This is utter bull... they can go buy their own guns... my god... this was my biggest fear this gen... game milking and EA is the spearhead...

Sweet! We can pay them extra now or later!

Sigh.

They did this with the Godfather "cheats" way back when. This stinks of EA pulling the same old crap again. Which is why I own very few EA games to begin with.

The EA machine inches ever deeper into our wallets. If they are testing the waters, then times may be dire indeed.

Still, correct me if I'm wrong, but if I'm playing multiplayer and the guy on the other team has one of these "extra" weapons and I can see it on my screen, then it means they're embedded in the code on the regular-price game disk, right? I'm guessing a small but dedicated part of the user base will try to "extract" these weapons by non-paying means, if you get my HACKING meaning.

This is rediculous, make some actaul DLC that we can pay for, not an extra gun with a scope or some crap.

This doesn't look to good for balance in gameplay

I remember back when you bought a video game and didn't have to worry about stupid bullshit.

Seems EA loves charging for downloadable content and usually overpriced. I'm guessing we all know about the Godfather game which costs almost double or so if you consider all the downloadable content.

Unless the response is "Sorry, we're getting rid of that," then fuck them.

Reading...

Fuck them.

So, they're reacting to the outcry over having to purchase weapons by....confirming that we will have to purchase some weapons?

Where does this make sense?

after EA aquires take two, gta 5 will require you to pay in order to open up new map areas and radio stations.

I could care less about this game with everything that has come out recently and will be coming out soon.

Anyways, I say anyone who buys this should pass on the added weapons and send EA a clear message about microtransactions.

New maps are fine additions to pay for. Weapons that were developed at the same time as the game and could easily be included are not.

i still don't think you should charge for extra weapons. I don't like where this is going. It's going to give them a reason to half-ass on a game and complete the bloody thing later on. In addition, i find it crazy to charge for a weapon. EA...you are something.

New Ultimate Jesus Bloody Christ EA.

The Godfather. Hmphh. I was so bitter about that. I didn't spend a cent on that malarkey. I did the entire game with just the money I earned from rackets. And that game sucked.

Who's the fool?

~
Go CJ!

You know, I was really looking forward to this game as well, and no I have almost no desire to buy it.

@3inst3in:

You'll have to pay "tolls" to get to new areas. And use the "ATM" to get money to buy weapons.

Shit, why stop there? You enter your credit card info at the beginning of the game and it deducts payments whenever you get arrested. You can use your real life health insurance at the hospitals.

oh yah, wouldn't it be awesome if the game they released was actually "microtransaction:the game" and instead of shooting guns you spent money, and instead of your bullets hitting aliens or nazis, your money went straight into EA's bank account. god. that would be awesome. just what us consumers want.

listen up EA: make a good product and you will attract more consumers and make more money. produce inferior products, and no amount of tomfoolery will yield you the sweet sweet dollars.

And so begins the next stage in micro transactions.. Oh! And of course console gamers (I own a 360 and game on PC btw) will pay for it thinking they are getting their moneys worth if it's just 400 MS points per weapon pack. Here's how I see it: If millions of gamers are willing to pay 800MS points for 4 new Gears of War maps then they'll pay for practically anything. Same goes for buying into the "Xbox classic games" or whatever its called by paying 20 bucks for 5-10 dollar titles..

@Sundermania: new maps is something (while it took me a while cause i figure you should put the bloody map in the first place before releasing the game) i got used to. it's not so bad considering the maps can be huge, ala Warhawk. But for weapons...that shit is wrong in my eye. Next, it's gonna be for the latest armor, while supposedly balancing the game. Eventually this might lead to a point where you 're gonna have to pay in order to advance to the next level.

you know what, if you're gonna do that, how about EA something about thier madden series. Pay one time and after that, for every where, charge a small amount for the updates...since they are essentially updates.

I found this last night after downloading the beta off of XBOX Live. While it does stink, it isn't anything new. EA did this with every expansion to BF2 and while they didn't affect gameplay, folks still paid into worthless expansions that offered little more than new guns, and grappling hooks. It pissed me off then and it pisses me off now.

