Battlefield 3 Update Includes Paid "Shortcuts"

[Cowabungaa]

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.

Yes it does, because we players know how much it influences the game. You do not. And we players can tell you that these shortcuts do not influence the game in a negative way. We've seen this in Bad Company 2 already. Where's your argument against it except for "Well that's just my opinion."

 

[JoesshittyOs]

Am I the only one who got all the Co-Op weapons when they made that patch a few months back? Because I think that might have been a glitch.

 

[Therumancer]

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. 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.

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

Actually it does, because your looking at people getting perks they did not earn within the game. Someone getting something for mere money that someone else has to earn defeats the entire purpose of it being a reward for good play and committment.

Also, in reality most gaming, especially when it comes to shooters and such, does not generally involve "superman" going up against some complete scrub, though that does happen. For most players that are in the average catagory, access to more and better/more specialized guns with a higher chance of finding their ideal weapon can provide a decisive edge over a player that they would have been balanced against skillwise to begin with. Granted some scrub isn't going to be able to pwn the experts with thus stuff, but your typical player is going to have an edge against other players of his skill level who haven't spent the money.

Your right about STO to an extent, the ships are mostly an excuse to get the free players to donate money to the game. It's defended by the simple fact that nowadays you can convert dilithium into cryptic points, and Cryptic itself puts points up on the market for people to obtain that way. Your typical "free player" is limited to being able to refine 8000 dilithium a day, but with two characters who can make the 2000 cps needed to buy a top tier ship in a month of solid play and doing daily dilithium missions. Paid players wind up getting no limits on dilithium refinement, and receive 400 cps per month their account is active.

Don't get me wrong it's a borked system, but it's also not making pretensions of having a level playing field based around skill, as it's quite frank about there being "levels" of players with differant perks and ease of play. If you play STO you sign up for that, as opposed to this apparently being added into B3 well after launch despite other EA games having done it. Had B3 launched with this active and announced this system before the game came out (which does not seem to be the case) I'd have a somewhat differant attitude about it.

I do play STO casually and have given them a bit of money, indeed it's one of the only FTP games I've supported (and I have my reasons beyond the gameplay advantages which I won't go into since it would be increasingly off subject). The thing is I knew what I was signing up for, and truthfully if it wasn't for the dilithium exchange they probably wouldn't have gotten me to stick around even to the extent that I play. When it comes to B3 the fact that this is being annouced now, makes it pretty clear that this wasn't part of the package when most of the players started... and that's a big part of why I think it's ridiculous.

 

[Therumancer]

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.

Yes it does, because we players know how much it influences the game. You do not. And we players can tell you that these shortcuts do not influence the game in a negative way. We've seen this in Bad Company 2 already. Where's your argument against it except for "Well that's just my opinion."

That is my opinion, just as what your saying is your opinion, you don't speak for anyone other than yourself. Trying to make pretensions of speaking for a group just makes you look silly in cases like this.

 

[Doclector]

I don't have a problem with this. It's not as if you HAVE to pay to unlock certain things, and the price seems fairly steep for people who want to take the easy route, and besides, these newer players with high level kit ain't gonna be experienced with it. In a fairly tactical, hardcore online shooter like BF3, that makes all the difference.

 

[CCountZero]

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

As far as "funding the war effort goes" cute line, but in the end people already paid $60 for this. This is an example of the industry getting too greedy, with the greed undermining the integrity of the games.

I don't fully agree with that assessment.

I started out in the Beta, and then the Alpha. I played the unfinished multiplayer so much pre-release that I needed a break when it was actually released.

That meant that I came in about a month later than everyone else, and I can only say that some of those unlocks are a huge pain to acquire when everyone else on the battlefield already has them.

A great example is for the planes, 'cus if you don't have Stealth, you will be shot down by AA missiles before your manage a kill, and it has only gotten worse for newbies since then.

I can sorta follow the line of thinking that you unlock the items as you learn the game, but it actually does take a very, very long time to unlock some of these things, and you will certainly have learned what needs to be learned long before you unlock the last item in any of the progression trees.

Calling it "Pay to Win", when it's only really useful for new players coming in, seems somewhat ignorant to me, I have to admit.

At least, I know I've been in places, both when I started out in BF3, but certainly also in other games, where this sort of thing would have added to the enjoyment quite a bit, while not really making a difference for other players.


------------------------------------------------------------------

Also, what the hell is up with everyone going "OMG!!! F2P!!! 4Shame EA! /cry"

Paying for this is not gonna make your performance better. Are some weapons arguably better than others in the same class? Sure. But it's still 85% skill + 10% weapon familiarity + 5% actual weapon that makes that happen. The weapons themselves are such a tiny part of the equation.

And as I said above, theres a huge difference between it being an option now, or at release. At release, I would have been up in arms, surely, but right now we have everyone and their mums running around with all of this stuff anyway, which means it's only really useful as a shoe-in for new players. I don't see the harm.

