BF3 Premium Bait and Switch

  • 53 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Edited by Seppli (10251 posts) -

Update: EA clarified - there will be new weapons in the two remaining BF Premium expansions, just as initially advertised.
 
The German Gamestar magazine has an article up about an apparent upcoming bait and switch, which EA seems to be pulling on BF3 Premium customers. Up to a couple of days ago, Premium has been advertised with 'new weapons' for the final two pieces of DLC, namely Aftermath and Endgame.

If this will turn out to be true, that'd be seriously fucked up. Guess that's the kind of shit, why EA doesn't allow paying customers to class action lawsuit their asses anymore (via EULA). Guess EA just doesn't care anymore. They are already voted in as 'the worst' company in America - so why not be even worse.

Anyways - just wanted to let you guys know, EA is pulling a fast one on us. Shitstorm anyone?

Somebody call Patrick 'Scoops' Klepek - there's some investigative journalism to be had...
#2 Posted by runnah555 (148 posts) -

Yet I get blasted when I say DLC is a scam and shit like this just proves it.

#3 Posted by mosdl (3228 posts) -

People buy premium for the maps...

#4 Posted by Seppli (10251 posts) -

@runnah555 said:

Yet I get blasted when I say DLC is a scam and shit like this just proves it.

The value proposition for BF3 Premium is insanely awesome, even without the promised weapons - nonetheless, fucked up shit's fucked up.

Do you really want to make me hate you - EA? Did I ever do anything but love you? *cry*

#5 Edited by Seppli (10251 posts) -

@mosdl said:

People buy premium for the maps...

...then don't advertise with 'new weapons' in advance, and then pull them willy-nilly. And I very much enjoy new weapons. Pretty much got 200-500 kills with every gun in that game.

I bought and paid for those weapons up front, is how I see it - which makes this thievery. Not that I'm crazy upset or anything. Just think it's a nasty piece of business.

#6 Edited by Chtasm (448 posts) -

This is an example of why EA gets no more of my precious monies.

#7 Posted by TheHT (11155 posts) -

In fairness, is does say "and more!" so there could very well still be new weapons, but they just want to advertise the new game modes.

#8 Edited by bushpusherr (778 posts) -

The game is already massively cluttered with redundant weapons. What other weapons could you possibly ask for that would actually add any new value gameplay wise?

#9 Posted by MariachiMacabre (7077 posts) -

If they advertised the new weapons it doesn't fucking matter if people bought Premium for the maps or that there are already a lot of weapons. They advertised new weapons for premium so they should have to deliver what they promised. People have already paid for the content so removing things from said content that were promised is fucked up.

#10 Posted by Hunkulese (2702 posts) -

You want to file a class action lawsuit over this?

#11 Posted by zombie2011 (4972 posts) -

Why does no one blame DICE for this? It's always EA's fault apparently.

#12 Posted by ShaggE (6427 posts) -

@bushpusherr said:

What other weapons could you possibly ask for that would actually add any new value gameplay wise?

BFG. Chainsaw cannon. Lemon juice water gun. Hand-cranked face grinder. An angry puppy.

#13 Posted by AhmadMetallic (18955 posts) -

lol weapons

#14 Posted by Lukeweizer (2655 posts) -

There's probably some fineprint that you clicked OK to that says "DLC can change without notice and you can't sue us."

#15 Posted by bushpusherr (778 posts) -

@ShaggE said:

@bushpusherr said:

What other weapons could you possibly ask for that would actually add any new value gameplay wise?

BFG. Chainsaw cannon. Lemon juice water gun. Hand-cranked face grinder. An angry puppy.

I had assumed I didn't need to add the additional clause that stated the weapons should fit with the modern military theme already in place.

I would still use the shit out of those weapons, though.

#16 Posted by Crixaliz (782 posts) -

@TheHT said:

In fairness, is does say "and more!" so there could very well still be new weapons, but they just want to advertise the new game modes.

