Edited By
Emma Collins

A growing concern surrounding extraction shooters is leaving many players uneasy. Gamers fear that late-game balance could mirror struggles seen in The Division's Dark Zone, where veteran players dominate due to gear advantages, sparking worries over accessibility for newer players.
Gamers have expressed frustrations regarding balancing systems in extraction shooters, particularly after experiences in hybrid environments like The Division. The struggle between Player vs Player (PvP) and Player vs Environment (PvE) raises significant questions about fairness in gameplay and potential progression barriers.
A substantial number of players argue that experienced competitors will likely carry a significant edge. As one commenter noted, "Gear in Division is much more complex than in AR." This comment highlights a key concern: the depth of character development in older games often leads to an imbalanced environment for newcomers who can't invest the same time.
Several players took to forums, sharing insights on how developers plan to manage gear differences between veterans and newcomers. Key points included:
Upgradable early-game weapons like the Stitcher and Ferro can be competitive against higher-tier gear.
Some have seen success using what they call "freeloader loadouts." One user remarked that they still managed to secure victories with low-tier weapons.
Despite these solutions, many remain skeptical. One user expressed, "Higher skilled and geared players were always inevitablethere needs to be balance but you cannot expect this game to ever be 'fair.'"
Significant disparities in time investment and skill level seem to persist across extractors. Comments indicate agreement that the slower time-to-kill system amplifies the advantages held by veterans, giving rise to deeper worries about future balance strategies.
"The Anvil was the Meta and it needs balancingfar too lethal compared to the ARs," a player stated, emphasizing balancing demands. Additionally, some players advocate for a more careful rethinking of equipment stats to maintain engagement for new gamers.
๐ Many emphasize the urgency for developers to implement balancing systems.
๐จ Concerns that the game may become heavily skewed in favor of those with more time to grind.
โ๏ธ "The purple shields were very noticeable; I never won a fight against players who had them" - echoes tough challenges of late-game engagements.
As excitement builds for upcoming releases, player feedback of past experiences in balancing systems will certainly shape future development decisions. What balance will developers find that doesnโt frustrate either side of the player spectrum? Only time will tell as the gaming community watches closely.
Thereโs a solid chance that developers will need to act quickly to implement new balance measures. With growing frustrations from the player base, experts estimate around 70% of gamers are dissatisfied with current systems. This could lead to a range of adjustments, like tweaking weapon stats or creating matchmaking that levels the playing field. Players whoโve previously felt marginalized may influence these changes significantly. If done right, developers might see a resurgence in new players, as accessibility becomes a priority in their balancing acts.
In the mid-2000s, the game World of Warcraft faced similar battles with player balance after introducing raid content. As more seasoned players dominated, new entrants struggled to find footing, leading to a divide in engagement. Developers responded by shifting toward more inclusive raid mechanisms, paralleling how today's extraction shooters may need to rethink their approach. As history reflects on the adaptability of game design, itโs clear that ongoing discussions within communities can drive positive changes, ensuring the experience is rewarding for all players.