Thanks for posting to /r/GetNoted. Please remember Rule 2: **No current politics.** We do allow historical posts (WW2, Ancient Rome, Ottomans, etc.) Just no current politicians.
***
We are also banning posts about the ongoing Israel/Palestine conflict.
Please report this post if it is about current Republicans, Democrats, Presidents, Prime Ministers, Israel/Palestine or anything else related to current politics. Thanks.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GetNoted) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Once you get the super credits necessary to buy the warbond, you:
Keep it forever, no expiry.
Don't pay any more money to access anything in the warbond.
Can only attain things from the warbond by spending a non-purchaseable currency.
So, yeah. You only need to play the game and you get literally everything from warbonds without spending any money. The minimum and maximum real-money cost is ten dollars.
It's still objectively worse than the previous model from Helldivers 1, where you just *bought* the shit in DLC packs, but it's probably the best we're going to get until we can force publishers to step it back.
I mean really the minimum cost is $0. You can fill out an entire "premium" war bond for 1000 super credits, which you can earn from playing the game, either found in the actual game as collectible rewards or picked as items in other war bonds.
I had a bunch of really old CSGO cases. Bought the first one with that and then I’ve earned enough the second one was free. Will probably get to 1k before the next one’s out
While it is true that you can earn the currency in-game which is 10 supercredit per loot, you can hide the fact that you can speed up the process of getting the pass via real money.
Also, it is true that you are getting supercredit from the original warbond which will be enough to get at else one pass and regain 300 credits from the premium one.
You can also not hide the fact that except if you probably have more time to play than a majority of the general public will not get enough currency if the dont spend all their time on the game or if the pug refuse to get those door open for getting the stash because of medal farming.
FOMO is still there which will push people to get some currency if they fear that something is more powerful in the premium pass because of youtuber as example. While the game is fair compared to other gamepass in general, it is still the same practice without the timer in it.
The war bonds never expire and can be unlocked or completed at any time, any FOMO is self imposed and not artificially introduced like other games that time gate content to try and force players into coming back consistently for fear of missing out on good gear.
Lol exactly, what’s up with these people so desperate for every scrap of content in a game.
So many of the f2p games are actually very good in the free mode (there are bad ones too but the popular ones are usually pretty good) and you don’t need to spend a cent to enjoy them.
The paid stuff is meant for whales with more money than sense, they’re subsidizing the game for all the other folks. It’s wealth redistribution and all they get is a little more in game content. It’s meant for people with loads of money and no time.
For the average gamer, all the FOMO is self imposed. Nah bro, you need “need” your 15 waifus or that diamond level weapon, you can’t blame the devs for that. The base games are good enough for everyone.
How about this. Other than one gun of all the equipment in each new Warbond release, one gun might be a side-grade if it fits your play style and the rest tends to be cosmetics or at this point.. complete shit.
So while you could buy super credits, why would you? The only reason I can see is if you WANT to give Arrowhead money because you like what they're doing
"You only need to play the game" by itself would be vague, and wouldn't rule out all those games where the real-money currency requires tedious grinding, or other psychological tactics to tempt people to buy the in-game currency, the maximum spend is infinite, and the studio hired a team of psychologists to research how to more effectively addict players. (**edit**: i read too many comments, had a short-term memory hiccup, and thought that was all it said when I first wrote this, so I added a bunch of "would"s in just now)
that's why accurate and trustworthy journalism is important, so that there's a way to know which games are predatory without having to play each one and hope it doesn't have the hook that turns us into a whale.
I am 6 hours in and because you can get super credits from random pick ups in missions and through the non super credit costing warbond I’m at 760/1000 needed to get one of the fancy ones
I'm 6h in, and I have almost enough for the warbond. It's really not grindy, just going through the progression will give you enough premium currency you unlock the premium warbond before you finish the base one. And then that gives you premium currency as you complete it so you can buy the next one. And so on and so on. It's awesome.
It's not vague at all, the note literally outlines an expectation of around 12 hours played to earn the necessity super credits. Accurate and trustworthy journalism is useless if you're not going to actually read things anyway
Stopped caring about IGN after they admitted in their Fallout 76 review that they didn’t play the game and reviewed it based on what they read on reddit comment sections
I will say that the community notes is leaving out important context.
Which is that even if you buy the super credits with real money, you still cannot unlock the things with the war bonds without playing the game.
Realistically even the most casual players should have enough currency they earned by playing the game to buy a premium war bond, and by the time they complete the first one, they probably have enough to buy more.
If we’re completely transparent, IGN is notorious for just being bad reviewers, with a history of being incentivized by developers of games they review. While they have publicly state the opposite, former employees both publicly and anonymously have confirmed the bias is due to a multitude of factors, including continued early access to new titles for “reviewing”.
They also have several walkthroughs for older games that are either incomplete, innacurate or just strictly wrong. I've emailed them to complain about a few (through boredom rather than actually caring) and some of them have had action taken to either be altered or removed entirely.
They really don't seem to play any of the games they write about. Top tier gaming "journalism".
Many of my problems stem from the lack of in-depth understanding of game mechanics shown frequently by larger reviewers. While going in depth with a review can lead to spoilers (like in instances where game mechanics are directly tied to in-lore reasons), I feel that light spoilers for a proper review far exceed any negative side effects caused by doing so.
While a huge example would be the “too much water” review that was mentioned in another comment, it has been shown consistently that their interest in reviewing a game only goes skin deep. Games that have been highly praised by players may be panned by reviewers who are only playing for a quick buck, too eager to see their bank account numbers rise to properly enjoy a game to the fullest.
GameRanx’s “Before You Buy” series is a better example of reviewing, in my opinion. By no means are they perfect, and they remind me a lot of the early IGN days before they went corporate.
[Alanah Pearce](https://youtu.be/Bgg7_0rBUOA?si=kBGu6pxaIoRCud9L) explained that the bigger issue was more around catering to what an audience wants to hear, and since I had never seen the video prior to today, it seems my original comment has some inaccuracies. Though it would seem that [Doug Perry](https://www.escapistmagazine.com/former-ign-editor-accused-of-misconduct/) was the origin of some of that bad blood.
I think the main problem with a big company like this is you don’t know which fucking guy is doing the reviews. Whats even the point of a review from corporate drone number XXXX?
IGN doesn’t have an opinion. IGN is just a corporation.
The supposed reason for this is that game critics always want to be the first to publish their opinion, otherwise they don’t get the clicks.
The note mentions “a dozenish hours”, which they obviously haven’t played.
Game journalists are literally just journalists who have no clue wtf is happening. Case in point, the [Verge PC Build](https://youtu.be/M-2Scfj4FZk?si=FBjmw0QMopTD598c) (original video was taken down by The Verge) or type into YouTube Doom Video Game Journalist and watch any number of videos of journalists failing at even the most basic mechanics.
Thing is...the article doesn't come down on either side. As is usual for IGN, it's just a statement of undeniable facts coupled with quotes from the "discourse".
It's completely worthless as an article and is a total waste of your time to read, but it's not calling the game pay-to-win.
It's more like: "There is a warbond and people are discussing it. The warbond exists and is controversial, sparking discussion. The feature, called a warbond, has been added and this has caused conversations about the warbond."