Agreed. I doubt they would do a 'bait and switch'

#17 Posted by Ravenlight (8040 posts) -

@ShaggE said:

@bushpusherr said:

What other weapons could you possibly ask for that would actually add any new value gameplay wise?

BFG. Chainsaw cannon. Lemon juice water gun. Hand-cranked face grinder. An angry puppy.

I promise to purchase BF3 if those weapons make it into the game.

#18 Edited by ShaggE (6427 posts) -

@bushpusherr said:

@ShaggE said:

@bushpusherr said:

What other weapons could you possibly ask for that would actually add any new value gameplay wise?

BFG. Chainsaw cannon. Lemon juice water gun. Hand-cranked face grinder. An angry puppy.

I had assumed I didn't need to add the additional clause that stated the weapons should fit with the modern military theme already in place.

You didn't. The point of the joke was non-military themed weapons. I had assumed that my suggestions were ridiculous enough to make that clear.

#19 Posted by bushpusherr (778 posts) -

@ShaggE said:

@bushpusherr said:

@ShaggE said:

@bushpusherr said:

What other weapons could you possibly ask for that would actually add any new value gameplay wise?

BFG. Chainsaw cannon. Lemon juice water gun. Hand-cranked face grinder. An angry puppy.

I had assumed I didn't need to add the additional clause that stated the weapons should fit with the modern military theme already in place.

You didn't. The point of the joke was non-military themed weapons. I had assumed that my suggestions were ridiculous enough to make that clear.

I thought as much, but you don't have to look far to find statements more ridiculous from sincere people. :)

#20 Posted by S0ndor (2716 posts) -

All I see in this thread is a bunch of melodrama. Much ado about nothing.

#21 Posted by mlarrabee (2929 posts) -

That could be just rethinking the marketing. I've no interest in new weapons for B3, but new game modes, sure.

They could have swapped "New Game Modes" and "New Weapons" out of "And More!"

Let's not get our pitchforks until we find out for certain whether or not new weapons are included.

#22 Edited by ArtelinaRose (1850 posts) -

@mlarrabee said:

That could be just rethinking the marketing. I've no interest in new weapons for B3, but new game modes, sure.

They could have swapped "New Game Modes" and "New Weapons" out of "And More!"

Let's not get our pitchforks until we find out for certain whether or not new weapons are included.

Basically. I feel like this is a bad case of jumping the gun.

#23 Posted by ShaggE (6427 posts) -

@bushpusherr: I'm not saying I'm not sincere. I truly want angry puppies to become the new standard in military shooters. :P Corgi combat. Dachshund demolition. Terrier terrorists. Beagle bloodshed. Maltese mayhem. Volpino violence. Other animal alliteration.

#24 Edited by Cronus42 (275 posts) -

I think the real issue here is that it's technically false advertising. And none of the bullshit Mass Effect 3 drama false advertising. Anyone who bought premium bought it under the perks detailed on the site. Someone could argue that they bought premium because they just can't get enough guns, and look it said MOAR GUNS right there when he bought it. I'm no lawyer, but in the real world, if you bought a full set of silverware from somewhere, and they only sent spoons because everything else didn't get done, that seems like a pretty clear cut case. I realize its a video game and development makes things change all the time, but this is as far as people can tell an unannounced change, so it just seems super shady.

I agree some of it is blown out of proportion, but it's still a dick move. And hey, I bought premium, I like new guns, so yea it kinda irks me if they really are just dropping that. But like it's been said, guns might still be there and someone just decided this looks more appealing.

Online
#25 Edited by big_jon (5723 posts) -

I don't really get it, I already think premium was a bit of a waste of money though, I already had to buy Karkand, after paying 70$ for the game, then paid 50 for four map packs, and Armoured kill, the one I was supposed to like, is an unbalanced mess.

