Will you please tell these FS2 Know-it-alls that fs1 was indeed a P2W game in the true sense. Please someone from fs1 tell them that if you didn't purchase gkash you were SOL?
-
-
FS1 was indeed a p2w game but its the same as this game in a sense. U can survive without buying gkash. -
yo fs 1 = pay to win.
let me see u play that game with 5 slots skill slots.
Comment
-
If the game was still out i would for u.Comment
-
i felt like fs1 was pay to compete lol. cus u could buy just as much gkash as the next guy but if u stink, u still stink. but yea u definietly couldnt even compete without it tobegin withComment
-
Both games were P2W. I don't know if GK went overboard with FS1, but the Sierra version of FS1 didn't require nearly as much of a financial investment to get an optimal character.Comment
-
Yes brah, GK went overboard with it, it was almost comical.Originally posted by larson View PostComment
-
I see what you're saying TBrown, you could survive without slots and statted clotes but, be real it was like 1 position you could survive on without slots or stats, and that was PG.
And Kev I see what you're saying too, you had to have gkash to get that competitive edge.Comment
-
I don't think statted clothes were essential but slots were. BTD2 was also essential for guards. It might become the same in FS2 as more and more players get better at the game.Comment
-
I disagree that it was pay to play. Pay to start or as otgers said, pay to compete seems like the better word.
For every negative GK has given, the one positive is that we didn't have to have GKash anymore once we bought slots and a dribble or 2. Clothes did not define one's skill and I saved so much money because of FS...Comment
-
fs1 was p2w. fs2 is notComment
-
its true however at least they had multiple opportunities to help like free gkash offers and item giveaways that give stated clothes.Comment
Comment