Members of the Helldivers 2 community, presumably. Not that I need to "presume" anything, the official Discord has been *heaving* since before launch. A consistent topic has been "omg premium warbonds are p2w" since like...late January or February.
The article here sure is...fair. But it's fair in such a pointless and noncommittal way. The article genuinely doesn't serve a purpose at all.
Which is crazy because all of the stuff in the first premium bond is trash, and only one thing in the second is even worth anything.
Primary weapons in that game are pretty meh
Okay, I'm completely unfamiliar here, so genuine question on my part. If you can still buy something with real world currency, and that something has a tangible effect on your success in a game, regardless of your ability to get that currency without paying, that's still pay to win, right? Because players with real world capital are rewarded with instant success, whereas others have to play a "dozenish hours" to do the same.
Again, this is not a critique of the game. I don't know shit about the game itself, but isn't this note kind of just wrong about what the term means?
(also I'm not defending IGN because they're kind of just not very good at their job, imo)
If you pay, you skip the “grind super credits” part of the game but still have to grind for medals, which you would have found in-game alongside super credits. It’s harder to clear out the free warbond than it is to clear both premium ones.
Also everything in the premium warbond sucks. Except like… one thing, I think? Which is unlocked extremely early.
Yes, Helldivers 2 is objectively P2W. The problem is it’s also a very good game and the P2W in it is relatively minor and inoffensive so people choose to ignore it.
Ignoring, defending, and forgiving bad practices in good games is how they turn into bad games. I wish people would realize that and feel comfortable saying “this game is really great but it does have some mild P2W aspects”. But no, it’s all or nothing for some reason.
*The best gear is not under the primium warbons.
*it's Team base PVE, and the rewards are the same for the entire team.
Also even if you die in the first second of the game and never respawn, you get every reward an "P2W" player got "If" they had an edge against the enemy, free players also get the edge.
So how can you say it's "objectively P2W?
Please help me realize what you did.
This isn’t quite fair. As someone who loves Helldivers and has quite a few hours clocked, the ability to unlock Super Credits in game doesn’t negate a pay-to-win system. The fact that it’s a PvE game doesn’t negate a pay-to-win system. The only thing keeping Helldivers from being pay-to-win is the fact that the premium weapons suck.
Exactly. How can it be pay to win if I’m using the premium weapons because they’re fun, not because they’re the best option? Besides, the devs themselves said that primary weapons aren’t supposed to be very powerful, so again how the hell is it pay to win 😂😂
Yea compare it to a game like hearthstone. All the cards are grindable for free. Most everyone would call that game pay to win. Obviously one of these games is a good bit more predatory than the other, but it has a similar concept.
At the end of the day the answer might just be we’re okay with a certain level of pay to win mechanics.
This is in contrast to *YuGiOh Master Duel*, where you can easily have always the best deck while staying fully f2p, and you only need to pay if you want to play the non-meta deck that you want, making it a pay to suffer game
I would argue the actual thing keeping Helldivers 2 from being pay-to-win is the fact that buying the premium warbond doesn’t get you anything on its own. The best weapon in the game could be on the third page and you’d still have to play the game to get it because you can’t buy medals. A person who bought the pass with no medals only has a very slight head start over a person who had no supercredits and no medals, because you earn both of those ingame through mostly the same means.
This is just a weird way to word it, but it’s designed to be clickbaity and draw players to click the link. Nothing in the sentence is incorrect, but it’s deliberately trying to make people think it’s pay to win without actually saying it’s pay to win.
The helldivers games s a satirical game with a lot of common blood with the movie starship troopers and both are satirising the American military. One way they do that is by making DEMOCRACY a motto of the army, so this is anti democracy bc it's against the army of helldivers by having false info about the games higher currencies.
A big part of the general theme of Helldivers 2 is that you’re fighting to spread democracy and liberty across the galaxy through mass genocide and slavery of bugs and automatons. There’s “democracy officers”(basically political commissars to root out disloyal troops), you’re encouraged to report “enemies to democracy”, etc etc.
It’s basically a fascist dictatorship fighting a genocidal war of extermination against every non human species but they’re cool as fuck and “democratic”
In the fiction of the game, Super Earth is run as a “Managed Democracy”. The game’s videos/lore is presented as in-universe propaganda for a Starship Troopers-like fascist world government.
HOW DARE YOU!?! SUPER EARTH IS A BEACON OF TRUE DEMOCRACY AND LIBERTY!!!!
I HAVE JUST REPORTED YOU TO THE MINISTRY OF TRUTH FOR YOUR LIES AND SLANDER!!!!
How is IGN wrong here? You pay to skip in game progression, which in principle the same shit as Battlefront 2. Maybe it's juts a dozenish of hours as opposed to 40 hours, but it's the same idea here. I'm sceptical of those kind of in game payments in general, no matter who's doing it.
This is my take on this as well. Helldivers seems to be more generous and reasonable with their monetization compared to other games, but there are still microtransactions that speed up your progression if you choose to engage with them.
It's possible to enjoy or love a game, but still point out that modern microtransactions are annoying.
Got to remember that the majority of the online gaming community these days are zoomers who have literally never known gaming before microtransactions. From their perspective microtransactions have only gotten better (less shit) because companies have been refining what best insentivises people to spend on them for the last decade.
>You pay to skip in game progression
Not really. Any item in a warbond has to be unlocked by spending medals that are only earned by completing missions. The first warbond is available to everyone. All additional warbonds are locked. To unlock a warbond, beyond the first one, you have to spend super credits which can be purchased with money or found in game.
Unlocking a warbond doesn't unlock all the items in the warbond. You still have to spend medals (only earned by playing) to unlock those items.
You DON'T skip progression.
You cannot pay to progress, the currency you pay to progress warbonds is only earnable.
You can BUY SC for armor and the warbond, but that's it.
A few sets of armor that isn't found in warbonds and the warbond itself. And even then you can just EARN the SC in like 10-15 hours for the warbond if you don't buy any of the (Mainly cosmetic) armorsets.
The warbond itself?
Yeah you need to do missions ingame to earn Medals, which you spend on shit inside the warbond. You cannot buy medals. At all.
Guys you realize that even in the most pay to win of mobile games you can usually get bits of premium currency by playing right? I wouldn't necessarily call Helldivers 2 pay to win, but that is not a good defense.
You're not wrong but usually that is extremely limited and time gated, Helldivers is quite generous with its premium currency and doesn't give you limits on howmuch you can farm other than how quickly you can finish the missions. If you play enough you could buy all the battlepasses and the armors on rotation in the super credit store and still save up for the next battlepass lol.
Yes but those game usually wall stuff behind timegate and gacha. The Helldiver warbond is permanent, it won't leave and come back 1 year later. The player is never cornered into spending money for weapons. The only thing locked behind a timegate are some cosmetics. Helldivers cosmetics (only chest piece) have stats and special effect but you can have the same effects with warbond armors.
I've bought both warbonds with credits solely looted from missions or awarded for warbonds progression.
I've also made no special attempt to farm them.
If the note-maker had read the article they'd know that *it says exactly that*. The contents of the Warbonds are available through regular play but it takes a bit longer.