EA already went wrong in so many ways with this game, this small "issue" is making something out of virtually nothing. There are far bigger issues like It pisses me off that this unpolished half piece of shit game even launched the way that it did. Almost everything outside of the basic gunplay and infantry combat is fucking bad in this game when compared to BFBC2, that is not something to be proud of yet this fucking game STILL sold better.

I literally have 40,000 kills in this game and I wonder why when so many things about it are just bad in my eyes, i guess the infantry combat is just good, and there are no other Multiplayer games that am into that have come out since, I think Halo 4 will make me say no more to BF3 though, at least for the most part.

#26 Edited by Seppli (10251 posts) -

@rebgav said:

@Seppli said:

I bought and paid for those weapons up front, is how I see it - which makes this thievery. Not that I'm crazy upset or anything. Just think it's a nasty piece of business.

Did they promise new weapons for these packs before you paid for the premium pass?

Regardless, stuff gets cut from releases all the time. Imagine if you'd pre-ordered Mass Effect based on the E3 2006 demo (yeah, I'm aware that it's not the same thing - "plans change" is all I'm saying.)

Yeah they did advertise it so. And it's not quite the same thing as pre-ordering an as of yet unreleased game. The whole pay-upfront for your Season Pass deal builds on trust. Betraying your word on what content you'll deliver, that's a breach of trust that'll damage your brand - at the very least. It's borderline criminal in my eyes.

Nothing's official yet, maybe it's nothing, and those weapons are still in the package, as promised. If not, then they truely wanted to pull a fast one on us. Fuck me - is what's going on. At the very least I'd expect some transparancy on what's going on. Maybe selling 800k+ of BF3 Premium wasn't enough to warrant the asset production cost for new guns.

Guess it's expecting way too much, when I think a EA should be more classy about such a thing - which is simply impossible - with EA being a publicly traded company, with a brass that has to keep face and push shareholder value at every turn. What a nightmare.

#27 Posted by TooWalrus (13178 posts) -

There's probably something in the thing you signed saying they can change it whenever they want.

#28 Posted by MB (12281 posts) -

@S0ndor said:

All I see in this thread is a bunch of melodrama. Much ado about nothing.

Couldn't agree with you more, dude.

Beyond that, I hope Giant Bomb doesn't do a story about this - because there isn't a story. All I see is some people with a sense of entitlement and their finger on the trigger to lash out at EA at the first and earliest opportunity over nothing whenever it presents itself.

Moderator
#29 Posted by Dagbiker (6974 posts) -

@bushpusherr said:

The game is already massively cluttered with redundant weapons. What other weapons could you possibly ask for that would actually add any new value gameplay wise?

The Gravity gun, Portal gun, a gun that shots Shurikins make of lightning?

#30 Edited by Seppli (10251 posts) -

@MB said:

@S0ndor said:

All I see in this thread is a bunch of melodrama. Much ado about nothing.

Couldn't agree with you more, dude.

Beyond that, I hope Giant Bomb doesn't do a story about this - because there isn't a story. All I see is some people with a sense of entitlement and their finger on the trigger to lash out at EA at the first and earliest opportunity over nothing whenever it presents itself.

If you fork over 60 bucks for a code-in-a-box, with the aforementioned weapons being specifically mentioned as content - and then that box doesn't actually contain that content in the long-run, then that's something. Not the most heinous crime ever, but it's fishy, uncool and as far from classy a move as you can make.

It's speculation as of now, but given EA's track record, the lingering and semi-vocal mistrust is warranted. At the very least, Premium customers are entitled to know what's going on. Gamestar is the biggest PC-gaming centric publication in the world with some of the most BF-crazy writers in the bizz, and as of yet, EA has not yet clarified what's going on.

If it's nothing, then they'd certainly say so.

#31 Posted by EthanielRain (816 posts) -

I never did get that BF 1943 game I was promised to get free with BF3...twice. I don't really care, but this game has unfortunately had some poop associated with it; hopefully this isn't another example :(

#33 Posted by Blackout62 (1339 posts) -

@S0ndor said:

All I see in this thread is a bunch of melodrama. Much ado about nothing.

