Blood Money: Battlefield 4 Adds Microtransactions

Argh, my... wallet...

Somewhere beneath all of Battlefield 4‘s glitches, server woes, and ceaseless controversy lies a very good game. Even back when it first launched, I jumped into a few matches that went off without a hitch, and I thought to myself, “Wow, there is a preposterous amount going on here and also I just murdered a man with a defibrillator.” But it’s like a “levolutionary” building with sickly hunks of concrete hanging from twisting threads of rebar – one small push, and everything comes crumbling down (unless there is a physics glitch). And now the latest not-so-great-looking mark on a very not-sterling record: EA and DICE have added microtransactions to Battlefield 4, a premium game that still hasn’t seen a single price drop. But hey, at least they’re optional.

In addition to earning Battlepacks in-game, you can now opt to buy them with real world money. DICE made the announcement in a blog post:

“Starting today, we are introducing a new way to acquire Battlepacks, the bundles of content that provide a mix of in-game items including accessories, emblem shapes, profile pictures, dog tags, XP boosts, knives, and paints. Battlepacks can still be earned through normal gameplay progressions, but we are now giving players the option to purchase Battlepacks as a shortcut to catch up with their friends on the Battlefield.”

Bronze battlepacks will run you $1, silver will go for $2, and gold for $3. So yep, if you don’t feel like playing, you can gear up for money now.

As if this even needs to be said, this seems like a pretty poor choice on DICE/EA’s part given that the game’s been marred by technical troubles since day one. Asking for more money – whether from new players or longtimers – is maybe not the best idea when many still don’t feel like they got their money’s worth out of your original product.

But here we are. Who’s still playing BF4? How do you feel about buyable battlepacks? How do you feel about the word battlepack? Personally I think DICE should just go all the way and preface everything with “battle.” Hungry? Have a battlesnack. Tired? Take a battlenap. Feel an overwhelming need to weaponize an otherwise docile mountain creature? Have this battleyak. I can do this all day, which means I should probably stop now and never speak of it again.


  1. phelix says:

    So this is what EA were talking about when they talked about cheapening intellectual property…

    • Wonderboy2402 says:

      I think there are quite a few jaded battlefield players and none really surprised by this move. But keep in mind, the next big fps coming is going to be a star wars title. Will we remember?

      • Dogsbody says:

        Speaking as somebody who’s boycotted #4 because of the mad amount of issues it’s had, and hates EA with a passion – no, we will super not remember, at all, because Battlefield: Star Wars – I MUST HAVE THISSS

      • Sidewinder says:

        Why must you remind us of that? WHY? It’s an EA product, so I wouldn’t touch it with a ten-foot pole anyway, but still…

        I’m going to go hug my TIE Fighter CD and cry.

    • Orija says:

      There was a time when Activision’s microtransactions and map-packs were EA/DICE’s objects of derision in PR. Look at these cheeky fuckers now.

  2. DarkLiberator says:

    Anybody stupidly wanting to pay for these Battlepacks should be aware that usually you get nothing but 25% battle boosts, a bunch of attachments that are usually useless or can be unlocked by getting kills, and emblem stuff. Its a waste of money, but hey, go right ahead.

    • BobbyDylan says:

      I wish you could sell Battlepacks. I have Dozens of the frikken things and feel no need to open them.

    • Ernesto says:

      But Battlepacks make you more awesome!

      There are always people like that. I have some friends who are constantly raging when they get fragged by a guy with . They are convinced that they were fragged because of that weapon. They don’t even for a second consider that it’s their own fault from bad positioning and generally not thinking. A ‘Battlepack’ is the perfect product for them. It doesn’t change anything, but for a while they will feel extra awesome because they ‘improved’ their gun.

  3. xcession says:

    The depreciation of goods is the best parallel with the whole “pay2win” model, as the haters call it. If you buy a game at £X, but within a few months it’s half-£X, do you care? No (probably), because you understand that products almost always drop in price but you’re choosing to pay now to experience it immediately.

    If you play like a bastard to get all your weapons, then 6 months later all those weapons become comparatively easy to get, was your previous experienced diminished? No. You can’t un-enjoy it retrospectively. Is your future experience diminished? No, because your skill is still higher than those who’ve played it less and only recently “paid 2 win”. Moreover you can’t really “win” purely by holding a weapon further down the unlock tree. Skill is always the biggest factor.

    • battles_atlas says:

      Was previous experience diminished? Hell yes. I bought bf4 about six months after my buddy. When I bought it it included several full weapon tree unlocks. My buddy was still grinding away to get all the pistols, and I roll in with all of them. The progression/grind is a central element to these games. To arbitrarily allow some to circumvent the whole thing is to pull back the curtain. It’s to say “this scarcity is all just a cheap psychological hook. Of course you know that already, but until it’s pushed in your face its perfectly easy to ignore.

