digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

See the original image at sarcasticgamer.com —

Battlefield: Bad Company boycott video

sarcasticgamer.com — In an effort to raise awareness of EA's new QUESTIONABLE policy of charging EXTRA MONEY for GUNS in a FIRST PERSON SHOOTER, Sarcastic Gamer presents a twisted version of the game trailer that more accurately reflects this blooming trend. They are organizing a boycott of BF: BC.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • Volkov137, on 03/31/2008, -8/+102Do what you'd do to any other BAD COMPANY! Boycott!
    • Jimbob200, on 03/31/2008, -26/+3This is a new way of generating revenue for EA. Thank piraters for this new development. At the same time, wWhy in God's name does the article uploader feel entitled to this game? Vote with your dollars. I guarantee there will be people putting down cash for these items. If you can buy a warcraft account, a sword, gold, or any other digital information that exists as 1's and 0's, you can bet you'll be seeing more stuff like this in the future, whether you like it or not.
      • Chaulis, on 03/31/2008, -2/+6I think I missed the entitlement part, anyone else catch that?
        • Jimbob200, on 03/31/2008, -4/+4"EA's new QUESTIONABLE policy of charging EXTRA MONEY for GUNS in a FIRST PERSON SHOOTER"

          Don't tell me he doesn't have an opinion about it. He's clearly annoyed at this development.
          • Chaulis, on 03/31/2008, -4/+6RIght, but you said "the article uploader (what ever that is supposed to mean) feel entitled to this game" So to be entitled means
            1. to give (a person or thing) a title, right, or claim to something; furnish with grounds for laying claim: His executive position entitled him to certain courtesies rarely accorded others.
            2. to call by a particular title or name: What was the book entitled?
            3. to designate (a person) by an honorary title.
            And in common every day usage of the word definition one is the most popular. So, would you justify your statement that the author is deserving and claims ownership of the game?
      • bagboyrebel, on 03/31/2008, -0/+13"Vote with your dollars."
        umm... that's what a boycott is.
      • emjaymj, on 03/31/2008, -0/+15Map packs and the like are one thing, but charging for weapons is a bit ridiculous. Let's face it, multiplayer is why most people buy the battlefield games, and the thing that makes multiplayer gaming such as this fun is that everybody is on the same level and you're competing against the skill of other players. When you have to spend extra money on a game you already bought just to keep the gameplay fair, it's getting a bit ridiculous.

        You're absolutely right that EA is within their rights to make money, but your rant is baseless. You tell the submitter to vote with their dollars, and last time I checked, that is the precisely the point of a boycott. I for one am also going to stop buying EA games like this, even if the price is reasonable - which it isn't - it's apparent now that costs can pop up at anytime just to keep up with other players. If these guns could be restricted from certain games, I'd have less of a problem, but we're looking at something way different from your ordinary expansion pack.
        • blake_mooney, on 03/31/2008, -8/+9Pirates have nothing to do with this, ***** moron.
          • emjaymj, on 03/31/2008, -1/+6Where did I so much as imply it had anything to do with pirates?
          • Jimbob200, on 03/31/2008, -0/+7Haha you pwnd the wrong person, friggin newb.
        • Bilabrin, on 03/31/2008, -1/+2Yeah, that's what basically killed "Magic: the gathering" for me. If you wanted to stay competitvive you had to lay out large chunks of cash every time a new expansion came out and then if your set was older than 3 expansions, it became obsolete.
    • gfair, on 03/31/2008, -5/+6Don't you think that EA's charging for expansion packs is almost entirely the same thing? EA calls them "booster packs". For BF2 there are two packs:

      Armored Fury
      Euro Force

      Both expansions, both you have to pay for. What do you get? New content.

      What this looks like is EA making its expansion content CHEAPER by charging on a per-item basis. Boycot? Yeah, but for legit reasons - ***** server search system, bugs (Titan mode), Punkbuster, etc.
      • afruff23, on 03/31/2008, -0/+5From what I understand, the new game is not going to let you to even out the playing field. In the BF2 series and its boosters you can choose to play on maps and servers that did not have the weapons since the maps themselves had a set weapon list.
    • MacSuxWindozSux, on 03/31/2008, -3/+12They make a living creating video games, instead of creating video games for a living.
    • elimrawne, on 03/31/2008, -2/+4is this comment not brought to us by bacon salt?
    • Asianwaste, on 03/31/2008, -6/+1The guy's acting like this is a new and unexpected thing.
    • joeanon, on 03/31/2008, -3/+1Boycotts are still wealth biased not democratic. They allow the upper middle and wealthy classes more say than the majority demographics, so they are only so useful in todays globalized mega corporate economy.

      Though of all things video games are easier to boycott, it's still a weak solution at best simply not buying.
      If you want to invoke change you need more active methods to pressure a company.

      They can take your boycott and raise your another expansion pack and still make money. Maybe less money, but still a healthy profit.
      • popwesa, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1Not entirely true. Depends on what your boycotting. The Montgomery Bus Boycott is a pretty good counterexample to the argument that it is a tool of the rich.

        Boycotts have proven to be one of the most effective means of change in the market sector. Anything really that targets a company's profits largely is going to get the attention of the board of directors, and they will make changes in accordance motivated purely on restoring a gap in profits.