What! They were promising Much Ado About Nothing? Damn, we could have used an entry in the underused subgenre of thespian war simulators.

#34 Posted by two_socks (230 posts) -

They did a similar thing with the AK pack. In one of the teaser videos for it, they said, "Bring 5 new vehicle unlocks back to the main game." yet no such thing is possible. I honestly don't care though. Most weapons are just re-skins as is, and are only just now becoming somewhat balanced. Adding more just seems like a bad idea.

#35 Posted by PillClinton (3291 posts) -

The actual content of this is definitely not a big deal, but I agree it's theoretically a shitty little piece of businessin' on EA's part, if the new weapons aren't now included in "and more!", which they very well could be, right?

#36 Posted by mosdl (3228 posts) -

@Seppli said:

@rebgav said:

@Seppli said:

I bought and paid for those weapons up front, is how I see it - which makes this thievery. Not that I'm crazy upset or anything. Just think it's a nasty piece of business.

Did they promise new weapons for these packs before you paid for the premium pass?

Regardless, stuff gets cut from releases all the time. Imagine if you'd pre-ordered Mass Effect based on the E3 2006 demo (yeah, I'm aware that it's not the same thing - "plans change" is all I'm saying.)

Yeah they did advertise it so. And it's not quite the same thing as pre-ordering an as of yet unreleased game. The whole pay-upfront for your Season Pass deal builds on trust. Betraying your word on what content you'll deliver, that's a breach of trust that'll damage your brand - at the very least. It's borderline criminal in my eyes.

Nothing's official yet, maybe it's nothing, and those weapons are still in the package, as promised. If not, then they truely wanted to pull a fast one on us. Fuck me - is what's going on. At the very least I'd expect some transparancy on what's going on. Maybe selling 800k+ of BF3 Premium wasn't enough to warrant the asset production cost for new guns.

Guess it's expecting way too much, when I think a EA should be more classy about such a thing - which is simply impossible - with EA being a publicly traded company, with a brass that has to keep face and push shareholder value at every turn. What a nightmare.

I don't remember them having any info about the last 2 packs when I bought premium. They had info on closed quarters and a bit of info on Armored Assault (biggest map ever) and just the names of the last packs.

EA has had a pretty good record with BF3 and ME3 (lots of free MP packs). They keep updating Battlelog, re-balancing the games and fixing bugs.

#37 Posted by konig_kei (607 posts) -

I sure hope that dinosaur dlc is real, I'll actually buy that one not these generic cod copycat junk.

#38 Edited by Seppli (10251 posts) -

@mosdl said:

@Seppli said:

@rebgav said:

@Seppli said:

I bought and paid for those weapons up front, is how I see it - which makes this thievery. Not that I'm crazy upset or anything. Just think it's a nasty piece of business.

Did they promise new weapons for these packs before you paid for the premium pass?

Regardless, stuff gets cut from releases all the time. Imagine if you'd pre-ordered Mass Effect based on the E3 2006 demo (yeah, I'm aware that it's not the same thing - "plans change" is all I'm saying.)

Yeah they did advertise it so. And it's not quite the same thing as pre-ordering an as of yet unreleased game. The whole pay-upfront for your Season Pass deal builds on trust. Betraying your word on what content you'll deliver, that's a breach of trust that'll damage your brand - at the very least. It's borderline criminal in my eyes.

Nothing's official yet, maybe it's nothing, and those weapons are still in the package, as promised. If not, then they truely wanted to pull a fast one on us. Fuck me - is what's going on. At the very least I'd expect some transparancy on what's going on. Maybe selling 800k+ of BF3 Premium wasn't enough to warrant the asset production cost for new guns.

Guess it's expecting way too much, when I think a EA should be more classy about such a thing - which is simply impossible - with EA being a publicly traded company, with a brass that has to keep face and push shareholder value at every turn. What a nightmare.

