|
On July 18 2012 10:05 prOxi.swAMi wrote:
I am forever confused at these displays of open-mouth-frothing anger toward EA. When a company does something you disagree with, just don't give them your money. I don't understand how it goes beyond that.
that is what I do now, I won't buy any EA game ever. my last one was BF3.
i wanted to try out secret world, then I saw EA which made me say "lolnope"
|
meh, if the up coming maps for bf3 are good i will buy bf4. As of now the close quarters map packs sucks so much dik it is amazing.
|
United Kingdom1148 Posts
BF is no better than COD. We had a leg to stand on when we had a decent game and a strong modding community. Now we have neither, and a yearly release just highlights how bad things have become.
|
On July 18 2012 10:05 prOxi.swAMi wrote:
I am forever confused at these displays of open-mouth-frothing anger toward EA. When a company does something you disagree with, just don't give them your money. I don't understand how it goes beyond that.
Because you're on a forum where people discuss things. This includes discussing your dismay for something.
|
Modern military shooters seem to be heading for the sports game model; release the same game every year at full price with very minor incremental improvements.
I wonder how they're gonna deal with F2P shooters? I mean surely people won't keep buying the same thing over and over again when they can get it for free?
|
On July 18 2012 10:59 Infernal_dream wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 10:05 prOxi.swAMi wrote:
I am forever confused at these displays of open-mouth-frothing anger toward EA. When a company does something you disagree with, just don't give them your money. I don't understand how it goes beyond that. Because you're on a forum where people discuss things. This includes discussing your dismay for something.
yeah, these are forums for discussion, however statements like
On July 18 2012 10:03 yrba1 wrote:
Battlefield 2 is the last game I'm buying from them, yes this is a successful business model but I hope it backfires when people start to realize EA's evils, I hope John Riccitiello rots in bankruptcy.
are not meaningful or pleasant to read. Especially not when when the majority of posts are disparaging EA in a way that doesn't lead to a point.
|
On July 18 2012 11:06 pleasantlygrapefruit wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 10:59 Infernal_dream wrote:On July 18 2012 10:05 prOxi.swAMi wrote:
I am forever confused at these displays of open-mouth-frothing anger toward EA. When a company does something you disagree with, just don't give them your money. I don't understand how it goes beyond that. Because you're on a forum where people discuss things. This includes discussing your dismay for something. yeah, these are forums for discussion, however statements like Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 10:03 yrba1 wrote:
Battlefield 2 is the last game I'm buying from them, yes this is a successful business model but I hope it backfires when people start to realize EA's evils, I hope John Riccitiello rots in bankruptcy. are not meaningful or pleasant to read. Especially not when when the majority of posts are disparaging EA in a way that doesn't lead to a point.
When you're in a thread full of people disparaging EA in a negative way, perhaps you can extrapolate a 'point' from that.
This is a discussion of Battlefield 4. We are discussing how they are rushing to announce this and to release it next year when they still got three more expansion packs not even announced yet that they promised to release. This is a discussion of how EA is moving their cost of their games up and are announcing major sequels to games after releasing a "Premium" service for the original one. People are fucking upset with this as they have every right to be, and we're discussing it.
He has a point. This IS a good business model, it's been shown time and time again but I personally won't be supporting it and I hope it backfires hard on them so that people stop pulling shit like this. EA has ruined a ridiculous amount of IP's already and I'll be damned if they ruin my favorite.
|
Yeah sorry DICE but I think we're over. It's not me, it's you.
|
Ugh I can't believe you all don't like progress. Why don't you go play team fortress 1 or quake 3 or something.
|
On July 18 2012 10:05 prOxi.swAMi wrote:
I am forever confused at these displays of open-mouth-frothing anger toward EA.
They killed Westwood and then proceeded to ruin the Command and Conquer series.
|
On July 18 2012 11:44 Chriscras wrote:
Ugh I can't believe you all don't like progress. Why don't you go play team fortress 1 or quake 3 or something.
Progress would be DICE releasing content patches for free like in the old days.
|
On July 18 2012 11:44 Chriscras wrote:
Ugh I can't believe you all don't like progress. Why don't you go play team fortress 1 or quake 3 or something.
You know what
I'll go play some Quake 3 right now. That sounds pretty fun.
