Battlefield 3 Boycott is picking up steam

[Thelionheart]

Personally, I play Hardcore mode. So someone having a better gun doesn't really make that much of a difference to me.

 

 

But it does in fact make a difference. The fact that those who preorder are going to have exclusive items that directly influence gameplay will exclude people from playing the game the way it was meant to be played. The fact that they are actually weapons and attachments is even more absurd. I realize that you most likely believe the EA FAQ about the Physical Warfare Pack. I am here to tell you that a PR department in a company is not necessarily there to tell you the truth. If our own government, our families, our friends, our lovers can lie to us, then why can't a multibillion dollar company lie to you in order to get more money? That fact is is that they can, they will and they have. Look at Enron, look at, look at Bank of America, look at all of the banks that failed during the recession. Here's just an excerpt on some of the BS lies and cheats that companies have done in the last couple of years.

 

"Testimony given to the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission by Richard M. Bowen, III on events during his tenure as Citi's Business Chief Underwriter for Correspondent Lending in the Consumer Lending Group (where he was responsible for over 220 professional underwriters) suggests that by the final years of the US housing bubble (2006–2007), the collapse of mortgage underwriting standards was endemic. His testimony stated that by 2006, 60% of mortgages purchased by Citi from some 1,600 mortgage companies were "defective" (were not underwritten to policy, or did not contain all policy-required documents). This, despite the fact that each of these 1,600 originators were contractually responsible (certified via representations and warrantees) that their mortgage originations met Citi's standards. Moreover, during 2007, "defective mortgages (from mortgage originators contractually bound to perform underwriting to Citi's standards) increased... to over 80% of production".[47]" Source

 

If some of the worlds largest corporations and organizations can lie on a scale such as that and get away with it, who is to say that EA can't lie about the effectiveness of some weapons in a videogame?

[Gracinfields]

Well it looks like the Swedish are very very ticked off now as their Pre-order was finally Announced, what does the Country where DICE calls home get. *Drum roll* They get eight SPECACT character skins only, no gun skins just Character skins. Either EA is now seeing the flak finally headed their way and going to change course or their going to fly straite into the flak storm just ahead of them.

[Rational314]

You can't blame EA totally because of it though. So far DICE, EA and retailers are to blame over exclusive DLC. I've been trying to tell you guys but you don't listen. We don't know enough to make a conclusive claim that X did that and it isn't really healthy to do so.

 

No. It's EA choice to create exclusive DLC, the retailers ask for it, simple as that. Just like with every other company, the retailers ask for the dlc to boost pre sales, and the publishers give it to them. Stop deflecting the blame from EA. The company has the choice to say no to dlc and they choose not to.

 

There is a huge difference between EA publishing and EA developer. The same thing happens with other products as well (who remembers ME2 Dr Pepper).

 

 

And it is still the choice of EA publishing. It's still the choice of the company to create these things.

[Gracinfields]

Actually Grimm Dice already had made the weapons and where to be part of the game. When the warfare pack was finally annoyunced to be exlusive content instead of early access, left a few DICE members quite angry about it, and infact he is trying to pull together the reactions of the community and present this info to EA directly and show that the Community is heavily agaisnt their exlusive deal with weapons.

[CommanderCrazy]

Alright. Thats enough.

Boycott's never work. Remember the 'Boycott MW2' steam group? When the game was released, almost 70% of people in the group were playing it.

Hell, i'd put money down that the people complaining here about it will still get it. I know i will.

The thing i'm trying to say is that yes, ea really screwed this up. But no, that wont make the game bad, by any stretch of the word.

So lets all stop saying that it will cause the game to suck. So what if people buying it from certain stores get different guns, theres other ones you can use. It's not like they are getting the 'tank' armor from mw2 and a metalstorm rifle, is it? They can still be killed.

Edited June 16, 2011 by CommanderCrazy

[Thelionheart]

Alright. Thats enough.

Boycott's never work. Remember the 'Boycott MW2' steam group? When the game was released, almost 70% of people in the group were playing it.

Hell, i'd put money down that the people complaining here about it will still get it. I know i will.