        A company like EA is no different. Just think how much a hit they are going to take financially from this PR. Its very possible that if this news gets enough buzz it'll detract enough buyers from the game to make it more profitable for EA to simply make the guns free instead to regain those lost profits and attract more buyers again.
    • rchargel, on 03/31/2008, -0/+11If you think this is bad, consider this. Now video games are getting sponsorships, which is why you see real adds for real products in the middle of your game. Like those damn billboards during racing games. I have no problem with this, except that when the Radio and TV companies do this, they offer their product free of charge. Commercials are the reason you don't pay a monthly rate to get NBC, CBS, ABC, etc. Those video games should at least be cheaper if they get to make money off of the advertising. D-Bags
      • Nobi-Wan, on 03/31/2008, -0/+8I don't understand why you're being dugg down because what you're saying is absolutely true. Another thing is that the Gold Subscription for Xbox Live shouldn't have ads either. They can slap as much up on the Silver membership as they want... it's free. When you're a customer you shouldn't be paying full price if you're forced to sit through ads or look at ads in the game.

        It's so stupid that they're making people pay for weapons in the game. How can they call the game "balanced" if someone can use something that another person can't? They're probably already on the disc anyway and what you're downloading is a "key" to unlock them.
    • muzy, on 03/31/2008, -0/+2If EA, did the same to upcoming BF3, there will be millions of angry fans. No one will ever buy the game.
    • GliTCH82, on 03/31/2008, -1/+2As if expansion packs and sequels weren't bad enough, now companies how found a new way to milk money out of a game. Except, it's not really new, and racing games have been doing this with downloadable cars since the release of the 360.

      It was only a matter of time before FPSes picked up on it.
    • MrFisty, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1Come on, who didn't see this coming. Just watch as they do the exact same thing with the upcoming Team Fortress 2, I mean, Battlefield Heroes where it's "free" but they'll nickle and dime you for everything little thing in the game.
    • Warfang866, on 04/02/2008, -0/+0This article (brought to you by Bacon Salt) makes me NOT want to buy this game. Before, this was one of my most anticipated games. I don't wanna buy extra crap that, according to EA, doesn't have any worth, but they still wanna sell it for lots of cash. Does that make any sense? It must have some worth. I guess this game will be overrun by rich people who have the time and the money to buy the DLC.
  • Krelith, on 03/31/2008, -4/+102Seriously, if EA's reputation gets any lower it won't be long until they're on a level with the Third Reich. Okay, maybe that's a slight over exaggeration. I mean they just released Army Of Two a couple of months later than scheduled to work through the complaints they got about gameplay, and then just as i'm thinking, "wow, EA may have actually changed their tune," they suddenly pull this crap! I was REALLY looking forward to this game after seeing the tech demo and now I don't even know if I want to buy it anymore.

    Boycott, boycott to hell.
    • Akaji, on 03/31/2008, -1/+15Careful, you almost committed a grievous Godwin offense, and we're not even nesting comments yet!
    • alexhazeldean, on 03/31/2008, -2/+8Theres a branch of EA right near where I live in Guildford, England. Every time i walk past it i annoy at least one member of staff by saying that battlefield sucks compared to call of duty. But this is just a joke. They're gonna get an earful next time im out :)
    • Radan, on 03/31/2008, -5/+3Having played the beta for about a week now I can say that even with the buyable weapons, the game feels more Dice than EA. Trust me, it is a very good game with a lot of sarcastic humour and fun. And I don't even like the Battlefield series that much. Also, the weapons you can currently buy is complete rubbish anyway.
    • OwdenBowden, on 03/31/2008, -0/+3Evil Arts has been screwing around with the people since their inception. Each of us pay to be Beta testers for EA when they put out a product. That's right - they always put out a product that acts as a beta with problems and all only to eventually fix them in the next version. And EA keeps the screwing going when they required you to agree to their terms (i.e. - give them your email address so they could spam you) prior to playing their games. Then they went into the charging you (after paying $60.00) to unlock content that is ALREADY ON THE DISK (not Down loadable content - unlocking content).

      I work my ass off for my money. It is not enough that the prices of games are continually going up and up - and now we have to pay even more by buying extras that will be needed and should have been included already. I say SHAME SHAME SHAME on you EA. I will join the boycott and not make the purchase of the game - all I will do is play the demo alone.
  • rothbart, on 03/31/2008, -2/+208Remember, you can't spell "mean" or "sleazy" without "ea".
    • hammerpants, on 03/31/2008, -5/+30...or "great."