Funny thing is that back when EA did it with BF2 there were a lot of players shouting about it on the forums. One of the big complaints was not to allow EA to set a precedent, that if you didn't by it, they wouldn't try that BS again.

That said, at least the diehards that have been looking forward to this game can get this stuff for free through the promos if they are interested. However, as any good BF player knows, its not the gun that makes you good, its your squad.

You know, I don't really care. EA has fucked up so many franchises that Battlefield is overdue. I mean, 2142 was awful already, which is why I don't really care for BC to begin with.

This is just the tip of the iceberg (or shitberg in this case). I'm just glad that publishers which I actually appreciate, namely Ubi, Sony, Konami and a bunch of others, seem to get the hint and don't copy EA's marketing strategy.

Hmm, I am already dubious of their claims of balance.

I am not going to purchase any version of this game really. I gave up on the series when I discovered auto-update feature of PunkBuster on 2142. If I hear they replaced punk-buster with something less permanently running-ish, I'll give it another look.

This is ridiculous, DLC for more guns? EA and whoever buys this garbage is contributing to a darker future of gaming.

this is kinda like the 360's Hardrive situation. anyway kinda figured something like this would happen once EA started selling cheat codes instead of having them in the game like ones of old did

We're on a slippery slope...

NO DLC UNLESS IT'S FREE!

>_>
<_<

(sssshhhhhhhhhh....)
I'm going to post a free Battlefield Beta key in the very next topic Brian Crecente posts.

Well, to begin with, even though they say weapons are "balanced," they usually aren't when an advanced metagame is developed. There's always going to be some type of advantage in a few guns that make them better than others to use...with EA though, they just tend to be the ones you pay extra for. Way to go EA, just when I thought you couldn't stoop much lower!

EDIT: I just got word of EA's new game in development; you'll have to pay for each map and each character customization individually. For the complete package you may be looking at round $300 (whoops I mean pesos). Yay for corporate monoliths!

EA's answer is pathetic. It's almost a disrespectful joke to consumers.

That's why I didn't buy a single game made or even published by EA in 2 years. It's kinda getting hard to do that, as EA continues to buyout other companies thou.

I can hear the commentary of gamers over the ages, "OMG, it's exactly like the real thing!" starting to ring ring ring in our ears...

I didn't mind when you could pay EA in Tiger Woods to unlock everything in the game. I didn't fully agree with it, but I could see where they where coming from and understood it. This though, this is just plain wrong. I will be boycotting this game for sure, and if EA does continue on this course I will have to boycott them.
I have no probs with DLC, bring on more GR:AW maps/missions, but to not include a gun in a game so you can sell it via a CE, or $5 DLC doesnt sit well at all.

Though now I'm looking forward to the beta. Hopefully it's a shitty game.

I'm Calling BS

EA Exec: How does this work again?

EA Marketing: sell the gimped regular SKU and Trumped up Gold SKU.

EA Exec:two SKU's

EA Marketing: Yep and after many head shots Plebs playing online will want the cool new guns and pay "a small individualized price per item"

EA Exec: So everyone is Gold!

EA Marketing: Bling, Bling Baby!

It makes more sense for EA to charge for new weapons then it does for new maps. The problem with charging for maps is that you fragment your user base into those that can pay for them and those that can't.

I'm not a huge fan of the concept of paying for new weapons however if Call of Duty 4 had come out without the skorpion and at a later date it was made available for purchase would that ruin the game?

Everyone seems to think that having weapons for sale will do two things: 1)unbalance the game giving people an unfair advantage and 2) take some content away from people who can't afford or don't wish to pay extra money for extra weapons.

EA, no matter what you think of them, isn't short-sighted enough to sell a weapon that would unbalance the game; what's the point of making a few sales of new guns if you lose a lot of sales of your actual product because everyone stops playing it? I would be surprised if they were not very careful to make certain that the game remains balanced with or without those new weapons.

