Link the article.

Are you sure it wasn't a user review or blog?

No it was in the Massive by-line by Adam Biessener. He has been writing for GI since 2003.

An article in the latest issue of GameInformer jabs at Dust 514's clunky mechanics, mediocre graphics, limited game modes and 'barely there' connectivity with EVE Online. It isn't anything we have not heard a dozen times before and while most is true to some extent we all deal with the game's limitations in our own way.

However, the author, who seems to have spent all of 20 min actually playing the game (apparently Dust 514 has 'hover tanks' and 'laser pistols') goes on to state that "the often derided, 'pay to win' scenario is definitely at play in Dust". He later claims, "the tie between in-game power and real-money purchases pushes the boundaries of what I'll accept in a competitive game."

Of course this is after he confuses readers by explaining the standard market like players have to regularly pay real money for items and "the sums of which aren't huge (on the order of pennies or less per use" and that "you can buy real-money currency from fellow players and acquire goods that way as well".

It is obvious this guy (Adam Biessener) spent all of 20 minutes in game but despite that, in the 14 months I have been playing Dust 514 I have NEVER felt like the game was 'Pay-to-Win'. Now I know a few questionable items have popped up on the market from time to time and CCP has generally addressed most issues when the players cry foul. But I was curious if other players really felt there was a significant 'Pay-to-Win' stigma attached to the game.

I for one say no. I play dozens of matches each week and I rarely find myself the victim of AUR weapons or equipment. Sure it is out there but I do not think any of it is tipping the balance of power or whatever the hell this guy thinks it's doing. I am pretty sure most major corps and alliances are using standard ISK variants in the majority of PC battles out there. Anyway...interested to hear what others have to say.

Why haven't you linked it already?

You can fit aur tanks better than regular tanks because they have more CPU.

You can buy grenades with real money that cannot be obtained with isk.

P2w.

You can fit aur tanks better than regular tanks because they have more CPU.

You can buy grenades with real money that cannot be obtained with isk.

P2w.

first no you really can't fit better tanks that way and second yes fused are very clearly breaking the P2W they swore not to do along with the M8 cavity ones too.

You can fit aur tanks better than regular tanks because they have more CPU.

M2 Cavity and Fused Locus Nades baby.. pay to win to the extreme.

He was right, it is pay to win, he was wrong on exactly why its pay to win though.

I swore he was talking about planetside 2 for a bit after reading
PG 28 Vol 244

An article in the latest issue of GameInformer jabs at Dust 514's clunky mechanics, mediocre graphics, limited game modes and 'barely there' connectivity with EVE Online. It isn't anything we have not heard a dozen times before and while most is true to some extent we all deal with the game's limitations in our own way.

However, the author, who seems to have spent all of 20 min actually playing the game (apparently Dust 514 has 'hover tanks' and 'laser pistols') goes on to state that "the often derided, 'pay to win' scenario is definitely at play in Dust". He later claims, "the tie between in-game power and real-money purchases pushes the boundaries of what I'll accept in a competitive game."

Of course this is after he confuses readers by explaining the standard market like players have to regularly pay real money for items and "the sums of which aren't huge (on the order of pennies or less per use" and that "you can buy real-money currency from fellow players and acquire goods that way as well".

It is obvious this guy (Adam Biessener) spent all of 20 minutes in game but despite that, in the 14 months I have been playing Dust 514 I have NEVER felt like the game was 'Pay-to-Win'. Now I know a few questionable items have popped up on the market from time to time and CCP has generally addressed most issues when the players cry foul. But I was curious if other players really felt there was a significant 'Pay-to-Win' stigma attached to the game.

I for one say no. I play dozens of matches each week and I rarely find myself the victim of AUR weapons or equipment. Sure it is out there but I do not think any of it is tipping the balance of power or whatever the hell this guy thinks it's doing. I am pretty sure most major corps and alliances are using standard ISK variants in the majority of PC battles out there. Anyway...interested to hear what others have to say.

