As a gamer, I simply cannot ignore the point he makes about consumers having to draw the line and exclusive, functional in-game items for a multi player game doesn't sit right with me. Single player items, go ahead, you don't change anybody's experience except for the person who purchased the content.|
Cosmetic stuff is fine by me too. I don't even begrudge the development time spent on it cause in the end gaming is a business and it is a nice money spinner for retailers and publishers (who are presumably paid by retailers).
I have never been a fan of DLC though, mostly because a lot of it seems to be sub-par, based on what others have said about the Bioshock 2 big daddy challenge thing or Dragon Agerigins DLCs. Additionally, the cost of some DLC packages required a double take (Modern Warfare 2 map packs).
With regards to BF3, because of this hubbub I will probably delay my purchase (which would've been a pre-order) until I have heard some user feedback as to how these special items affect the game play. DICE saying they aren't game changing is all well and good, but then they are hardly going to say "Yes, they are unfair, I wouldn't bother buying unless you get it from GAME/GameStation.". On the flip side, it seems highly unlikely they would do something so drastic and I can't help but feel the marketing spiel for the exclusive weapons/items is just marketing spiel.
#7578412, By teh_MBK Battlefield 3 (PC)
teh_MBK 197 posts
Seen 2 years ago
Registered 4 years ago