Comments on: Poll Question 102 – If Valve were to start selling add-on weapons would you buy them?

By: Dusty_Lions

Dusty_Lions — Fri, 10 Sep 2010 22:31:38 +0000

An artist should be paid so it’s a maybe, depending on the price thing for me.

By: Grey Acumen

Grey Acumen — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 15:58:17 +0000

No. There are only 3 ways that a addon weapon can happen

1) The add-on weapon is utterly useless and adds nothing to the game = not worth paying for

2) the add-on weapon is utterly overpowered and breaks game balance = not worth paying for

3) the add-on weapon is completely useful, without being overpowered, which means that the developers sold me a game that was incomplete, either unintentionally or intentionally = not worth paying for (both the weapon AND the game)

About the best case scenario for the game is if the weapon is power equivalent to a weapon already in game, but it adds a humorous effect when you use it. That might be worth getting, but only if it’s really cheep (less than $1)

By: Dr. Doomy

Dr. Doomy — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 03:59:43 +0000

Hell, I refuse to buy games that require me to pay monthly. I’m not going to start for something as insignificant as weapon thingys.

As for changing the weapons themselves… I don’t care. The default half life weapons (especially HL2) are so butchered they can’t possibly make them worse :p

By: Berrie

Berrie — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 10:55:36 +0000

Such an insubstantial add-on would not get my money.

However if a mod was given this kind of possibility I would be willing to pay if the price stayed was in accordance with the size, quality of the mod.
I especially like the idea of giving a part to charity and those who worked on it.

By: Ade

Ade — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 10:53:21 +0000

True. It’s just too much of a hassle for too little gain.

By: Sortie

Sortie — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 23:50:20 +0000

I’m against this kind of paid add-ons. And why would the author even need the extra buck or two he earns? I think these talented people should make their own mod or game, and get into the industry instead.

By: planetphillip

planetphillip — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 21:38:11 +0000

using it before you are supposed to get these objects?

No. Each weapon would have a “base” weapon. This weapon would be the one it replaces in the game. Makers would therefore have to ensure that it’s power and use would be similar to that of the base weapon otherwise it would become silly.

Good point though.

I would never ever pay for a single weapon, no matter what the price, but maybe if it is a pack of say 20 high quality guns, I might consider paying 50 cents for it.

That sound a bit mean 50 cents for 20 weapons! I’d buy a couple of bucks for 5 really good weapons.

By: andyb

andyb — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 21:24:46 +0000

I can’t vote because a number of factors are not taken into account.Are we talking about buying a rocket launcher/sniper rifle and using it before you are supposed to get these objects?I don’t mind just having new sounds/models etc but the game can’t lose it’s balance as you said but when would you get these weapons?

By: m82sniper

m82sniper — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 18:43:18 +0000

I would never ever pay for a single weapon, no matter what the price, but maybe if it is a pack of say 20 high quality guns, I might consider paying 50 cents for it.