I buy nothing except active and passive boosters I have been in dust for 6 months so that still adds up to a pretty penny spent !!!!

Are you saying that Boosters are 'Pay-to-Win' or just too hard to avoid in a game touted as 'Free-to-Play'?

M2 Cavity and Fused Locus Nades baby.. pay to win to the extreme.

He was right, it is pay to win, he was wrong on exactly why its pay to win though.

hard to avoid you need all the help you can get to gain sp gets you into proto suits a lot quicker

(apparently Dust 514 has 'hover tanks' and 'laser pistols')

CPU be damned, I have more CPU then I'll ever, EVER need. Every top-tier tanker both Armor or Shield wants PG, we have more then enough CPU if skills are properly invested in. Only a low-skill tanker or someone running a bizzare crap fit is ever starved for CPU.

Because reviewers, sadly, are paid to either persuade ignorant gamers or they give the people what they want to hear.

The problem with reviewers, as a whole, is that they don't review games objectively. They are either comparing it to another game in its same genre or they judge upon their own personal expectations. Take for instance the situation with The Last Of Us. Dude expressed how he didn't enjoy it. You know what happened? The internet went into uproar. The icing on the cake was Shuhei even taking to twitter to air out his disapproval of the man's review. All because he wasn't praising and bowing to it?

I said all that to say this, in the gaming community I find it ironic that it was once recognized as an outcast haven and now gamers outcast their own when they don't follow the trend or go along with majority. Dust is not a trending game currently. I don't think it ever will be.

Dust, honestly for some odd reason, is hated on by plenty of folks because they compare it to Battlefield and COD. If it doesn't add up or play like a pick up and play game, they have something negative to say.

Instead of judging the grandscope, he got his butt handed to him and he didn't like it. You can't pull that BF and COD stunt in this game. You can't sit down and say its P2W only.

But like EVE, I believe Dust is not going to be accepted by the majority, yet it will have a strong enough community that it will do well. EVE is not on everyone's to play list. Even the video game journalist hardly ever talk about it unless it's about some heist or someone losing their expensive ship in battle.

Yet that community thrives.

The review is ignorant. And like most reviews, I don't pay attention to them.

An article in the latest issue of GameInformer jabs at Dust 514's clunky mechanics, mediocre graphics, limited game modes and 'barely there' connectivity with EVE Online. It isn't anything we have not heard a dozen times before and while most is true to some extent we all deal with the game's limitations in our own way.

However, the author, who seems to have spent all of 20 min actually playing the game (apparently Dust 514 has 'hover tanks' and 'laser pistols') goes on to state that "the often derided, 'pay to win' scenario is definitely at play in Dust". He later claims, "the tie between in-game power and real-money purchases pushes the boundaries of what I'll accept in a competitive game."

Of course this is after he confuses readers by explaining the standard market like players have to regularly pay real money for items and "the sums of which aren't huge (on the order of pennies or less per use" and that "you can buy real-money currency from fellow players and acquire goods that way as well".

It is obvious this guy (Adam Biessener) spent all of 20 minutes in game but despite that, in the 14 months I have been playing Dust 514 I have NEVER felt like the game was 'Pay-to-Win'. Now I know a few questionable items have popped up on the market from time to time and CCP has generally addressed most issues when the players cry foul. But I was curious if other players really felt there was a significant 'Pay-to-Win' stigma attached to the game.

I for one say no. I play dozens of matches each week and I rarely find myself the victim of AUR weapons or equipment. Sure it is out there but I do not think any of it is tipping the balance of power or whatever the hell this guy thinks it's doing. I am pretty sure most major corps and alliances are using standard ISK variants in the majority of PC battles out there. Anyway...interested to hear what others have to say.

The gaming community gives EVE high praises up and down cuz it's a great game.

Dust gets horrible reviews cuz it's a really bad game. Bro ME3 is deeper than dust i can actually customize my weapons, my characters, more maps, core mechanics are way better. IE: shooting.

