Anything that gives an edge in an aspect can be P2W if it’s locked behind. This is why I’ve been fine with cosmetics. This is actually worthy of concern, so please be mindful and think through every aspect of how this can make/break a game.
The DLC JUST as guns is an entire risk at making itself appear (even if false) as a cashgrab. The DLC with BETTER guns can be considered P2W, because it’s behind a paywall to get the best meta. If the guns are WORSE, it’s a DLC people will label not worth, unless you buy it for the aesthetic aspect. That said, it needs to be middle ground or else there are gonna be issues and I just see that as Devs restricting themselves more and more, because they’re not innovating, they’re buying themselves time
I’m not judging the pack but competitive PVE has been around forever. It has taken many forms from leader boards, status, bragging rights, completion or whatever someone uses as a metric for success. Getting any type of advantage in a metic hidden behind a paygate will be rightfully seen as P2W for someone using said metric. Do I believe all metrics are valid, absolutely not.
Damage boost is most definitely one of those that shouldn’t be in a DLC. If someone that paid for something that does more damage in the base game it means that I’ll be losing time if I don’t opt in. So if I’m losing time the person that paid is winning – i.e. P2W
Lets exaggerate bit, imagine GZ with one stars weapons were base price, 2* double, 3* triple etc. Wouldn’t that be seen as P2W?
Mostly anything non-vanity is a slippery slope that can generate a lot of hate.
I agree in the sense that I have jumped the gun here, but still. The term PTW in this game is flawed in an by itself. Anyway, having actual items that may/may not have a real impact on actual gameplay blocked behind a dlc that you have to pay for, may very well fall into the category of “ptw”.
Vanity items is one thing, and in this case that could have very well have been skins for existing weaponry.
I hope you understand my concerns.
While it’s true GZ doens’t have PVP, it is a PVE game where you can get better advantages with better guns. Of course that’s a given with PVE focused games. But since these new guns are more than vanity or new explorable areas, you are paying for something that can have an affect on the meta. Who knows, these new guns could be the new meta or maybe not. I can’t really judge it entirely until all the details are out there.
The problem is that if they are going to add new guns that cost money then they need to be balanced so that they do not over shadow current ones. It’s a risky move that needs to be done right. But let’s say these guns are the best ones. Then DLC owners can get an advantage against current and future enemies compared to non DLC owners. For instance get better kill time for the reaper, then non dlc owners would feel that they need to pay more money to beat machines faster. In that sense it would make weapon DLC P2W.
I do get where you’re coming from. I’m a strong opposer to PTW myself. But I also have faith that the devs can find a way to balance the DLC guns so that they offer more variety and flavour along with the guns that already exist, without overshadowing them. I don’t think the intention is to offer an advantage that has to be paid for, just additional, optional content.
I just don’t get it sure I would pay to unlock these weapons to FIND and use if that is indeed what’s intended… Or will if be free idk I’m not gonna know maybe till it’s out… but what happens if you don’t have the Pack and join someone’s who has its game. Will that cause problems?
Love they are giving us more diverse weapons though and I support this game and the people that work on it
I am excited for this, because new weapons that are not swedish or experimental. But im also afraid that it will be OP and the game will become pay to win. But then again, this is gz, i doubt it will be OP.
To be honest I don’t think we should spew hate without having the full picture
All we know is the addition of new guns and possibly cosmetic items
And we don’t even know weather the guns will just be handed to the player immediately or placed in machine and gun case loot tables also there’s the fact you’d probably find dilapidated varients starting off
Who told you I have junk I never use?
I have all the weapons with no copies there, and I keep changing them to keep things interesting.
The rest is mostly ammo, specially for the SMG´s and assault rifles.
I agree with @Bronyboi18
It´s still too soon , we don´t know any other details.
I find their approach a bit weird, it´s been almost 2 years since the game came out, they have been giving free weapons and now they develop a Weapons pack DLC and it´s probably paid?
A bit weird, but we don´t know most of the details.
