Q: If you had a chance to go back and do it again, would you have released more map packs earlier rather than using the VIP strategy, which simply opened up pre-existing maps for new modes?
  
 
A: We think doing the VIP program was a good way to give our fans complementing features that we did not have the possibility of implementing in the base game at launch, and we have received good feedback for our VIP program. That being said, we are currently evaluating the VIP program to decide how to best approach this in the future. 

Battlefield 3?

That's what happens when you put a PC centric game to the consoles as a lead.  Sad to say it but it's true. 
 
If BC2 was just for PC, I bet it would've been having much better support.

I think lack of DLC has certainly been a factor. But another thing to consider is that Call of Duty is so much easier to get into, whereas Bad Company 2 takes dedication to be good at. That's most certainly a turn off for some people. 
 
As for Halo, well, the name sells.

And what FPS's do you play that have had more support barely a half year after they came out?  At this point for MW2, it only had one map pack released.

What kind of support would you have wanted?  DLC maps and/or modes?
 
Reach was always going to be popular online, there's nothing DICE could have done to stop that.

" @Shadow: Team Fortess 2?  Unreal 2004, both Counter Strikes? "

Seems like they're putting all their eggs in the Medal of Honor basket. Its callus to say but a lot of people at EA are just like "BC2 sold what its going to sold, there's no point in wasting resources on it now". This shortsightedness if going to harbor resentment. How many people are going to try out BC3 after this?

" I think lack of DLC has certainly been a factor. But another thing to consider is that Call of Duty is so much easier to get into, whereas Bad Company 2 takes dedication to be good at. That's most certainly a turn off for some people.  As for Halo, well, the name sells. "

" @Shadow: Team Fortess 2?  Unreal 2004, both Counter Strikes? "

I'm just upset that they never brought the Dr Pepper DLC to PCs. Sigh. But really, more maps would have been great.

people play de_dust for over a decade, the core is simple but it doesn't get old, even after 10 years. 
  
its clearly support but not because the lack of extra content but the inability to fix a broken game. 
how many people leveled exploiting the horrible revive point system. (in BC2 if you kill your teammate you lost  some points but if you revive that person you killed after you get more points than you lost from killing, so you end up positive and in the top of the chart.)

I feel like Valve and Bungie are really the only ones that support their games anymore on the 360 side. On the PS3 side it's really only Naughty dog, and...Insomniac for Resistance? I don't know, I haven't had too many problems with many PS3 games as I haven't played enough of them yet. Still, the life cycle of games depend on the frequency of release IMO. Most developers love putting out a game a year which practically nullifies the argument for post-game patches/support. It's sad, really.

" I feel like Valve and Bungie are really the only ones that support their games anymore on the 360 side. On the PS3 side it's really only Naughty dog, and...Insomniac for Resistance? I don't know, I haven't had too many problems with many PS3 games as I haven't played enough of them yet. Still, the life cycle of games depend on the frequency of release IMO. Most developers love putting out a game a year which practically nullifies the argument for post-game patches/support. It's sad, really. "

" @huntad said:

" I feel like Valve and Bungie are really the only ones that support their games anymore on the 360 side. On the PS3 side it's really only Naughty dog, and...Insomniac for Resistance? I don't know, I haven't had too many problems with many PS3 games as I haven't played enough of them yet. Still, the life cycle of games depend on the frequency of release IMO. Most developers love putting out a game a year which practically nullifies the argument for post-game patches/support. It's sad, really. "

Valve doesn't? L4D aside, they haven't done jack with TF2 all these years on the 360 "

" @KaosAngel said:

" @Shadow: Team Fortess 2?  Unreal 2004, both Counter Strikes? "

Don't forget Borderlands and Left 4 Dead 1&2. "

I think this has more to do with how accessible and enticing to the casual crowd games like Halo and MW2 are.
It's very similar to the reason WoW is so successful. The barrier to entry is super low even if the skill cap can be high.
For an average person it is much easier to think about coming home and playing  few rounds of Halo or MW2 to relax then say BFBC2 which is a more serious shooter. (by serious I don't mean better or worse) 
 
I still play a few times a week, but will probably move onto MoH when it comes out. Not feeling Vietnam at all.

