You don't need gun control, you need bullet control!

Not surprising, I still remember the manual DLC they authorized. And yes, wouldn't surprise me if they started making you pay to save your damn game, or to use invincibility power ups or adrenaline shots to take 50 bullets before going down.

I said this a long time ago about LIVE, but this is seriously getting ridiculous.

If it weren't for games like rez and n+ I wouldn't have put any money into that service in almost a year. Not that me not doing it will necessarily change anything, but wtf is this?

love the ammo comment btw.

Will the weapons shoot advertisements?

I guess I should also note before I get majorly flamed that I understand this is EA, but its my personal opinion that alot of this has stemmed from MS's model of DLC and devs finally understanding how much money could be made by doing crap like this.

What's next you ask? They'll charge you for button usage. Wanna use that right trigger? Yea, you pay. Start button to pause the game? Better ready your CC. Rumble on both sides of the pad? That'll cost ya.

Wow i thought we'd already been over this with the Godfather "cheats" and whatnot.

What soulless jerk thinks of this stuff; here i was thinking EA had seen at least some of the light.

To be fair it doesn't look like any of the additional weapons actually have an advantage over the ones in the game. There are a couple of different stats for each gun and the beta has a function where you can compare those stats to the other guns.

Still a dumb idea for charging to unlock weapons that are IN THE GAME.

I can only agree, it's a slippery slope this stuff. Getting extra maps is just fun, I especially liked the premium modules for Neverwinter Nights, THAT is how payed content should be when it comes to quality (I'm still a bit mad that Witch's Wake and Shadowguard didn't get any sequels though). Pirates of the Sword Coast and Kingmaker are just awesome experiences.

Hell, IMO, you shouldn't even be able to get weapons that are better as unlockables, as it is almost the same thing, only you create a big canyon between veteran players and new players instead of people with too much money and people without too much money.

@Bon5ai:
XD chris rock FTW!

Just when I thought EA couldn't sink any lower...

This practice is despicable and a blight on the industry. The EA-Borg analogy becomes truer every day.

How much for a tank?

@Milihpen:

Yes, when you fire, McDonald's tiny burgers hit the soldiers and they die from high cholesterol, great bio-weapons.

Having to buy ammo would be hilarious though, sort of a game within a game, meet the objectives, high accuracy etc earns you credit, which you can use for ammo in the next round...

You would have to have a mediocre backup weapon so you don't run totally out of ammo and scavenging downed players becomes all the more important.

I find the clan thing for the ps# more bothersome though.

For every 10$, youll get another 5mph added to your bullet. If you dont pay anything, the bullet will fart out of the gun about 1 foot.

Well, there goes my purchase of that game. What a rip off...developers are getting out of hand with this DLC business.

Will this be the fate of MASS EFFECT 2?

And I know its not the developers fault btw, EA is a bitch...

On the other hand, nearly all collectible card games function this way. You buy booster packs to get better cards. Sometimes you get cards you already have.

I don't mind paying for new stages & new game modes, but weapons that should be INCLUDED in the game? EA has sunk to a new DLC low. Next thing you know, they'll start charging per online match.

I'm not surprise by it...from EA you can't expect less.

Whoa whoa whoa, slow your horses. Aren't you jumping the gun a bit here kotaku?

We don't actually know anything about the guns yet. It is entirely possible they are just cosmetic changes to existing guns. Or that they are different but are equally balanced. So maybe a different pistol that is slower but more powerful etc.

There was a limited gun included in copies of BF2142 sold at certain stores and it actually turned out to be worse than the gun it replaced.

While I will say it is slimy for them to hold back content to then merely release it later for extra cash. It is unfair to say they are''allowing players to pay in order to get a leg up on the competition''.

So slimy yes, but we have no idea to what extent yet and I feel the article here is a bit of a knee jerk reaction.

Pretty soon you're going to be buying discs with just a title screen saying (insert CC# to continue) and some developer credits.

Is that a price tag gun? I bet that sucka tears up the battlefield.

Dammit EA, just as you were starting on the path away from being the Great Satan of gaming...

