If people want to pay for an accessory to give them a slight advantage then that's up to them. There's nothing devs can do about it.
But I don't think people should be able to buy something IN-GAME that gives them an advantage. Pay-to-win is definitely not ok IMO.
And paying for customisation is fine by me as well.
1) Yes, this is OK. This is simply using things that are already built into the game. Not everybody has the same TV, not everybody has the same internet, not everybody has the same controller and not everybody has the same sound setup. There is no unfair advantage here. I compare this to sports equipment. Not everyone can afford the most expensive set of clubs, the lightest pair of basketball shoes, or the finest tennis racquet, but everyone still plays by the same rules. Headsets aren't an unfair advantage, everyone gets the same sound cues. Its not like a modded controller or hacked console, which are against the Code of Conduct. Headsets are a perfectly legal accessory, and one can argue that at times they are a hinderance, as the user tends to focus more on listening to sounds than sight and their instincts.
2) No, No, No, And NO. Its a game, and everything you get should have to be earned. We pay for the game and for DLC, but we should always have to earn what we get in game. Everything in-game should be available to everyone willing to work for it. Sound is available to all in-game, Perks should be the same way and everyone should have to take the same steps to earn them.
3) I think in the case of CEs this practice is OK. It gives people an incentive to buy the Special/Collector's Editions and doesn't directly impact the game. Its like paying a little more for a Blu-Ray that has more behind the scenes and bonus features... everyone gets the same movie, but those who buy the special edition get something extra for their money. I have heard people complain because Elite founders got a special camo and they can't get it. Everyone had a chance to be an Elite Founder, it wasn't like those who did it got special invitations or anything. It doesn't give anyone an unfair advantage, it just gives them something to show for their investment. As far as buying camos and such outside of something like a CE? I personally feel its a bad idea. Make everything available to everyone in game, but make them so that its a challenge to unlock. Then people can wear them as a badge of honor, knowing that they accomplished the feat of doing so.
Exactly what this guy said. Headsets are fine, but I think dead silence should make you completely silent to counter them (but that's a different topic).
The second one is just a horrible idea. I'd instantly quit if this ever happened - Prestige Tokens were bad enough
The third one I think is fine - It's purely cosmetic and offers no ingame advantage. So why not?
So, I listen to Painkiller Already. It's a Podcast hosted by a few gamers in the Youtube community, if you didnt know. They have twice now talked about Gaming advantages when it comes to Call of Duty.
I just wanted to hear your opinion. I have three instances here:
1. Do you think that being able to pay for an accessory outside of the game to give you an advantage is okay?
2. Do you think that being able to pay for in-game benefits (or, Pay-to-win) is okay?
3. Do you think paying for extra Camos/Outfits/Customization options is okay?
I bolded the question of each part for those of you who don't like a bit of reading.
1. I have 9.1 surround sound receiver (games are only 5.1, I know) with Bose speakers versus a headset... Reality of life... some peeps have better stuff than others.
2. This must be a proposal... currently there has not been a mechanic like this in any COD title. (Although, WaW allowed you to have one gun by default until level 4 each prestige... big whoop).
3. No issue with camos/outfits... not down with attachments for purchase. But this is another proposal... this has not been done in COD to date either.
The amount of advantage a person gains by using a fancy headset is so minescule it's not worth thinking about.
I haven't heard about the 2nd thing you mentioned. Is buying access to perks ect early in the game a new feature in BO2? If so, I guess I don't really care. There's no way I'm going to spend money just to get certain things a few levels earlier. I'm pretty sure I'll still be able to hold my own with the equipment provided for me at whatever level I happen to be at the time.
1. to be able to get an atvantage just because you have money... not sure i agree with it, but its a fact of life i will get over it. For the headsets it is using whats already there, but let us go back to MW2 and anyone remember modded controllers? not that either made a huge difference in the game. I would be upset if someone gained a huge atvantage on me just because they shelled out a few bucks.
2. dont agree with this one either, and i think it would be stupid to include it in the game.
3. as long as it is just visual stuff, i could care less
Point of interst: i notice that alot of people above are saying yes to number one and no to number two. Are you not essentialy paying to win for both of them? one is just in game and the other is not. (just to play devils advicate)
1. Paying money for a headset. This gives you an advantage through outside-means by allowing you to hear character sounds/footsteps easier than a standard TV. Do you think that being able to pay for an accessory outside of the game to give you an advantage is okay?
I own a pair of Astro A40's & the only time I feel I'm getting an advantage is when I use sound perks i.e. Dead Silence/Sitrep Pro.
However with using a headset & a non-sound perk, it's the same experience as if I'm listening through TV speakers. (can't really hear footsteps or identify enemy positions through sound)
So it's not the headsets that give me the advantage, it's really the perks that give the headsets a boost.
To answer your question, I don't have an issue with it.
2. Paying money for in-game perks. This gives you a direct situational-advantage. By this, I mean paying money to get Pro Perks or Weapons earlier than everyone who doesnt pay for them. This is not an advantage like Headsets; You wouldnt always have these guns/perks equipped, unless you chose to make all of your custom classes the same. Unlike headsets, where you always have it on. Do you think that being able to pay for in-game benefits (or, Pay-to-win) is okay?
EA & their developers have incorporated "shortcut packs" & Day 1 weapon unlocks into their Battlefield & Medal of Honor (2010) title by giving players an opportunity to unlock weapons/items without the requirement of levelling up but there's a cost.
I don't like this idea. Levelling up is the one aspect I enjoy in a video game & we should not pay for perks & unlocking weapons early. This should be earned by levelling up.
3. Pre-order bonuses/Special Edition bonuses. These are bonuses only given to a player if they choose to drop $5 to pre-order the game or if they choose to buy a special edition. These types of things that people have wanted would be Extra Camos or Extra customization options for the character (Wearing a special outfit, maybe a custom coloring option for the character model's outfit.) Would not give any direct-advantage over other players other than the fact they the people who bought it have it, and nobody else can get it. Do you think paying for extra Camos/Outfits/Customization options is okay?
Cosmetic changes to the player's character outfit, weapon camo isn't an issue for me. I don't think you gain much for your playable character looking different compared to someone who doesn't have it.