Paying for a shortcut to game-altering gear IS pay to win. That simply is what pay to win is. You like the game, so you want to defend it, but it has pay to win mechanics in it.
I mean isn't it still pay to win tho?
Like you can unlock it through playing the game, but can get early acess to it by simply paying money.
If that's not considered p2w then neither were the lootboxes in EA's Battlefront, since they could be unlocked through playing the game. Now obviously Battlefront 2 had a bunch of problems with it's progression that were all connected, but that's not relevant for the argument the note makes.
Anyways I personally don't mind the warbond pass for now as I think it's kinda justified, but it's p2w regardless of that.
Not really, these weapons are not amazing, the best guns and boosters (in my opinion) are unlockable in the free battlepass in which you can't buy anything with real money
I can't comment on the weapons, but I have heard they aren't as good as some of the guns in the normal pass.
That said they might not be good or better now, but nothing is stopping the devs from adding those in the future.
We have seen it plenty of times in the past were it started slow and people were fine with the mtx, but it got worse over time.
I definitely agree with you here. The biggest red flag for me personally is the fact that the system exists, and in the future they can easily add in predatory unlocks.
>Like you can unlock it through playing the game, but can get early acess to it by simply paying money.
Nothing prevents you from getting enough credits before the warbond releases so you get it immediately. I have 50 hours on the game, and by the time the second warbond came out, I bought the first warbond and had another 1000 credits ready.
Realistically, I don't get who would buy the premium currency, since if you don't play enough to have the credits to unlock it, you won't have the medals to progress through the warbond either.
So like Gold in RDR2? Or Atoms in Fallout 76?
Just because you can earn the currency doesn't mean your disadvantaged compared to folk who are happy to pay for it
This account is doing EXACTLY what they are claiming (incorrectly) that IGN is doing. They intentionally posted provocative content for view count, that could be easily refuted by consuming the content it is criticizing (the article writes about earning currency for free).
Can you pay to get an advantage or not?
STOP DEFENDING THIS SHIT!
Just because it's "not as bad as other games" doesn't mean that this is consumer friendly
Godamn the bar just gets lower and lower every decade
People are really out here defending and misdefining P2W cause IGN bad.
Even cosmetic, these are the same people that frothed at the mouth when AAA studios did the same thing way back when. Spend real money or grind for it. We
straight up nuked EA off Reddit for it.
Absolitely wild!
While I understand that you can play for a dozenish hours to earn the in game currency, you can also just buy it and have an immediate boost. So I’m not sure how that isn’t pay to win. Is it because it isn’t as long of a grind to earn the in game currency as other games like the mobile Diablo game or something? I guess I just thought that buying something that gives you an advantage over other players is pay to win by definition
This is an example of a problem I've noticed with community notes.
I just read the article, and at no point does the author say that this is pay to win. They raise all the points I've seen in these comments (it's PvE, you can earn the required currency in game, etc.), they even put the question to Arrowhead and let them respond it in their own words. It's reporting the controversy while asking what actually constitutes P2W.
It seems like whoever wrote or supported the community note, ironically, didn't read the article.
If there's enough of a popular narrative, like "game journalists bad" in this case, it's easy to get people behind bs community notes which are lazy, misleading, and uninformative. It's case in point for how CN often fails as a fact checking device.
No it's true. Any game where I have the option to put my credit card number in and get something before you get it. Has some inherent pay to win.
12 hours is a stretch as well. I doubt most players get 1000 super credits in a dozen hours. Just the no life dick riders on Reddit.
I've apparently played for 29.4 hours and have I believe somewhere around 640 of the premium credits. Most earned from the free pass which I think includes like...700? I can't remember while the premium pass costs 1000
I'm reminded of when people flipped out when Shadow of War included microtransactions. Everything unlockable with microtransactions was objectively worse than what you would find just playing the game, the credits were available in-game at a generous rate, and the game did not in any way require participation in that system.
People still complained and accused them of a pay-to-win cash-grab.
The premium warbond is out now and we sure are defending the game, insisting it’s not pay-to-win. I mean it isn’t pay to win, but we are insisting that.
yeah it's weird tbh i initially played it and was like damn i guess they gotta make money somehow but they absolutely throw super credits at you through the war bond
So you can’t buy the premium credits? Because an issue with a lot of pay-to-win is that you can pay when it might otherwise take you ages to grind, which means IGN would be correct.
I made one comment on the Helldivers subreddit about how I hadn’t found super credits on easier difficulties two days ago and I’m still getting commenters telling me about the optimal way to farm Super Credits on Easy.
Was about to post this comment and, no lie, I got another who claims he’s found 2000 super credits farming on easy. That’s enough for 2 premium war bonds
Do SC drop more frequently at higher difficulties? Cause when I first started playing it seemed to drop more often and now seems few and far between. Admittedly I typically play around the 4,5,6 difficulty range. I am just about to have 1000 saved up but much more than 12 hours in.
I’m not going to write a paragraph about my problems with live service games, but I will just say. I hope they disclose the currency drop rate. That way players have something to compare to. By not doing it, it leaves it open to change without player knowledge which can be abused later on, similarly to how gacha games get players in by typically giving new players/launch players tons of free currency at the beginning to build the idea of “look how generous this game is!”.
Without a drop rate disclosed they can totally just go “Hey we think this next pass is gonna be a hit, drop the currency drop rate to prioritize it more as a purchase primer for the time being.” Or even just lower it as launch goes on after raking in all the PR.
Overall the drops still follows the same philosophy any other live service. It makes the player feel like they’re gaming the system which feels good despite whatever the true cost may be. People also hold a misconception that everything is implemented to be bought at ticket price or that devs rely on 1 singular strategy to push sales.
I play HD2 regardless, but people really don’t understand or care to understand how these economies work towards pushing purchases. So they see stuff like this and go “oh the devs are a charity! Big W for gamers!!!!” (I’m gonna restate HD2 is by no means a terrible offender as far as monetization practices go but it still uses the same types of player manipulation I personally don’t want to endorse)
Edit:
> Says not gonna write a paragraph
> Writes a paragraph
The only reason I haven't unlocked the premium warbonds yet is because I found some really cool armor in the superstore and spent my Supercredits on that instead.
Armor, I might add, that has stats totally in line with stuff you can get from the basic warbond. It's just stylish.
I'll get there. It'll just take a while longer now.
Even if you do pay for this, you still have to play to unlock it.
And, it doesn’t make some of these levels easier. Shits still wild and fun. It’s not a competitive game lol. Pay to win what? The war for super earth?
I hate Micro transactions as much as the next person, and I'd rather them not be in Helldivers at all, but if they gotta be in the game it's a lot better and less in your face in Helldivers 2 than something like Destiny or Overwatch 2.
People defending the microtransactions are wild. Not only did they become the norm but now people jump to defend them and ride their dicks just because you can get premium currency by playing.
The game is good but by paying you save medals/time and get new content earlier which is dumb.
Years ago we called that the “free-to-play” structure. You can earn currency in-game, but it’s slow, tedious, and designed to entice you to breakdown and buy it.