 

[CCountZero]

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 handful of basic weapons, to earn your variant and specialized weapons, someone not having to pay the same dues, and just getting the payoff and step in with equivalent 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.

As far as I can see, your whole "status symbol" issue is taken care of. First of all, having all weapons in BF3 is not a status symbol, but rather the "mastery" dog-tag unlocks are, as well as your experience level. Both of those won't be affected by this.

The foot-soldier equipment is only gonna have a very small effect on game balance. A bad players with a huge gun is still gonna get decimated.

Some of the vehicle unlocks are downright necessary to start using vehicles at this point, as without them you will be killed long before you have a chance to get unlock points. That's sort of a broken system, and there are better ways to fix that, but at least this is a way to get around it for whomever really wants to fly those planes so bad.

About the whole "defeats the point of the competition", you're kinda looking at it wrong. The competition isn't and has never been about the unlocks. Just look at the scores, and who wins. Who has what weapons and how they got them shouldn't be an issue, unless those weapons aren't obtainable for you.

Honestly, I don't wanna instigate anything, but that part just made it sound like you have low self esteem and vanity issues.

 

[Dastardly]

I'm glad I'm not invested in it. 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.

As far as "funding the war effort goes" cute line, but in the end people already paid $60 for this. This is an example of the industry getting too greedy, with the greed undermining the integrity of the games.

Of course it really doesn't surprise me, it's the same basic thing EA is doing with ME3's muliplayer, except without the randomization inherant in the packs.

It's really good to notice EA listening to it's fans, especially seeing as that was part of what all the bile over ME3 is about. The paid multiplayer being connected to the ending dispute because to even see all of the crap ending you need to do it, and they are selling the same kind of "shortcuts" for real money which amounts to having monetized the ending.

In this case, I don't see "pay to win." People who are just now getting the game, logging in to play, and getting stomped aren't having much fun. I've been "that guy" in plenty of games like that. The problem? After awhile, new people just stop coming, and the game slowly becomes a ghost town without new blood.

You've got plenty of vets that really want new people to play with/against. And you've got other vets that... what? Want new people to join the game, but spend the first few weeks as easy targets to pad the vets' kill scores?

Now, when I first read the title, I thought this was going to be about some kind of shortcuts through the map that would only be accessible to those that buy them. That would be "pay to win," for sure.

 

[Dogstile]

Tough shit, everybody else had to do it the same way and they should too... fair play and all, I couldn't care less about how much they "value their time", maybe they shouldn't be playing then?

I hear you. Man, I don't get why people would even think about being casual gamers. What's the point of even playing a game if you're not going to practice at least 12 hours a day on it? They're what's killing competitive gaming.

I think you messed up the quotes.

Either that or the man is being sarcastic. I kinda got that vibe.

OT: Eh, I could care less, I stuck to my boycott of not paying for any game EA put's stupid requirements on. I'll just ask a friend for a copy down the line instead if i really want to play it.

 

[Amnestic]

I dont see a problem with this.

So long as all the content in the packs can be unlocked normally, its a nice grey middle ground.

if this content that can be "unlocked through normal play" was "end game" level gear in another game...like say WoW...you'd see the problem all right...it would probably crash the internet...or at the very least Blizzards web server.

as for the server rentals thing...kinda sickened that its come to this tbh

Logical fallacy. Try harder

really ? which one ?

not that i care after the "try harder" remark.

ah, to be a teenager before you realised "logic" was bullshit...

It's fallacious because it's a false equivalency. In WoW, the endgame items are demonstrably better than other items. An Experimental Specimen Slicer is quite clearly better than a Pit Lord's Destroyer. A Dragonwrath, Tarecgosa's Rest is better than a Ti'tahk. A Maw of the Dragonlord is better than a Scepter of Azshara. There's no two ways about it. That's just how it is.

In BF3, it's more of a matter of taste and feel. (In theory) The guns should all be pretty much equal to one another, whereas in WoW that's quite clearly not the case.

Check out the Best in Slot (BiS) list for WoW and then try to find an equivalent, vetted and generally agreed upon list for BF3. I can almost guarantee that no such list exists.

 

[ShindoL Shill]

Have they fixed the bugs yet?
Like, being unable to connect, freezing and not having a gun?
No, seriously. Are they going to fix the game or just shove more crap in it?

 

[Kungfu_Teddybear]

Completely pointless considering some of the stuff you start off with are still some of the best weapons you can get.

-cough- M16A4 -cough-

 

[Megacherv]

Mneh, I've seen this sort of stuff before, and I think it's alright. They're not selling a permanent advantage, and it's only going to help people who are A) Lazy and will probably stop playing in a short while or B) people who don't have much time to play.

So yeah, go them...

