View Poll Results: Are you for, or against the idea?

Voters
120. You may not vote on this poll
  • For

    23 19.17%
  • Against

    79 65.83%
  • Impartial

    18 15.00%
Page 1 of 11 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 109

Thread: Purchasing In-Game Items or DLC?

  1. #1

    CSA Brigadier General

    Arkansan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    214

    Question Purchasing In-Game Items or DLC?

    As of right now, War of Rights is set to release and be completely yours after that. But seeing that the company doesn't have the money or resources that back some of these bigger titles, will it be enough? I'd like to run by the idea of adding more content into the game later that you pay for. ie-Equipment/Uniforms/Extras. Here is a list of some of the Pros and Cons I could think of using this system.





























    Pro
    Con
    -The company has another form of income to fix bugs,
    add updates, and supply more content.
    -If there is something special or neat that you want,
    you have to fork out a couple bucks.
    -You can 'pimp' your characters Uniform/Beard/Weapon.
    -You're poor and your character looks like a hobo with a rusty old musket.
    Not to mention the guy shooting at you has a scoped/rifled musket.
    -It would be more realistic, in the sense that only the
    people who could afford the nice gear had it
    -You play the game for fun and not so much for the realism.
    Everyone should be equally hoboish.
    -Your company can be decked out in the same nice
    uniforms, looking snazzy as you soak up minie balls
    -Everyone in your company is playing with different
    uniforms they purchased and y'all look like a colorful fruitcake.


    Personally, I am for this. Other games do very well using this system. Take 'War Thunder' for example. You don't have to pay a dime for the game. Though you can pay real money to level up faster, buy prototype vehicles of the WW2 period, and get extra decals to paint on your vehicle. MMO's use this system a LOT. 'World of Warcraft' is making a shit ton of money off of some of the silliest stuff. Pets, gear, mounts, ect. Due to this, they are constantly pumping out new DLC.

    I don't want to see this turn into a grab for money. Greed can ruin the immersion. I don't want advertisements in every loading menu I see or popups when I enter new menus. A simple tab for extras would suffice. As far as everyone in a company being mismatched, that really boils down to the discipline of the unit or the rules of the community it plays with. In skirmish, I'm not sure it should matter.

    The default uniforms, gear, and basic accessories should still be there and be able to be customized by the average player. But for those who want to take it to the next level, buy that spiffy parade uniform, or get the sharp gentleman's haircut, give them the option to help support everyone's gameplay by giving more for more. I think the game is on the right track, but I think this would help tremendously in the long run.


    What do y'all think?
    11th Mississippi Infantry, "Lamar Rifles" Company G [NA]

  2. #2

    USA Major

    Jamez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    293
    I would be completely against this. The way those games are designed is to pump out money for them. This is not what the developers of this game are going for.

  3. #3

    CSA Major

    Willie Fisterbottom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    204
    Heres the way i see it. They definitely shouldnt add paid dlc like maps guns or units bc then the community becomes divided and its harder to find a match. I would also be against adding whole new guns or attachments for guns that cost money. Now what i would understand charging for is things like uniforms or skins for your guns stuff like that, just nothing paid that takes away content or alters gameplay.

  4. #4

    CSA Colonel

    Jonny Powers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    68
    Well, my stance on these things is that I don't mind cosmetic items (unit uniforms, accouterments, gun engravings, etc), but pay to win features I'm pretty against. On the other hand, there's a loooot of cool guns that I'd like to see from the period. I think the nature of the game won't allow for the introduction of new weapons to throw the balance of the game (unless, say, they're like the scoped rifle, which has a natural advantage). And if it can provide more cash to further expand the game, well, I don't see a real big issue with it. And as far as expanding the scope of the game (other campaigns/theaters, etc), DLC looks to be like the most viable way to do it.
    Sincerely,
    Lieutenant Colonel Jonny Powers
    5th Georgia Volunteers, Company A, "Clinch Rifles"


  5. #5

    CSA Brigadier General

    Arkansan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    214
    Quote Originally Posted by Willie Fisterbottom View Post
    They definitely shouldnt add paid dlc like maps guns or units bc then the community becomes divided and its harder to find a match. I would also be against adding whole new guns or attachments for guns that cost money.
    If a form of DLC was released, it would be so everyone could still play together. Only people who buy it could use what it offers. Can't say I've ever heard of a game that did it any other way.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jamez View Post
    I would be completely against this. The way those games are designed is to pump out money for them. This is not what the developers of this game are going for.
    Nothing would force people to buy the extras. They are just that, extra. The purpose is to help support the game that is still trying to make a name for itself. Gotta pay the bills.
    Last edited by Arkansan; 12-13-2015 at 06:19 AM.
    11th Mississippi Infantry, "Lamar Rifles" Company G [NA]