I played MAG yesterday and that game is way better than Dust. Dust is the worse FPS I've ever played, and CCP just keeps making it worse with every tweak or patch.

You are full of **** when it comes to comparing the two games. PS2 is leagues better on balance, technology, and F2P model.

M2 Cavity and Fused Locus Nades baby.. pay to win to the extreme.

He was right, it is pay to win, he was wrong on exactly why its pay to win though.

I read the lol informer article again and what I really struggle with is how its a really really good free game but free is stated only once.

you cannot pay to win here. That is a lie. Granades almost never kill you. Ive died 50 times from grenades.....seen 10k thrown 2k......maybe killed 10 people.

What really pisses me off is how lol informer just loves animal crossing and jet pack 7 year old phone game but dust gets zero.

They do a hell of a job selling wii u and mario garbage though.

The gaming community gives EVE high praises up and down cuz it's a great game.

Dust gets horrible reviews cuz it's a really bad game. Bro ME3 is deeper than dust i can actually customize my weapons, my characters, more maps, core mechanics are way better. IE: shooting.

I played MAG yesterday and that game is way better than Dust. Dust is the worse FPS I've ever played, and CCP just keeps making it worse with every tweak or patch.

So depth is decided by customization and characters? Are we now treating this game as if CCP has walked away from it? (OH YEA YOU ARE). Did not CCP say they have a 10 year plan? Did not EVE get horrible reviews when it first dropped and visually looked terrible? Now it has a thriving community and it looks fantastic?

This is what I mean. Mental maturity. Able to look at this whole thing and judge objectively.

[quote=Michael Arck]
Is there a section in their ten year plan for how they will recoup the lost players who have been turned away by bad balance, shoddy developing and broken mechanics?

Is there a section in the plan for how they intend to go about fixing the absolutely horrid reputation this shooter has right now?

CCP alt?

Smells like it.

Granted. But is there anything stopping any player from coming back 3, 6, 10, 12 months later to check in on the progress of Dust and gauge whether it might have met some of that potential and improved to a point where it might be a viable game to start reinvesting a little playtime in?

What are players going to NOT play out of spite, even if the game enhances all the aspects that caused them to look elsewhere for a time? I mean c'mon. If Dust 514 came out on PS4 nine months after the platform launch and was significantly improved, players are not going to log in, distribute the millions of skill points they have acquired while they were away and jump into the Burnzone to see how things have progressed?

Gimmie a break.

He didn't accidentally review PS2 and call it DUST did he

Oh yeah, pay to win? Not really. Some of the grenades are pushing it but its not really a huge disadvantage. The biggest problem is more rubbish balancing.

Flying tanks.... The OP'ness intrigues me ( that part would mean tanks worked...LoLtanks)

Dust is not Eve.

Thinking that Dust can follow the same development style of Eve is dooming it to failure.

Judging the game objectively is why it gets absolutely horrid reviews. Because, objectively, it is a bad FPS. A great idea, with tons of potential, but still a bad FPS.

CCP can take the ten year plan and laugh at how wildly they dreamt while 1000 eve fans who can't be competitive in any real FPS struggle to smash new players who only play because their brother or sister handed them down a PS3.

Is there a section in their ten year plan for how they will recoup the lost players who have been turned away by bad balance, shoddy developing and broken mechanics?

Is there a section in the plan for how they intend to go about fixing the absolutely horrid reputation this shooter has right now?

Is there a space in that plan for how they intend to combat the vets, the very people who tolerated this behaviour for so long, going around afterwards saying "F Dust"? Because there were many people who ask me if Dust is ready to paly yet, and I have to laugh and tell them not yet. Because I got a lot of people to play this thing back in open beta, only one of them still plays it. When they see people like me who gave this game every chance to get better finally throw in the towel, why would they think that that is something they need to try?

