Expansion boycott banners (forum sigs)

[SmokingTarpan]

Originally Posted by MileHighAko

It is more of an issue of how the software marketplace has evolved. As consumers demand lower prices, similarly the quality of the software drops in order to maintain expected margins.

Unfortunately, I've seen a drop in quality without an accompanying drop in price. From my very first computer game (Quest for Glory I) all the way to BF2, I've been paying an average of $50 per game. In fact, the only time that I pay substantially less is when a game has been out over a year or more. When I hear of a new computer game coming out that I want to play, I budget about $55 dollars because I know that will be approximately how much I will spend. So I don't think this argument really works.

[Trooper]

With that kind of logic, unions would not exist

thats a totaly different topic...

[Telorn]

Originally Posted by SmokingTarpan

Unfortunately, I've seen a drop in quality without an accompanying drop in price. From my very first computer game (Quest for Glory I) all the way to BF2, I've been paying an average of $50 per game. In fact, the only time that I pay substantially less is when a game has been out over a year or more. When I hear of a new computer game coming out that I want to play, I budget about $55 dollars because I know that will be approximately how much I will spend. So I don't think this argument really works.

This is true...but you have to take in to effect the considerable rise in costs of development for the game. A game that might have cost 1 million back in 1995 now costs 8 million to produce...but it's being sold at the same $50 tag as back in '95. So, although we haven't seen price drops...game companies are making less off of games per purchase than they use to..but at the same time more people are gaming these days and they still make more money overall due to sheer volume of units sold.

[Nemesis]

Honestly, I can see how people would feel that a boycott would be the best course of action, but do you really think EA is going to worry about the THREAT of one when BF2 is still flying off the shelves and the servers are PACKED 24/7?????

I mean think about it for a second. Here people are, bitching about bugs in the game (and totally justified in doing so) yet they are still playing. Constantly. Yes, they have your $50.00 already but what sends a more effective message to them than having people stop playing?

The threat of future action that doesn't jibe with the reality of THOUSANDS of people playing on full servers.

Or the sound of people leaving EA to empty servers? Now.

Personally, I'd vote for the latter option to really make a statement. But to many, that would impede on their fun. I mean, hell, they already bought the game and it really is fun......soooooooo, let's boycott the NEXT one! Brilliant!

Meanwhile, EA sits back and laughs off any threat because not only do they have your money now, they also see that all the problems with bugs really has NO effect on the current playing population.

Dunno....a boycott might work, but not until there something more than words backing it up.

Just my opinion.

[SmokingTarpan]

Originally Posted by Nemesis

Meanwhile, EA sits back and laughs off any threat because not only do they have your money now, they also see that all the problems with bugs really has NO effect on the current playing population.

Current population? No, probably not. But what does EA really care about? Future population (sales), and that has definitely been affected.

We've had a few handfuls of people pop in here and start threads asking if the game is worth it because they've heard about the bugs, broken ranking system, etc. I'm sure we're not the only place to have seen this. We've seen people say "well, I'll wait for them to work out the bugs before I buy", and although that might not be a million people, it's still less money for EA based on bad word of mouth.

Would it be impressive to have everyone just suddenly stop playing until EA straightens out? Hell yes. Since it's agreed that won't happen though, we just have to take restitution in the fact that the reputation those of us that have spent the money give the game will influence future sales. If we say it sucks, EA makes less money. We say it rocks, EA makes more money.

Sinces EA's eyes are obviously on the horizon instead of what's right in front of them, our actions have to adjust accordingly to influence those things on the horizon as well. That means spreading the word about possibly boycotting the expansion until EA looks at what they should.

[Kojio]

What really bothers me, is the bull****.

Why hasn't the MDT been released? Why has it been suspiciously delayed in-line with the release of BF:SF? "Because the in-house MDT is too problematic and bug-ridden to be released." That was EA's exuse. But wait a minute.. how did they design and build an expansion so quickly with an entirely different team using the same tools?

Either the tools are ready and being delayed under false claims, or their "EA Canada" team has been working with these tools during BF2's own development and release. Either way, EA had the resources available to fix their damn game and instead threw the talent into cranking out another expansion. That is bull****.

Rank servers are also polluting this community with stat-farming whores and exploiters, yet since EA is witholding any private-host ranking functionality, and because people want to experience 100% of what their game has to offer, you find most ranked servers full and unranked servers empty. I've never seen any respectable level of teamplay on any ranked server, and I'm not suprised.

Not only that, but these so-called 'trusted partners' that are given the golden ticket to sell ranked servers, are far too often rip-off artists and incompetent twats that continue to flood the server list with bad game hosting and angry players. The good private groups and clans trying to maintain an honorable 'ranked' teamplay server get shafted by overpricing or horrible cluster-**** server boxes provided by EA's trusted hosts, while their own 'free' servers are running smoothly with no adminship and horrible teamplay. But what does EA care? It doesn't affect their pockets.

EA/DICE wouldn't be where they are today without support from the community, but man are they milking the community hard.

[Nemesis]

I agree with you in principle Tarpan....however the proof is in the pudding. The numbers in favor of the game, bugs and all, far outweigh the people complaining. EA knows there's problems, but it's all about riding the momentum of the initial launch. And by all accounts, it's been a slam dunk.

Yeah, people are bitching but how much weight does it have when the one's bitching are basically addicted?


Person 1: Anyone tell me if BF2 is worth it?

Person 2: Well it's buggy as hell, EA's first patch broke the game worse than it was and they're already working on an expansion without the Original game being fixed yet.

Person 1: Wow, so I guess that means you hate it and aren't playing?

Person 2: Are you kidding? I'm about to jump in and frag right now. Oh but EA still sucks!

Person 1: ..........


To show our displeasure, we should stop playing now until the game is fixed. However, unless it's something that people can't play around, they won't stop. Because EA knows the game is just too damn fun.

Will they fix the bugs? I sure hope so. And I'm all for a boycott if things don't get better....trust me, I'm not trying to defend EA here or say the idea of a boycott is a bad one.

I'm just not seeing how much power it's going to have over EA as long as their sales of THIS game are still stellar and people are playing in droves. Hell, I'm just as guilty as anyone else of doing this and the bugs bug the hell out of me.

So I hope the talk of a boycott will get EA off it's butt and get to fixing the numerous issues in game. However, I'm just not optimistic over the chances without something stronger than a threatned boycott backing it up.

Time will tell.

[Ricochet911]

wow.... I like BF2.

[Edwin]

As consumers demand lower prices, similarly the quality of the software drops in order to maintain expected margins.

Unless I just went blind the MSRP for BF2 is still the normal $49.99 + tax. Maybe I didn't go blind.

The released product isn't quite finished. It never is. Sometimes patches are created in order to maintain a market position, but ultimately the real investment goes into the next version.

If that were true then BF1942 would be the buggy mess (which it was on release) and BF2 would be the real investment. Yet I see no signs of that. Maybe I do need glasses, because I'm not seeing what you are talking about.

Can't argue with you about the EULA, thats the truth. Doesn't change the fact that EULA's are stacked against the consumer and should be considered not legal.

[Edwin]

Why hasn't the MDT been released? Why has it been suspiciously delayed in-line with the release of BF:SF? "Because the in-house MDT is too problematic and bug-ridden to be released." That was EA's exuse. But wait a minute.. how did they design and build an expansion so quickly with an entirely different team using the same tools?

The same thing happened with BF1942. No mod tools till WAY after Road to Rome/Secret Weapons.