      Just sayin'...
    • DifferentAngle, on 03/31/2008, -1/+23or tea... mm... tea...
    • Shadic, on 03/31/2008, -1/+12Or "Cheap" !
    • Ocelot13, on 03/31/2008, -3/+9what about awesome? sure, theyre split up..but still there!
      • bobbob1016, on 03/31/2008, -2/+2What about "Ass holEs" backwards and split up, but still there.
        What about "douchE bAgs" split up, but still there.
    • DigDugDigger, on 03/31/2008, -6/+2I see what you did there.
    • Nobi-Wan, on 03/31/2008, -0/+2or EAt me.
    • AntiJohnny, on 04/09/2008, -0/+0can i digg this twice? lol
  • Dalilama30, on 03/31/2008, -0/+59I think there's someone from EA looking under my couch cushions for all my spare change.
  • ASexyNerd, on 03/31/2008, -4/+207"EA it's in the game....... well most of it"
    • terryhuang, on 03/31/2008, -1/+8best aprt of the video
    • Mikhail101, on 03/31/2008, -5/+10yea thx for telling me what i just saw.
    • popfrogs, on 03/31/2008, -2/+3When I was playing BF2 on the PC every day after it was first released, I used to play with my brother (who lives in another state). Every time we saw a crazy glitch like the forced commander takeover and the vehicle drop spamming, we'd say "EA Games...it's in the patch".
    • ch4os1337, on 03/31/2008, -2/+3There are a total of 8 marketplace guns. 4 come with the "gold" edition of the game, but that costs more. And the guns are Garbage anyways.
    • Thierzarr, on 03/31/2008, -1/+0Well i find an A and an E in games.
    • SgtQuackers, on 03/31/2008, -2/+2EA it's in the game........but you have to pay extra to get it
  • Christbait, on 03/31/2008, -13/+51EAids.
  • abc12000, on 03/31/2008, -2/+121I bought a shirt from EA today that only had one arm sleeve... Now I've got to take it back and pay another five dollars for another sleeve...

    Thanks EA!
    • Dgen_X, on 03/31/2008, -1/+7Welcome to the new world of micro transactions!
    • ghostlywind, on 03/31/2008, -0/+7Hey at least it's only $2.00 for the thread
  • Aggort, on 03/31/2008, -32/+5OK, this is clearly not the first game to charge for content. Chromehounds did it, Multiple racing game do it for cars, Crackdown did it for extra guns, and some even influence gameplay. Can anyone explain to me why I should be upset that they are doing this? If it's because they are an influential company and you are all worried this will happen in several games, think about it for one second and realize that not every game developer has their head up their ass and not everyone will buy the content. Just don't buy the game and shut the ***** up.
    • Cpd4224, on 03/31/2008, -0/+27People don't mind paying for things that are seen as "extras" but when you start charging for things that should be included in the game already (i.e. guns) then it makes people upset.
      • fkr3, on 03/31/2008, -4/+5Are there no guns in it or are these "extra" guns?
        • alkajazz, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1there is a total of 10 guns you can't use. 5 of them you can get from pre-ordering Bad company, but they can all be bought from the marketplace. Also they've said these weapons aren't significantly better than any of the other weapons that comes with the game. Don't get me wrong i don't like the idea of this (I don't mind buying maps but weapons?). I'm on the beta, the game play is hit or miss right now just a few tweaks and they have a really cool Multiplayer experience.
      • caleb4mj, on 03/31/2008, -7/+0If it were open source and users could make their own guns, etc. it might cost less to introduce new content...
        • fkr3, on 03/31/2008, -3/+6That's a great idea for multiplayer games.... let everyone make their own guns. Mine'll do a gazillion hitpoints of damage to everyone but me regardless of who I point it at. Also it'll shoot flowers that spray deadly squirrels but you won't see because you'll be on the other side of the map when I frag your n00b ass with my awesome gun.

          In fact my gun'll be so cool when I click my mouse the game'll just declare me the winner.

          Open source is an option for some things not a solution for everything.
          • emjaymj, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1You could always have a points system like sports games use to customize your gun. For instance, you could have ridiculous damage at the expense of rate of fire, accuracy, recoil, etc.
    • bossm4n, on 03/31/2008, -0/+23This is about drawing a line in the sand and telling game developers and specifically publishers that we're not happy going down this road. EA's track record post 1942 is abysmal. It's bad enough that they released garbage like BF: Vietnam and BF2 which were very unplayable until the first few patches were released (in fact I don't know that they ever got BFV right), but to think that they are going to release potential crap that you will have to pay additional dollars for extras is absurd. Not to mention the fact that most games are now $60 to begin with. Plus I still have a chip on my shoulder for the way that EA/Dice f^cked over the guys from Trauma who developed the Desert Combat mod for 1942. So yeah, I won't buy the game, but I also won't shut the ***** up because I hate what EA is continuing to do with the industry.
      • TheBEAST205, on 03/31/2008, -0/+8Not to mention the fact that EA practically steals money from all of the idiots who buy the same football game every year. I've hated EA for a very long time, I'm actually not too surprised buy this. Didn't they do the thing for the Godfather game where you could buy weapons on the marketplace that you eventually unlocked in the game, but they never told you that you could simply get them in single player? I believe they did the same for a Need for Speed game. Those guys are bastards.
        • HolyChimp, on 03/31/2008, -0/+2Need for Speed said "These Addons are Unlockable through Regular Gameplay" or something to that effect.
      • active1x0, on 03/31/2008, -1/+4I DIGG YOU PROUDLY SIR
    • Krazykorean530, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1The thing is that all this content is already loaded on the disc, EA's done this before and basically what it means is that your paying extra money for something you've already bought. And don't go thinking that the extra content was developed and then put onto the game disc to save the gamer time, no EA received a full game from the developer and then proceeded to lock away a lot of the content. ***** YOU EA!!!
  • Blackstar69, on 04/03/2008, -4/+110Soon they'll charge per frames per second...
    • supermanred, on 03/31/2008, -16/+4I used to be a PC gamer, they have ALWAYS charged for frames per second. That's why during my last "upgrade" I decided to buy a 360 and a bunch of games instead of buying 2 new PCI video cards for my rig.
      • logandurand, on 03/31/2008, -0/+7Wow, if you think you *need* SLI for PC gaming, you're just plain stupid. Buy yourself an 8800 GT for $200 and your computer will be able to almost completely max out Crysis.
        • qwertydvorak, on 03/31/2008, -4/+3where in my laptop do i put that ? we need upgradable video in laptops. that is the next logical step. they are now outselling desktops. turn the whole lid into a heatsink for all i care, just make it so gaming laptops are upgradable. /endrant
          • Scynet, on 03/31/2008, -1/+4It's not that easy, graphics cards need different amount of power and ventilation, for example. You'd also need upgradable fans. In the end you'll just end up with a "laptop" that's as big and heavy as a desktop.

