SecondPrize said:
If given the option to play a game where more grind is a plus for the publishers because they get paid for "easing" it, or playing a game where developers designed the pacing with the sole variable of player enjoyment in mind, i'll pick the latter every time.
The inclusion of micro transactions in this game most definitely DOES affect the game I get, whether I partake in them or not.
Well, it's most likely already is designed for standard play without the boosters, paced out so you're relatively weak in the beginning, have to search around for money, materials, a workbench, then get tons of upgrades by the end to feel like a bad ass. And balanced so you can only upgrade a handful of weapons, not all of them.
You know, much like the difficulty design for Dead Space 1, 2, or
any other game out there.
Again, the boosters are like cheats, but in this case it's pay. Or unlocking New Game+ mode with a L30 guy right off the bat. Just because it's available, whether in-game, pay, trainers, whatever, it is optional, and the game is not designed to forced you to.
Or should I bring up games with intentional grindy aspects WITHOUT any sort of boost option? Any RPG: western, Japanese, or MMO? Diablo, Dungeon Defenders are also good examples, as are many Rogue-likes. Disgaea comes to mind for a strategy game. Borderlands. You can still play the game without grinding, but admittedly beating the last boss at L50 instead of L30 does make things easier, if you want to grind for the XP and equipment.
So I still fail to see why people are complaining that it affects your game since it doesn't - YOU are the one letting it affect you, not the game's design.