I will use Dead Space 3 as my example.

by uberfoop , Seattle-ish, Wednesday, February 27, 2013, 13:27 (4291 days ago) @ bryan newman

Saying that it takes "200 years" or what ever gross exaggeration that you use is silly.

Obviously. That was the point; if it did take "200 years," the black-and-white statement you made falls apart, which implies that there is some point at which even being able to unlock things through gameplay becomes problematic. Combine that with the suggestion that it's unlikely to be a single point but rather a more continuous progression toward being a problem, and you have the argument that your argument trivializes a more complex problem worth discussing.

The idea of having a faster way to approach things is nice to have at times. In competitive multiplayer however that is horseshit. Everybody should be on an even entry level in MP.

While I don't agree that it makes any more sense in SP than MP, I read your earlier post as suggesting that you had a very different view here:

"The day that it becomes REQUIRED to purchased additional materials to either complete the single player or get extra guns in COMPETITIVE multiplayer (Halo, Battlefield, CoD etc.) is the day that I will damn micro transactions to hell."

The way you worded this makes it sound as though, as long as you can grind for those competitive MP weapons, it's okay to have them be on a microtransactions system. Which I would personally really strongly disagree with, and it's one of the reasons that I've been so slow in throwing together a new PC and engaging in the PC competitive shooter space; everything I'd want to play at least starts out with such a microtransactions/grinding system.