GAMING NEWSHas EA Taken Preorder DLC Too Far?Posted on Tuesday, June 14 @ 18:39:08 Eastern by Daniel Bischoff
![]() Let's just say that there are several individuals excited about Battlefield 3 here at the GR compound. There's me... and Ku'ulei... and probably some others. What can I say? I grew up on Battlefield 1942 and its expansion packs. Battlefield 2 blew my high-school-aged brain away. That kind of programming won't go away with the announcement of preorder bonuses but the gaming community is a fickle one. Here's my brain when I think about Battlefield 3: WHAT?! You can go prone?! WOAH! HOLY SHIT! This game looks awesome! If only there was something to get upset about!! There is: apparently there are a handful of games that EA have revealed to be exclusive to those who preorder the game. EA announced the "Physical Warfare" pack for the UK (only for the UK so far by the way). Customers who preordered the game will receive weapons, equipment and ammo that supposedly gives them an advantage over Joe Schmoe who doesn't preorder the game. How do I put this delicately? Reddit is absolutely fucking pissed. If you haven't been paying attention, it's not the first time EA has attempted to offer gamers the opportunity to buy themselves better, more powerful weapons (they previously undid this exact same type of mess with Bad Company 2). I guess if you have a big game, you have to try to manipulate as much money out of it as possible, but I honestly think the better path would be for EA to just give the first DLC pack away for free. Who knows how much your customer will buy if you give them the first taste for free? Wait... that's drug dealer talk. With these addictive online multiplayer shooters, is there anyone better suited to hand out advice? More from the Game Revolution Network Comments
Post a Comment
LOGIN or REGISTER to post a comment or rate this article.
|
|
| More On GameRevolution | |
danielrbischoff
Joined: Nov 2009
warmaster670
Joined: Jun 2007
danielrbischoff
Joined: Nov 2009
BigWoopMagazine
Joined: Jun 2011
Ranim
Joined: Nov 2005
The cold hard fact of the matter is that in both occasions when they tried to force exclusive weapons on people the active community was almost completely united in opposition to it, and in at least the first case their cries won out (i totally forget the outcome of the second incident). It would be foolish to let this be a sole indicator, but if you go to the EA Battlefield 3 forum and look at the very top poll about this subject you will see that 2000+ people plainly stated NO, an overwhelming margin, this could possibly be a rigged poll, but there is no proof so take that poll with a grain of salt.
If
Ranim
Joined: Nov 2005
I personally am against making exclusive items which have a purpose that affects the core game-play. It doesn't matter if its balanced, what ever that means in Battlefield 3s context. If this was just some vanity thing like the skins in Bad Company 2, I could care less, but we're talking about something that actually has an impact in the game environment, and its only for those who buy from certain places.
You have to maintain a constant vigil against these kinds of practices regardless of whether its a big deal or not, because publishers are CONSTANTLY gauging what they can get out of consumers. This being one such event. This is a boundary that they're violating.
Thats how I think about it right now.
danielrbischoff
Joined: Nov 2009