So depth is decided by customization and characters? Are we now treating this game as if CCP has walked away from it? (OH YEA YOU ARE). Did not CCP say they have a 10 year plan? Did not EVE get horrible reviews when it first dropped and visually looked terrible? Now it has a thriving community and it looks fantastic?

This is what I mean. Mental maturity. Able to look at this whole thing and judge objectively.

I don't care about MAG. Who gives a fluff?

This community or at least this forum, don't support CCP properly. It's always you whiners and "its the worse game I ever played but I still play it-whoa" folks who are the ones messing it up.

But you're an opportunist. A fair weather friend. The community is supposed to help build this game the same way EVE players helped build EVE. It's funny, even the EVE community talks about how bad the support is over here on the Dust forums. The way they describe it makes the majority of this community sound like a bunch of big bratty babies who can't possibly fathom how they're constructive involvement can help Dust to continue to get better.

I mean, we have the same opportunity as EVE players have to help craft a fine piece of software. But only brats would play it, see the mistakes and get mad because its not perfection. How silly. You can tell who were given candy whenever they pitched a fit at walmart when they were kids

People like you should head towards the door. Majority of you just come here to spread ill will but don't even play the game or if you do, you play it daily. Yet you have time to say how bad it is.

I can't even take your kind seriously.

Atleast one cant be overun by flying tanks, lets have the LAVs hover too...!

If the bumper hits my dome, could this be considered a head shot?

gameinformer is still a magazine? that's just sad.

weren't they involved in 'review-gate'?

An article in the latest issue of GameInformer jabs at Dust 514's clunky mechanics, mediocre graphics, limited game modes and 'barely there' connectivity with EVE Online. It isn't anything we have not heard a dozen times before and while most is true to some extent we all deal with the game's limitations in our own way.

However, the author, who seems to have spent all of 20 min actually playing the game (apparently Dust 514 has 'hover tanks' and 'laser pistols') goes on to state that "the often derided, 'pay to win' scenario is definitely at play in Dust". He later claims, "the tie between in-game power and real-money purchases pushes the boundaries of what I'll accept in a competitive game."

Of course this is after he confuses readers by explaining the standard market like players have to regularly pay real money for items and "the sums of which aren't huge (on the order of pennies or less per use" and that "you can buy real-money currency from fellow players and acquire goods that way as well".

It is obvious this guy (Adam Biessener) spent all of 20 minutes in game but despite that, in the 14 months I have been playing Dust 514 I have NEVER felt like the game was 'Pay-to-Win'. Now I know a few questionable items have popped up on the market from time to time and CCP has generally addressed most issues when the players cry foul. But I was curious if other players really felt there was a significant 'Pay-to-Win' stigma attached to the game.

I for one say no. I play dozens of matches each week and I rarely find myself the victim of AUR weapons or equipment. Sure it is out there but I do not think any of it is tipping the balance of power or whatever the hell this guy thinks it's doing. I am pretty sure most major corps and alliances are using standard ISK variants in the majority of PC battles out there. Anyway...interested to hear what others have to say.

You can fit aur tanks better than regular tanks because they have more CPU.

You can buy grenades with real money that cannot be obtained with isk.

P2w.

DUST514 is P2W Faster

Seeing as the main crutch of this game is how much SP you have then being able to spend real money to buy boosters to increase SP gain means you gain an advantage from spending money.

Being able to buy early access to higher tiered gear with lower skill requirements is P2W

The only way for a game to be truly not P2W would be for the cash shop to only sell customized avatars/aesthetic packs

Any advantage gained by spending money is P2W

DUST514 is P2W Faster

Seeing as the main crutch of this game is how much SP you have then being able to spend real money to buy boosters to increase SP gain means you gain an advantage from spending money.

Being able to buy early access to higher tiered gear with lower skill requirements is P2W

The only way for a game to be truly not P2W would be for the cash shop to only sell customized avatars/aesthetic packs

Any advantage gained by spending money is P2W

Your point is valid to a degree. The boosters certainly show there is a inherent bonus to spending a little money depending upon how serious you are about the game. And AURUM based gear and equipment generally does provide a bonus to efficiency or performance. All true statements.