We could look at these weapons as an expansion to the original product; is there any difference between buying these new weapons and an rts player who has purchased an expansion playing with a new army against someone who hasn't and who is playing with an old army? You want everyone to have fun and keep it all balanced so the product keeps on living and you keep on making sales.

DLC is a scam. Hurry up and realize it, people. :)

Ridiculous.

Starting now, I refuse to buy a game with the EA logo on it. While it won't effect the bottom line, if more gamers refused to buy EAs shit games, maybe they would wake up, make a decent product, and stop nickel and diming everyone for things that should have been included from the begining.

JOIN THE EA BOYCOTT TODAY!

lol

I wasn't particularly interested in the game before, but now I have zero interest. I am not going to get worked up about it. I am simply not going to buy the game. If people continue to pay for stuff like this, it will never go away.

My thoughts in an ordered list:

1. Including extra stuff in a gold edition is pretty much standard. After all, if the gold edition DIDN'T have anything in it, no one would buy it. (Look, it's the "We want more money edition"!! I have to buy it!) Normally it's stuff like stickers, a making of DVD, or some other stuff no one but big fans ever give a crap about. So, including actual in-game weapons on the gold edition is an interesting way to try to promote sales.
2. I've had games where I wished I had bought the gold edition after the fact, so allowing folks to buy the stuff that makes it the gold edition is kind of nice. BUT, the only times I've ever had that style of buyers remorse is when the gold edition came out months after the first game with extra maps or something that you couldn't download for free or a fee. (*cough*Thief 1*cough*)
3. I think EA might be facing a bit of a consumer backlash on this one, but if they announced "All of these pay to play weapons AND the bonus weapons that will be out there because of promotions will be free in 6 months", I think it would probably help smooth things over. Folks who want the shiny stuff will pay for it, folks who could care less will wait it out. Heck, it works for Halo!
4. Right now I have yet to see anything that makes me want to run out and buy this game. I'm sure it will be well done, it just hasn't grabbed my attention. Maybe I'm just getting sick of shooters? :-P

This is lame.

I'm probably in the minority here, but this doesn't sound like the end of the world to me: you can pay more for more content, but if you choose not to, you're not screwed. As long as gameplay is balanced between all players, there's no problem. I've seen a lot worse stratification in browser-based games.

Not to mention pokemans. Why can't I fight my red version versus your diamond-encrusted yellow onyx version? Ugh. I paid good money for that cartridge.

i was soooooooooooooooooo excited for this game!!! I think i was the biggest fanboy ever actually for this game. Hearing this was the LAST straw. I bet their fucking servers are still going to be as laggy as it was on Modern Combat and full of the same goddamn glitches. I've converted to SOCOM. EA i hate you. die slow u bastards.

@Jim Reilly: Amen Sir.

[www.penny-arcade.com]

"I can't help but think that this is just EA testing the waters."
Brian I could not agree with you more and people who support micro transactions are a part of the problem.

This is the completely wrong direction for the business. The fact that they are already creating something for the game just so they can make a special addition and/or charge people for their bottom line is sickening. Even worse is that they're trying to smooth it all over by saying we'll get most of the stuff for free through promos before and after the game is released. WHY ISN'T IT INCLUDED FROM THE START?

"In addition to the core set of weapons, Battlefield: Bad Company will release five unique weapons free of charge through five different promotional programs prior to launch."

I smell a Cheetos rocket launcher coming out of these "promotional programs." Now my life is complete.

@TheEngineer: Kirbytheslayer is awesome.: Those were my thoughts exactly. I hope this game loses money. We need a pre-launch campaign against this game so people refuse to buy into their crap.

@fallingdove: You know what? I'm with you. Fuck it -- I'll boycott EA until they drop this or otherwise resolve it so that everyone can have the same gameplay.

Like others here have said, maps are one thing. They (in generic terms) expand the game universe. However, weapons expand core gameplay, and that's not the same thing.

JOIN THE EA BOYCOTT TODAY!

In before horse armor.