            I don't see the point, just play with a desktop, it's not like you can play anything without a mouse either, and for that you need a flat surface like a table.
          • BoneheadFarker, on 03/31/2008, -0/+2Actually, many gaming laptops have upgradable video cards in them. Of course you'll be paying a premium for a gaming laptop...
          • qwertydvorak, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1my laptop is almost as heavy as a desktop. i game in my recliner with a trackball. like i said, i don't care if they turned the whole lid into a giant heatsink, just make it doable.
        • v0yeur, on 03/31/2008, -0/+2Come on. Crysis nearly maxed on a $200 card? Please, tell me where you buy that top-grade weed
        • jermm, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1http://tinyurl.com/2qhsac
          8800GTs on Newegg for about $200
      • Sagags, on 03/31/2008, -0/+6I didn't realize that you cant game on a PC without SLI, man what have I been doing all these years with just one video card!!
      • AmnioticEntity, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1stop digging down superman when you know he is right. these video cards claim they can do 16x AA and 16x AF , but they don't tell you that you need at least 2 of them with a minimum of 1GB of DDR3/4 to achieve that in today's modern games. sure they can do those settings in q3ta..but who wants to play q3ta?
    • 2Bnor2B, on 03/31/2008, -0/+41After reading your post some EA executive just had an epiphany.
    • AmnioticEntity, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1you mean epic games is not in cahoots with nvidia and intel? dammit....i guess i'll go back to using my radeon 8500pro 128mb w/ 3.3ns hynix ram for playing UT3, RS6V2, etc....

      NOT!
    • Bravo2ster, on 06/24/2008, -0/+0lol were all screwed...what if they wanted you all to pay 5.00 for every time you typed "EA" wich is trademarked....I wouldnt put it past them...lmao


      Have fun,

      =BRAVO2=
      www.usef.net
  • Craftybadger, on 03/31/2008, -1/+182Great, now I'll be getting killed by all the rich kids.
    • linuxrocks2007, on 03/31/2008, -2/+42Rich, spoiled, annoying, racist, idiotic kids. Sometimes I'm glad there's a mute button.
      • popfrogs, on 03/31/2008, -1/+4Hence why I never bought an Xbox. The kids that only play FPS games their entire life are usually the guilty parties on Live.
      • IndigoMoss, on 03/31/2008, -1/+2I've only played 5 minutes of Halo 3 at my brother's house, and those five minutes were enjoyed with the likes of the people you speak of. If I ever bought an Xbox, I sure as hell am not playing it online.
      • tchynerd, on 03/31/2008, -0/+17"Mute button available at an additional charge"
    • LiquidLeopard, on 03/31/2008, -0/+7if you don't help boycott it....
      • oflaherty, on 03/31/2008, -4/+1you really think it will change anything?
        • butterz730, on 04/10/2008, -0/+1LOL DOUCHEBAG IT DID CHECK BACK ON sarcasticgamer.com!!!
    • fxu1989, on 03/31/2008, -1/+4Rich kids ?

      You mean kids who steal their parents' credit cards.
    • atgmac, on 03/31/2008, -2/+11Guns: $5
      Tank: $10
      BF crashing on startup: Priceless
    • noctu, on 03/31/2008, -0/+3the only game that I hope to see cheaters by the droves come in with their hacks.
    • skyroket, on 03/31/2008, -0/+2Every post after this guy's can just be ignored. This hit the nail on the head.
  • Cpd4224, on 03/31/2008, -0/+95EA Games, purchase EVERYthing
    • prophetpimp, on 03/31/2008, -2/+3Pirate everything. And play online using VPN and Lan Network Gameplay.
      • arcooke, on 03/31/2008, -0/+6Yay for Hamachi.
        • Monk22, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1props to logmein for all the free programs they have that totally kick ass.
  • MrM1yagi, on 03/31/2008, -5/+49***** EA!
  • Ganja420, on 03/31/2008, -0/+48Its not that good of a game anyway... ive got the beta.
    CoD4 and Halo are way better and don't charge for guns (just maps)
    i dont think this kind of gaming model will work... boycott or not
    • valkyries, on 03/31/2008, -2/+42"just maps" once you buy a game everything for it should be free. thanks you Valve! *cough*pc*cough*
      • TheBEAST205, on 03/31/2008, -17/+6While I do agree with you that it'd be nice for free, I still prefer not having to update my console every other year. Thank you Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo!
        • transform100, on 03/31/2008, -3/+8Yeah and you get red rings freezes and much much more!
        • SpeedSteamBoat, on 03/31/2008, -1/+10This is a tired, outmoded argument. Honestly, this may have been true ten years ago, but the fact is I could go drop $400-$600 on parts to build my own PC right now that would look better, and continue to look better than any console out their until the next generation of consoles (at which point, your point becomes moot). It's not like ***** becomes unplayably better looking for the latest (or even mid-to-high end) hardware every other year like it used to. You don't have to play everyone game at max settings on ultra high resolution, you know? In fact, I'd venture a guess to say most people don't.

