Battlefield 3's Pre-Order Firepower Upsets Gamers

CD-R

New member
Mar 1, 2009
1,355
0
0
If the Type 88 is any thing like the one in Bad Company 2 people have nothing to worry about. That thing was useless.
 

Mandalore_15

New member
Aug 12, 2009
741
0
0
I'm glad people are making some noise about this. Not only is it goddamn irritating that they're bundling exclusive items that could be game-changers, but it's about time we did away with all this pre-order exclusive horse-shit. I don't want to be left with an inferior game to my mate just because I waited for the reviews to come in before I bought it!
 

bob1052

New member
Oct 12, 2010
774
0
0
Deofuta said:
It is always a point of contention where bonus content should fall in terms of the scale between cosmetic and practical. I don't really see this being something too earth shattering, and I wouldn't be surprised if we will simply unlock the exact same features rather early in Multiplayer progression.
Except that in the description of the pre-order bonus, DICE/EA have labelled some of the items as "exclusive" leading to the conclusion that these items are unavailable by any other means.

UberMore said:
To pre-order the game from Game costs the same as to buy it on day one, or from release.

Why do people have an issue with this? Just order it now, make sure you have the money in your account when the game is released and you'll be better off for no extra price.

Really, complaining about FREE extras is just shite. Pre-order it and be done with the moaning, they'll print as many codes as need be.
Except that it isn't free extras. It is on the disc, meaning that it isn't the kind of Day 1 DLC that missed making it in the game prior to the time that the Ratings boards get their hands on the game (your not allowed to alter your game after it has been given its rating, otherwise you would have to resubmit it) and looking at it as free extras is wrong. All it is is unnecessarily locked content for anyone who doesn't buy the game from the two retailers that are offering the full content.

People who do get it aren't getting extras, they are getting the full amount of content. People who don't get it are getting locked out of exclusive content for no reason other then you didn't preorder it (its not even one of those things included in every new box, it actually will punish you for buying the game brand new a week later) or you didn't go to one of the two retailers who are offering it.
 

Nurb

Cynical bastard
Dec 9, 2008
3,078
0
0
DICE has been making online multiplayer shooters for years, so you'd think it would know how unbalancing this bonus would be.
Hello, they're owned by EA, one of the worst offenders in DLC and reselling finished content! They'll unbalance and ruin any game so long as they can shake a few extra dollars out of their customers' pockets.

These days "loyal customer" means "Sucker"
 

Baneat

New member
Jul 18, 2008
2,762
0
0
Sonic Doctor said:
Baneat said:
Pay for stats?

Pass on game.
Not really, it would be if people that pre-order were paying extra money compared to people that are buying a regular copy after launch. Preorder the limited edition costs the same as buying the regular edition a few days later.

It's kind of silly to pass on the game(if your were going to get it in the first place) because of something so inconsequential as this.
I'd have gotten it for the multiplayer, and pay/dowhatwetellyou to get better stats kills it dead. Levelling's bad enough.
 

A Raging Emo

New member
Apr 14, 2009
1,844
0
0
Guys... I pre-ordered, but not because I wanted the extra stuff and a temporary advantage. I pre-ordered the game because I love Battlefield. You will surely be able to unlock these at a later date, and if not, then there are bound to be better weapons to be unlocked in the game anyway. Besides, your loadout is just your tool, and it will be near useless against a good squad who are using teamwork and employing good tactics.
 

Frotality

New member
Oct 25, 2010
982
0
0
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.
 

danhere

New member
Apr 5, 2010
98
0
0
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

New member
Apr 15, 2009
1,955
0
0
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

New member
Oct 29, 2009
1,835
0
0
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

New member
Sep 3, 2010
385
0
0
Ephraim J. Witchwood said:
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.

Riobux said:
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

New member
May 6, 2011
4,141
0
0
RUINER ACTUAL said:
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

New member
Oct 29, 2009
1,835
0
0
Kahunaburger said:
RUINER ACTUAL said:
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

New member
May 6, 2011
4,141
0
0
RUINER ACTUAL said:
Kahunaburger said:
RUINER ACTUAL said:
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

New member
Jun 12, 2008
121
0
0
Kahunaburger said:
RUINER ACTUAL said:
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

New member
Jul 14, 2009
562
0
0
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.