Why yes I would pay 6000 space bucks for your aim-bot, thank you, have a nice day.

@Candlejack: In reality, this may not work because of patent issues of making money off a button-pressing patent that doesn't belong to you, but hey it is EA...

I wish someone would organize a boycott of this game. Teach EA a lesson.

I hate EA, they have become a cancer in the gaming industry. Buying up awesome companies, turning them to dross, nickel and diming consumers for what should be standard features of a game.

If trends like these spread, i will have to downgrade my gamer status from fanatic to an occasional pass the time participant.

Dammit, EA always knows how to leave a bad taste in my mouth.

E..A Games... "Its from our Ass"

"This frag brought to you by [insert company here]"

Congratulations you have just purchased the 9mm pistol for 50 dollars and have unlocked the sub machine gun class by purchasing the pistol. If you wish to purchase a submachine gun that will be 100 dollars....

EA are getting dangerously close to that.

Fucking EA...always the one to screw evryone over. The sad part is, someone will buy this and start a downward spiral for all of us gamers. They are going to charge us for things that should be included. When you think EA can't stoop any lower...surprise...they outdone themselves again.

If true, it's outrageous

wow gaming is heading in the wrong direction. I say let the comments build for a day and then send a link to ea showing them that the gaming community thinks this idea makes ea look like thrown fecal matter from a caged monkey

DLC should be additions to the game, NOT unlocking parts of a game.

@JakeDunn:
No, i think he means you start shelling out 400 MS points per clip...

Funny, because when people talk about paying for maps other people start complaining saying it splits the community and that guns and outfits are all that should be charged for.

I doubt the guns are much better, there was a similar situation in Battlefield 2, if you bought the Special Forces add on you unlocked a whole new tier of weapons, none of them was game breakingly good.

I think even in 2142 there's a similar advantage to buying the Northern Strike add on, you unlock a new tier of "perks".

Meant nothing gameplay wise, but if you wanted it, you could buy it.

I can't wait til I have to pay for more spaceship fuel in Mass Effect 2 through micro transactions.

@Psychotic173:

well yeah I caught the sarcasm

I'm just intrigued by the idea, having you make effort to survive the game not just for unlocking shiny new things (and then doing it all again on the next prestige ;) )

Actually yeah someone had a good idea up there.... id be willing to start a boycott on this game, but i dont know where to start, cause if one company gets away with this, the rest ae going to want their piece of the evil pie...
its not like we could get mass numbers with a boycott, not enough to affect EA seriously but the negative publicity would be something

@RiazM:

Problem in special forces, the guns unlocked were only for those guys, you couldn't use em in bf2.

I liked one of the maps though, a lot, but hated the at night maps.

@Bon5ai: classic Chris Rock!

I think a better idea would be to just tie your creditcard info to your character, so every 1 standard bullet you fire charges $0.01 to your card. Extra charge for different types of ammo, such as explosive rounds.
They can call it a Credit Clip or something.

I hate to say it, but this is the inherent problem with the internet, and news via blog in particular. We're getting half-information here. Does anyone know if these weapons are simply cosmetic 'horse armor?' Are they almost exactly the same as weapons already in the game, but with slight variations? Maybe this one can hold 24 rounds in a clip instead of 20, but it takes longer to reload, resulting in a net zero difference. I guess it's more fun to jump on the hate bandwagon, there's more booze on board or something.

In reality, how different is this from other games, MMOs in particular. I don't see anyone whining when Blizzard puts out an expansion to WoW. No one's crying, "But.. but.. those guys are spending more money and they get better gear!! Waaah!" I am willing to bet the difference in balance there between someone who purchases an expansion and someone who does not, is far more significant than 10 weapons in an FPS. And apare me the "but that's different" argument. I get it, it's different, but the concept is still very similar. You might reason that those guns should have been included in the purchased game. Well, there's a lot of stuff in MMO expansions that should have probably been in the purchased game too.

