Baal Roo
Subdreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
1402
   |
Posted - 2013.05.24 22:34:00 -
[1] - Quote
In his defense, it doesn't look like CCP have any real intentions of ACTUALLY removing the P2W aspects anytime soon. I mean, they're still releasing AUR only items that are superior to ISK items. Honestly, I was on CCP's side on this for awhile, because they keep giving the problem lip service. However, just take a look at the Blood Raider Saga for example. It's a regular Saga, but with a MUCH higher shield recharge rate, better than any other LAV in the game.
If they want to people to take the "AUR items just let you get stuff faster" argument seriously, THEY need to take it seriously. |
Baal Roo
Subdreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
1403
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 22:44:00 -
[2] - Quote
xprotoman23 wrote:Baal Roo wrote:In his defense, it doesn't look like CCP have any real intentions of ACTUALLY removing the P2W aspects anytime soon. I mean, they're still releasing AUR only items that are superior to ISK items. Honestly, I was on CCP's side on this for awhile, because they keep giving the problem lip service. However, just take a look at the Blood Raider Saga for example. It's a regular Saga, but with a MUCH higher shield recharge rate, better than any other LAV in the game.
If they want people to take the "AUR items just let you get stuff faster" argument seriously, THEY need to take it seriously. CCP took away some of the variation in STD and ADV weapons so no wonder things are perceived as being P2W. When I first started speccing into the SCAR and realized the assault versions were unlocked at levels 4+5 i couldn't help put think things appeared to be P2W.
Like I said, as long as they CONTINUE to release AUR only items that don't have ISK equivalent versions the game IS, by definition, P2W.
CCP keeps telling us that it's not their intention to release items like this, and then keep releasing them. How hard is it to pull up the specs of the current ISK versions of an item and cross check the AUR version you're about to release? The obvious conclusion is that, as usual, CCP are saying one thing, but doing something else entirely. I don't know if it's just awful management, or intentional deceit, but neither bodes well. |