Battlefield 3 Update Includes Paid "Shortcuts"

[Therumancer]

I know players are going to complain about this but I really don't see how this is a problem. I don't see any difference between the game being imbalanced because of spent time playing or just spending money to gain that advantage.

It's like this, if I spend 100 hours or more gradually building up my arsenal of weapons and unlocks, putting in a lot of time and effort, it utterly sucks if some rich kid can walk up, swipe daddy's credit card, and get everything I worked for without having to put in the effort.

All game balance issues aside, having this stuff is a status symbol, having a top tier unlock means you did a lot to earn it. It's cheapened if anyone who want to spend a few bucks can have it too, it's no longer a sign of an accomplishment and mastery of the game.

What's more if you worked your way up from a handfull of basic weapons, to earn your varient and specialized weapons, someone not having to pay the same dues, and just getting the payoff and step in with equivilent gear and options also sucks.

Part of the point of a competitive game is that by playing and sticking with it, or dominating it with skill, you are going to be outright better than other players, when people no longer have to earn that stuff it defeats part of the entire point of the competition.

You make it sound like skill and gaming ability have nothing to do with winning.

Perhaps, but they have even less to do with it when someone can just buy all the perks.

My basic attitude is that skill and gaming abillity do figure into it, but so does simple persistance, and truthfully I think persistance is the key to success for most people since in the end only a few people are ever going to really be on top. What's more persistance and practice is how people tend to develop the skills.

As odd as it sounds, I think being a newb and having to fight past that is part of what helps people develop skill, in any type of game, and if they don't ever become skilled, they at least tend to learn patience and how to follow directions and support better players.

 

[Joccaren]

Honestly, IDGAF about this. The first few games are pretty crap until you get some good equipment, and evening the odds is a nice idea - even if you do have to pay. You're not sacrificing anything by not paying, you're just less likely to enjoy your first few matches than someone who pays more. It doesn't disrupt game balance - hell, it actually helps preserve it really - and it doesn't add any unobtainable content. Really, I see nothing wrong with this. Now, if they then added new guns to these packs that were only available by buying these - then I'd have a problem - but this is the sort of microtransaction done in other games these days too. Those willing to pay get a headstart, but others will always catch up to them simply by playing the games.

 

[R0cklobster]

I definitely don't feel all that comfortable about this. That being said, I don't necessarily think that this sort of thing shouldn't be done, it's just that it seems like something that would need to have a very fine equilibrium between how much time it takes to unlock things, what you get for your money etc. Going slightly too far either could very well end in quite an uproar. However, if someone wants to pay to get somewhere quicker, then I guess that that could/should be an option?

 

[R0cklobster]

Just as a sidenote: it's still the job of the dev team to make sure that the game is still relatively balanced, irrespective of what level people are at. In my experience, games that don't do this very well don't really seem to get that much traction either way.

 

[Gardenia]

as I've been up for 26 hours and counting, I don't really want to read all the comments, so I'll just say this: I'm ok with it. Why? Well because it doesn't matter! As the Assault class, you start out with the M16A4 on the US side (correct me if I'm wrong). That's a perfectly good weapon. Mostly all of them are! Now to get your heavy barrel, foregrip and scope, you need 30 kills with this weapon. Thirty. You can manage that in 2 rounds of rush if you're halfway decent. The specializations take a little more time, but most people carry squad specializations now, so it won't really hurt in any meaningful way. And who the fuck cares enough about camouflage to pay money for it?

If you buy this just to unlock the mortar though, I will find you and fart in your mouth as you sleep.

 

[mezorin]

Was happy to finally get everything for all four classes unlocked playing the game as usual, and you know what? This pack is not the end of the world. If anything, it gives the newbie who picks up the game right now a fighting chance against people who have been grinding for five months.

If you picked up a brand new copy of BF3 and put it into the PS3 right now, you would get horribly destroyed. While the "default" gear is all right, some of the higher tier guns and abilities are needed to participate in the high level meta-game. See: Recon MAV, Assault Grenade launcher, Support Claymores/Mortars, and Engineer SAM missiles/EOD bot.

