Well Crytek said the future of console gaming is F2P. Not that I have any real respect for what Crytek says anymore, but I have more respect for their word that yours.hm...pc gaming going f2p and facebook...phone, and tablet gaming dominating pc gaming now...
hmmmm
WilliamRLBaker
JC_Spot's forum posts
Exactly what I was complaining about to start with. The polar opposites point is very important too, because I want to play close quarters because all my friends prefer the COD style gameplay and want CQ where as they don't want the others, and I prefer to play with them, so I just want CQ instead of buying the whole thing, but I'm at a disadvantage if I do so.Premium is only a "deal" if you are going to like all the map packs, and considering that some of them are polar opposites in design focus, it's kind of a stupid argument to make.
Either way I normally wouldn't care, but its getting annoying as sh!@ having "premium, buy premium, this guy that killed you has premium, double xp premium weekend, premium server, hey hey, did you hear? Premium" shoved in my damn face every 2 seconds.
topgunmv
But BC2 will? I find that surprising.... And anyway, the egregious error was not so much in playing MW3, but calling it a hardcore game.[QUOTE="JC_Spot"][QUOTE="gooner187"]
Had to settle with MW3 BCZ BF3 wont run on my computer :(
gooner187
Okay maybe our definitions of hardcore games differ.BTW I was able to run BFBC2 very well on medium settings without any problem.So should i be able to run BF3??Well the problem might be my ATI RADEON HD 5470 video card.
Just google BF3 benchmarks on your card or something. You may well be able to run it in low settings, if you have a friend that has the game on PC just get his Origin password and install the game, then play it and see if it runs, so you don't have to risk buying it and having it not work.Exploiting workers is business, duping people about investments you know are destined to fail is business, giving mortgages to people with a 0% chance of failure is business. But business is business right, and we should never question it. The point you're making is people will buy it anyway, so they do it. So I should never speak up about Apple's ridiculous overcharging because it's business? People have the right to complain about things.[QUOTE="JC_Spot"][QUOTE="James161324"]
Then why are you trying to make BF3 Premium worse. Atleast bf3 is actually adding content to the game. Maps, Weapons, gamemodes and vechiles. Cod Elite you get some tiny maps.
But as i said this is business so neither of them is bad. They want to make money and people buy it. DLC WILL NEVER BE FREE AGAIN. Its just the state of games. There is no reason to come cry about it on a fourm
James161324
Its pointless and annoying complaining. Apple will never reduce pricing, and EA will charge for DLC. You can whine on fourms are you want but if millions buy it, they charge that price.
That's such backwards thinking, let's never complain about anything we can't control! Anyway, my original point was COD is better value in 2012 than BF3, which is still correct. We got horribly off topic.Exploiting workers is business, duping people about investments you know are destined to fail is business, giving mortgages to people with a 0% chance of failure is business. But business is business right, and we should never question it. The point you're making is people will buy it anyway, so they do it. So I should never speak up about Apple's ridiculous overcharging because it's business? People have the right to complain about things.[QUOTE="JC_Spot"][QUOTE="James161324"]
Then why are you trying to make BF3 Premium worse. Atleast bf3 is actually adding content to the game. Maps, Weapons, gamemodes and vechiles. Cod Elite you get some tiny maps.
But as i said this is business so neither of them is bad. They want to make money and people buy it. DLC WILL NEVER BE FREE AGAIN. Its just the state of games. There is no reason to come cry about it on a fourm
Wasdie
You can complain all you want, but you only look like an idiot complaing about something you have no control over and over something that has no effect on you at all. Nobody is forcing you to buy any of it. That's the whole point of a free market system.
Uhm.... Let's say I have family in Syria that is being killed by the government (I don't) and I have no control over it, so I shouldn't complain? Okay.... It does have an effect anyway, as mentioned, the server issues, XP etc. So you've NEVER complained about the pricing of something? If your boss lowered your pay by 10% and said, "It's the market" you would shake his hand and agree? There are barriers to entry and exit from the labour market so you would probably have to accept it. Just because the market is responsible doesn't mean I shouldn't complain. The market dictated (or seemed to) Dark Souls for the PC was not viable, then people complained and they brought it. Example of complaining working.[QUOTE="JC_Spot"]
Firstly, the premium knife is superior to the original one so....
