News EA explains Battlefield: Bad Company

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2008/03/25/ea_explains_battlefield_bad_company/1

Confused about the pay-to-play weaponry and DLC on offer in the upcoming Bad Company? Well, listen closely then...

 

Maybe the new guns cater to the hardcore player? A really powerful but totally unweildly and with massive reload time and kick-back sniper rifle? It's the kind of gun the hardcore players would pay to get hold of, but the more casual players would never feel like they are missing out through not having it, as the learning curve to get good with it is just too high.

 

I can understand maps a bit, but weapons? At least maps you know take them a bunch of time to create. Weapons don't seem like they would be worth buying. Especially if they say they are balanced. If they are that balanced they should let you pick which ones you want, then you buy the others.

 

It looks to me that EA wants everyone to buy the Gold version

 

They are learning from companies like APPLE.

Apple always offers a low end gimped edition of every product they sell. The product you actually want is the mid or high end model, and the difference between low and mid range is always just about affordable to make you think you need it.

In this case the difference between gold and standard will probably be a few $/£ so you will end up getting it as well.

Wonder what else they will start charging for...

But you know... I bet they make 100's of thousands of $/£ from it. All those pumped up kids wanting the extra P90 or M16scope edition. LOL! The same people who buy all the other rubbish on MS LIVE's DLC area.

 

They already tried this in a game called WarRock.
The best players are those who could dish out the most cash.
And that is just an elitist crock of crap.

On the other hand if the weapons DON'T have an advantage--
why the hell would you pay?
Especially if its a PC game? Just mod the gun into it, client side.
(ala Counter-Strike)

 

There is no way I am believing the crock about new weapons not unbalancing the game. This is a nickel-and-dime scheme, and they should be ashamed of themselves.

I'm starting dev work on a new FPS: you pay $0.10 per headshot, and for $5.00 you can buy two minutes of invulnerability. Please.

 

I don't believe this either. The weapons from the BF2 special forces pack were better than the normal bf2 guns, wouldn't surprise me if they did the same thing here.

 

yet again EA does not cease to surprise me with their greed...

 

lol rember when you used to get free things with patches you know like how AVP2 was given about 5 maps completly new game modes and aliens and weapons? yeah.

 

or just let the AIX devs get a hold of the game

wouldn't have to worry about fun weapons and vehicles then.

 

I can hear 'em say
Bad company and I won't deny
Bad, bad company 'til the day I die, I
Oh yeah, 'til the day I die!

 

Why not just make every usable thing in the game 'pay to play'? Stupid crap.... Unlocking weapons wasnt that bad in BF2, it was if you didnt play much as well.. you had stock. But this pay-to-use thing is just, dangit, a freaking way to squeeze more blood from the gamers. Downloadable content my freaking big toe, how about making the game usable/fun so everyone has the same dang thing? Eh?

EA named its game correctly... bad company indeed.... >:|

 

I wonder how much money is enough for EA?

 

Does anyone remember the times when you bought a game and... you know, actually got all of it, to play for as long as you liked?

I'm the kinda guy that objects to having to pay monthly for a game (dammned MMORPGers!) so there's no way I'd be interested in paying for a game where there are parts (aka weapons) missing that the developers have made and deemed good enough for the game, but are holding out on their customers.

Would you buy a box of Monopoly that came with just the board and the cards, pieces sold seprately? I doubt it.

 

after reading the article, it has really put the icing on my crap cake!

it started getting bad when Battle field 2 had online accounts and you could only unlock larger maps and weapons by playing online, before then gaming was fun, now there getting really greedy for there money. bad enough games cost a best part of a days wage! (for those on minium wage that is)

even hardware is becoming stupidly priced! Intel for example there extreme edition CPU's and Nvidia's flagship motherboards. dam it if i'll ever pay £300 for a mobo and £500 for a CPU!

yes im ranting but modern gaming has gone down hill and become sh*t!

*edit* if this dose go though pirate copies, and illegal downloads will go though the roof, people dont want to get screwed over when paying out there cash.

its gonna get like printers, sell the printer at a lose and make the money back on the ink. so in the future you'll buy the game engine but the rest will be an extra cost, completly custom of course and crap! we started making the game, can you finish it...

 

Does not surprise me coming from EA.

In NFS: Pro Street you could either unlock cars as you go through the career, or buy them from the start if you wanted to pay for them. Maybe EA should start making games worth paying for.

 

http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2008/03/26

exactly what i feel....

 

they now cost a full days net pay for those on min wage (usually students)


and EA = crap, only good games it publishes are re-branded from small independent dev teams

 

Wonder how much a nuke will cost.
Probably what EA "think" is a small tactical advantage.