Note that people who were in on the game day 1 were fighting other people who were day 1, so they were on even footing. At this point, the people who are "new" are far outweighed by "the vets" who have all their gear by this point. Mister elite level 50 right now had a much easier grind "back in the day" than the newb just playing his first game tonight because of this. I know I'm glad I got my classes all unlocked back in November rather than today.

I agree with the notion that this is a cynical money grab on EA's part though, as the ideal solution would be to make the class unlock leveling grind smoother, and the weapons better balanced. It still won't help that you actually have to get good at the game and learn the maps though. But in all honesty I can't blame a guy for wanting to pay five bucks to have a jet or chopper with flares/stealth/rocket pods day 1.

 

[Dandark]

Oh look. EA is trying to make BF3 multiplayer use a free to play model, except they are still charging £40 for it. Yep, im glad I didn't buy this game. Im actully kinda surprised I don't like this, the reason I didn't buy it was because of the unlocking crap so this should make me happy if anything, it's just that this is the same thing free to play games do, except they are free. I really can't see this as anything other than EA being greedy.

Tribes: Ascend has a similar system and I don't really have a problem with that game, so why would I have a problem with this? Hell, in T:A you have entire classes locked until you either get a good chunk of experience or purchase it for a few bucks. However, the base 3 classes are also all quite good at the roles they do (flag capture for pathfinder, all around for soldier/ base defense for juggernaut.), however, everything is still all available for unlocking in game, it just takes a lot more time. However, from experience, those who are still at a higher rank are typically a LOT better than those who are of lower rank, even if both players have everything unlocked.

If BF3 is even slightly similar to TA these shortcuts shouldn't be gamebreaking.

Paying for a custom server though, is bull.

The difference is that Tribes: Ascend is a free to play game. As in you didn't have to pay £40 to buy it.

 

[LiquidSolstice]

This might actually be a problem if having the all the guns actually meant a goddamn shit as far as your skill goes . Calm down, people.

You could do this in BC2 as well, it didn't break the game. The idiots that buy these shortcut packs thinking they'll have the upper edge won't have a clue on what is better than what, and will struggle to get acquainted with how shooting feels and how weapons handle in BF3.

 

[LiquidSolstice]

Perhaps, but they have even less to do with it when someone can just buy all the perks.

They're not perks. This isn't Call of Duty. They're guns and equipment/camo. Each gun is balanced out by another gun. Each Spec is cancelled by another. You're not buying your way to winning games, you're buying your way through the upgrade tree.

If you suck, you aren't going to do any better because you have the extended Mag and Squad Sprint or something...

 

[LiquidSolstice]

Oh look. EA is trying to make BF3 multiplayer use a free to play model, except they are still charging £40 for it. Yep, im glad I didn't buy this game.

I like people who decide what a game is like and then state they didn't buy it. Drink your kool-aid, then, go on...

 

[LiquidSolstice]

Battlefield 3 is a well known game and pop culture phenomena like CoD, you can't follow gaming like I do without gaining some familiarity with it.

"I've never actually played this game but I've read about it so it's basically the same thing."

I'm sorry, did you even read this bit that you typed? Battlefield is not political news. You don't "follow it" and gain familiarity with it. You either play the goddamn game and know what you're talking about or you accept that you have not played it and therefore are not qualified to pass judgements on its addons and accessories.

 

[getoffmycloud]

What does it matter to you where I got my weapons?

Are you unhappy because you can't just kick the piss out of the new players now because they have a way to even the playing field? These packs are not giving them an advantage, these are the same exact weapons that you get.

To go with your chess analogy:
-A player started in November has the full board
-A player starting right now has pawns (seriously, we don't get shit in the beginning)

I just don't see how anyone could possibly see this as a bad thing. You're getting a bunch of new players in the game, some new blood, and allowing them the option to put themselves even with the players who have been playing since November.

I've actually not played BF3 since somewhere when they introduced Back to Karkand, also I've been playing it on PC where this doesn't seem to be available.
It's just the idea that people can basically pay money to cheat themselves to the top that is baffling, every single player so far started at the bottom and worked his way up and that's how it should work. If they wanted to give "everyone a fair chance" they should've designed their game differently without Unlocks, like Counter Strike or Unreal Tournament or whatnot or made them much faster to get.
What they are doing is selling power, pure and simple.