But the way I tend to determine if there is a Pay to Win stigma in the game is if those bonuses ultimately translate into a unique advantage that cannot be obtained through other means. I believe in the case of Dust 514 they do not. Whatever advantage you get from spending money in Dust 514 can also be provided to another player by simply playing the game more.

Dust 514 is FREE, don't complain about something your being aloud to use without any cost.
sure there are glitches... so what? some of them are absolutley hilarious to be honest.
i had placed a droplink up in ambush match and the thing ended up spawning people 500 feet up in the air like the MCC, hlaf of the people didn't noticed what was happening and became pancakes on the battlegrounds floor.
(one after another, splat splat splat.)

Some of the more memorable parts of the game start as an annoying glitch, or game feature, that chaps your ass a few too many times.

Murder taxi 514 was a royal pain in the arse... but funny as hell in retrospect. I don't want it back and I hated getting run over by idiots on either team but I still got a kick out of it.

Jumping out of the MCC to discover lag you hadn't see during the last two hours... spamming the inertial dampeners.... only to get the splat animation at the end... haahahhaha. It sucks... but come on, its comedy gold.

Pay to win because of some of the AUR exclusive items and boosters lol

LoL someone saying dust is pay to win. I have read dozens of articles about dust being this and that and each and everyone looks like someone wen t online, watched a couple of videos, talked to some "real" scrubs and then made the article.

I read in one about payer trading and such... made me laugh so hard. I smell foul play TBH. Dust, even though we talk **** about it, is being noticed. And some people don't like it.

I wouldn't be surprised if it where corporate sabotage just to make the game fail somme of the big companies have an interest in it to fail because if it succeeds it's the end for mediocre point and shoot games that have absolutely no depth.

It would be naive to not admit that the game has flaws and to be honest i've even come in and blasted dust and it's devs a couple of times here in the forums, but no one gets to point out the flaws of the game except the actual players that are invested in the game and actually know about it's ins and outs.

On what planet do you spend much of your time?

This game is very PTW and, as Game Informer has stated on several occasions, calling something a Beta with an open cash shop is disingenuous in the extreme.

As far a playing for 20 minutes is concerned. I think that is probably about the average playing time for most people who download the game. After 20 minutes it becomes obvious that there is no actual content beyond getting stomped by players who have been boosting and buying aurum gear since last feb.

Pay to win means that you pay and win. In dust every item is available either for aurum or isk. No Pay to win. I can use any item I choose to without aurum and have been doing soo all the time.

There is nothing in the game that is more powerful than their isk equivalent. Even contact grenades have been leveled and they all have their isk equivalent.

I call you out. Tell me one thing that is pay to win that cannot be gained throuugh i game isk. Apart from BPO's which have the same stats as in game items. And are not pay to win.

And yes game informer warned about beta games but DUST IS NOT IN BETA

bump

Boosters. [drops mic]

Is money of any kind involved? Yes, it's play to win. Those who can shore up more money cna continue to spam proto on the poor.

In his defense the way things are presented in game does lead to that conclusion if you are just glossing over things quickly like you have a deadline to meet and cant spend an hour or so reading menus and item descriptions
CCP could really present things a lot better and show that this game is not pay to win contact nades aside

CCP should provide special test characters for critics, with loads of SP and ISK. Or full proto fittings for each role, so they can get a better feel as to what it's like.

Also, let them squad up with people who can show them the ropes.

It is P2W, it's always been P2W, it will always be P2W. Arguing otherwise just makes you look like a fan boy apologist.




This would mean that critics weren't actually reviewing the game as it actually exists. The fact you think CCP should try to trick critics into giving false reviews just shows how bad things really are

bump

EDIT: Honestly...the race to Proto is overrated. Newer players are better off sinking SP into core skills like Electronics and Engineering to make the most of the suits they have before leveling up to Proto right off the bat. But that is just my opinion.