          Don't get me wrong here, I've played console games for years and still do, but I don't play for the graphics. I can get those anywhere.
          • popfrogs, on 03/31/2008, -14/+2*****, a $400-$600 PC won't even boot Vista these days.
          • drksun, on 03/31/2008, -0/+10lol yes it will, for 600 you can build a nice rig with a core2duo, 2gb ram, 8800gt with room to spare
          • prophetpimp, on 03/31/2008, -0/+3Are you retarded frog?
            a 8800 is only 200 bucks and a core 2 duo can be had for less then a 100. Ram is Cheap and a 500GB HDD is less then 50$. Hell you can even squeeze in a Blu Ray Drive.
      • cgbspender, on 03/31/2008, -0/+5Free is nicer, but if they make new maps after they released the game and want some money for their work I dont have any problem with that. Making good maps is a lot of work and therefore costs the company money. I can still enjoy the game like on the first day I bought it without buying more maps.
        If they however disable parts of the game before the release I feel deceived and if they sell modifications that give others unfair advantages it destroys they game experience I have paid for and I feel blackmailed.
      • yohnstoppable, on 03/31/2008, -0/+3Paying for extra content isn't exclusive to the pc

        *cough* rockband *cough*

        And it isn't a bad thing as long as it doesn't give you an advantage over others in direct competition.
        • repick3, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1But none of those songs were originally in Rock Band... All these guns are IN the game... you just have to pay for them.
    • AwesomePossum, on 03/31/2008, -0/+3Ive got the beta as well and I'd agree its nothing special other than some of the gfx. It takes almost a full clip on the assault rifle to kill someone even at point blank range! Ridiculous... Save your money for GTA
    • Nobi-Wan, on 03/31/2008, -0/+2I don't have a problem with maps and such as long as they're made AFTER the game has already come out. I like that developers support their games even after they're released.
  • DiggDavey, on 03/31/2008, -27/+5Wendy's Spicy Baconator.
    • SpookyPig, on 03/31/2008, -0/+7Heartburn *and* a heart attack!
      • bjornski, on 03/31/2008, -0/+3Yeah, but with that much bacon, it's worth it.

        /mmmmm, bacon.
    • albinoMithos, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1Hey at least I don't have to pay for the heartburn and heart attack separately. I get those both in one nice package deal.
  • Fkb797, on 03/31/2008, -0/+21I really think that boycotting this game is a good idea. Imagine if they get Take-Two! Guaranteed they will suck everything honest out of GTA.
    ***** Peter Moore!
  • Efflux, on 03/31/2008, -2/+15I thought they were going to become a better company after they announced that battlefield Heroes game that was a TF2 ripof.....
    Crap.
  • h4ckler, on 03/31/2008, -1/+24I'm all for purchasing additional content... but right on the release of the game I have to purchase even more over the $60 fee to get everything the developed game has... screw that.

    Consider this boycotted.
  • bonnerfishX, on 03/31/2008, -0/+48what a BAD COMPANY
  • AwesomeMonster, on 03/31/2008, -0/+14Really? I was looking forward to this alot. way to ruin a good game with greed ea. You don't rush a product out, but instead you ruin it with other shamless tactics.
  • radarbeam, on 03/31/2008, -2/+35I don't care for console-only games.
    Still Dugg because EA greediness.
  • cnot3, on 03/31/2008, -0/+65Do the guns come textured with advertisements for intel and pepsi on them?
    • whyufail, on 03/31/2008, -1/+8No but they shoot McDonald's burgers (also conveniently the only use for them)
    • MasterThief117, on 03/31/2008, -0/+3You probably have to pay extra for the textures.
      • masterthiefster, on 04/01/2008, -0/+1Nah, you'd just have to pay extra if you want to *remove* them. Actually, just like GameSpot.
  • jeriaemt, on 03/31/2008, -10/+35This is an example of how the free market works. If you don't like it don't buy it. The market will tell EA that this plan is a failure or a winner.
    • Sairgem, on 03/31/2008, -7/+13So you have absolutely no problem with this? You're gonna avoid having an opinion and hide behind "it's a free market!"?
      • nfs3freak, on 03/31/2008, -1/+11Naw I see what he's saying, the game won't do well with this concept anyway. Let's still take a stand and have our voice be heard and our disapproval as hardcore gamers and enthusiasts.
      • Ouze, on 03/31/2008, -10/+5/shrug - for how hard Digg rides Ron Paul's nuts, you'd think there would be more people down with how a free market actually works.
      • MrWhite7, on 03/31/2008, -2/+10He's saying people can express their "problem" by not buying the game... I'm amused that not buying something you don't want is considered a 'boycott' now.
        • Shaflugi, on 03/31/2008, -2/+9Is that not what a boycott has always been?
          • MutexDeadlocked, on 03/31/2008, -2/+5No usually a boycott refers to not purchasing something based on policy, even if you do want it.
          • popfrogs, on 03/31/2008, -2/+4No, you misunderstand. Typically, you boycott a product you *want* to buy. That teaches the company selling the product that they're losing out on sales for whatever reason started the boycott.
  • cannonball, on 03/31/2008, -1/+15Just another EA game that will collect dust on a shelf in Best Buy.
  • indiandudeo, on 03/31/2008, -2/+12Taken from one of the comments:
    EA: Bad Company
  • Ouze, on 03/31/2008, -5/+20I find your use of CAPITAL LETTERS for RANDOM WORDS to be QUESTIONABLE, personally.
    • Smills, on 03/31/2008, -0/+5At LeAsT It IsN't MySpAcE StYlE...
      • imdwalrus, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1ALL CAPITAL LETTERS WOULD BE ANNOYING TOO, probably.
    • Krazykorean530, on 03/31/2008, -1/+1I don't know who you're talking to but I luled regardless.
  • mitchography, on 03/31/2008, -1/+21New company vision
    EA..Insert Token Insert Token
  • Funpolice2050, on 03/31/2008, -33/+2Hey all I have to say is ***** YOU. If you dont like it dont buy it you pricks.
    • bjornski, on 03/31/2008, -0/+13Boy, living up to your name there are ya?
    • Nobi-Wan, on 03/31/2008, -0/+6Ah, I see we have some EA CEO's on Digg.
  • rick2k, on 03/31/2008, -2/+16Bad company sucks. I know its only beta ATM but the gameplay was just pure trash. GG EA. I wont buy it anyway.
  • supermanred, on 03/31/2008, -4/+37***** this game. I don't mind paying 2 bucks for say, a package of new maps (which took weeks to design and months to playtest) after the fact, but to pay for a ***** gun in a shooting game? Get real, EA.