Secondly the queue thing DOES matter if you are in AUS where there are MUCH less servers, and the majority of Close Quarters servers are Premium only, which means my choice of maps/game types/player count is much more limited than a premium player.
Wasdie
The knife isn't superior at all... I have no idea where the hell you get yourinformation.
As for the queue, it doesn't really matter. If you really care so much about it, go rent your own server. Just because the server owners in your area want you to have the CQ pack doesn't mean you're forced to play on those servers.
What if 10 years ago I required you to own Opposing Forces content to play on my Half-Life server? Or, in the case of Battlefield, what if I ran a server with the Rome maps and you didn't own them. Not my fault. I'm just renting a server for my own use. You, again, don't have any control over what the people do around you.
If you can't find servers to play in, then maybe you need to check your filters (you can filter out servers based on the DLC), or you can just buy the DLC because apparently everybody else around you finds value in it and you're the only one that doesn't. That's not EA's fault anymore. You can still play the game without hte DLC no problem.
I'm not an idiot, I know how to use filters, what I was saying was that if I BUY close quarters but not premium, I find it very hard to find a CQ server that I can play without being premium, since non premiums are blocked, so I have to buy the whole thing if I want to actually use my CQ map pack. And I can't find any official stats on the ACB-90 but a lot of people in forums are saying it swings faster and kills faster than the previous knife.Your entire argument revolves around the assumption that DICE and EA absolutely NEED to charge $50 for this content to turn a profit. This is obviously absurd and not the case. You really believe that the cost of these maps is the same or similar as an AAA full release game expected to sell hundreds of thousands, if not millions of copies? What they should really do, is reward the people that bought their game by using their hundreds of millions of dollars of profits from the original game to give content. If they actually operated on the edge of cost and profit then I would have no issue with charging the necessary price for the content, but this is just greed. I mean Activision could probably charge $20 for COD and still make a crazy amount of money.[QUOTE="JC_Spot"][QUOTE="Wasdie"]
10 years ago games were developed for about 1/100th of the cost they are now, modding was a necessary part of the game to get longevity out of the game, and game developers were fractions of the size they are now. Back then, games and maps were a tiny fraction of the complexity they are now. You could pump out new maps for Unreal or Counter Strike without much problem.
Developers learned that they cannot just keep working for free. They started releasing expansion packs, which were pretty much what DLC is today only less frequent, had a bit more content, and were more expensive. If you add up the BF3 premium, it's about the same amount of content as the 3 expansions for BF2 for $10 less.
It's all context and PC gamers are the worst at seeing this. They believe just becuase it used to be free means it should be today. With a map taking thousands of hours longer to make to the standards of the rest of the game, and mod tools costing millions of licensing fees to produce, it's just not viable to be putting out free content and mod tools all of the time.
Our own demand for higher quality graphics and games has put developers in a position they cannot support the industry like they used to be able to. Ever notice that all of the most moddable games today are always running on some pretty old engines and that indie game developers have even stopped giving out free content? There is a reason for this. Costs are to damn high to let your employees make more content for a game for free. You don't see any revenue from it and you waste your employees time they could be spent on making content for new games.
People "accept" it now because they feel that $15 for 3-5 well made multiplayer maps is still worth it, especially when they are playing a game for 200 hours. If people didn't feel that this content was worth their money, they wouldn't buy it. There are plenty of examples of DLC completely failing because it wasn't nearly worth the money.
In the case of BF3, I get more maps than launched with the game over the course of an entire year for $50. That's a damn good deal if you ask me. These aren't crappy maps that I have to play the alpha of for 6 months and redownload every time I go into a server, these are fully supported, well made maps by the developer.
In the case of Mount and Blade, I happily paid $10 (or was it $15) for that Napoleonic DLC. That was an indie game it was once a mod I could play for free, but it was loaded with good content and was a ton of fun.
I'm not playing PC games to uphold a status quo. I understand that developing games is damn expensive and as long as the content is worth the money, I'll pay for it. Everybody remembers all of the free crap we used to have back 10-15 years ago, but everybody forgets the hassle it was to get it all working and all of the hundreds of revisions it would take for something to be finished. It was annoying. People would spend more time messing with mods than they would playing. That's why expansion packs, even when the game was moddable, were able to sell no problem. Professionally made content is almost always worth the charge.