      Of course it diminishes experience.

      • Askis says:

        Ah yes, the Shortcut bundles, those have been in the game for a while and while they’re a little too pricy to be called “microtransactions”, it’s not like being able to buy Battlepacks now is anything new.

        For those not in the know, you can drop 7€ (10$?) to fully unlock one class without having to play it, 25€ for all classes, 15€ for just all weapons without class based stuff, 4€ for one of the all-kit weapon types (Shotguns, DMRs, Carbines, Pistols, Grenades), 10€ for vehicle unlocks, one bundle for air and one for ground vehicles or just plop down an extra 40€ for everything together.

      • xcession says:

        Perhaps this is getting a bit too existential, but if I play for 10 hours to unlock a weapon and enjoy myself, then later realise those 10 hours were in vain, nothing can change what occurred in those 10 hours. I was entertained, I was happy. More importantly I felt the fuzzy warmth of being rewarded. Buying a weapon offers none of that.

        My time *was* wasted, yes, but I’d only have used that time getting a different unlock. My progress has simply been delayed. And seeing as it’s not a race – you don’t gain something from doing it first – that delay is largely inconsequential.

        • Ksempac says:

          Maybe the case for Battlefield is less clear cut because you still need skills, and the weapons are still a mean to an end.

          But think about MMORPG, where level + equipment is a bigger part of knowing who is on top of the food chain, and also max level is a end in and of itself. These games also tend to feature things such as wings, colored aura, golden name, and others glitzy stuff to convey the message “that avatar is a high level character, don’t mess with him/her, admire him/her”

          If someone spent 500h over 6 months to get on top, he is expecting that at the end he will be one of the top players (at least in terms of pure numbers, he may still be unskilled). He is also expecting that he will be able to parade down the main trading town, with his “shiny aura of golden awesomness” item, and looks down at all the lower level peons…Others players will know the guy at least worked/grinded hard for that, and treat him with respect (or jealousy) for all the “work” he has put into the game.

          It may all be petty/shallow feelings like vanity, jealousy, etc… but really, trying to be #1 in any leaderboard has always been a very good motivation for human beings and has often be for petty reasons.

          Then suddenly the publisher offers a “Get max level for only 50 euros”, and suddenly hundreds of beginner players have the “shiny gold aura of total awesomeness”. Well, the guy who spent 500h to get that will definitely be pissed off and have a diminished experience because no one will care anymore about all theses guys in “shiny gold aura of awesomeness” and the item will not carry the message anymore that “that player has worked hard”

        • MykulJaxin says:

          And people say the Bible isn’t relevant in our day. link to


      • DrollRemark says:

        The progression/grind is a central element to these games.

        No, it really isn’t.

        • zblackmore says:

          To you it isn’t. To many players a certain coloring on the tank is nothing more than a way of indicating to other players that you did the specific thing it takes (whether it’s a specific achievement style task, or amount of grind, or whatever). In this case, if you allow purchasing the item with money, the item loses all of its value. For some players, or some items, the item is for the enjoyment of customizing the way you look. The 2 should be kept separate, IMO, if you allow buying items at all. Make the items that can be purchased accessible only by purchasing them. But obviously, the monetization folks would never allow this.

        • hotmaildidntwork says:

          If anything I would say that their willingness to start selling off “progression” for extra money X months after the sale (and I would assume that this timetable was planned) only throws the tacked on nature of unlocks into such sharp relief that people can’t help but feel a bit insulted by it.
          “Still haven’t unlocked all those pistols, eh Jimmy? Well for only $5 you can now shortcut all the blockades that we ourselves placed into the game for reasons that now seem kind of suspect! And there’s not even a penalty for having pushed yourself a bit beyond the point of having fun to chase “progress” other than that you’ll pay the same price for goods that have less value to you!”

  4. MrFlakeOne says:

    I don’t care about paying for Battlepacks, cause you get random part of equipment and maybe some XP boost, so it’s more of a gamble with no influence on actual game. Anyway I think that BF4 is still crap. I gave up after 20+ h of gameplay which was buggy and glitchy – not like being disconnected all the time, but these were just minor bugs and glitches repeating on and on, which made playing the game unbearable. I still can’t figure out how did the same company made BF: Bad Company 2, which had better gameplay, was less bugged and still had more destructible environment.

  5. Stupoider says:

    To the people who bought Battlefield 4: this is the grave you dug.

    • TechnicalBen says:

      And while digging, and burning on the slow boat to the grave, how many defend it? There is nothing more sad than someone defending the drug/gambling habit they are being enticed to get hooked on. :(

  6. bstard says:

    Holy crap! Hmm well maybe not that divine.

