Single player games shouldn't have pay to win options either..,(reply>), @Yamanii   oh yeah i remember that,  i even bought a few of those gold coin packs, 50 bucks got me 2 swords that were too weak to ever even use and 3 orc captains who were equally useless.  Of course it doesn't really matter considering how the feminist anti-male sjw nazis utterly butchered the story in every conceivable way. Still pisses me off what they did to that games storyline.  smh,(reply>), Pay to win for people with money and people that not have time to grind game because they working. Asian has longer time of work.,(reply>), @Jan so what ???,(reply>), Remember how in the past games used to have cheat codes?,(reply>), Great. Except this law can reasonably be read so that any attempt to use a DLC to rebalance gameplay after the fact is "Pay to Win" and thus illegal. So if a game adds a new class for the player. Or if it adds new magic items, to you know, justify you paying for the DLC, it becomes "pay to win" by this definition and illegal. <br><br>Or Paradox, which completely rebalanced Stellaris a year ago to allow new features and ideas to be added to the game. They include a DLC to highlight the changes in the new system. "NOOO! That's pay to win. Because people who don't have the DLC can't have the same advantage." <br><br>This Bill, as it stands, could realistically wipe out any and all non-cosmetic DLC. Even a quality one like Blood and Wine from Witcher 3, I could argue was "pay to win." The mutagen system added by the DLC makes narrative progress simpler than the base leveling system. And is thus "pay to win." And since it can be imported into the Base Game (via NG+), it gives a real advantage to players of the DLC. <br><br>This. Is. Dumb.