    The good news is that once EA has really ***** up and gone ***** up, some of the smaller design houses can be reborn to make good games.

    Dear EA:

    $59.99 plus stupid micro transactions for things that should be included is BAD.

    $79.99 for a game, that's fine as long as everything is in the ***** game.

    Basically, charge us for the game. Not in bits and peices.
    • Mikhail101, on 03/31/2008, -0/+23im not paying 80 bucks for a game ***** that.

      50 bucks and everything is included.
      • Gizza, on 03/31/2008, -0/+3Here in Aus it is $90AU (~$80US) without everything included.
      • Nitrodist88, on 03/31/2008, -0/+2PC games have been at the $50 price point for at least the past decade. In 2000 they were priced at $50. If you take into account inflation, the price that you should be paying today should actually be in the $59-61 range -- an increase of 20%.
    • PurpleSfinx, on 03/31/2008, -0/+3Hey, at least you don't live in Australia. New AAA console games are $120 (~$110 US I believe), PLUS downloadable content.
      • arcooke, on 03/31/2008, -0/+3PC.
      • savantidiot, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1That is quite a lot for a game, what is the economic justification for that price?
        • Orion682, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1There is none...
          • savantidiot, on 04/01/2008, -0/+0I meant is there some sort of tariff on electronic imports or another equally silly reason? I'm too lazy to look it up. 120-110 a pop is so high I'd think people wouldn't pay. You'd be better off buying your girl a garment from a local shop (site NSFW but link is mostly SFW http://wickedweasel.com/info/ ) for that price.
    • web2pointYo, on 03/31/2008, -0/+2Well...what they actually should be doing is giving the game away for free, and charging 50c, 99c, 1.99 or whatever for upgrades, mods, maps, custom clothes etc (itunes model) . You would get some who would not buy anything, and others who would in the long run, end up paying much more than 59 bucks.
      And if they reaaaaally wanted to do it right, they would go with the business model that TV and Radio have been using for about 70 years...sell advertising. Nobody subscribed to or paid 59 bucks for "Friends". But somehow NBC made enough money off that through advertising to pay the people starring in it a Million dollars an episode.
  • snoox, on 03/31/2008, -37/+2you guys crack me up, whenever some company devises a new idea you all scream boycott!!! but you guys arent that organized, and are talking about your parents $ anyway
    • Cenobia, on 03/31/2008, -0/+8Wow, you're dumb. Just because you're 12 doesn't mean the internet is.
    • Krazykorean530, on 03/31/2008, -0/+2Lol if your not under 11 years old your probably a corporate tool, and fyi the internet isn't fond of either of those.
  • MrWhite7, on 03/31/2008, -20/+3I wonder how many people bitching are also demanding that the record industry "change its sales structure or be left behind."
    • Charlesbian, on 03/31/2008, -0/+6wow, those two are totally unrelated.

      Let's assume you are talking about wanting the industry to adopt a more micro-transaction oriented pricing structure. People wanting to buy one song instead of a whole album is COMPLETELY different than a videogame where buying one gun can dramatically effect not only your own playing experience but also everyone else's.

