So I play Battlefield 1 quite a bit and have noticed this in quite a few other game genres, getting skins for weapons, vehicles etc.
Does anyone actually use them?
I'm pretty sure the ones in battlefield have no benefit.
Are You for Skins or against Them in Games?
Comments
Still skins
I would wear compression tights during soccer games, as it offered sun protection and kept movement good. i dont believe a lot of the extra stuff they claim to do (increase your optimality etc).
Also wearing compression tights after a game (sleeping in a fresh pair) was very beneficial to recovery.
If free via in game achievements = yes!
If only unlocked by paying for them = no!
As somebody who plays the Steam Community Market selling skins from various games, I'm for it as long as they remain purely cosmetic. (Don't need any Pay-To-Win BS.)
Isnt skins in games when you're playing soccer with your mates and you don't have different coloured shirts so you have 'shirts and skins' where the skins team plays without their shirts on?
this
I use to play it to my advantage back in the beta counter strike days. Not any more though as i cant be stuff and a lot of detail goes into games these days as they have the ability to do it.
My skins of choice for cs was hyper color so they easily stand out.
a co-worker explained to me it helps to camouflage his weapon.
I was confused 'so your weapon is camo but not your soldier?
I am for skins. They give no stat or mechanical advantages, but it allows the developers to make money from people who like aesthetic stuff, allowing them to keep working on a free to play game (or make it cheaper for non-skin buyers).
The skins in Battlefield are a point of contention for me. The crates were made out to be a big deal but they added nearly nothing. Many games have a skin system that is commendable, but Battlefield's was so random and pointless that it made playing for crates seem like a grind.
A game I play called Battlerite has a decent crate/skin system. You get a crate for your daily quests, which contains 3 items. You can also get crates through accollades, rank ups, and purchasing (with in-game money or real money). Getting duplicates of items gives you a currency called 'runes' which can be spent directly on specific items. Alternatively, you can buy runes. Through this system, I was able to buy the legendary skin and weapons for the character I liked with hard work, skill, and almost 100 hours of gameplay. But it felt rewarding when I finally got it.
Skins in paid games are okay, but they should definitely be obtainable through gameplay. However, when the game is free, it's arguably okay that there is stuff behind a pay wall, but it's always better if it's not pay to win.
Free skins? Sure why not.
Paid skins? Yes if it means DLC is free (Like Overwatch), no if they still expect you to buy map-packs or season passes and have skins.Some gamers are aesthetic, some are all about the mechanic. Skins are just dressups for your weapon, and like in most MMOs you gotta pay to stand out. If I played multiplayer lets shoot each other games, I would probably pay for a skin if I had a strong gaming family. I have shelled out for skins for my sword in GW2, clothes for my Character in ESO and for exclusive mounts in WoW even though I have in game versions of them all, they make me look good, which I like looking at, make my team look good when we coordinate out team, and are a talking point and conversation starter. Weapon skins are no different, buy a fancy skin if you want to look at it.
I feel discriminated against why no options for Aliens?
It really depends IMO. If NEW weapon types are available only via skins, thats a BS. For EX, in CSGO, different knife types are available only via skins. Even a default vanilla skins have to be purchased separately.
Better question is are you for or against paying for them
I clicked on this assuming it was referring to wearing compression tights during sports … bikies