EA has denied claims that gamers who pre-order Battlefield 3 will gain an advantage in play over those who don't. Some fans began calling for an international boycott after reports surfaced that buyers who pre-order the game will gain unfair advantage thanks to the exclusive Battlefield 3 weaponry they will receive as an early - …
I'm just going to look forward to both games without worrying about the petty rivalries. As long as they include multiplayer that allows me and my friends to play together, without involving the rest of the internet, and have good stories and fun gameplay then I'm all for them.
Pretty graphics notwithstanding, if either game involves sitting around for 10 minutes at a time without actually doing anything or presenting good story then it's dull and I'll switch off. If the game spends it's time showing big XXXX BUY THIS ITEM FROM THE STORE XXXX signs then I'm definitely not going to buy it.
But then I admit I'm likely in the minority when I say I have very little interest in tedious run-around-the-same-five-maps multiplayer scenarios with people I don't know. Give me a two-to-four player campaign and I'm all yours.
bf3 might not be the game for you. bf is the big sandbox style game with massive maps and high player counts (for pc - fps isnt for consoles imo), oh and vehicles. im not sure how good the offline will be but 90% of the people playing it never play the single player anyway.
bf may only have 10 maps or so but they will be massive. you can often spend hours playing the same map and never be in in the same place. cod is the opposite, small maps with campers and very repetitive.
"EA has denied claims that gamers who pre-order Battlefield 3 will not gain an advantage in play over those who don't."
Isn't that a double negative that translates to:
EA has confirmed claims that gamers who pre-order Battlefield 3 will gain an advantage in play over those that don't
Depends on where it is available
If the PC version of Battlefield 3 is an exclusive on EA's rebranded download service plus Web2.0rhea, Origin, then "no sale".
Steam or others download distributors for me, not buying into having a separate store for each publisher to fuck me over a barrel with.
just buy the DVD
as i will - pre-order and usually cheaper. same with steam - its often cheaper to buy physical media than download from steam!
Can't be arsed with putting discs in drives
Which is why I prefer download versions, don't want to be bothering with media and finding a disc to pass DRM test to play a game or find serial number if I need to reinstall.
Unfortunately Steam's retail prices are set by publishers, and you're right ... publishers have no control over the price that physical retailers sell the game for.
Which is another reason why I am wary of publisher exclusive stores, they are bound to be the most expensive way to buy and they want to strangle every other way to buy.
"its often cheaper to buy physical media than download from steam"
Um, excuse me, but you obviously don't have Steam.
I do, and I have gotten games for €1.50 off it. I got Left 4 Dead 2 for all of €5 by taking advantage of a weekend special. Sure, I didn't get it the day it came out, but I am patient enough.
I do believe that, however patient you may be, you'll never get a brand-new Left 4 Dead 2 DVD for €5.
What? Will they or will they not?
>> "EA: early Battlefield 3 buyers will gain no advantage"
So, no advantage.
>> "EA has denied claims that gamers who pre-order Battlefield 3 will not gain an advantage in play over those who don't."
Wait, they *denied* that they players will not gain an advantage? So, they *will* get an advantage after all.
>> "reports surfaced that buyers who pre-order the game will gain unfair advantage [...] EA today dismissed the claims"
Hum, no advantage, then.
>> "Owning these items will give you a more varied arsenal, but it will not give you a significant advantage on the battlefield.
Wait, now they *will* get an advantage, just not a significant one?
So, Mr. Cox, which is it, advantage or no advantage?
"EA has denied claims that gamers who pre-order Battlefield 3 will not gain an advantage in play over those who don't"
Denying they will not gain an advantage surely would be confirming that they do? Perhaps the article should have read "EA has denied claims that gamers who pre-order Battlefield 3 WILL gain an advantage in play over those who don't"
What a Mess
The way they should do the 'special' pre-order store bonuses is something like, if you buy from Game you get the first two levels of the Sniper tree unlocked at launch or buy from Play and get the two levels of medic at launch etc.
This way you would still have some advantage at launch but this would never unbalance the game or discourage people from picking up the game in the future.
from what i see thats what they are doing. plus giving a free camper sniper suppressor. to me thats the worst option. invisible snipers! <sigh>
What they are doing is doing an early unlock on one weapon, but giving 3 items to people that buy from this shop that cannot be aquired any other way.
If these items were just early unlocks I doubt there would be any outcry.
BF2 was the daddy - and I see no reason why BF3 won't be also. To be honest I think BF & MF are two different flavours of the same genre..
It's amusing that when the marketing department get to write the pre-order material they say that the items are 'essential' for a particular class.
Then, when they need to write the follow up, they say that the items don't change the balance at all.
Modern Battlefield 3
I almost feel this "rivalry" is being manufactured by the 2 parties to generate additional publicity.
Most of the people who buy CoD games will buy MW3
Most of the people who buy BF games will buy BF3
Often people sit in both camps.
Almost nobody cares which is better, they are different.
They both will sell absolute boatloads.
Personally I will buy neither because I'm sick of this "spat", don't like the drive to increase PC game prices, don't like the way MW2 overcharged for Map Packs ultimately just don't have time as I still have 9 games to complete or even start.
The only thing that would make this interesting
Would be if BF3 or MW3 managed to find a way to "integrate" into the other companies multiplayer so you could take the best items from said game then nuke the people playing on the other game with them at random - just pop in and BAM!
If the companies figure out how to do that - then its rivalry - until then its just the two companies saying our version of clickdeath is better and more entertaining than the other version.
I don't know who started this trend, but its got to stop
All Valve games now have 'achievements' which usually unlock abilities and features. The first game I came across that they added this to was TF2, which I thought was awesome until they added this 'feature'.
To me, it completely ruined TF2. Unless you a) played non stop, or b) played on servers/maps specifically designed to allow you to get achievements, you were always disadvantaged compared to those who didn't. As an example, one of the achievements for a particular class gave you an item which gives you an extra 40% health.
Then, having realised that they had fucked up the game, they made it so the items were randomly 'found' by playing the game. So now, even if you get the stupid achievements, you don't get the items. Utterly retarded.
It most fucked me off that they did all this in the name of 'balance'. Over-balance more like - each 'weak' class they took and made strong was weak for a reason, and had its purpose and strength, but noobs don't play to purpose and strength, they run around like tools, and valve were trying their damnedest to make it noob friendly.
I have to stop now, as I am incandescent with rage again. I will never fork over money for a game where ostensibly fair online play is affected by how many achievements or magic doodahs you have.
much better IMO. beware if you have an ATI card though.
grrr at in game purchases
Totally agree with you there..... I know its on a tangent but I finished playing TF2 as soon as they brought in ...erm in game purchases to get an advantage.
Wonder if thats the future for PC games.
- Vid Google opens Inbox – email for people too thick to handle email
- RUMPY PUMPY: Bone says humans BONED Neanderthals 50,000 years B.C.
- Pic Forget the $2499 5K iMac – today we reveal Apple's most expensive computer to date
- Geek's Guide to Britain Kingston's aviation empire: From industry firsts to Airfix heroes
- Is your home or office internet gateway one of '1.2 MILLION' wide open to hijacking?