      I've been involved in games where microtransactions for better equipment exist. It really fooks balance and divides the player base, and in the end the community forces the company to balance around and ultimately nerf the 'premium items' anyways, AFTER the damage to the company's reputation and trust of the player base has been done.
      • MrWhite7, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1My point is the endeavor, not the success. People want implementation of new ideas, but never the eggs that are broken along the way.
    • Charlesbian, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1messing with balance is never ever a good idea however. EA's other battlefield game, battlefield heroes i believe its called, is charging microtransactions for COSMETIC changes, not new guns or abilities. In the previous game I mentioned, cosmetic changes are in high demand, and wouldnt change the balance at all.
  • tcardone05, on 03/31/2008, -18/+11Don't play it then.
    • dustin32, on 03/31/2008, -2/+19Uhhh... That's actually the point of this submission, in case you missed it. Boycott. It's right in the title.
    • StolenLamp, on 03/31/2008, -1/+8That is the weakest argument ever. You suck.
    • Forsakenmantra, on 03/31/2008, -0/+0Not to sound like a broken record, but that is the idea of a boycott. Also... you don't seem to understand snowball effect this is going to start if nothing is done about it. Sure now its buy extra guns, soon every game you buy will require you to pay a crap load of micro transactions out of the box. MADDEN '09 (not that I actually like madden) ... All NFL TEAMS (Superbowl teams 2.99 extra) and so on.
  • mbonzo531, on 03/31/2008, -5/+20EA doesn't care what you think, they're a monopoly... in fact they own that video game too.
    • MrESaulved, on 03/31/2008, -0/+7Actually Hasbro Interactive created the official Monopoly PC game, and Hasbro Interactive was sold to Infogrames in the early 2000's, after the trouble with Atari, Infogrames sold Hasbro Interactive's portfolio back to Hasbro in 2005.

      The point is, EA hasn't it's paws on Monopoly (I'm actually playing Monopoly right now and reading the stuff from the credits)
      • mitchlourens, on 03/31/2008, -1/+1what a fantastic coincidence.
        • MrESaulved, on 04/01/2008, -0/+1Or an elaborate lie. Can you tell the difference mitch?
  • kingUssop, on 03/31/2008, -1/+27The only thing scarier than EA are folks that defend EA... EA has always been just a slime pit looking to burn down any creative development house after taking all the franchised-to-death sales they can.
  • GarrettB, on 03/31/2008, -18/+1Ugh, everyone obviously didn't read the article...it's fake.
  • IamKrAzE, on 03/31/2008, -5/+1Mirror? :(
  • ch4os1337, on 03/31/2008, -3/+24I should mention that the guns you buy from the marketplace are actually worse then the guns you get for free but have to unlock, I am in the Closed-Beta.
    • s1mph0ny, on 03/31/2008, -11/+3Sorry, I have to bury you on account of epic fail. The mac logo doesn't belong anywhere near the word 1337.
      • Ovalteen, on 03/31/2008, -2/+6A Mac is just BSD with a nicer looking GUI. You can be just as 1337 with Macs as you can on any OS should you so desire. If anything it's Windows users who should have 1337 stripped from them. Any OS without a shell at least as good as bash out of the box = fail.
        Oh, and ***** EA (token statement to get back on topic).
  • IamKrAzE, on 03/31/2008, -8/+1http://duggmirror.com/gaming_news/Battlefield_Bad_ ...
  • Xanthan, on 03/31/2008, -0/+15http://youtube.com/watch?v=N2y8p2Na-Bo --direct link to the YouTube
  • Hetman, on 03/31/2008, -16/+1We live in a supply and demand economy. They do not change gameplay. Only idoits buy things that do not help them. If the grame is great it is not worth boycotting.
    • verifex, on 03/31/2008, -0/+10Make an expansion pack with it all in there. Don't nickel and dime people simply because you can.

      Hetman, you sound like a great candidate to try out this new concept for a grocery store. They charge you for 'renting' the shopping cart (0.25), charge you for access to the freshest produce (0.25), charge you for access to the freshest milk and meat (0.25) and then charge you again for going through the checkout line without waiting 30 minutes (0.25).
      • Nobi-Wan, on 03/31/2008, -1/+1I'd pay 25 cents if it's a 30 minute wait and I can have the option of skipping to the front. Especially on Thanksgiving.
  • IamKrAzE, on 03/31/2008, -5/+5http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2y8p2Na-Bo

    Direct link to video.
  • seraphimhunter, on 03/31/2008, -11/+1The only reason I dugg this is I enjoyed the video. Were you actually expecting EA to come out with an entirely free game after spending this much time and money on it? So what if you have to pay for everything individually? Instead of paying $60 for a game, and not using everything in it, I can pay $20 for a game, and use everything in it. It's saving people money.
    • mbonzo531, on 03/31/2008, -0/+6The game alone is $60, if you want to buy the "extra" content, which will change gameplay and perhaps give multiplayer benefits, then it will cost you an extra $20. $20 + $60 = $80.
      I guarentee after a couple weeks they will offer you some new maps and guns for only another $5 each...
    • WoollyMittens, on 03/31/2008, -0/+6You have to pay for the game.
      This is not Battlefield Heroes, their free-to-play webgame. This is about Battlefield: Bad Company, the xbox 360 game.
      • blake_mooney, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1seraphimhunter, are you ***** retarded? You are actually trying to defend this disgusting act from EA...?
  • dhVyse, on 03/31/2008, -0/+9***** E.A. and their shady ass way of running things.
  • JavertHolmes, on 03/31/2008, -1/+16The next Gran Turismo plans to do this as well. You get over 3,000 cars with the game itself, but pay $20 per gas pedal installed.
    • salvadorwii, on 03/31/2008, -0/+8you will pay 6.00$ per galon
    • popfrogs, on 03/31/2008, -0/+7Funny, but nowhere close to being true. Polyphony Digital would never do anything that shameful. You just gave EA another idea for the next Burnout though.
      • thanakar, on 03/31/2008, -0/+3You fail at identifying sarcasm....
  • munkeypantsman, on 03/31/2008, -4/+8I won't be buying it because the beta is awful. The framerate is choppy with lots of screen tearing, controls are sluggish and bad, weapons feel like they're firing BB's instead of bullets, and the touted destructible environments don't work all that well.

