Battlefield 3's Pre-Order Firepower Upsets Gamers

[Frotality]

im not really into the whole competitive multiplayer thing, but isnt 'balance' kind of a big thing, and obviously favoring those who gave you slightly more money kind of a BAD thing?

eh, more pre-order bullshit. im sure people will still buy into it like crazy.

 

[The Random One]

Well, if they're trying to beat Activision, they're off to a great start.

 

[danhere]

Me before: "Battlefield 3 looks pretty damn good. Maybe I'll get into FPSes again."
Me after I heard about this earlier: "Well, nevermind."

Someone in marketing needs to be fired.

 

[Riobux]

What's the chances of EA backing down?

Yeah, I severely doubt it as well. Sometimes, you have to applaud the video-game industry for holding the largest biggest metaphorical cock competition, with Activision and EA right there with Viagra and enlargers. I swear those two publishers just go out of their way to annoy their fan-base; maybe they're some of the few who realise we want to be abused as much as possible, it gets us excited.

 

[RUINER ACTUAL]

Weapon balance is my biggest fear in shooters. Look at the VSS in BC2, or the UMP in MW2. They are ridiculously overpowered. However, I don't think balance will be as big of an issue in BF3, as they want the best most balanced game they can deliver. I'm wary about this move (why not just weapon skins???), but I'm not up in arms against it.

 

[Numachuka]

Sounds like it's just earlier access. Not a problem, and people are getting a bit to riled up about it.

It's not earlier access. You can't get the T88, flash suppressor or flechette ammo unless you pre-order.

What's the chances of EA backing down?

Yeah, I severely doubt it as well. Sometimes, you have to applaud the video-game industry for holding the largest biggest metaphorical cock competition, with Activision and EA right there with Viagra and enlargers. I swear those two publishers just go out of their way to annoy their fan-base; maybe they're some of the few who realise we want to be abused as much as possible, it gets us excited.

They backed down for BC1, I don't see a reason why they won't now.

 

[Kahunaburger]

Look at the VSS in BC2

Haha this gun is hilarious. Anything that I can A. snipe with, B. hold a position with, and C. run around in a chewbacca suit spraying people with is pretty awesome.

EDIT:

OT, I was probably going to get BF3 but this is basically a deal-breaker for me. A flash suppressor is a huge deal for a battlefield game, in particular, and any company that ships unbalanced multiplayer should get their heads checked.

 

[RUINER ACTUAL]

Look at the VSS in BC2

Haha this gun is hilarious. Anything that I can A. snipe with, B. hold a position with, and C. run around in a chewbacca suit spraying people with is pretty awesome.

EDIT:

OT, I was probably going to get BF3 but this is basically a deal-breaker for me. A flash suppressor is a huge deal for a battlefield game, in particular, and any company that ships unbalanced multiplayer should get their heads checked.

I hate it because I play hardcore, and its a long barrel, long range SMG.

I don't think the weapons will be that big of a deal. Plus we don't know how attachments will work in the game, or that they are even the best weapons (which they probably aren't anyways), and if you buy the limited edition, it doesn't really matter to you, does it?

 

[Kahunaburger]

Look at the VSS in BC2

Haha this gun is hilarious. Anything that I can A. snipe with, B. hold a position with, and C. run around in a chewbacca suit spraying people with is pretty awesome.

EDIT:

OT, I was probably going to get BF3 but this is basically a deal-breaker for me. A flash suppressor is a huge deal for a battlefield game, in particular, and any company that ships unbalanced multiplayer should get their heads checked.

I hate it because I play hardcore, and its a long barrel, long range SMG.

I don't think the weapons will be that big of a deal. Plus we don't know how attachments will work in the game, or that they are even the best weapons (which they probably aren't anyways), and if you buy the limited edition, it doesn't really matter to you, does it?

I play core, so it isn't quite as absurd as it is in hardcore. But it's still pretty ridiculously OP haha - it's a (silenced) sniper at long range, a (silenced) Akban at mid-range, and a (silenced) USAS at short range. I have no idea why more people in core aren't using it.

Well, the flash suppressor could be pretty massive if you snipe because the muzzle flare is generally how you get spotted. But it's more a general principle thing - any multiplayer that is by definition unfair is broken. Would you play chess if some players could have a third rook instead of one of their bishops if they spend extra?

 

[Pebsy]

Look at the VSS in BC2

Haha this gun is hilarious. Anything that I can A. snipe with, B. hold a position with, and C. run around in a chewbacca suit spraying people with is pretty awesome.

EDIT:

OT, I was probably going to get BF3 but this is basically a deal-breaker for me. A flash suppressor is a huge deal for a battlefield game, in particular, and any company that ships unbalanced multiplayer should get their heads checked.

They just had a short FAQ about this, the purpose of these weapons is to add variety. Now the flash suppressor is for the sks, what if other sniper rifles also have flash suppressors? The SKS is also more of an urban sniper (kinda like the type 88 sniper from BC2 I would think, or maybe even closer to the M14, would a flash surpressor really upset the WHOLE game? The Developers at DICE aren't stupid, don't even try to think that they are. They specifically said in the FAQ, exclusive content gives more variety. Now instead of choosing an LMG with a 600 rpm fire rate and a 900 rpm fire rate, you can get one with 750 rpm (with damage being adjusted to compensate). Is that so bad?