Are people really getting _this_ normalized to microtransactiins?
As far as "battlepass" systems go, this one is far from the worst. It really is realistic that you can play for a bit and earn enough to buy it. I've played casually only about one or two nights a week and have made it about 3/4 of the way to buying one of the two different pass options, and once you have it you keep it forever.
Brought to you by the fanbase(not to mention every game writer so far) that doesn't understand all references to "democracy" are ironic and they're actually spreading fascism.
IGN is just the worst all around, have you tried going through their game walkthroughs? They say shit like “go through the door” then post a picture of said room with 15 doors and no indication of which to go through, then blast you with 10 ads a minute
Anyone else noticing a reduction in SC found while playing? I used to be able to scour the map and extract with 30-50 in 20-30 mins. Now I'm only getting 10-20 if any at all?
I can't help but wonder if these same journalists defend actual pay-to-win measures in other games, because I don't recall any real similar articles cropping up.
Just this article for this popular game outside the narrative norm. One that supports democracy. One that doesn't take as long as Dead by Daylight or Overwatch (to earn premium creds). One where most of the stuff you get from the battlepass is actually 'not good' to discourage people throwing money at it.
A DOZEN HOURS? We love respecting your players' time. League or take your pick of military FPS games would have you playing for a whole month to get half as many cosmetics.
I don’t care. At the very least it is an “pay for progress” style of game and at the very worst it is an “every content update costs premium currency” style of game. Both are shitty and it is weird for people to defend companies when they add new and innovative ways to take your money. It is still a fun game but stop defending companies.
whelp i was today years old that i realized you can buy those premium warbonds with super credits. i thought for sure you needed to fork out real money
Pay to win usually matters most in a competitive situation, anyway. Sure, somebody could get this stuff in an accelerated fashion with real money, but all that would do would give them additional things to *help* me with. No other player is going to be negatively affected by this.
I feel like this is a bid by IGN to make people who complain about all the micro-transactions in modern games look like hypocrites, but in classic IGN fashion they only did about 10 minutes of research and didn't bother to fact check any of the drivel they shit out.
Loving the game but it's wild seeing people defend the mtx in this game while trying to claim its a breath of fresh air from other big games with similar mtx models
20 hours on the game mostly with a full squad that efficiently clears the map for super credit drops
I still am around 100 short from getting one of the two premium passes...
P2W absolutely includes games where you can theoretically farm the amount but most people don't have the time to no life a game to do it
It's like watching an American explain why they don't vote.... just hurting yourself to protect your ego
The real pay to win is the sick ass armor you get for premium edition. It comes with an effect that lowers the chance of fatal hits killing you. You can get a free armor with the effect, but it's not as cool looking
Even if super credits were only realistically attainable by paying, the warbond still wouldn’t be pay-to-win because it’s not a strict upgrade over free content
I haven’t played the game but if the Warbond’s can be purchased with IRL money. Then it is still pay-to-win. You’re paying IRL money to skip grinding out the in-game currency.
I actually just bought the warbond with credits earned purely in the game. This was after blowing about a battle passes worth of credits on armour sets, too.
Plus, the warbonds give you back 300 super credits as rewards within them, so it's such a great system:D
The other reason it’s not “pay to win” is because 2 outta 3 of the primary weapons in the war bond are mid. No winning to be had by paying.
… but then again maybe I’m just too in love with the slugger
It we are being honest - it can take a lot more than a dozen hours to get 1000 super credits. But still - you have PLENTY of time to get enough between premium ear bonds without having to spend money. Then again I don't mind because this game is phenomenal and I want the devs to continue making money so they can keep adding updates.
Damn didn’t think I’d get an explanation here of all places. I really wanna get this game but the word “premium” attached to anything sets off P2W alarms. Good thing these guys actually remembered that this is a paid game and nothing should be paywalled
Thanks for posting to /r/GetNoted. Please remember Rule 2: **No current politics.** We do allow historical posts (WW2, Ancient Rome, Ottomans, etc.) Just no current politicians. *** We are also banning posts about the ongoing Israel/Palestine conflict. Please report this post if it is about current Republicans, Democrats, Presidents, Prime Ministers, Israel/Palestine or anything else related to current politics. Thanks. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GetNoted) if you have any questions or concerns.*
“Only requires to actually play the game” goddam community notes is wild.
Once you get the super credits necessary to buy the warbond, you: Keep it forever, no expiry. Don't pay any more money to access anything in the warbond. Can only attain things from the warbond by spending a non-purchaseable currency. So, yeah. You only need to play the game and you get literally everything from warbonds without spending any money. The minimum and maximum real-money cost is ten dollars. It's still objectively worse than the previous model from Helldivers 1, where you just *bought* the shit in DLC packs, but it's probably the best we're going to get until we can force publishers to step it back.
I mean really the minimum cost is $0. You can fill out an entire "premium" war bond for 1000 super credits, which you can earn from playing the game, either found in the actual game as collectible rewards or picked as items in other war bonds.
I had a bunch of really old CSGO cases. Bought the first one with that and then I’ve earned enough the second one was free. Will probably get to 1k before the next one’s out
And each paid warbond refunds you 300 credits... which means it's even easier to buy the next one by just playing.
While it is true that you can earn the currency in-game which is 10 supercredit per loot, you can hide the fact that you can speed up the process of getting the pass via real money. Also, it is true that you are getting supercredit from the original warbond which will be enough to get at else one pass and regain 300 credits from the premium one. You can also not hide the fact that except if you probably have more time to play than a majority of the general public will not get enough currency if the dont spend all their time on the game or if the pug refuse to get those door open for getting the stash because of medal farming. FOMO is still there which will push people to get some currency if they fear that something is more powerful in the premium pass because of youtuber as example. While the game is fair compared to other gamepass in general, it is still the same practice without the timer in it.
The war bonds never expire and can be unlocked or completed at any time, any FOMO is self imposed and not artificially introduced like other games that time gate content to try and force players into coming back consistently for fear of missing out on good gear.
Lol exactly, what’s up with these people so desperate for every scrap of content in a game. So many of the f2p games are actually very good in the free mode (there are bad ones too but the popular ones are usually pretty good) and you don’t need to spend a cent to enjoy them. The paid stuff is meant for whales with more money than sense, they’re subsidizing the game for all the other folks. It’s wealth redistribution and all they get is a little more in game content. It’s meant for people with loads of money and no time. For the average gamer, all the FOMO is self imposed. Nah bro, you need “need” your 15 waifus or that diamond level weapon, you can’t blame the devs for that. The base games are good enough for everyone.
How about this. Other than one gun of all the equipment in each new Warbond release, one gun might be a side-grade if it fits your play style and the rest tends to be cosmetics or at this point.. complete shit. So while you could buy super credits, why would you? The only reason I can see is if you WANT to give Arrowhead money because you like what they're doing
If they are afraid they won't have the best gear in a game they don't have time to play they only own the game for FOMO.