    Overall it's a huge downgrade from Battlefield 2 for PC.
    • nirav72, on 03/31/2008, -1/+1I haven't had any choppy performance on the 360 and destructible enviroments do work. I'm not sure what you were expecting. Maybe flatten entire villages in the game with a single bomb? I was actually quite impressed..first game I've see where they've done a great job with the destructible environment. It is totally chaotic. I guess my biggest issue was with the weapons and the map design. The maps should have been designed with more emphasis on squad tactics. So far the beta has been similar to Unreal tournament. Run and Gun. However, the controls are one nicely for once. I don't miss the keyboard and mouse much.

      However, I agree with you regarding the weapons. They need to seriously tweak those. Obviously nothing will compare to BF1942 or BF2 (including all the mods).
    • candyman420, on 03/31/2008, -2/+1do you judge everything before it is finished?
    • diggrim, on 04/01/2008, -0/+1A buggy Beta...what an interesting concept
  • jjones20, on 03/31/2008, -1/+9They really need to stop announcing things, or letting their DLC offerings leak. If the game came out, with a decent set of weapons, and it was entirely playable for the price people pay initially, then it'd be fine. Months down the road they could release a DLC pack and noone would complain (well, some die hard EA haters would). But instead they release info about how they will offer their DLC before the game is even out, which leads people to believe that they could have included some things in the game but were holding off to release it as DLC and nickel and dime people for guns.

    Ill hold off on the boycott as i actually want to play the game (didnt get into the beta), but i swear to god if i pay extra money for some DLC weapons and they're just re skins of ones already in the game, or even worse, THEY'RE ALREADY ON THE ***** DISK, ill punch myself in the dick and not only not buy Bad Company, i may never buy another EA developed or published game as long as i live.
    • StolenLamp, on 03/31/2008, -0/+3With the way things are going, we won't have a choice very soon.
    • vtnerd, on 03/31/2008, -0/+2If they did it the other way then everyone would complain that they wouldn't have bought the game if they had known they had to buy weapons down the road.
      In fact, it's already happened....BF2142 and the Northern Strike booster pack that included new weapons and abilities for those that chose to purchase it.
  • dhVyse, on 03/31/2008, -0/+22I'm never buying another EA game again after BF2. EVERY single piece of content was PAY. Not only that, that game had the WORST server browser in any game ever released. And they have YET to remedy it. It's pathetic really...
    • bjornski, on 03/31/2008, -0/+9I'd like to say that BF2 was the last EA game I ever plan to purchase, but I'm going to get Spore.

      As for the rest of their offerings? ***** 'em.
    • RidiculousHat, on 03/31/2008, -2/+6You seem ANGRY to the point that you are using CAPITAL LETTERS to express your UNSTOPPABLE RAGE.
      • wojci, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1I am just as angry as bjornski. I ***** hate EA games. After buying BF2 I decided never to buy from EA again, mostly because their software is unstable the first 6 months after release and also because using their game browser sucks so much.
        I mean if a server if full or have reserved slots, it does not automatically try to connect until there is room, it just tells you with an annoying pop-up that there is no room. Other games, like http://www.enemyterritory.com/, can do this.
    • DenRoedeBaron, on 03/31/2008, -0/+3Exactly. Don't bother to buy BF 2142 either. It's a lot of fun, but it really gets on your nerves because of the following:
      1) You can't skip the intro animation of EA's friggin logo without having to delete the video files from the disk.
      2) The server browser still sucks.
      3) The game's framerate is very inconsistent, meaning Titan maps are virutally unplayable, on a decent dual-core XP machine with low graphics settings applied..
      4) Bugs like pod-surfing still exist.
      5) Punkbuster!
      6) I still experience crashes and have had to reinstall the game a couple of times.
      Let the swedes finish the game before releasing it, ok?
    • tchynerd, on 03/31/2008, -0/+3Heh... I dare you to look at the server browser for the game Soldner.... now that was horrid. Took about 15-20 minutes to find a game that you could actually JOIN. (Soldner also had destructible environments but they were horrid)
  • drewcarey, on 03/31/2008, -4/+10"Bad Company!" Get it? Har har har...
  • dustout, on 03/31/2008, -4/+7earning weapons through experiance is bad enough, but paying for them is definatly something i'd never do

    ohh well, at least battlefield 1942 works in linux :P
  • WoollyMittens, on 03/31/2008, -0/+4We all knew something like this would happen when EA bought DICE. EA has exploited, neglected and then destroyed every franchise it has ever bought, going back to Westwood Studios (Command and Conquer).

    I just hope what usualy happens, happens. EA will murder the franchise, demanding cheaply made sequels. The talented developers will run away to new independent companies.
    • vtnerd, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1Not sure why everyone is up in arms this time.

      EA/DICE already did this with 2142 and the Northern Strike booster pack for PC. If you bought Northern Strike you got some sweet weapons and abilities that non-purchasers did not have.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 134 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.