A random philosophical question for my fellow forumsiders. The game allows you to buy weapons that are sidegrades to avoid the perception of pay-to-win by having different guns: however, vanilla guns tend to be worse than their certed out counterparts. Would it make more sense then to buy attachments and *earn* guns? Granted it's waaay too late to have this discussion; but I'm curious to see what people think.
i would say no. i say that because the price for scopes and upgrades are dirt cheap, and wouldn't be viable for monitization. really all the guns are side grades, their for, all of them are balanced if they are all completely uncerted, give one guy a scope or a bigger clip and he has the advantage because he put effort into his gun. its also a way of having progress for new players, and not frustrating vetrains i bought the Bolt Action sniper because the TR have a **** default infiltrator weapon. by getting that gun my enjoyment of the game went up tenfold, it kept me playing. i eventually learned to play the other classes and enjoy them as we. if it were a "pay to unlock scopes and extras" then i would be a pay to win model
The cert upgrades are often much more of an upgrade than what you can buy. Most guns are sidegrades. They are better at some specific stuff which means they are worse at other stuff. Certed stuff like the foregrip has no downside, it's a straight upgrade. So are most other stuff. The only thing you are missing out on is not being able to use the other upgrades. The free guns are pretty neat. I see no point to buy anything else than the T9 CARV for my TR Heavy. I bought the S-version of the stock gun for my Engineer so I could get the underbarrel grenade launcher. If it wasn't for that, I would have kept the free gun. It gets a lot more obvious when you look at the vehicles.
