaries and utility like bag spaces/tools, but you can also get them by playing the game". For the record, I don't think that Guild Wars 2 is pay to win, but at the same time, the way he described it is almost word for word how p2w game developers defend their games when they implement mtx that allow them to directly purchase power.

I think that Warframe also has something similar where, if you buy platinum, then you can buy mods from other players, warframes and weapons from the shop, etc. Again, I wouldn't call Warframe a p2w game either, but the point still stands.

If we defend the pratice from Arena Net and Digital Extremes (for GW2 and WF respectively), shouldn't we apply that same metrics to other games? IIRC if I remember correctly Tarisland was blasted for the same thing recently when the devs opened to the possibility of selling gear that could be still obtainable in game through gameplay.

I'll reiterate, I don't say this to flame or criticize those 2 games, I just think there is a wacky double standard here because either:

A) When you go through the steps of purchasing a in-game currency and then trade the in-game currency to other players for power we feel like we aren't purchasing power directly or B) We really like those games or devs and we are cutting them some slack.

Anyway, I'd like to hear other thoughts on the matter.