" @ch13696 said:

" @KaosAngel said:

" @Shadow: Team Fortess 2?  Unreal 2004, both Counter Strikes? "

Don't forget Borderlands and Left 4 Dead 1&2. "

I did mean console games.  There's no competing with the constant mods the PC market introduces, or Valve's PC support.  Borderlands I won't argue but by this time past the release date, Left 4 Dead had that one free pack (if that) and Left 4 Dead 2 hadn't yet released the DLC for it.  Bad Company 2 has been getting fantastic support and unless you're Call of Duty or Halo, you're simply not going to stay on that top 10 list.  It doesn't matter how much you support something when the top 10 list will forever be a mix of Call of Duty, Halo, and whatever happened to be released that particular week. "

I've been playing BC2 with no problems and still having as much fun with it as when I started. 
 
I don't see any problems at all. Who seriously gives a fuck about top ten lists, as long as I can get into a full game I'm happy. When people stop playing, I'll be disappointed.  
 
DLC is a waste of time, when Special forces came out for BF2 nobody bought it and everyone stuck with the original game. 

Either way it was still by far the best multiplayer shooter that has come out in the past year (even more since I though MW2 sucked).

" Either way it was still by far the best multiplayer shooter that has come out in the past year (even more since I though MW2 sucked). "

Support for Bad Company 2 hasn't been that bad in my opinion. Alright, some of the features, such as the VIP scheme were more hassle than they were worth, and some of the DLC should not have costed. For example: Onslaught was already contained on the disc. Overall though I enjoyed Bad Company 2, and I still do. I'm not bothered by Medal of Honor, so I'll pass it up for more Battlefield content, such as the Vietnam pack. I might buy some Microsoft Points to get it, after Black Ops releases and I try it out.

Really, you want DLC mappacks that split the community even further?

" @RsistncE said:

" Either way it was still by far the best multiplayer shooter that has come out in the past year (even more since I though MW2 sucked). "

I agree with this. I still play a few games a week, and even if I know MW2 may be more popular, I simply can't find the motivation to even go back to playing it eversince I stated playing BFBC2. :o "

Quality over quantitty. 
I played more BC2 then MW2,and I'll be getting Battlefield 3 instead of Black Ops.  
Just my 2 cents.

I don't see why DICE couldn't produce at least a couple map packs. The maps in Battlefield are simple, just copy and pasted models placed around a simple open designed map. Only time consuming thing would be the designing and balancing of the object and spawn locations. But BC2 maps aren't exactly super well designed or balanced. Even if they were, it still wouldn't take much time or resources. DICE just moved on to other games.  
 
As for the people going "BC2 is a serious, grownup FPS.". What the heck? Is BC2 the only shooter you have played? BC2 is in no way shape or form a hard, serious or grownup game. You people either have not played games for very long(which I don't blame you or care) or you're just ignorant. Don't get me wrong, I liked BC2. It was a good game, but to say it was "the FPS for grownups" like a PR guy spewing buzzwords is just beyond idiotic to the point of being puerile. 

For the record, I have over 200 hours in BC2 (yeah, I have no life).

Maybe it doesn't have to do with support, maybe it just wasn't deep enough?

I am just hoping BF3 isn't going to be more like BC3...

" I am just hoping BF3 isn't going to be more like BC3... "

" I am just hoping BF3 isn't going to be more like BC3... "

"

Quality over quantitty. 
I played more BC2 then MW2,and I'll be getting Battlefield 3 instead of Black Ops.  
Just my 2 cents.

"

Well I haven't seen the NEED for support, I mean other than some new maps I like the game the way it is.

" That's what happens when you put a PC centric game to the consoles as a lead.  Sad to say it but it's true.  If BC2 was just for PC, I bet it would've been having much better support. "

" That's what happens when you put a PC centric game to the consoles as a lead.  Sad to say it but it's true.  If BC2 was just for PC, I bet it would've been having much better support. "

" That's what happens when you put a PC centric game to the consoles as a lead.  Sad to say it but it's true.  If BC2 was just for PC, I bet it would've been having much better support. "