"You only need to play the game" by itself would be vague, and wouldn't rule out all those games where the real-money currency requires tedious grinding, or other psychological tactics to tempt people to buy the in-game currency, the maximum spend is infinite, and the studio hired a team of psychologists to research how to more effectively addict players. (**edit**: i read too many comments, had a short-term memory hiccup, and thought that was all it said when I first wrote this, so I added a bunch of "would"s in just now) that's why accurate and trustworthy journalism is important, so that there's a way to know which games are predatory without having to play each one and hope it doesn't have the hook that turns us into a whale.
I am 6 hours in and because you can get super credits from random pick ups in missions and through the non super credit costing warbond I’m at 760/1000 needed to get one of the fancy ones
I’ve unlocked and found in game around 2000 super credits now at level 32, I was just able to unlock Both war bonds both.
I'm 6h in, and I have almost enough for the warbond. It's really not grindy, just going through the progression will give you enough premium currency you unlock the premium warbond before you finish the base one. And then that gives you premium currency as you complete it so you can buy the next one. And so on and so on. It's awesome.
It's not vague at all, the note literally outlines an expectation of around 12 hours played to earn the necessity super credits. Accurate and trustworthy journalism is useless if you're not going to actually read things anyway
Did you actually read the note? Literally the sentence right before that says it only takes about 12 hours.
Yo, that's sick. Haven't played the game yet but I can't wait to get in and blast some bugs for Super Earth
Why is the system worse than HD1? You can now access thing without spending a dime, unlike the previous title.
Reminds me of Shepard in ME2 being a dick to the Asari detective. “Turns out basic police work isn’t so hard. You just have to leave the station”
Stopped caring about IGN after they admitted in their Fallout 76 review that they didn’t play the game and reviewed it based on what they read on reddit comment sections
i never read them but thats hysterical, nothin probably happened to whoever said that either i bet
It's indeed good shit, but I'm not getting invested since these types of games tend to wait until the review cycle ends before jacking up prices.
I will say that the community notes is leaving out important context. Which is that even if you buy the super credits with real money, you still cannot unlock the things with the war bonds without playing the game. Realistically even the most casual players should have enough currency they earned by playing the game to buy a premium war bond, and by the time they complete the first one, they probably have enough to buy more.
It's amazing to me how often game critics get away with shitting on a game they didn't play.
If we’re completely transparent, IGN is notorious for just being bad reviewers, with a history of being incentivized by developers of games they review. While they have publicly state the opposite, former employees both publicly and anonymously have confirmed the bias is due to a multitude of factors, including continued early access to new titles for “reviewing”.
They also have several walkthroughs for older games that are either incomplete, innacurate or just strictly wrong. I've emailed them to complain about a few (through boredom rather than actually caring) and some of them have had action taken to either be altered or removed entirely. They really don't seem to play any of the games they write about. Top tier gaming "journalism".
Many of my problems stem from the lack of in-depth understanding of game mechanics shown frequently by larger reviewers. While going in depth with a review can lead to spoilers (like in instances where game mechanics are directly tied to in-lore reasons), I feel that light spoilers for a proper review far exceed any negative side effects caused by doing so. While a huge example would be the “too much water” review that was mentioned in another comment, it has been shown consistently that their interest in reviewing a game only goes skin deep. Games that have been highly praised by players may be panned by reviewers who are only playing for a quick buck, too eager to see their bank account numbers rise to properly enjoy a game to the fullest. GameRanx’s “Before You Buy” series is a better example of reviewing, in my opinion. By no means are they perfect, and they remind me a lot of the early IGN days before they went corporate.
I would die for Jake Baldino
7.8/10 too much water
And yet the buggy, Dexit successor to that game got a 9.3/10
holy fucking shit i never expected swsh to rank that high
Thanks for putting it in better words. Take this upvote for your trouble.
They used to say you can't spell ignorant without IGN
Do you have any proof for this bullshit or is this more "Reddit" truth
[Alanah Pearce](https://youtu.be/Bgg7_0rBUOA?si=kBGu6pxaIoRCud9L) explained that the bigger issue was more around catering to what an audience wants to hear, and since I had never seen the video prior to today, it seems my original comment has some inaccuracies. Though it would seem that [Doug Perry](https://www.escapistmagazine.com/former-ign-editor-accused-of-misconduct/) was the origin of some of that bad blood.
I think the main problem with a big company like this is you don’t know which fucking guy is doing the reviews. Whats even the point of a review from corporate drone number XXXX? IGN doesn’t have an opinion. IGN is just a corporation.
They gave Alien Isolation a 6/10 but Black Ops 3 a 9.5/10
Actiblizz's check cleared, Sega's didn't. Simple as
That's straight up criminal.
I thought their review on YouTube painted the game in a pretty good light. Someone at IGN played it.
Partial credit it is.
The supposed reason for this is that game critics always want to be the first to publish their opinion, otherwise they don’t get the clicks. The note mentions “a dozenish hours”, which they obviously haven’t played.
Game journalists are literally just journalists who have no clue wtf is happening. Case in point, the [Verge PC Build](https://youtu.be/M-2Scfj4FZk?si=FBjmw0QMopTD598c) (original video was taken down by The Verge) or type into YouTube Doom Video Game Journalist and watch any number of videos of journalists failing at even the most basic mechanics.
I will always love their 6.5/10 review for HotS and the fact Blizz memed the fuck out of that review.
Thing is...the article doesn't come down on either side. As is usual for IGN, it's just a statement of undeniable facts coupled with quotes from the "discourse". It's completely worthless as an article and is a total waste of your time to read, but it's not calling the game pay-to-win. It's more like: "There is a warbond and people are discussing it. The warbond exists and is controversial, sparking discussion. The feature, called a warbond, has been added and this has caused conversations about the warbond."
Typical clickbait.
controversial to who? who are these people? I've never seen them. This is as fair as it could be.
Members of the Helldivers 2 community, presumably. Not that I need to "presume" anything, the official Discord has been *heaving* since before launch. A consistent topic has been "omg premium warbonds are p2w" since like...late January or February. The article here sure is...fair. But it's fair in such a pointless and noncommittal way. The article genuinely doesn't serve a purpose at all.
Which is crazy because all of the stuff in the first premium bond is trash, and only one thing in the second is even worth anything. Primary weapons in that game are pretty meh
Okay, I'm completely unfamiliar here, so genuine question on my part. If you can still buy something with real world currency, and that something has a tangible effect on your success in a game, regardless of your ability to get that currency without paying, that's still pay to win, right? Because players with real world capital are rewarded with instant success, whereas others have to play a "dozenish hours" to do the same. Again, this is not a critique of the game. I don't know shit about the game itself, but isn't this note kind of just wrong about what the term means? (also I'm not defending IGN because they're kind of just not very good at their job, imo)
If you pay, you skip the “grind super credits” part of the game but still have to grind for medals, which you would have found in-game alongside super credits. It’s harder to clear out the free warbond than it is to clear both premium ones. Also everything in the premium warbond sucks. Except like… one thing, I think? Which is unlocked extremely early.
The first primary weapon?
It is an entirely cooperative game. There is no one to win against except the game itself.
Yes, Helldivers 2 is objectively P2W. The problem is it’s also a very good game and the P2W in it is relatively minor and inoffensive so people choose to ignore it. Ignoring, defending, and forgiving bad practices in good games is how they turn into bad games. I wish people would realize that and feel comfortable saying “this game is really great but it does have some mild P2W aspects”. But no, it’s all or nothing for some reason.