  6. #6

    CSA Major

    Willie Fisterbottom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by Jonny Powers View Post
    Well, my stance on these things is that I don't mind cosmetic items (unit uniforms, accouterments, gun engravings, etc), but pay to win features I'm pretty against. On the other hand, there's a loooot of cool guns that I'd like to see from the period. I think the nature of the game won't allow for the introduction of new weapons to throw the balance of the game (unless, say, they're like the scoped rifle, which has a natural advantage). And if it can provide more cash to further expand the game, well, I don't see a real big issue with it. And as far as expanding the scope of the game (other campaigns/theaters, etc), DLC looks to be like the most viable way to do it.
    No, no dlc with any paid guns, to balance it out just do what red orchestra does, only allow like two people per team to choose a sniper class or something like that

    Quote Originally Posted by Arkansan View Post
    If a form of DLC was released, it would be so everyone could still play together. Only people who buy it could use what it offers. Can't say I've ever heard of a game that did it any other way.


    Nothing would force people to buy the extras. They are just that, extra. The purpose is to help support the game that is still trying to make a name for itself. Gotta pay the bills.
    Well lets say they made a Gettysburg map later on and were going to release it as paid dlc, only the people who buy that dlc could actually play on it so the community would be split.

  7. #7

    CSA Brigadier General

    Arkansan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    214
    I really doubt they would restrict maps to DLC's. I would be against that for sure. Here would be my example of a DLC. Say they added the battle of Gettysburg. It would include the free map and several free regiments for people to chose from during the battle. What people would pay for, is the other uniforms of regiments that you can't chose from. This would mean the community wouldn't be divided, the game would still profit while making more content, and overall the game grows.

    I have to say, I have a problem with games being fair and balanced. Nothing was fair or balanced for any war. I do think skill should have a great influence on battles. When I say skill I'm more referring to Company based skill and not of a rambo.
    Last edited by Arkansan; 12-13-2015 at 06:40 AM.
    11th Mississippi Infantry, "Lamar Rifles" Company G [NA]

  8. #8

    CSA Major

    Willie Fisterbottom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by Arkansan View Post
    I really doubt they would restrict maps to DLC's. I would be against that for sure. Here would be my example of a DLC. Say they added the battle of Gettysburg. It would include the free map and several free regiments for people to chose from during the battle. What people would pay for, is the other uniforms of regiments that you can't chose from. This would mean the community wouldn't be divided, the game would still profit while making more content, and overall the game grows.

    I have to say, I have a problem with games being fair and balanced. Nothing was fair or balanced for any war. I do think skill should have a great influence on battles. When I say skill I'm more referring to Company based skill and not of a rambo.
    Yea uniforms, hats, anything customization really is fine.
    I just dont like the idea of having to pay to use any gun in a game. Really im against any kind of level up unlock system too id rather just have all the equipment usable from teh first battle.

  9. #9

    CSA Brigadier General

    Arkansan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    214
    I'm definitely not for having every gun usable to everyone. Especially that scoped one.. Like Jonny mentioned, there are a lot of neat guns from the time. Some of these were specialty items and rare. I believe they would be perfect to implement into the system. I also don't care for levels in this though.
    11th Mississippi Infantry, "Lamar Rifles" Company G [NA]

  10. #10

    CSA Captain

    William F. Randolph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Memphis, Tennessee
    Posts
    224
    Hell, I'd pay five bucks on steam for a new hat, blanket, and manly knowledge of the art of beard growing. But seriously, this kind of thing would encourage more uniqueness to your character for just a few bucks. It isn't pay to win if its just cosmetic
    50th Georgia Co. C "Coffee County Guards"
    1st Lt. Soldier


    Have you lived off of poor rations, dehydrated, in horrible boots and feared for your life while running half a mile and then brought your sights up? If you can answer yes to those questions I'll consider your suggestion to reduce aim sway. -Trusty
    I did shoot a deer at 100m once in 20 degree weather with Ugg's boots on and I hadn't eaten breakfast, closest I could get to your description -Me

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •