Why do you do this DICE and EA? Do you not realize the majority of gamers don't want this.

We want everyone to have a fair and balanced experience. We want to be able to play all maps without having to pay for them. Remember when maps were free and games came with map editors so people could create their own?

Games like Starcraft and Warcraft had their custom mappers who enhanced the gaming experience for everyone at no charge. Counter-strike has it's custom maps and game types and it's still one of the most played games around.

Exclusive weapon packs make the game seem imbalanced. Some weapons are going to be better than others.

This is my opinion and I'm fairly certain it is the opinion of most gamers. But maybe I'm wrong, what are your opinions? I know most forums for specific games are filled with overzealous users who love everything the company does, but let's hope you guys can give constructive reasons why DLC, and exclusive content is ever good for the consumer.

late edit: wrote "exclusive map packs make the game seem imbalanced", obviously meant to write "exclusive weapon packs"

DLC weapons. Make it the same damage as any other gun. Yeah "unrealistic" but they cant put a weapon with high damage and high acuracy for MP points. completely wrong.

DLC should include balanced weapons and maps. I'm all for weapons in DLC in an age where $15 bucks for maps only is par for the course. If it's balanced, I'm all for it.

Battlefield 2 has been around for 6 years. One of the reasons it has lasted so long is because it wasn't bastardized from the beginning. Could you imagine seeing BF2 on a Steam sale, and installing it only to find that there is content missing because you didn't pre-order the game 4 years ago? Why on earth do developers have to appease retailers with pre-order bonuses. There are plenty of people that don't shop at stores like Gamestop simply because they hate being treated like cash cows every time you walk into the store. I know that the people making the game are just interested in creating the best experience, but obviously the suits seem to think that it's better to find ways to grab customers by the balls in order to make their job seem just as important as the people who are actually making the game.

The reason that the indie game market is exploding isn't some big mystery of price points and game content. The programmers and artists who make video games do it because it's a labor of love. I am willing to overpay (dollars to man-hour wise) for a * indie game because it is obvious that they just want people to play the goddamn game, and aren't looking to * me over by making content specific deals with retailers.

I really wanted to email EA about this, but maybe this will get to them indirectly eventually. I will not bring my clan to Battlefield 3 if there is extra DLC like this, especially DLC that gives a person an edge. If I wanted to play a game where I can pay to buy my weapons and maps, I would have kept on with Modern Warfare 2. Modern Warfare 2 moved to DLC so I quit, as did my forum of friends and their server. Now we have a BF:BC2 server and you are moving to DLC? /sigh, We will not buy BF3 if you do this.

We used to be a big proponent of BF3, but now we are just going to have to speak out against it whenever the topic comes up. =(

Please, don't continue down this path.

ForgotenImpulse wrote:DLC weapons. Make it the same damage as any other gun. Yeah "unrealistic" but they cant put a weapon with high damage and high acuracy for MP points. completely wrong.

You're saying the DLC weapons are balanced? It's kind of difficult to balance weapons. Even the stock weapons in most games end up getting balanced in updates (like in TF2). Adding more weapons adds to the complexity of balancing.


For the people voting that exclusive DLC and paying for maps is a good thing, care to elaborate why?? As I mentioned in my post, I have found that most people on game specific forums to be overzealous. Give me a reason why exclusive content and paying for DLC is a good thing.
I've written how maps used to be free. Not allowing people to make custom maps/mods will decrease the lifetime of the game. BF2 has a large modding community who create custom maps and have even developed the Project Reality mod. These things have extended the life of the game at no cost to the consumer.

Not allowing custom maps and only allowing exclusive DLC maps is limiting the way I can play the game and makes me less likely to buy the game.

I really wanted to email EA about this, but maybe this will get to them indirectly eventually. I will not bring my clan to Battlefield 3 if there is extra DLC like this, especially DLC that gives a person an edge. If I wanted to play a game where I can pay to buy my weapons and maps, I would have kept on with Modern Warfare 2. Modern Warfare 2 moved to DLC so I quit, as did my forum of friends and their server. Now we have a BF:BC2 server and you are moving to DLC? /sigh, We will not buy BF3 if you do this.

We used to be a big proponent of BF3, but now we are just going to have to speak out against it whenever the topic comes up. =(

Please, don't continue down this path.

lolz-wut wrote:

ForgotenImpulse wrote:DLC weapons. Make it the same damage as any other gun. Yeah "unrealistic" but they cant put a weapon with high damage and high acuracy for MP points. completely wrong.