Next week I bet we will have more information , till then the best approach is to wait and see what comes next.
I have been reading a lot of hate already on other forums, really funny how easy and quick they are getting their nickers in a twist, for something as trivial as a game. There are however, also many people who like this new Weapon Pack announcement. A weapon Pack was not what I was hoping for. I’d rather have a Mystery Mission Pack.
I don’t see this weapon pack as a pay to win pack, because the weapons that are in the game are good and i think you must not buy for to win. What i see is that i can buy a special pack of weapons for my optic. The whole time i fought only with four weapons. That was a 5* Klaucke a 5* AG4 and 5* HP5 as i finished the archipelago i got hands over this weapons and they worked fine.
Sometimes for the bigger boyz or when i need a fast solution then i use a exp PVG 90.
But I’m excited what will come up and i hope there is the Beretta or the 1911Colt. In IRL the Glock is better than the old fashioned Colt1911 because her trim is better and with 17 rounds she carrys more ammo than the Colt that have only eight shots.
The Beretta is heavy but she can carry 14 rounds IRL. But i love the Beretta because she lies good in the Hand at shooting.
I see this DLC the same as the fashion pack or the vanity pack. Something for the optic.
When they make the exp weapons to pay then i will consider this as a p2win.
But i think the Devs will not do this because that is the ruin of the game.
I’m jumping on that boat too. Occult and machines that shaken, not stirred is kinda new experience (Wolfenstein doesn’t count - these machines are occult in the first place).
Back to guns.
I forecast “Warsaw pact” pack, where people will get what they ask for: vs 61 as SMG in secondary slot, SVD as middle ground rifle between Elkgun and Barrett and PM-84 Glauberit for those who want Uzi, but in Europe.
These packs (including announced US Pack) may or may not fit in. SPOILERS
By the late game quests NATO and still existing USSR already noticed big fan spinning and waterfall of shit pouring over it in Sweden, specifically on and around it’s tiny island. And they already took some
measures. (like that EMP bomb)
SPOILERS ENDS
I wouldn’t be surprised if we one day find out that there’s relief forces consisting of joint NATO armies, USSR company and mainland ground forces. Our role would be sabotage defences in certain area to help 'em deploy. Or somehow get boxes/containers with supplies to combat machines. That would be pretext to get all the popular and famous guns of 90s and before from both sides of Atlantic and beyond.
I’d like to keep current gun roster as is, because every piece has it’s strong points and every piece is equally usable. This has good balance in variety.
isnt US weapons a bit basic? they appear in most fps. I think I would’ve liked it more if they exppanded on the swedish stuff. or perhaps some other european stuff, like norwegian or finnish maybe
The concerns of pay to win in gz are moot. There is no pay to win because there is no player to player competition.
If people were concerned about predatory microtransactions that’d be fair, but people whining about pay to win need to understand what pay to win really means.
Progress boosters, exp weapons, weapon packs etc. are not pay to win, especially in the circumstance of what type of game GZ is. Sure the argument could be “if you pay for this you rob yourself the experience” but that’s not paying to win, that’s paying to push past what is a fundamental game loop, which should be a decision of the beholder.
Plus video games are an industry, you think the devs are getting a pay cheque based on your hours put into the game? No they stopped earning money the moment you paid for the game/dlc/cosmetic pack.
Video games that have longevity are based off recurrent monetization, if we want to see GZ have a long life span, we need to accept the venues of monetization that are put into the game.
So again; if they are not predatory there is no cause for outcry.
You are incorrect. GZ can easily be turned into a P2W game without any PVP.
EDIT : To be clear, I’m not saying the devs are planning on turning GZ into P2W. I just want to be clear that PvE only is not immune to P2W.
No you are incorrect. “winning” in gz is not having the guns, it’s not beating the machines, it’s not leveling up your character.
Winning in generation zero is enjoying the experience, the world, the story telling.
If your opinion is otherwise you have a incredibly shallow perspective on what this game is.