But hint, this is not progress. This is regress. Content used to be released for free. Developers used to release content regularly, for free, and to build onto a game and make that game great. Developers used to release modding tools for their games so the community can enjoy them years after they stop producing content with the users own. Apparently them taking this all away and replacing it with Premium Services, yearly releases and paid DLC is "progress". Apparently developers not trying to make truly great games, but make cash cows that sell quickly with fancy trailers and 50% of their budget spent on advertisement to build up ridiculous hype and then moving onto the next one is progress.
That's progress, people.
|
Might as well just wait for Battlefield 5 which is probably in Alpha stages or gonna hit beta soon or just enjoy what you have since BF 6 is also prob around the corner like christmas of next year.
I might also just pick up the Battlefield Anthology in Q1 2014 which will probably include BF3,4,5,6,7 and 8.
|
If EA dies, then EA sports dies, and I will probably NEVER buy a console ever again
|
Too may people exaggerating and speaking out of ignorance.
Too soon? If it were coming out this year. Autumn 2013 at the earliest. Over a year from now. And as it turns out, that's actually longer than the average time between Battlefield games. Yup, you read that right.
2002: BF1942
2004: BFVietnam
2005: BF2
2006: BF2142
2008:BFBC
2010:BFBC2
2011:BF3
2013(?): BF4
Access to the exclusive beta will be available in Autumn 2013
2 years for a new Battlefield game is... surprise... typical! Bad Company 1 did not come out on PC so there was a 4 year gap for PC games (once) but 2 year gaps is typical and one year gaps have occured three times already.
BF2142 will have been released closer to BF2 than BF4 was to BF3. In both cases, the later game uses basically the same engine. I personally didn't play BF2142 because BF2 left be satisfied and I will reserve the right to do the same this time. BF2 had a higher player base than BF2142 for this very reason, so I don't see any problem whatsover about splitting the player base.
I only ask that people who got up in arms at the two year gap between BF3 and BF4 reconsider their "DICE and EA are now Activision and lost forever" stance, because I can't help but think there are many people reacting without proper pause for thought. It has only been 9 months since BF3 came out, and we will have atleast a minimum of 15 more months to go. BF3 still has plenty of time as the newest BF. Don't let the early announcement of BF4 cloud your perception of time, and the series' history.
|
On July 18 2012 12:09 Crisium wrote:Too may people exaggerating and speaking out of ignorance. Too soon? If it were coming out this year. Autumn 2013 at the earliest. Over a year from now. And as it turns out, that's actually longer than the average time between Battlefield games. Yup, you read that right. 2002: BF1942 2004: BFVietnam 2005: BF2 2006: BF2142 2008:BFBC 2010:BFBC2 2011:BF3 2013(?): BF4 2 years for a new Battlefield game is... surprise... typical! Bad Company 1 did not come out on PC so there was a 4 year gap for PC games (once) but 2 year gaps is typical and one year gaps have occured three times already. BF2142 will have been released closer to BF2 than BF4 was to BF3. In both cases, the later game uses basically the same engine.
I think most of the frustration is that there are still 3 full expansions to be released, let alone announced, within the next 1.5 years and they're already SELLING access to the Battlefield 4 beta. That's the problem here. The main team is not working on the new content they promised us, they're working on the next installment of the series. The B-team, if you will, is now going to be developing the next content updates (and the last one was already rather lackluster in itself).
At least that's what is bothering me personally. I know that 2-3 years is the rough time between battlefield games, but there is so much more content promised and they're already marketing and selling shit for BF4 before even half of the post-release content for BF3 is even announced. That just tells me everything else they're doing for BF3 is probably going to be half assed. That and of course the glaring issue of, knowing EA and the amount of content to be released, BF3 will probably release it's final content update either just before the BF4 beta or just before the BF4 release. I dont think I need to explain how that's stupid.
Also, comparing the dynamic between BF2 -> BF2142 and BF3 -> BF4 is completely fallacious. BF2 to BF2142 were two ENTIRELY different games, in stylistic and gameplay ways. I don't see how they can add anything meaningful to BF4 other than an improved Frostbite Engine and some new guns and maps. It'll be a glorified expansion. Much like Call of Duty. Which is what is scaring people. If the next one was BF2143 I'd be much more accepting to it because it wouldn't seem like an Activision-esque cash out.