  7. Askis says:

    While I’m not surprised that they’re selling the Battlepacks now, anyone who’s played the game a little is probably aware that they’re pointless.
    If you’re looking for one particular attachment for one gun, you’re better off just using it constantly, as you’ll get weapon specific packs after a while, the normal packs are way too random and mostly give you some Exp boosters, maybe a camo type, maybe a knife, maybe some Emblem stuff or Soldier portraits…

    There’s really nothing in there that would allow you to “catch-up” as everything apart from the weapon attachments is cosmetic and even then there’s only 4 attachments for each weapon that aren’t variants of stuff you unlock for using the gun anyway.
    The Thermal and FLIR sights (pretty bad sights, unless you intend to use smoke grenades to make them worthwhile), the Laser+Light combo in case you like to shine a bright beacon around at all times and the Flash Hider, which is probably the only useful attachment that you can’t get without a pack.

    But again, if you’re looking to trick out a specific weapon, it’s better to just use it and get the packs for that weapon than to roll the Dice (uhehe) with normal Battlepacks.

    Well, the Exp boosters do allow you to catch up somewhat, I’ve never found them necessary, still got tons lying around from all the packs I got from playing.
    Not worth even 1$ per booster.

    • Joshua says:

      Actually, just enable all of those XP boosters. You get new XP boosters almost as quick as it takes for your current ones to run out.

      • Askis says:

        Thing is, I don’t need them.
        I’ve got everything unlocked except for some Shotguns and DMRs (which I barely use anyway) and some of those Assignment specific weapons.
        The boosters don’t help with getting weapon attachments, as you need kills for those, so the only thing that they would speed up is getting a higher rank and apart from getting a Gold pack for each rank (more boosters, yay?) it’s just a pointless E-Peen number.

    • haradaya says:

      If only they’d let us choose the attachments on each “weapon level up”. From the moment I picked up the M1014 shotgun, I wanted a flashlight attached. 250 kills later I got it. Now I’m kind of sick of using the M1014.

      • Askis says:

        The M1014 gets the Flashlight at 160 kills :P
        But why would you want it anyway? It doesn’t really help apart from enemies in front of you knowing exactly where to shoot.

        • haradaya says:

          Cause I like the way it looks. I keep it off in areas where it’s not needed.

  8. CountVlad says:

    They should totally add a Battleyak. That might just convince me to come back! :)

  9. Crainey says:

    EA loves breaking my heart. Battlefield 1942 and Battlefield 2 were my jam growing up, they were the two games I’ve probably spent the most hours in ever, and they continue to rot away at my beloved Battlefield.

  10. Joshua says:

    I have clocked several hundreds of hours in BF4 by now. I am in a battlefield clan, which is great fun. There’s still quite a few issues, although a lot less then when it was first release.
    The gameplay IMO better then BF3. However, it is an obvious case of “ambitious but rubbish” going on here. Many issues with the latency compensation. It seems that the game has a lot more going on in it then BF3 (such as boats with wakes that influence other player’s boats and individually destructible superficial objects which can be destroyed in many different ways) and as such the servers have trouble keeping up. Although the individually collapsable houses from BC2 are actually back, there’s a lot fewer of them, ocasionally appearing on some maps. I geuss the ‘netcode’ issues would be even worse if we had 64 player maps with BC2 style destruction all over the place, but… yeah.

    The battlepacks are almost identical to those found in Mass Effect 3 (Although ME3’s packs actually gave you new classes, BF4’s battlepacks give you only cosmetic stuff and XP boosts), and it beats me why you would pay for any of them in that game, and it beats me even more why you would pay for any of them now. I am actually surprised it took them so long to implement these microtransactions, as it was obvious from the start they were going the same route as ME3 with them.

    • Chuckleluck says:

      If DICE had just released a water combat + commander DLC for Battlefield 3 I would have been perfectly happy.

  11. radrex says:

    I really enjoy BF4 and I don’t care about battlepacks…I kinda feel there is something wrong with me but I don’t think there is…it is a really fun game when you don’t read the chatlog thing.

  12. LuckyLuigi says:

    Crying about this is ridiculous. As anyone who actually played the game it is bloody raining battlepacks for free. I must have 50 unused ones.
    If DICE wants to make a few $ by allowing newbies who have little time but lots of cash to quickly unlock everything and play on a ‘level’ playing field compared to the veterans more power to them.
    You don’t NEED to buy them to play so it is not pay to win so no one should give a damn.

  13. CookPassBabtridge says:

    I’ve just bought this. And Titanfall. I’ve also stapled my scrotum to a plank and secreted orange juice in my eye. Are there any other EA games I can buy to feed my inexplicable need to punish myself? Must go. The stag beetles I released into my boxer shorts have just started their main course.

    • Tams80 says:

      You could try purchasing some Ubisoft games.