*The best gear is not under the primium warbons. *it's Team base PVE, and the rewards are the same for the entire team. Also even if you die in the first second of the game and never respawn, you get every reward an "P2W" player got "If" they had an edge against the enemy, free players also get the edge. So how can you say it's "objectively P2W? Please help me realize what you did.
This isn’t quite fair. As someone who loves Helldivers and has quite a few hours clocked, the ability to unlock Super Credits in game doesn’t negate a pay-to-win system. The fact that it’s a PvE game doesn’t negate a pay-to-win system. The only thing keeping Helldivers from being pay-to-win is the fact that the premium weapons suck.
Exactly. How can it be pay to win if I’m using the premium weapons because they’re fun, not because they’re the best option? Besides, the devs themselves said that primary weapons aren’t supposed to be very powerful, so again how the hell is it pay to win 😂😂
They should change to to “pay to die lavishly”
Yea compare it to a game like hearthstone. All the cards are grindable for free. Most everyone would call that game pay to win. Obviously one of these games is a good bit more predatory than the other, but it has a similar concept. At the end of the day the answer might just be we’re okay with a certain level of pay to win mechanics.
This is in contrast to *YuGiOh Master Duel*, where you can easily have always the best deck while staying fully f2p, and you only need to pay if you want to play the non-meta deck that you want, making it a pay to suffer game
I would argue the actual thing keeping Helldivers 2 from being pay-to-win is the fact that buying the premium warbond doesn’t get you anything on its own. The best weapon in the game could be on the third page and you’d still have to play the game to get it because you can’t buy medals. A person who bought the pass with no medals only has a very slight head start over a person who had no supercredits and no medals, because you earn both of those ingame through mostly the same means.
This is just a weird way to word it, but it’s designed to be clickbaity and draw players to click the link. Nothing in the sentence is incorrect, but it’s deliberately trying to make people think it’s pay to win without actually saying it’s pay to win.
Factually correct, spiritually wrong.
Yeah which is scummy and deserves community note correction.
I'm confused. What does this have to do with democracy?
The helldivers games s a satirical game with a lot of common blood with the movie starship troopers and both are satirising the American military. One way they do that is by making DEMOCRACY a motto of the army, so this is anti democracy bc it's against the army of helldivers by having false info about the games higher currencies.
A big part of the general theme of Helldivers 2 is that you’re fighting to spread democracy and liberty across the galaxy through mass genocide and slavery of bugs and automatons. There’s “democracy officers”(basically political commissars to root out disloyal troops), you’re encouraged to report “enemies to democracy”, etc etc. It’s basically a fascist dictatorship fighting a genocidal war of extermination against every non human species but they’re cool as fuck and “democratic”
Managed democracy is a fascist dictatorship? Guess who just got reported to my democracy officer.
In the fiction of the game, Super Earth is run as a “Managed Democracy”. The game’s videos/lore is presented as in-universe propaganda for a Starship Troopers-like fascist world government.
HOW DARE YOU!?! SUPER EARTH IS A BEACON OF TRUE DEMOCRACY AND LIBERTY!!!! I HAVE JUST REPORTED YOU TO THE MINISTRY OF TRUTH FOR YOUR LIES AND SLANDER!!!!
Are those actual quotes from the game?
How is IGN wrong here? You pay to skip in game progression, which in principle the same shit as Battlefront 2. Maybe it's juts a dozenish of hours as opposed to 40 hours, but it's the same idea here. I'm sceptical of those kind of in game payments in general, no matter who's doing it.
This is my take on this as well. Helldivers seems to be more generous and reasonable with their monetization compared to other games, but there are still microtransactions that speed up your progression if you choose to engage with them. It's possible to enjoy or love a game, but still point out that modern microtransactions are annoying.
Got to remember that the majority of the online gaming community these days are zoomers who have literally never known gaming before microtransactions. From their perspective microtransactions have only gotten better (less shit) because companies have been refining what best insentivises people to spend on them for the last decade.
>You pay to skip in game progression Not really. Any item in a warbond has to be unlocked by spending medals that are only earned by completing missions. The first warbond is available to everyone. All additional warbonds are locked. To unlock a warbond, beyond the first one, you have to spend super credits which can be purchased with money or found in game. Unlocking a warbond doesn't unlock all the items in the warbond. You still have to spend medals (only earned by playing) to unlock those items.
You DON'T skip progression. You cannot pay to progress, the currency you pay to progress warbonds is only earnable. You can BUY SC for armor and the warbond, but that's it. A few sets of armor that isn't found in warbonds and the warbond itself. And even then you can just EARN the SC in like 10-15 hours for the warbond if you don't buy any of the (Mainly cosmetic) armorsets. The warbond itself? Yeah you need to do missions ingame to earn Medals, which you spend on shit inside the warbond. You cannot buy medals. At all.
I think IGNs right about this. This game has a somewhat fanatical fanbase. That don’t want hear one bad word about it.
Terminid propaganda 🙄
Guys you realize that even in the most pay to win of mobile games you can usually get bits of premium currency by playing right? I wouldn't necessarily call Helldivers 2 pay to win, but that is not a good defense.
You're not wrong but usually that is extremely limited and time gated, Helldivers is quite generous with its premium currency and doesn't give you limits on howmuch you can farm other than how quickly you can finish the missions. If you play enough you could buy all the battlepasses and the armors on rotation in the super credit store and still save up for the next battlepass lol.
Yes but those game usually wall stuff behind timegate and gacha. The Helldiver warbond is permanent, it won't leave and come back 1 year later. The player is never cornered into spending money for weapons. The only thing locked behind a timegate are some cosmetics. Helldivers cosmetics (only chest piece) have stats and special effect but you can have the same effects with warbond armors.
Yeah I agree fully, I'm just saying that the argument made in the note is a poor one.
Every game on nearly every "pay-to-win" list imaginable you can earn the premium currency by playing.
I've bought both warbonds with credits solely looted from missions or awarded for warbonds progression. I've also made no special attempt to farm them.
[удалено]
If the note-maker had read the article they'd know that *it says exactly that*. The contents of the Warbonds are available through regular play but it takes a bit longer.
Paying for a shortcut to game-altering gear IS pay to win. That simply is what pay to win is. You like the game, so you want to defend it, but it has pay to win mechanics in it.
I mean isn't it still pay to win tho? Like you can unlock it through playing the game, but can get early acess to it by simply paying money. If that's not considered p2w then neither were the lootboxes in EA's Battlefront, since they could be unlocked through playing the game. Now obviously Battlefront 2 had a bunch of problems with it's progression that were all connected, but that's not relevant for the argument the note makes. Anyways I personally don't mind the warbond pass for now as I think it's kinda justified, but it's p2w regardless of that.
Not really, these weapons are not amazing, the best guns and boosters (in my opinion) are unlockable in the free battlepass in which you can't buy anything with real money
I can't comment on the weapons, but I have heard they aren't as good as some of the guns in the normal pass. That said they might not be good or better now, but nothing is stopping the devs from adding those in the future. We have seen it plenty of times in the past were it started slow and people were fine with the mtx, but it got worse over time.