In an age where video games are taking more money to make than Hollywood films, with a much smaller revenue stream model, how can you blame companies for wanting to make money back on their investment? Sure, blame them all you want when it comes down to things like this potential issue, where they may charge you more if you want to be able to compete. But, to jump to conclusions based on what someone says, without hearing the whole story is just plain ridiculous. You wouldn't like it if someone said that they saw you drop a napkin and not pick it up, then everyone else started running around saying that you were a fat ugly slob who doesn't care about the environment and picks their nose and eats it. If you are this person, well.. I guess it's deserved at least.

Fuckers.

Come on EA, don't make me not want to buy this game.

@Milihpen: I for one dread that day, which is sadly almost inevitable given the way things are going. Shame.

Imagine Bioshock 2: actually having to play for plasmids and upgrades when you reach a vending machine. Tbh, wouldn't be half surprised if some game actually tries that.

Next EA 'microtransaction': buy the gameworld on a disc, but pay us for an avatar to navigate it with!

wow, if this ends up being true, I'd imagine that EA will get a TON of flak.

@JakeDunn:
yeah i suppose that would make for an interesting game concept.... though hard to build a sotry on why your soldier is having to swipe his credit card for his ammo lolz but it would put an end to the Halo "ATTACK!!!! ...dead RESPAWN!!!!!"cycle (which i enjoy very much btw)

yet if EA released their own console with ridiculous failure rates EVERYBODY would LOVE them and join the EA fanboy cause

It is slimy. They should be paying me rent for storing their inventory on MY disc.

If it's on your disc, shouldn't you own it?

I wasn't going to buy it but now I surely won't :)

One would assume that weapons PAID FOR in the beta will carry over to the final product. But to be fair if we didn't keep paying for this crap, the developers wouldn't keep dropping it in our laps...

Maybe someone should set up a petition?

I've seen several games for 360 where you could buy features online that you could also unlock yourself in the game. I don't see anything wrong with this, as long as it's just something that's "tacked on" rather than the basic way that players are going to access this content. In other words, it has to actually be possible to unlock the features in the game.

If paying was the only way to unlock these weapons, I'd agree, it's an awful decision. However, I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they're not THAT stupid...

Paying for gun in a FPS... Wow that it totally gay. How arrogant for XBL and developers to expect us. the gamers. the guys who pay their fucking bills. To have to pay 60 dollars and additional money for guns. WTF. How stupid. Not going to buy it now. Stick with CSS.COD4 and RB6V

@TheRockingDead:
Well for ripping on all of us for jumping at something that could start an entire new pay-for-your-games mindset you seem to be doing the same thing as us in your post. Except there is only one of you. And your post is very long and articulate. And actually a very good point... and...
Well I don't have the kind of money to bathe in and it made me just as mad when I saw cars unlockable through DLC(50MS points) in PGR3
So EA might not have added huge advantage weapons for purchase but how long is it before someone does if we do not take action?

@whiptcracker: Crackdown did this to. I got the game a month or so ago and had a few title updates (read: "Patches") to download before I could start.

Next thing I know there are locked guns, vehicles, and MISSIONS all over the place. I'll run up to a marker and get a message saying "You must purchase this to do it."

What kind of BS is that?

@Bon5ai: i was just about to post that.....

+ Watch video

You have no one to blame but yourselves for this mess. If you would not buy their crap they wouldn't charge for it plain and simple. I haven't paid for any map packs or dlc and never will since I have the patience to wait until its free. Ill wait until the mass effect dlc becomes free and if it doesn't then I'll never play that side story just like I don't have the hero pack for Marvel Ultimate Alliance which should be free by now.

Seems to me with the problems that EA has had with public opinion from gamers they wouldn't pull this kind of crap. Now if they are gonna drop the price of the game to 19.99 or free and pull microtransaction stuff that is fine. I don't see how they can justify this when other games (Better games) don't do this (COD 4).

thats why developers prefer xbox+live i guess...
:) nice plan m$ but i don't want

I don't know who's worse. EA or the tools who pay who pay money for this kind of bullshit.

EA wins by default, but barely...

P.S.: Can anyone imagine how much at the extras is SSBB would've cost if EA made it? $500 for a complete game, that's the EA way!