 

[Mr Pantomime]

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.

Tribes Ascend also has Jetpacks and Skiing. Thats whats most important really.

But id have to agree. Systems like this have been in place for years in the free to play scene. The idea really is that people value their time more than their money, and so will pay to unlock things that would otherwise require time investment. Ive played 55 hours of Bad Company 2, and Im only level 15 out of 50. If theres a weapon I want, I want it now, and would probably pay a dollar or two for it rather than playing for 10 hours just to try it.

 

[natster43]

They did it with Bad Company 2, they also threw in extra costumes with some of the shortcuts, so I don't care if they do it in 3. If people want to get weapons by paying, go ahead, I'll just keep playing the game to get my stuff.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

If people are dumb enough to pay for this let them.

Although knowing EA their next attempt will be selling a shooter with only one weapon and then setting up an online marketplace with all the different weapons for you to spend your hard earn money on.

This is the kind of stuff that could potentially set a dangerous precedent. And it's what video game journalists should discuss.

 

[Vrach]

Battlefield is really mostly designed to be playable without any unlocks, especially infantry wise (all vehicle unlocks are beneficial). What you get with unlocks is more utility and less advantage, most things you get have a downside as well as an upside.

And considering how long the game's been out, even the most casual BF3 player could've unlocked most, if not all things by now. This just allows new people to jump right in and be able to play with what they want. It's also very much not necessary for the most part, as getting weapons gradually will let you try them out gradually rather than be forced to choose from a billion of them (along with all the following upgrades).

All in all, don't really care. What I'm wondering is why this is only available on the PS3.

 

[Leyvin]

I'm glad I'm not invested in it. 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.

As far as "funding the war effort goes" cute line, but in the end people already paid $60 for this. This is an example of the industry getting too greedy, with the greed undermining the integrity of the games.

Of course it really doesn't surprise me, it's the same basic thing EA is doing with ME3's muliplayer, except without the randomization inherant in the packs.

It's really good to notice EA listening to it's fans, especially seeing as that was part of what all the bile over ME3 is about. The paid multiplayer being connected to the ending dispute because to even see all of the crap ending you need to do it, and they are selling the same kind of "shortcuts" for real money which amounts to having monetized the ending.

While I have BF3 on Xbox 360, the fact that this was only done for PS3 and not the other two platforms makes me think that perhaps PlayStation owners don't really give a toss about Battlefield 3.

Personally with the exception of that god damn USAS with Frag Rounds; it is a fairly "solid" multiplayer experience... even if the icons, crosshairs, parts of the map disappaear and you can effortlessly leap from tall buildings but hope over a 6" high kurb entails several attempts followed by an odd insta-death, plus there are some issues with tank audio disappearing allowing them to 'sneak' up on you... etc, etc, etc... well I never said it wasn't a buggy game, but it is fun.

It also doesn't actually take that long to unlock everything. Seriously, I'm not exactly Mr. Awesome McHeadshot at the game, but took me about 3 Days (72 hours) to unlock all of the weaponry even the B2K ones which are a ***** because of certain requirements. In real life time this took me about 3 months, which is easily done on the weekends off and made much more entertaining with friends who also happen to own the game and constantly ask you to play.

This all said though, generally speaking I still prefer most of the starter weapons and a couple of the B2K ones which are some of the quickest to unlock if you grind away at the assignments. There are no truely "You will own once you unlock this.." weapon, if you're a Call of Duty person shedding tears for Noobtubes; simply kill 30 people with any shotgun, unlock frag rounds then play on Sienne or Metro Conquest; I guarentee you will finish with a positive K/D and level up a damn sight quicker.

It's the same if you focus on objectives and simply thrown down ammo/heal or heal tanks constantly. The game honestly rewards people who are total pussies and don't want to really get involved.

There have been more than a few games where I have gone 30-5 yet some fucker who is 0-0 or 0-10 has beat me by a massive margin for game MVP because he was stood behind everyone reviving them and throwing out heats as if they were tic-tacs.

Point being here that really these packs are totally unnecessary, and those who feel the need to purchase them should probably stop playing an FPS; and try something easier like LittleBigPlanet. I dunno, as I said this feels an awful lot like they're trying to encourage more PS3 players to actually bother playing the game with the promise of all these "super weapons" which realistically might get people to play for a little longer but it is little more than a plaster solution.

 

[Wicky_42]

I dont see a problem with this.

So long as all the content in the packs can be unlocked normally, its a nice grey middle ground.

This man gets it. It's not "pay to win", it's "my time is more valuable than this" (as the title says, shortcuts). Some people (like me) need the progression and unlocks as a draw to continue with the game (when unlocks in TF2 went random I suddenly lost interest in it...), but others just want to play with all the options. Thats fine - especially since I expect that, as with other BF games, the starting guns actually turn out to be hella good once you get accustomed to the game.