The thing i'm trying to say is that yes, ea really screwed this up. But no, that wont make the game bad, by any stretch of the word.

So lets all stop saying that it will cause the game to suck. So what if people buying it from certain stores get different guns, theres other ones you can use. It's not like they are getting the 'tank' armor from mw2 and a metalstorm rifle, is it? They can still be killed.

 

For evidence of gaming boycotts actually working please read through the thread. No one ever said the game in its entirety would suck because of DLC. what I and many others have said is that giving someone else a weapon that has the potential of giving them an advantage over others is unacceptable. Regarding the MW2 boycott please read one of my previous responses in this thread, and the video that i so kindly linked for your convenience.

[Gracinfields]

Alright. Thats enough.

Boycott's never work. Remember the 'Boycott MW2' steam group? When the game was released, almost 70% of people in the group were playing it.

Hell, i'd put money down that the people complaining here about it will still get it. I know i will.

The thing i'm trying to say is that yes, ea really screwed this up. But no, that wont make the game bad, by any stretch of the word.

So lets all stop saying that it will cause the game to suck. So what if people buying it from certain stores get different guns, theres other ones you can use. It's not like they are getting the 'tank' armor from mw2 and a metalstorm rifle, is it? They can still be killed.

 

 

I wouldn't say they never work BC1 Boycott group got together and got the microtransaction for guns planned for BC1 removed. Here is their boycott video.

 

 

So do ever say never. Now if EA changes their Exlusive guns to EA gun Club which is free to sign up for then I have no issue. It has also been pretty much of no use after Medal of Honor came out as there was only one bonus for being a member so far and that was early access to the M24/ SV-98 in Medal of Honor which sucked because to use those effectively you needed the High Power scope which you don't unlock till after you get the M24.

Edited June 16, 2011 by Gracinfields

[hector530]

 

No one ever said the game in its entirety would suck because of DLC.

 

not in those words, but this whole thread has that "this game sucks" vibe. like said before the gun will be weaker then higher tier weapons also again like i said the bad company's had "exclusive" weapons didnt even take a year before they released them to everyone

[Thelionheart]

 

No one ever said the game in its entirety would suck because of DLC.

 

not in those words, but this whole thread has that "this game sucks" vibe. like said before the gun will be weaker then higher tier weapons also again like i said the bad company's had "exclusive" weapons didnt even take a year before they released them to everyone

 

I personally think the game looks amazing, however as I have previously stated this is one of those times that I will put my principles above pleasuring myself if the things I have asked for do not happen. Honestly, BF3 was my most anticipated game of 2011 by far until this DLC fiasco.

 

On other news John Riccitello has said something absolutely appauling concering DLC. Below is the Transcript of his comment, and after that the video source where it was originally said.

 

"Now what causes higher margins with digital, a couple of things..(skip a line)..The second thing and this is a point that I think might be lost on many, is a big and substantial portion of digital revenues are microtransactions. When you are 6 hours into playing Battlefield, and you run out of ammo in your clip, and we ask you for a dollar to reload, you’re really not very price sensitive at that point in time(laughter in the background). Um, and for what it’s worth the cogs on the clip, really low, and so, um ,essentially what ends up happening and the reason the play first, pay later model works so nicely is a consumer gets engaged in a property they might spend 10, 20, 30, 50 hours on the game, and then when they’re deep into the game they’re well invested in it, we’re not gouging, but we’re charging, and at that point in time the commitment can be pretty high. As a personal anecdote I spent about $5000 calendar year to date on doing just this thing, this type of thing, on our products and others, um, I can readily attest to how well it works, um, but it is a, it’s a great model and I think it represents a substantially better future for the industry…"

Source

 

Sounds like something that good ol' Bobby Kottick would say.

[antonkr]

I infact wanted to buy this game but with any preorder package.....

I understand DLCs but WHY NOT MAKE THEM AVAILABLE AS DLCs

Seriously!

They will lose more people not buy the game due to their policies than people buying the game in terms of "OMG PREORDERZ BONUS EXCLUSIVE GET GET GET!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"