This isn't a new request. I remember people asking for weapon DLC all the way back to MW2. I have mixed feeling about weapon DLC. It's really such a difficult thing to get correct. Say they charge for weapon packs or individual weapons. If the guns are too powerful then people will complain and call the game pay2win. If the guns are crap the people that bought them will complain. The only way for them to make everyone happy is to have free weapon DLC, but let's be honest it's Activision, that won't happen.
I think that if they add weapons they should be weapons that counteract OP weapons. like if shotguns are OP again they should add a really powerful assault rifle. and if there are DLC weapons they should go with the regular map packs. That way people could get everything in one package. but if they had free downloadable weapons for people who play for a long time that would be cool to. but I think it would be cool if the players could vote on upcoming DLC weapons. like they did with the camos. finally, if they are going to have weapon DLCs lets hope they don't screw us with just one like they did in BO2.
How about NO. Dont want this to become a pay to win game. where you have to buy the gun dlc in order to have a chance of fair match. For the dlc guns would be better than the stock guns and thus create an imbalance to anyone that did not have them as well. One was not an issue for it was only one; but when suddenly there is 5-6 more guns out there all better than what you have it does become an issue.
And no matter how skilled a player may be a poorly balanced weapon will throw out the balance of the game in general. Does not matter if it may be fun to level a new gun or not. It should not be done for the imbalance it would create.
Not every new idea is really a good idea nor should it be done in a game just because somone may think it would be fun to do and have. Or might as well toss balance out the window and allow full auto snipers and full auto grenade launchers, and players to carry 30+ grenades and C4 and claymores all at the same time.
MIght as well make a KS that allows a person to call in superman and he goes and beats up the enemy team for you. Or call in a Xenogears and have it blow the world up killing everyone ending the match giving the player that earned it a billion kills added to stats. yeah that sounds like fun and balanced and fair.. so yeah they need to add that too..
Or, you know they could properly balance the paid DLC weapons. But this is COD we're talking about and I don't think anybody trusts them to do it properly. The guns would more than likely turn out OP or underpowered. Even if the guns were perfectly balanced you would have a large group that would say the game was pay2win simply because you can buy weapons, regardless of if they're more powerful or not. So I think it's a pretty risky thing for them to do at this point with the COD community in its current state.
The likely hood that would happen is very slim to nil. For if the weapons are too balanced with the others there is less reason for anyone to buy them since there is no real advantage to having them.
If the game goes pay to win they will loose alot of players over it. But they don't care because of all the fools that will gladly pay for it just because they can now be better than someone else because of a bought weapon. Just like Ascend; Hand of Kul... a free to play game.. but is a pay to win game.
If they start doing dlc like that. They might as well put the MP up for free and just make everyone buy the weapons they want instead.
again it should be vanity hell you can custom look your toon now so I see that being in there, but wepons no rly no, it would have to have a edge for players to want it making it pay to win, map packs are ok now think in cod 5 if you did not have the map you would be kicked unless you payed them more cash to play, needless to say I did not bother with that game and mw2 waited till I found out about the map dlc if you needed it or not, and you did not so got the game.
vanity does not de balance the game in anyway and is up to a player to buy we all want are own look
map packs as well don't de balance
weapon packs will as they will have to give you an egde unless its for single player only
if they do and players buy it up like sheep then you will see kill streaks and perks next for dlc
Longest sentence ever.
what do I win and yes its a pointless reply to a pointless reply
Worst case scenario it might end up like BF2 did back in the day where the DLC stuff was way overpowered. A sort of "sure you dont have to buy the Kill-o-matron 4k Laser Minigun DLC....... but you will be screwed over by everyone who did" kinda deal.
The other possible problem is that, as mentioned by others, the DLC guns are simply not "worth it" and people wont buy any DLC. While I was not very fond of BF3 I kinda like their DLC system where they released larger DLC packs instead of just small mappacks like with CoD. Maybe that would be a solution. Instead of mappacks just release DLC with say a couple of new maps and weapons and maybe even new gamemodes if possible. A sort of "upgrade" pack rather then just new maps.
One thing I could see though would be alternate model DLCs for weapons. Like for an example a M4 model for the Honey Badger or a AK-47 for the AK12. Basicly the same gun statwise but with new looks.
Yeah but if they keep the weapon dlc's like they're now then you won't have either of that problem, I mean the peacekeeper wasn't overpowered and the dlc was for the rest as normal.