Fuck, now I'm sad that I wont see BF2142 on Frostbite 2 engine...
EDIT: Let me just say, I won't say this game is going to be shit right away. No way, I'll give it every chance like I do for every other game announced. I give every game the benefit of the doubt, no matter what, until I see hard gameplay. However, this looks really fishy as far as I'm concerned and I dont got my hopes up too high. It wouldn't be the first dozen times I went into a game thinking it would be absolutely horrendous and turned out loving it 
|
On July 18 2012 12:15 Candadar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 12:09 Crisium wrote:Too may people exaggerating and speaking out of ignorance. Too soon? If it were coming out this year. Autumn 2013 at the earliest. Over a year from now. And as it turns out, that's actually longer than the average time between Battlefield games. Yup, you read that right. 2002: BF1942 2004: BFVietnam 2005: BF2 2006: BF2142 2008:BFBC 2010:BFBC2 2011:BF3 2013(?): BF4 Access to the exclusive beta will be available in Autumn 2013 2 years for a new Battlefield game is... surprise... typical! Bad Company 1 did not come out on PC so there was a 4 year gap for PC games (once) but 2 year gaps is typical and one year gaps have occured three times already. BF2142 will have been released closer to BF2 than BF4 was to BF3. In both cases, the later game uses basically the same engine. I think most of the frustration is that there are still 3 full expansions to be released, let alone announced, within the next 1.5 years and they're already SELLING access to the Battlefield 4 beta. That's the problem here. The main team is not working on the new content they promised us, they're working on the next installment of the series. The B-team, if you will, is now going to be developing the next content updates (and the last one was already rather lackluster in itself).
I see, and that does leave possible worry to the quality of expansions. But Battlefield 2 had 4 expansions... and BF2142 came out only 16 months after BF2. So by DICE standards set in place last decade, 3 more expansions in the 15 months we still have to go is standard stuff. This isn't new DICE, that's what I'm trying to say to all the "DICE is dead to me now". It was dead to you in 2006 if that's the case, and I'm unclear why anyone with this attitude picked up any subsequent DICE games since then and would even care to be upset now.
At least that's what is bothering me personally. I know that 2-3 years is the rough time between battlefield games
No, there has never been a full 3 year gap. 1-2 years is typical.
|
Jesus christ.. the amount of whinging in these scenarios never ceases to amaze me.
They are a company with share holder obligations; all of you going on about regression because of expansion packs, more frequent releases and so forth need to drop the sense of entitlement.
None of this stops you from playing BF3, or christ, not even BF2. Nobody is obligated to buy expansion packs, nor are you even entitled to them being developed unless you bought the premium service, in which case, go to the fucking premium site to see the release window for all the expansions....
People throwing around phrases like "promised content" is pretty hilarious. Ignoring things like the actual release schedule for past BF games is just plain brain bending. The bottom line here is that money talks. Vote with your feet and dollars. If they're not giving you what you want, walk away and find something else to do. Tough shit for you, I guess, if there is a huge market out there willing to buy these things.
This is coming from a 28 year old gamer (edit: and BF fan) who has played games since 4 years of age. Get used to it; you're frothing at the mouth over nothing.
|
On July 18 2012 12:22 Crisium wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 12:15 Candadar wrote:On July 18 2012 12:09 Crisium wrote:Too may people exaggerating and speaking out of ignorance. Too soon? If it were coming out this year. Autumn 2013 at the earliest. Over a year from now. And as it turns out, that's actually longer than the average time between Battlefield games. Yup, you read that right. 2002: BF1942 2004: BFVietnam 2005: BF2 2006: BF2142 2008:BFBC 2010:BFBC2 2011:BF3 2013(?): BF4 Access to the exclusive beta will be available in Autumn 2013 2 years for a new Battlefield game is... surprise... typical! Bad Company 1 did not come out on PC so there was a 4 year gap for PC games (once) but 2 year gaps is typical and one year gaps have occured three times already. BF2142 will have been released closer to BF2 than BF4 was to BF3. In both cases, the later game uses basically the same engine. I think most of the frustration is that there are still 3 full expansions to be released, let alone announced, within the next 1.5 years and they're already SELLING access to the Battlefield 4 beta. That's the problem here. The main team is not working on the new content they promised us, they're working on the next installment of the series. The B-team, if you will, is now going to be developing the next content updates (and the last one was already rather lackluster in itself). I see, and that does leave possible worry to the quality of expansions. But Battlefield 2 had 4 expansions... and BF2142 came out only 16 months after BF2. So by DICE standards set in place last decade, 3 more expansions in the 15 months we still have to go is standard stuff. This isn't new DICE, that's what I'm trying to say to all the "DICE is dead to me now". It was dead to you in 2006 if that's the case, and I'm unclear why anyone with this attitude picked up any subsequent DICE games since then and would even care to be upset now. Show nested quote +At least that's what is bothering me personally. I know that 2-3 years is the rough time between battlefield games No, there has never been a full 3 year gap. 1-2 years is typical.