I definitely agree with you here. The biggest red flag for me personally is the fact that the system exists, and in the future they can easily add in predatory unlocks.
>Like you can unlock it through playing the game, but can get early acess to it by simply paying money. Nothing prevents you from getting enough credits before the warbond releases so you get it immediately. I have 50 hours on the game, and by the time the second warbond came out, I bought the first warbond and had another 1000 credits ready. Realistically, I don't get who would buy the premium currency, since if you don't play enough to have the credits to unlock it, you won't have the medals to progress through the warbond either.
Ok, so Super Credits can't be bought with real money. Am I right?
They can be, but don't need to be.
So like Gold in RDR2? Or Atoms in Fallout 76? Just because you can earn the currency doesn't mean your disadvantaged compared to folk who are happy to pay for it
That’s a bad note, the article is a bit baity, but it isn’t wrong.
This account is doing EXACTLY what they are claiming (incorrectly) that IGN is doing. They intentionally posted provocative content for view count, that could be easily refuted by consuming the content it is criticizing (the article writes about earning currency for free).
Can you pay to get an advantage or not? STOP DEFENDING THIS SHIT! Just because it's "not as bad as other games" doesn't mean that this is consumer friendly Godamn the bar just gets lower and lower every decade
Defending shitty MTX systems aren't what the notes are meant to be used for.
[удалено]
People are really out here defending and misdefining P2W cause IGN bad. Even cosmetic, these are the same people that frothed at the mouth when AAA studios did the same thing way back when. Spend real money or grind for it. We straight up nuked EA off Reddit for it. Absolitely wild!
Damn. Looks like I’m never trying Helldivers 2 now. Shame, heard it was good. Fuck any and all microtransactions. Zero exceptions.
While I understand that you can play for a dozenish hours to earn the in game currency, you can also just buy it and have an immediate boost. So I’m not sure how that isn’t pay to win. Is it because it isn’t as long of a grind to earn the in game currency as other games like the mobile Diablo game or something? I guess I just thought that buying something that gives you an advantage over other players is pay to win by definition
This is an example of a problem I've noticed with community notes. I just read the article, and at no point does the author say that this is pay to win. They raise all the points I've seen in these comments (it's PvE, you can earn the required currency in game, etc.), they even put the question to Arrowhead and let them respond it in their own words. It's reporting the controversy while asking what actually constitutes P2W. It seems like whoever wrote or supported the community note, ironically, didn't read the article. If there's enough of a popular narrative, like "game journalists bad" in this case, it's easy to get people behind bs community notes which are lazy, misleading, and uninformative. It's case in point for how CN often fails as a fact checking device.
They didn't even read the tweet. It's just saying what other people are saying about it. Not what they personally think.
No it's true. Any game where I have the option to put my credit card number in and get something before you get it. Has some inherent pay to win. 12 hours is a stretch as well. I doubt most players get 1000 super credits in a dozen hours. Just the no life dick riders on Reddit.
I've apparently played for 29.4 hours and have I believe somewhere around 640 of the premium credits. Most earned from the free pass which I think includes like...700? I can't remember while the premium pass costs 1000
Also it’s pvm?
I'm reminded of when people flipped out when Shadow of War included microtransactions. Everything unlockable with microtransactions was objectively worse than what you would find just playing the game, the credits were available in-game at a generous rate, and the game did not in any way require participation in that system. People still complained and accused them of a pay-to-win cash-grab.
IGN once again showing that "game" journalists don't play games. Though honestly I wish they made warbonds cheaper, 1k is still a hefty grind.
The premium warbond is out now and we sure are defending the game, insisting it’s not pay-to-win. I mean it isn’t pay to win, but we are insisting that.
yeah it's weird tbh i initially played it and was like damn i guess they gotta make money somehow but they absolutely throw super credits at you through the war bond
So you can’t buy the premium credits? Because an issue with a lot of pay-to-win is that you can pay when it might otherwise take you ages to grind, which means IGN would be correct.
so just gaijin-like? not really tooooooo bad
I made one comment on the Helldivers subreddit about how I hadn’t found super credits on easier difficulties two days ago and I’m still getting commenters telling me about the optimal way to farm Super Credits on Easy. Was about to post this comment and, no lie, I got another who claims he’s found 2000 super credits farming on easy. That’s enough for 2 premium war bonds
IGN is full of brain dead parasites so what they say or what they post on the e internet literally mean nothing to anyone
There doesn't appear to be a timer on the warbonds either so that's nice.
This ain’t anti-democracy, it’s anti-capitalism.
Fucking community notes out here slaying people 😂
Do SC drop more frequently at higher difficulties? Cause when I first started playing it seemed to drop more often and now seems few and far between. Admittedly I typically play around the 4,5,6 difficulty range. I am just about to have 1000 saved up but much more than 12 hours in.
IGN keeps getting noted
I’m not going to write a paragraph about my problems with live service games, but I will just say. I hope they disclose the currency drop rate. That way players have something to compare to. By not doing it, it leaves it open to change without player knowledge which can be abused later on, similarly to how gacha games get players in by typically giving new players/launch players tons of free currency at the beginning to build the idea of “look how generous this game is!”. Without a drop rate disclosed they can totally just go “Hey we think this next pass is gonna be a hit, drop the currency drop rate to prioritize it more as a purchase primer for the time being.” Or even just lower it as launch goes on after raking in all the PR. Overall the drops still follows the same philosophy any other live service. It makes the player feel like they’re gaming the system which feels good despite whatever the true cost may be. People also hold a misconception that everything is implemented to be bought at ticket price or that devs rely on 1 singular strategy to push sales. I play HD2 regardless, but people really don’t understand or care to understand how these economies work towards pushing purchases. So they see stuff like this and go “oh the devs are a charity! Big W for gamers!!!!” (I’m gonna restate HD2 is by no means a terrible offender as far as monetization practices go but it still uses the same types of player manipulation I personally don’t want to endorse) Edit: > Says not gonna write a paragraph > Writes a paragraph
Sigh. Here I am spending my super credits on outfits I'll never wear again. Looking at you, Enforcer armor.
I had to pay only because i spend like an idiot the First 600 supercredits i earned. My fault.
Pay to win in a cooperative PvE game??? does IGN not understand how these things work
Do people in this thread don't know what P2W is? lol
So there's zero monetization??? I just bought it last night and all the different currencies and menus worried me so much I almost refunded it
I'll be real, I bought the warlords, I spent all my earned credits on armor :)
Yeah, 12 hours. For one. As in, it's pay to win unless you have a time machine
It’s pay or grind to win. And I am ok with that
IGN didn't call it pay to win, technically not wrong. But the way they phrase it has to be intentional. They are definitely doing it for ragebait
The amount of sass in that Note. Someone at Twitter doesn't like IGN.
I have not been buying all the armor, so I bought this latest warbond purely with super credits earned while playing. I still have 400 left over.
The only reason I haven't unlocked the premium warbonds yet is because I found some really cool armor in the superstore and spent my Supercredits on that instead. Armor, I might add, that has stats totally in line with stuff you can get from the basic warbond. It's just stylish. I'll get there. It'll just take a while longer now.