They might be selling the best weapons but if you put a bunch of new player with all the weapons against a bunch of players who started playing in November and gave them only the starting weapons the experienced players will win because battlefield is designed so the team that plays the best wins not like COD where the team with the best weapons and kill streaks wins.

 

[Aeonknight]

Yeah, the power to absolutely destroy new players should remain firmly in the hands of those who worked the hardest to get that power. And if you destroy them hard enough, they'll never have a chance to catch up with you. That way, they quit playing and don't become competition for you later.

You're right of course, my bad... that power should go solely to the people with the most money to spend, not the people who played the game for months to unlock everything... where was my mind?
If you have a problem with the way the game is designed, then you have a problem with the way the game is designed, but that doesn't justify selling power for money.

Last I checked the gun didn't make the player. You can give them "ubergun2000" but if they don't know wtf they're doing it's not going to make a difference.

the same goes for vehicles. In fact it makes more sense for those. Example: Jet combat. I don't see a new pilot being able to do a damn thing to someone with Air Radar/Extinguishers/etc. They'd be lucky to get any points in the jet period without flares to save their ass from stingers/heat seekers. This gives them a means of playing on somewhat even ground, just without the experience to back it up.

I'm not going to say it's not a sort of money grab, but it does make the game more approachable to people who didn't get in on the ground floor. That's never a bad thing for extending the game's life span. Maybe EA is banking on trying to pick up a few burnt out CoD players looking for something new. Can't blame them for trying, but I seriously doubt I'm going to get my shit kicked in by a noob just cause he's packing a USAS-12 now.

 

[Cowabungaa]

I detest "pay to win" mechanics of this sort, it undermines the entire point of putting in the time and mastery and ultimatly winds up giving the rich an advantage.

Except that no exclusive, superior content is made available for customers who pay extra, which is what Pay2Win means. Star Trek Online is a great example of it, as they sell superior ships solely for real money, you can't get them any other way. BF3 doesn't do that, hence no Pay2Win.

Not to mention that buying those high level guns doesn't buy you gameplay experience, which is very important in a shooter. BF3 isn't as dependent on good stats or gear as an MMO is, not even nearly. A beginner wielding a high-level rifle is still going to get his ass kicked by a veteran using a low-level gun.

Is it a greedy and pretty lame move? Yeah. Does it hurt your gameplay experience and put the non-paying customer back? No.

 

[Therumancer]

Battlefield 3 is a well known game and pop culture phenomena like CoD, you can't follow gaming like I do without gaining some familiarity with it.

"I've never actually played this game but I've read about it so it's basically the same thing."

I'm sorry, did you even read this bit that you typed? Battlefield is not political news. You don't "follow it" and gain familiarity with it. You either play the goddamn game and know what you're talking about or you accept that you have not played it and therefore are not qualified to pass judgements on its addons and accessories.

Incorrect, Battlefield 3 is similar enough to other games that I have played where it's handfull of tweaks and changes hardly put it into truely alien territory. None of it's concepts are paticularly original, and I understand what your trying to say entirely, I just happen to disagree with you.

All attempts to argue with me are pretty much invalidated by the simple fact that the unlocks are functional rewards people work to unlock, and are seen as worthwhile bonuses which is why people pursue them. It is wrong for someone who has not done the work to be able to obtain the perks by paying real money... period.

I understand you disagree with me, but at least get it right, that's a matter of your opinion, not some kind of absolute fact reinforced by my ignorance.

If these purchuses did nothing for those buying them, there wouldn't be a market out there for EA to exploit by making them availible. It doesn't matter how much YOU think they don't influance the game, the entire point of the sale is that they do, which is why people purchuse the shortcuts.

 

[Fasckira]

Nothing new here, EA did the same to NFS The Run - you could buy an unlock pack that unlocked all the cars, avatars and backgrounds. I personally dislike it and would never use it myself but I know a lot of people bought it.