The difference here is that since it came out 16 months after BF2 it's safe to say the BF2 team and the BF2142 team both were given the engine and were working independently on their own games, two ENTIRELY different teams. After BF2 finished, the BF2 team kept working on BF2 and producing quality expansions while, what I would assume is a more minor team, continued working on 2142. This is an entirely different scenario. BF3 finished, the main team immediately gets to work on BF4 while the 'minor' team works on the fluff expansions.
Again, I won't judge before I see. However Close Quarters was pretty fucking bad, and there's still 3 more to go. There's still 3 more to go, more than half of the promised content yet to be announced, and they're already selling deals for Battlefield 4. It's clear where their focus is here and I personally hope BF4 is more than a glorified expansion on a slightly better engine. DICE isn't dead to me, I don't think anyone truly means that. DICE isn't responsible for anything. EA has been dead to me for years, however.
Jesus christ.. the amount of whinging in these scenarios never ceases to amaze me.
This might shock you, but this is in fact a gaming discussion forum. For discussing games. And we are their customers, and people will complain if they are dissatisfied with the direction things are going. In the games discussion thread. On a video game discussion forum. It will never cease to amaze me how people are so willing to protect and even support a publisher manipulating them more and more for as much money as possible with as little content as possible.
It just fucking blows me away that someone can SERIOUSLY say the equivalent of "who cares if they develop shit content you don't have to play it, your loss we don't want you if you're going to complain."
And that's not directed necessarily at you, but people like you in general who say that people who "whine" about publishers getting greedier and greedier, and wanting things to go back to the way they used to be instead of regressing into a business of cut and run are "entitled"
EDIT: Also, the quote below me too.
|
here is what i said in another thread about people defending dice...
On July 18 2012 10:17 Silidons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 05:34 zoLo wrote:On July 15 2012 02:10 TSBspartacus wrote:On July 14 2012 22:21 solidbebe wrote:On July 14 2012 20:51 BeMannerDuPenner wrote:sounds like a desperate move to sell moh. while bf4 will certainly come up faster then bf3 did i doubt they gonna go for the full 4 anytime soon. Exactly, that they give you beta access for pre-ordering says nothing about when the game will come out. It could come out in 5 years for all we know. Since BF3 is gonna get 5 DLC in total ( I think) and only 2 have been released, you can count on it that EA will milk this goldmine for a good while longer. nope, now EA have a hold on it they said they want to do what cod does with a game a year, alternating MoH and BF No, it's always been yearly releases from DICE. 2008 Battlefield: Bad Company 2009 Battlefield Heroes (cartoon game not mainstream bf game)2009 Battlefield 1943 (going back in time era =/= expansion on the game series, totally different then bc1)2010 Battlefield: Bad Company 2 2011 Battlefield Play4Free (uhhh free game nothing to do with bc2)2011 Battlefield 3 added in bold battlefield 4 = expansion of bf3. first time they're doing a yearly EXPANSION (calling it a new game, but its $60 xpac, see CoD)
No, it's always been yearly releases from DICE.
2008 Battlefield: Bad Company
2009 Battlefield Heroes (cartoon game not mainstream bf game)
2009 Battlefield 1943 (going back in time era =/= expansion on the game series, totally different then bc1)
2010 Battlefield: Bad Company 2
2011 Battlefield Play4Free (uhhh free game nothing to do with bc2)
2011 Battlefield 3
BF4 is an EXPANSION on BF3. You can't count games like 2142, it's not an expansion, it's an entire different game in a whole different era! BF4 is just an EXPANSION on the current game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
