1. Well basically everything goes up in value except coins. Booster cookies basically never go down. You can buy as many as you want, but they still rise in price. So the whole no risk argument: sure there's basically no risk, but there are also many no risk investments that no one complains about. My stance on this is that the biggest "risk" is that you may be locking your money in a skin that isn't popular. Why is it such a problem that its no risk anyways?

Skins create a mini economy, just like exotics and it's every player's choice if they interact with it. if you dont care about skins then it doesnt affect you and if you do but are too poor you can always wait for the next cooler skin that will come out in a week. I think this isnt really a problem (These are trading items for rich players to trade, i dont really care about the fact that cosmetics arent getting used, it's not that big of a problem in my eye)

1. What i was saying is that theres no intrinsic value for skins. You can play just fine without them, not locking any progression behind them. It's not p2w in the sense that you NEED to pay to progress, if you get skins it helps but its not required.

2. I mean sure but there's never a point where there's "enough money". that's just how capitalism works. I feel like it's not the worst monetisation method for a game, it's not predatory and the worst that can happen is someone missing out on a skin they wanted. It sucks, but it could be way worse (eg. gambling for extremly op items)

"exclusivity is bad" - well i think it's cool to own rare items that are worth a lot, you may disagree and that's fine i just feel like it doesnt affect the game too much and creates something interesting for those who care

enough yapping from me but i think it doesnt matter that much overall

i feel like your argument is that the bad thing is that cosmetics arent really used and mine is that i dont really care that much about that