 

[qeinar]

well it's not like bf3 is the only game doing this, i don't really care since i'm getting the game anyways, probably trough steam. Oh and it's not like i support it, the idea of getting stuff that makes you better by preordering a game is just retarded.

 

[Kahunaburger]

Look at the VSS in BC2

Haha this gun is hilarious. Anything that I can A. snipe with, B. hold a position with, and C. run around in a chewbacca suit spraying people with is pretty awesome.

EDIT:

OT, I was probably going to get BF3 but this is basically a deal-breaker for me. A flash suppressor is a huge deal for a battlefield game, in particular, and any company that ships unbalanced multiplayer should get their heads checked.

They just had a short FAQ about this, the purpose of these weapons is to add variety. Now the flash suppressor is for the sks, what if other sniper rifles also have flash suppressors? The SKS is also more of an urban sniper (kinda like the type 88 sniper from BC2 I would think, or maybe even closer to the M14, would a flash surpressor really upset the WHOLE game? The Developers at DICE aren't stupid, don't even try to think that they are. They specifically said in the FAQ, exclusive content gives more variety. Now instead of choosing an LMG with a 600 rpm fire rate and a 900 rpm fire rate, you can get one with 750 rpm (with damage being adjusted to compensate). Is that so bad?

The issue for me is that the game should, theoretically, ship balanced, so the either A) the flash supressor will balance a previously useless weapon (like putting it on the type 88) or B) it will create an unbalanced weapon (like putting it on the SVD from Vietnam). I'm not a fan of either option, honestly. And much as I like DICE, they were the people who brought us the M60. So balance may in fact be an issue even if they don't intend it to be.

 

[qeinar]

There's also this:
http://blogs.battlefield.ea.com/

Q: Will Physical Warfare Pack imbalance the game?
A: The three exclusive items in the Physical Warfare Pack were specifically chosen not to be overpowered or imbalance or break the game in any way.

Q: Why do I want the Physical Warfare Pack?
A: Owning these items will give you a more varied arsenal, but it will not give you a significant advantage on the battlefield.

Yes this. Also preordering the game doesn't really cost any extra money.. unless you wait a good while buying your games. their basicly rewarding fans that are really eager to play the game the secound it comes out.

 

[Katana314]

My entire opinion is based off of whether those items end up being somewhat game-changers, or if they're just mildly different choices of armament. Of course, determining if this is true involves waiting until the game releases and seeing what people think. Ironically, the pre-order bonus convinced me that even if I buy it, I should not preorder it. =p

 

[snfonseka]

At least they are giving something worthy for pre-orders. I doubt this package will totally unbalance the multi-player.

 

[strangemoose]

whats this?? an internet call to arms telling people to cancel their pre orders well jeez this has never been done before and will most certainly work!!

 

[Beautiful End]

Technically...it's not the store's fault. If EA tells them that they're giving away kittens with the Battlefield 3 pre-order, they're not gonna argue.

If anything, they should protest by going to EA HQ or whatever is the closest thing to that.

On the other hand, such is the point of pre-ordering the game: to get extra stuff that you normally wouldn't be able to get somewhere else. If you're a hardcore fan of the series and you're planning on getting the game as soon as it comes out, why not pre-order it and get something for it? If you don't want to pre-order it, then rise up to the challenge and kick butt with the conventional guns.

I don't see why people are so offended; 75% of the pre-orders give you something extra that you can't normally get anywhere else, such as the MK costumes. Sure, some give you an advantage over other players while others are just for fun. But this doesn't come as a surprise. I see this as EA's way of saying "Hey, we're giving away goodies for the game and you can get into that starting right now even though the game is schedules to come out next year. So come get some". :/

 

[Aerograt]

Fact: Developers like pre-orders because it's guaranteed sales.

Fact: Retailers like pre-orders because it's guaranteed sales.

Not necessarily, I have a bunch of games pre ordered with a five dollar deposit (mostly for the pre order demos) but I have no obligation to pay the rest of the money if I don't want to. For instance, I have Duke Nukem Forever preordered for its demo, but after realizing the game itself is shit I decided that I wasn't going to pay the full price for the game.

 

[Throwitawaynow]

Really? And these bonuses are only for UK pre-orders? Wow, and people always complain that they're last in getting games.

 

[irequirefood]

Well somebody already posted this link in this thread but I will do it in a less conspicuous way.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B002I0HJZO/ref=cm_sw_r_tw_dp_AmI9nb1DBMH2V

It is a free expansion pack that has four legendary maps form Battlefield 2 that have been re-imagined with the frostbite 2 engine, and weapons and vehicles and such from Battlefield 2.

There isn't a price increase, it is set at $59.95.

Well...damn. Guess there is no reason not to pre-order unless you don't have the money then.