Shurikane

To loosen the atmosphere, a gold nugget I found on Rooster Teeth:

Jason -- "I didn't play any of the previous Battlefield games, so I went to the Battlefield Heroes website to try to get the scoop. I was instructed to purchase the March issue of Games for Windows magazine for more info. I'm already not enjoying my "free" game experience."

__________________

skullhedman

The concept sounds cool. Did it fail because of the conquest system? Or did it fail because of the game mechanics?

__________________

*11th AIR Tactical Wiki*TG Gentleman's Agreement*Become a Supporting Member *New To TG? Start Here! *

Zoraster

Why would it be either morally bad or illegal? You get the game for FREE. They want to make money off of it though, of course, so they can let you get certain advantages for paying them. I see nothing wrong with that. I think it'd be unwise for them to let people who pay extreme amounts of money to be unstoppable because then people would be turned off the game, but I see nothing wrong with allowing them to allow upgrades with regards to performance.

Lots of games already do this. Take one game: www.albatross18.com. It's a golf game where you can essentially purchase more control, power, accuracy etc. There's nothing wrong with that. People of all types benefit. I'd rather have a game where I can try the full extent of the game for free and then pay if i want to be really competitive than the traditional demo model that doesn't show a whole lot, personally.

All that said, perhaps I simply misunderstood you?

__________________
|TG| Zoraster | Tactical Soccer Managing

Photometric

[sarcasm] Oh I don't know....I was looking forward to the day when all people...noobs and l337 can come together and say with one collective word.....BORING [/sarcasm]

__________________




"There's a new sheriff in town...and his name....is Reggie Hammond"

INSUNABULA

When creating a game like this and especially with a particular demographic in mind there are certain economic philosophies that need to be taken into account.

If you want a game to be viable in the long-term then you don't want to discourage the core player-base by offering advantages to those who happen to have a little more coin than others. Allowing this would create a 2-tier system that would sour the gameplay for others as it endorses discrimination.

The whole premis behind this recent shift by EA is to induct new players to the fold much like TG does: with a carrot not the stick. People will play because it's free and the only way they will enjoy the experience and stay is if they are able to advance at the same rate everyone else does. Nobody likes to see a noob walk in, purchase all the great hardware and own everyone around - people will just leave with a sour taste in their mouth and the whole experiment being conduted by EA will be killed.

Saying all this, it may turn out that EA prefers to make their money quick and then pull out and move onto the next game but that tactic will only tarnish their name and make it harder to do the second time round as people will know what to expect.

There is enough money to be made with in-game advertising and 'aesthetic' purchases and to keep the fans loving EA and keep them playing longer they will keep performance upgrades attainable only by playing the game itself. The longer people play, the more likely to purchase even more aesthetics and of course the more people online, the more companies will be lining up to advertise in the game to reach that audience.

__________________

Repaq

Skullheadman check out www.wwiionline.com for your MMO FPS. It's a pretty good game but also a steep learning curve.

__________________

skullhedman

It sounds cool. I'm just not ready to give up on BF2142.

__________________

*11th AIR Tactical Wiki*TG Gentleman's Agreement*Become a Supporting Member *New To TG? Start Here! *

Zoraster

This may be true, but that's a very different argument than it's morally ambiguous and possibly illegal.

I think that EA will want to create to some level a 2-tiered system. They don't want the game to be unplayable by those who haven't purchased anything, but I think they'll want to give a distinct advantage to those who have. Even 2142 does this to a small degree: the boots, IDS and extra rockets are very valuable add-ons that you can only get through purchasing NS or field upgrades.

I'd be unsurprised if EA starts with only minor performance additions to begin with and then as the game goes along they introduce more and more purchasable upgrades. That way, it'll keep costing new people the same amount of money to join the paying ranks but older gamers who want to keep up with the curve will have to shell out twice as much money.

I agree with you that EA doesn't want it to be too out of whack, but I disagree that they'll want to make the things you can buy purely cosmetic. Despite trying to attract a more casual crowd, I don't think they're trying to create Battlefield: Second Life.

__________________
|TG| Zoraster | Tactical Soccer Managing

nuckj

Why not just go ahead and pre order BF3? LOL.

http://www.game.co.uk/PC/Action/~r333421/Battlefield-3/

__________________

9th MID | 2142 Profile | New to TG?

Adeimos

Main reason I'm not getting this game: I don't need any more prepubescent punks yelling "OMG I JUST PWND DIS DOOD LOLOL!" into my ears.