Wasdie
So you're counter to my argument is yet an assumption that they are overcharging to make a proift, of which you have absolutely no evidence at all to back that claim. You have no idea what their operating costs are. I know they dumped 50 million into advertising alone, that doesn't include all of the licensed tech, development rights for the 2 consoles, manpower for 3 years of development, a creation of a new engine, overhead for distribution...
You also don't understand basic market economics either. As I said before, if people don't find value in the price, they don't buy it. Obviously people don't think that $50 for 16 maps, 20 weapons, and a bunch more crap is worth the money. You are not one of them but you completely fail to see the obvious that is right in front of you. Instead you make these terrible posts laiden with assumptions and misinformation.
If Elite wouldn't have sold the 2+ million copies it did, no way DICE and EA would have put out Premium for the same price. The DLC was still coming for $15 a peice. In the end, a person would have ended up buying $60 worth of DLC if they already owned the Back to Karkand expansion. They weren't going to just drop the price of the DLC as $15 is pretty standard for a map pack and some extras in todays world. People who buy these things obviously find the value in them or the wouldn't buy them.
Please, learn how the market works. Just because YOU would decide to operate on a no-profit margin (good luck growning a company that way), doesn't mean others will.You can label it greed all you want, you're just proving your ignorance to the entire business.
I understand market economics, but you're saying I shouldn't complain or speak out against products being expensive because it's just the market? People complain about Apple's overcharging, but we shouldn't because it's just the market? Also, there is no market equilibrium being formed here, it's just a set price. Anyway, this is a partial monopoly, since DICE are the only people in the market for BF3 maps. If others were allowed to make maps and market them, DICE would have to be competitive and I think the prices would be much lower. Some devs make games that sell 1/10th or less than what BF3 sold and still turn a profit, and they have to pay for engine cost, development costs etc. If you're suggesting DICE/EA aren't raking in the cash at a ridiculous rate then you're wrong.I'm not supporting COD, I'm saying both are bad.[QUOTE="JC_Spot"][QUOTE="James161324"]
Let me ask you a question, you run EA. Now cod elite did crazy well, and made like 100 million dollars. Now your EA and say hmm we are going to release all this dlc hmm, should we be nice and give them all this content for free, nah cod elite made so much money so people are willing to spend money on something like this. Neither are better than the other
James161324
Then why are you trying to make BF3 Premium worse. Atleast bf3 is actually adding content to the game. Maps, Weapons, gamemodes and vechiles. Cod Elite you get some tiny maps.
But as i said this is business so neither of them is bad. They want to make money and people buy it. DLC WILL NEVER BE FREE AGAIN. Its just the state of games. There is no reason to come cry about it on a fourm
Exploiting workers is business, duping people about investments you know are destined to fail is business, giving mortgages to people with a 0% chance of failure is business. But business is business right, and we should never question it. The point you're making is people will buy it anyway, so they do it. So I should never speak up about Apple's ridiculous overcharging because it's business? People have the right to complain about things.[QUOTE="REforever101"]
yes and no. its a walking simulator for 90% of the time, but when things get exciting they get awesome quickly
Wasdie
Well without all of the walking, the risk/reward factor wouldn't be there. If you could just respawn and gather a bunch of supplies easily then dying is more of an annoyance rather than a real punishment. Since you spent 2 hours looting maybe 2 towns and staying alive in between, you're going to be invested a lot more into your character, making you really want to keep him/her alive. This in turn increases the suspense and intensity of really desperate situations and makes the game a whole lot more enjoyable.
That's something a lot of modern games don't have anymore. They go straight to the fun and only mildly punish failure. This reduces the investment that the player has in the game and thus reduces the risk/reward causing situations to be less intense and a lot less impactful on the player's overall experience.
The downside, of course, to this method is that you need to invest quite a bit of time to fully enjoy the experiance, and that's something most gamers don't wnat to do.
I just don't have enough time in one period to play for that long, can you log off and resume from the same spot, or do you have to play through all at once?
Log in to comment