I made a thread when the gun was announced. This is is clearly a step toward pay to win. A gun that switches from an assault rifle to a SMG with the push of a button should not be "bought". This gives people who pay extra a clear advantage over those who do not. I have had no issue with guns being released with dlc. But the problem is this gun gives a clear advantage to those who pay extra. At the smallest, it let's you carry an SMG and AR without overkill. I could go on for hours. But what do you guys think?
I see no problem especially considering another game (BF4) gives you 4-5 weapons when you buy a map pack. I also see no big deal with it being an SMG and AR. Bad players will still suck good players will still be good.
How many weapons given isn't the point. And battfield has nothing to do with it. I'll say the point again in case it was missed. Having a weapon that changes from an assault rifle to a smg in game gives an advantage to the user. Others choose between the two and have to limit there decisions based on the weapon. The ripper user does not. I'm not sure how this is confusing? Bad players will be bad, good players will be good? No shite? Groundbreaking. But what does it do for two players who are equal? If one is limited to SMG range? I understand if you don't agree it is your opinion.
My point is obviously to complicated for you to understand. My point is whether they have a weapon that is an SMG or an AR or a combination of the 2 like the Ripper they will still suck or they will continue to be good. One gun isn't gonna make people magically better. That is what you are basically saying without seeming to understand yourself. This one weapon isn't gonna make bad players good all the sudden. And it isn't gonna make good players amazing all the sudden either.
I don't really think it's fair to say what you're saying. I understand where you're coming from, but unless the weapon was incredibly strong but really difficult to use, then your point could be relevant. This weapon isn't too hard to use, and it's a pretty powerful one at that. The weapon has an undeniable advantage over the other weapons in its class because it has the ability to switch between SMG and AR mode on the fly.
Your point is not hard to understand at all. Unfortunately it has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. No gun makes a bad player good or vice versa. I'm saying it gives those who pay an advantage.
You again can't understand if someone is terrible this gun won't give them an advantage because they are already bad. A paid for weapon isn't gonna make them better at aiming or give them better reaction time. So yes my point makes a lot of sense.
Please stop saying the same thing over and over. Your point has nothing at all to do with this thread. Please stop spamming. I get it that you don't understand what I'm trying to say. But repeating the same irrelevant sentence over and over doesn't make it relevant. I will not reply to another post from you on this subject. I guess when you feed a troll it doesn't go away.
I have to agree with you. Just because someone may be bad, doesn't mean they're not going to get an advantage. An advantage is an advantage, it has nothing to do with how good you are. The effect of the advantage may be different from player to player but that's not the point.
Exactly. And if the person is good already, the advantage grows.