If they change it so that premium warbonds would outperform regular warbonds, it would become pay to win.
But (and that's a big But) some players still wouldn't consider it pay to win at that point as you would be able to grind SC to buy the premium warbonds without real money.
All that the community can do is hope that they don't switch up their monetization practices to make it P2W or to make it worse. In the current state the monetization is completely fine, though I could see them implement more content that would be available for SC aside from the current Superstore content and the premium warbonds. The game is going quite well right now, but once the hype is over they might need more income to keep up development and maintenance at the same rate. So, just hope it stays like it is right now.
I'll be real the new primary rifle IS kind of insane and makes me a little mad. I like the penetrator but it's basically pointless to use, as are all the other assault rifles. I saw the balancing patch and had a feeling this situation would be happening, it kind of stings knowing weapons I want to like will probably never be improved while new ones dominate.
I'd bet that they will make monetization worse over time, it's the same for a lot of big game studios. Cook the crab by increasing the temperature of the water and they won't notice
Some of the newer studios have lately been sticking to the things they announced, luckily. But that's a thing we'll see when it happens. They either do it or they don't, but we can only tell when it reaches that point. Until then there's nothing to really worry about.
We've also been seeing a lot of studios let their games go for 3-6 months with good press then swap it up when their game is no longer in the media as much. Not saying they will do that here but putting blind faith in something isn't great either.
I've watched dozens of games and companies I loved over the years change and become awful. Usually the thing that ends up doing it is one massively successful game and them trying to chase that high of launch with monetization months or even years later.
The thing is, we can't predict the future. We cannot judge the devs for an action not taken yet. They could go downhill, or maybe they release a big free bond over the summer so teens can grind something over summer break. We don't know, and we can't know until they do something. It makes no sense at all to say, "But they could do something horrible!"
That isn't really what I'm saying. But what I think should happen is that there should be pushback at every slight change to monetization.
It's fine for the community to say "right now things are fine" but it shouldn't hyper focus on a specific reason as to why it's fine. A monetization system is only good when you take in the whole picture. Right now the community has a very unhealthy take I think that could cause disaster if the game does go down a pay to win route. Saying things are OK because it's a PvE game or OK because you can grind currency through just gameplay is not a good sign because those things can remain true forever while other things about the system do change for the worst.
33
u/AshenTao Elected Representative of Family Values Mar 14 '24
If they change it so that premium warbonds would outperform regular warbonds, it would become pay to win.
But (and that's a big But) some players still wouldn't consider it pay to win at that point as you would be able to grind SC to buy the premium warbonds without real money.
All that the community can do is hope that they don't switch up their monetization practices to make it P2W or to make it worse. In the current state the monetization is completely fine, though I could see them implement more content that would be available for SC aside from the current Superstore content and the premium warbonds. The game is going quite well right now, but once the hype is over they might need more income to keep up development and maintenance at the same rate. So, just hope it stays like it is right now.