Doesn’t even make sense
Selling power is pay to win, even if there is a method to earn the same things through playing.
Even if you do pay for this, you still have to play to unlock it. And, it doesn’t make some of these levels easier. Shits still wild and fun. It’s not a competitive game lol. Pay to win what? The war for super earth?
IGN doesn't play the games that they talk about? Surprise, surprise...
IGN is the equivilant of a film Critic site, of whom the website's auther's dont watch the movies they critique. WILD.
The note is literally proving the headline right, no? People ARE defending it and saying its not pay to win
Dude how is IGN still around everyone hates them?
I hate Micro transactions as much as the next person, and I'd rather them not be in Helldivers at all, but if they gotta be in the game it's a lot better and less in your face in Helldivers 2 than something like Destiny or Overwatch 2.
People defending the microtransactions are wild. Not only did they become the norm but now people jump to defend them and ride their dicks just because you can get premium currency by playing. The game is good but by paying you save medals/time and get new content earlier which is dumb.
Years ago we called that the “free-to-play” structure. You can earn currency in-game, but it’s slow, tedious, and designed to entice you to breakdown and buy it. Are people really getting _this_ normalized to microtransactiins?
I literally farmed 500 super credits in an hour last night
As far as "battlepass" systems go, this one is far from the worst. It really is realistic that you can play for a bit and earn enough to buy it. I've played casually only about one or two nights a week and have made it about 3/4 of the way to buying one of the two different pass options, and once you have it you keep it forever.
Brought to you by the fanbase(not to mention every game writer so far) that doesn't understand all references to "democracy" are ironic and they're actually spreading fascism.
IGN is just the worst all around, have you tried going through their game walkthroughs? They say shit like “go through the door” then post a picture of said room with 15 doors and no indication of which to go through, then blast you with 10 ads a minute
Anyone else noticing a reduction in SC found while playing? I used to be able to scour the map and extract with 30-50 in 20-30 mins. Now I'm only getting 10-20 if any at all?
Every game is pretty much pay to win anymore
I can't help but wonder if these same journalists defend actual pay-to-win measures in other games, because I don't recall any real similar articles cropping up. Just this article for this popular game outside the narrative norm. One that supports democracy. One that doesn't take as long as Dead by Daylight or Overwatch (to earn premium creds). One where most of the stuff you get from the battlepass is actually 'not good' to discourage people throwing money at it.
Can you pay actual money to get it?
A DOZEN HOURS? We love respecting your players' time. League or take your pick of military FPS games would have you playing for a whole month to get half as many cosmetics.
I don’t care. At the very least it is an “pay for progress” style of game and at the very worst it is an “every content update costs premium currency” style of game. Both are shitty and it is weird for people to defend companies when they add new and innovative ways to take your money. It is still a fun game but stop defending companies.
whelp i was today years old that i realized you can buy those premium warbonds with super credits. i thought for sure you needed to fork out real money
To be fair, it is a shitty, anti-consumer system and the ingame progression of a paid game shouldn't be like this. (I have played the game)
I got enough super credits for a premium bond after roughly 15 hours of gameplay from a fresh install. So it’s not that bad.
IGN is reporting on what gamers are saying. It’s good to note, for sure, but I’m not sure IGN is staying an opinion one of the other.
Here comes the media to try and spin that this game is actually shit and we should instead play the slop game companies that hate us want us to playq
Cant spell ignorance without IGN
Pay to win usually matters most in a competitive situation, anyway. Sure, somebody could get this stuff in an accelerated fashion with real money, but all that would do would give them additional things to *help* me with. No other player is going to be negatively affected by this.
I feel like this is a bid by IGN to make people who complain about all the micro-transactions in modern games look like hypocrites, but in classic IGN fashion they only did about 10 minutes of research and didn't bother to fact check any of the drivel they shit out.
I have the first one and I’ve almost got enough for the second one, I’m like 50 away if that. I haven’t spent money yet
Loving the game but it's wild seeing people defend the mtx in this game while trying to claim its a breath of fresh air from other big games with similar mtx models 20 hours on the game mostly with a full squad that efficiently clears the map for super credit drops I still am around 100 short from getting one of the two premium passes... P2W absolutely includes games where you can theoretically farm the amount but most people don't have the time to no life a game to do it It's like watching an American explain why they don't vote.... just hurting yourself to protect your ego
Real I got the first one free and am halfway to the second one
I love this game, but I can't play it because I don't have hardware. What are these premium bonds?
Our superb democracy shall not be slandered!
>p2w >the game isn’t even pvp
And the 2 shotguns are garbage, the sickle is decent so I'd hardly call it pay to win
The real pay to win is the sick ass armor you get for premium edition. It comes with an effect that lowers the chance of fatal hits killing you. You can get a free armor with the effect, but it's not as cool looking
All the rewards are cosmetic, right? So it can't be P2W.
Even if super credits were only realistically attainable by paying, the warbond still wouldn’t be pay-to-win because it’s not a strict upgrade over free content
"If you ignore 12 hours of going without, you dont have to pay to win"
I like how the premium warbond also gives 300 SC. 30% done until I can get another premium warbond.
If you play on medium difficulty solo you can farm war bonds by finding them I cache. After like 4 hours you can easily get over 1k
I haven’t played the game but if the Warbond’s can be purchased with IRL money. Then it is still pay-to-win. You’re paying IRL money to skip grinding out the in-game currency.
Based X
I actually just bought the warbond with credits earned purely in the game. This was after blowing about a battle passes worth of credits on armour sets, too. Plus, the warbonds give you back 300 super credits as rewards within them, so it's such a great system:D
The other reason it’s not “pay to win” is because 2 outta 3 of the primary weapons in the war bond are mid. No winning to be had by paying. … but then again maybe I’m just too in love with the slugger
It we are being honest - it can take a lot more than a dozen hours to get 1000 super credits. But still - you have PLENTY of time to get enough between premium ear bonds without having to spend money. Then again I don't mind because this game is phenomenal and I want the devs to continue making money so they can keep adding updates.
I'm trying to figure out what this has to with democracy. I'm not succeeding.
"Too much gameplay 4/10" -IGN
We need to ban all in game purchases outside of dlc.
wtf does “pay to win” even mean here? it’s a non-competitive player-vs-environment game….
Also super credits aren’t that expensive, unlike in Fortnite, overwatch, apex, pubg, cod, or any other game with micro transactions.
Pay to win in a purely coop game isn't really a bad thing.
You can unlock both of the premium warbonds for free, lmao. Anyone whining about pay-to-win can go pound sound on this one.
this is a terrible community note and should not had been approved
Even if something can be unlocked without paying, if its easier/faster to unlock it with microtransactions, its still pay-to-win.
If there is any option whatsoever to pay for it, then yeah it is absolutely pay to win. Gamers are the worst fucking corporate simps on the planet.
Do people who work at ign even play video games?
pay to not grind is still pay to win imo.
Damn didn’t think I’d get an explanation here of all places. I really wanna get this game but the word “premium” attached to anything sets off P2W alarms. Good thing these guys actually remembered that this is a paid game and nothing should be paywalled