Don't you love EA?

[Kenshin Himura]

More fuel for the fire...

EA Scraps Battlefield:BC DLC weapons

Apparently, EA finally caught on to the massive amounts of angst over the downloadable weapons in BC. Rather than just scrapping it altogether to begin with, they start giving excuses about how they weren't really going to make all of the weapons DLC. Now, they've just decided to scrap it all together.

Well, almost. Now they're adding the weapons to the Gold Edition of the game. So, any player that purchases the Gold Edition gets access to these 5 guns from the get-go, where as other players will have to achieve the highest rank in order to unlock them. Fair? Hardly. But hey... Who gives a flying fart about balance and fairness when you can earn an extra buck?

[Thrashdragon]

Actually I'm pretty encouraged that the proposed boycott and many, many forum posts about this had an effect. It's probably too late to save the game (plus, having played the beta, it's mediocre at best), but maybe they'll think twice before they do it again.

[BigTwinky]

I'm with Thrash on this one, I'm happy to see that the protests and such got through to them. I guess hearing from the people interested in the game and how they would not like / buy it made them rethink their decision.

I still hate the company, but at least the people had their way...kinda

[Thrashdragon]

Ugh...after reading some more on this, EA is now claiming that the beta showing purchasable weapons was a "bug" that resulted from "misinterpreted internal communications".

Funny, I remember them specifically stating those weapons would only be available as purchasable DLC.

[Trooper110]

EA lies....always :P

[Hammy]

How is this negative?
Presenting an idea like this was free feedback that they didn't have to learn the hard way.

It doesnt really say much to me at all. Put something shiny on the table, let people grab it. Then put it in a box, and see if people find it. Then put it in open veiw in a see through box that is locked,and see what happens then.

Here is how I see it happening at EA HQ:

"Would people buy this stuff?"
"I dunno."
"How do we test for it?"
"Why dont we just put it up there in a viewable but not accessible format and let the beta users respond. We have enough PR analysts trolling forums at the pop sites to tell us what is right."
"YEAH! And that way- if it is a bad idea, we can just claim errors and testing. And if it goes our way, WE MAKE MONEY."
"What if they dont like it though- how do we make the weapons available."
"Easy- unlockables that force them to spend more time absorbing our brand."
"Done. Foosball time?"
"Foosball time!"

[BigTwinky]

I'm thinking more like:

"Is there a way we can make more money off a game after its released? Look at MMOs and how they charge a monthly rate...."

"Hmm, not sure we can pull off a monthly rate for an FPS game"

"Good point. Well, we see that the model to reward players for playing a long time by giving them guns and shinny medals seems to work. If people like this stuff, then why not charge them for it? People are being stuff on ebay for their MMOs, I'm sure they would pony up the money"

"Ohh...now your talking. Make people pay for things we were originally giving them for free"

*a few months pass*

"Man, have you seen the fallout from the community about this?"

"Yeah, pretty nasty. But man, we need to make more money, the CEO expects it."

"How about putting the extras in a gold edition and charge more for that, and also make it available when they are high rank for free? The peons who want the stuff will pay right away."

"Cool."

[Hammy]

you forgot Foosball Twinky.

There is ALWAYS foosball out here.

[Thrashdragon]

Blizzard raking in 15 million dollars a month has completely corrupted the minds of the rest of the gaming industry.

[CarbonFire]

Ugh...after reading some more on this, EA is now claiming that the beta showing purchasable weapons was a "bug" that resulted from "misinterpreted internal communications".

Funny, I remember them specifically stating those weapons would only be available as purchasable DLC.

Translation: We WERE going to spring this on an unsuspecting public AFTER the game hit stores and we made a few million off of it. The internal communication let the cat out of the bag early, and now we're afraid we might lose those day 1 sales due to bad publicity, so now we must scrap the idea.

While I'm gald to see them back pedal, and it's terrific that for once they're listening to the criticism, I'm still not fully convinced EA has turned over a new leaf. It seems more like they got caught with their hand in the cookie jar, and now it's damage control time. Now if they don't try this again, and stop trying to wring every last nickel out of their clientele (us), then EA will have truly turned from the dark side.

Blizzard raking in 15 million dollars a month has completely corrupted the minds of the rest of the gaming industry.

I'm pretty sure EA was corrupted already. They've been trying to rape the gaming market for money long before WoW. But that I'm sure EA wants a piece of that juicy apple as well.

[Trooper110]

That's why EA bought Mythic like 7 or 8 months back...pick up Dark Age of Camelot and control the Warhammer MMO that they're currently developing. *Supposedly" Mythic is autonomous to an extent, but I played DAoC and I saw things get worse after EA was in full control.

[BigTwinky]

you forgot Foosball Twinky.

There is ALWAYS foosball out here.

How about some air hockey?

[-IRC-MIKE]

How about some air hockey?

Ping Pong! FTW!

or full contact golf.

[Thrashdragon]

That's why EA bought Mythic like 7 or 8 months back...pick up Dark Age of Camelot and control the Warhammer MMO that they're currently developing. *Supposedly" Mythic is autonomous to an extent, but I played DAoC and I saw things get worse after EA was in full control.

Mythic killed DAoC long before EA bought them out. They made a massive mistake in paying heed to the whiners on the Vault boards and nerfed their own game into oblivion. ToA was the icing on the cake.

Which sucks, because I really, really want Warhammer to be a good game. But I'm not going to let myself get too excited about it.

Good translation, Carbon, I think that's exactly what happened. My only hope for EA is that they are supposedly going to be leaving successful dev teams in place instead of just buying the name and then raping the franchise. I would never expect them to stop trying to extort every last cent out of us, though.

[ak416]

Ok, but is this not what everyone wanted? Now, insteading of spending the extra money, just play the game and you can unlock them. Obviously if your spending more, your going to get more. Most SE packages come with extras, why shouldnt a Gold Edition? Times are changing, and whether we like it or not, they are making games that are of interest to us, and wanting more money in return.

I would never, ever purchase individual guns, but if i can purchase a Gold Edition that happens to have more guns from the get go, sure, ill spend the extra 10 bucks or whatever. People were boycotting the fact that you had to purchase guns, which yes, is ridiculous. But now you have the choice. You can wait and unlock the guns and get the standard edition, or you can pay a few extra dollars and get them from the get-go.

If the issue lies in the possibility of this creating an unbalanced game, that is a ridiculous argument in my opinion. Thats like saying i should never have to play against someone with a higher rank than me in CoD because they have better guns and perks than i do. Once you level up, you'll get the exact same weapons they have, and you should feel better about it, too. Not only did you pay less, but you worked hard to reach those ranks and i think this is a nice reward for ranking up and should give you all a greater sense of accomplishment then those who bought the Gold Edition.