You're saying the DLC weapons are balanced? It's kind of difficult to balance weapons. Even the stock weapons in most games end up getting balanced in updates (like in TF2). Adding more weapons adds to the complexity of balancing.


For the people voting that exclusive DLC and paying for maps is a good thing, care to elaborate why?? As I mentioned in my post, I have found that most people on game specific forums to be overzealous. Give me a reason why exclusive content and paying for DLC is a good thing.
I've written how maps used to be free. Not allowing people to make custom maps/mods will decrease the lifetime of the game. BF2 has a large modding community who create custom maps and have even developed the Project Reality mod. These things have extended the life of the game at no cost to the consumer.

Not allowing custom maps and only allowing exclusive DLC maps is limiting the way I can play the game and makes me less likely to buy the game.

Perhaps the problem you're citing is the lack of mod tools? Frostbite 2 is incredibly difficult to make mod tools for if DICE is to be believed.

Furthermore, I don't believe -paying- for DLC is a good or bad thing. Paying insanely inflated prices is a bad thing, but if the prices are reasonable, then why not? There's nothing overtly -bad- about paying for a product, it's nice when it's offered for free, but you can't fault them for trying to make money.

As for weapons in DLC, like I said, if they're balanced, I'm alright with it. Being a gun guy, I'm all for more weapons. That being said, nobody should have to pay for weapons that are in any way -better- than the ones in the game.

DICE/EA is gonna' do DLC, so I want it to be the best product they can manage. Not like IW's $15 map packs that have five maps max with no real additions.

Made a profile specifically for this. I was planning on buying the game, but due to this exclusive weapon pack I will not be buying this game. Exclusive DLC should not impact game play. If you want to have special skins/camo etc that is fine but do not give an advantage to someone that cannot be unlocked in the game. I hope you enjoy not having my money.

Off1nTheCorner wrote:Made a profile specifically for this. I was planning on buying the game, but due to this exclusive weapon pack I will not be buying this game. Exclusive DLC should not impact game play. If you want to have special skins/camo etc that is fine but do not give an advantage to someone that cannot be unlocked in the game. I hope you enjoy not having my money.

It's not exclusive if you're referring to the Physical Warfare Pack. It's early access to weapons/attachments, you can still unlock them normally...

Made a profile specifically for this. I was planning on buying the game, but due to this exclusive weapon pack I will not be buying this game. Exclusive DLC should not impact game play. If you want to have special skins/camo etc that is fine but do not give an advantage to someone that cannot be unlocked in the game. I hope you enjoy not having my money.

Okay, let me get this straight. There will be specific items from specific stores that NO-ONE ELSE will be able to get?! I mean even if you pre-order it from one retail outlet then you miss out on the others. So to get the full game with everything you need to pre-order 4 copies or so (assuming there are about that many different retail pre-order bonuses).

WHAT THE HELL?

These items aren't just cosmetic. They actually effect gameplay and balance.

I know people are already discussing this, but this needs even more attention.

And tell me one thing, how are some of you fanboys actually justifying this? What the hell is wrong with you?

If anyone is doubting what I say, then read this: http://www.battlefield.com/uk/battlefield3/blog/battlefield-3-limited-edition-physical-warfare-pack-available

1 exclusive weapon, 2 exclusive weapon mods, 1 early unlock weapon.

You can unlock all the stuff in the Physical Warfare Pack in the game, those who pre-order get early access.

STOP MAKING REPEAT THREADS!

What is your proof? Yes, that would be okay with me, it would be like BFBC2. But they clearly say that only DAO-12 is an early unlock. Everything else is exclusive.

http://planetbattlefield.gamespy.com/fullstory.php?id=164936

There they say that all 4 items are exclusive. Another source says that DAO-12 is early access and Type 88 LMG, DAO-12 flechette ammo and SKS rifle flash suppressor are exclusive.

Mustkunstn1k wrote:What is your proof? Yes, this would be okay with me, it would be like BFBC2. But they clearly say that only DAO-12 is an early unlock. Everything else is exclusive.

http://planetbattlefield.gamespy.com/fullstory.php?id=164936

We'll just have to wait until October now won't we? They'll make it available for everyone.