I don't remember them having any info about the last 2 packs when I bought premium. They had info on closed quarters and a bit of info on Armored Assault (biggest map ever) and just the names of the last packs.

EA has had a pretty good record with BF3 and ME3 (lots of free MP packs). They keep updating Battlelog, re-balancing the games and fixing bugs.

You mean the free ME3 content, that's skewed towards free 2 play like lack of progression. That choses to reward players with redundant unlocks at every turn. So the more invested you are in the game, the more likely you'll start coughing up IRL cash? And for that IRL cash, you get the same crappy RNG-driven lootbags, buying into the same redundancy filled piece of crap unlock system - which offers less and less value the more you play (or pay)?

AKA THE FUCKING WORST DESIGNED UNLOCK AND PROGRESSION SYSTEM MAN HAS EVER CONCEIVED - Free 2 Play and otherwise? AKIN TO PRISON GANGRAPE IN THE BUTT?

Yes, I'm still angry at this.

#39 Posted by BitterAlmond (401 posts) -

Most of the weapons feel pretty samey -- I wouldn't worry about missing one or two if I were you. Little bits of bonus content are irrelevant as long as you can play the core game still.

#40 Posted by GoofyGoober (937 posts) -

Meh its EA.

#41 Posted by Humanity (9062 posts) -

@S0ndor said:

All I see in this thread is a bunch of melodrama. Much ado about nothing.

Also anyone that thinks EA is somehow worse over companies like BP should get their priorities straight.

#42 Posted by clstirens (847 posts) -

It would have been much worse if they suddenly just dropped aftermath or endgame. Just *poof* one less expansion.

Granted, I'm still frustrated about this. DICE and EA have had a poor relationship with their customers as of late (not to say we, as customers, are being CHEATED. )

#43 Posted by doobie (605 posts) -

@runnah555 said:

Yet I get blasted when I say DLC is a scam and shit like this just proves it.

i think judging each piece of DLC on its on merit is the way to go.

#44 Posted by Spoonman671 (4604 posts) -

We should probably overreact now before we find out it's not really that big of a deal.

#45 Posted by Seppli (10251 posts) -

Update: EA clarified - there will be new weapons in the two remaining BF Premium expansions, just as advertised.

#46 Posted by big_jon (5723 posts) -

So a bunch of melodrama for nothing, what a suprise.

#47 Edited by xMrSunshine (360 posts) -
@Humanity: bUT THEY CHARGE MUNEY FOR THEIR VIDE GAOMES THEY R THE DEVIL
#48 Edited by KaneRobot (1548 posts) -

@xMrSunshine said:

@Humanity: bUT THEY CHARGE MUNEY FOR THEIR VIDE GAOMES THEY R THE DEVIL

HRR HRR SPELNING FUNY MAKES UR POINT MORE VALED AN D ALSO VERY WITY

EA fucking sucks for plenty of reasons, whether this particular incident turned out to be a false alarm or not.

#49 Posted by devilzrule27 (1239 posts) -

@KaneRobot said:

@xMrSunshine said:

@Humanity: bUT THEY CHARGE MUNEY FOR THEIR VIDE GAOMES THEY R THE DEVIL

HRR HRR SPELNING FUNY MAKES UR POINT MORE VALED AN D ALSO VERY WITY

EA fucking sucks for plenty of reasons, whether this particular incident turned out to be a false alarm or not.

Most large video game companies suck. Honestly the practices at EA aren't far off from the practices elsewhere. EA is just fun to hate on because they are one of the largest and they are quite forthright with their shitty practices.

Also the person you quoted was replying to a post about how some idiots think EA is actually the worst company in the US. When you stop and pause for even just a second you realize how utterly insane such a statement is.

#50 Posted by sandweed (157 posts) -

Like anyone is gonna use anything but the M16A3 or M4A1 anyway.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.