      • CookPassBabtridge says:

        What do you think I am? A masochist? Anyways I’ve got Far Cry 3, which means I already own every Ubisoft game for the next six years.

  14. malkav11 says:

    There may not be an official price drop but Amazon is selling disc copies for about $20.

  15. bosseye says:

    I love BF4, despite the squilions of issues. When it works (which it does more often than not these days) its just sublime. I always open my battlepacks but I’ve yet to see anything super duper in there so certainly wouldn;t be paying for one. All the bits of kit I’ve wanted I’ve gained by grinding weapons (grinding in a good sense), getting the kills and getting the unlocks.

  16. thrymr says:

    Let’s see..

    I buy a glitched fullprice Game that uses it’s Buyers as Late Alpha/Early Beta testers, but that ain’t enough… I have to buy ‘premium’ so I do receive updates aka content… (aka the ‘finished’ Product?) … so i can keep playing with my friends – another fullprice investment.
    – Now, i have allready spent twice as much on the Game than any other AAA title, one that is still not finished or running without Problems.

    And now I see they want more money to bring out more useless Skins…. not fixing the friggin netcode or the bugs, or the balancing… a bunch of skins.
    Oh OK, and of course the weapons i can’t get though normal play, because the game keeps crashing serversided/resets stats… etc.

    a) release broken game
    b) make customer play twice for game
    c) make customer pay for the ‘unlocks’ he can’t/won’t do himself because game is broken.
    d) ???
    e) Profit!

    sounds like EA to me… Nothing new here, move along.

    • Bull0 says:

      Has to be said, if I were presiding over a broken game that’s a nightmare to play, and which features unlocks through play, if I were also selling shortcuts to unlock stuff without needing to play I’d probably think twice about bothering to fix the issues that stop people playing long enough to unlock stuff. Because to be in that position in the first place I’d be a fucking evil monster, and that’s how they think

  17. fish99 says:

    “a premium game that still hasn’t seen a single price drop”

    Errr… it was 40% off on origin recently (iirc) and the standard price on origin is now £30 versus about £45 when it launched. It’s also under £20 on amazon uk currently and I’ve seen it in other sales. Just saying.

    • Walsh says:

      Don’t let your facts get into the way of Nathan’s rants.You can tell it’s a whiny Nathan post by the click bait title.

      • Meusli says:

        I bet you two crusade on Battlelog as well, keep up the good fight. Pfft.

  18. OctoStepdad says:

    EA has been doing this for years now and nobody died because of it (not to my knowledge). I think they used to be called kit short-cuts in Bad Company and they had similar stuff in Battlefield 3. Atleast the mircotransactions from the past games would give you all the guns for a certain class..

    I believe even Skate 3 for the consoles did similar microtransactions too. You could pay “x” amount of money basically have the single-player complete to have the whole world unlocked.

    but I could really use a battlenap right now.

  19. GetsShotALot says:

    BattleFail 4 is a text-book example of what happens when you let a bunch of businessmen design a game. They’ll happily compromise a good game in favour of being “client-oritented” by using “synergy”, “big data” and other business-world non-sense.

    It’s not about creating (and subsequently promoting) a good game that people will appreciate. They might as well have said: “hey snipers, make your willy look like Mandingo’s with our x21 magnification scopes, because who cares about balanced gameplay “, “hey late-comers, annoyed that people who played the game is better than you, render their experience in the game completely wasted by buying everything they worked to unlock”.

    What happened to gamepay? Why aren’t each player type restricted (assault, engineer, etc) on a squad+team basis in order to provide a balanced and enjoyable gaming experience.
    Yes, I’m looking at you DMR’s(especially their x7 scopes AND 14x magnifier), AA and server admins who allow instant vehicle respawn.

    What’s the point in even trying to cap/blow/capture the objectives if someone can kill you repeatedly with those awful AA’s or a sniper from a hill or roof on the other side of the map (or their spawn zones)?

    And what about progression? Why am I forced to grind their singpleplayer campaign if I want to unlock certain guns (for multiplayer!) and why can’t I unlock certain scopes without having to pay for them?

    Thinking about it, Red Orchestra 2 and Battlefield 2’s Project Reality mod understands this, perhaps it’s because both started life as a mod (PR still is a mod) that are made by people who play games.

    To those who say “don’t buy it if you don’t want it”: I’m a little concerned for the future of gaming if we let EA turn every game they make into €70 “free-2-play’s” because other publishers WILL follow their lead. It WILL destroy good games.

    Today’s youth, the future of gaming, will grow accustomed to getting bummed by publishers and the older crowd (20+ year olds) will undoubtedly venture into wonderful niche games because the mainstream alternatives are disgusting piles of capitalist rubbish.
    But mainstream gaming is what brings new blood to our world so it’s important to maintain a healthy eco-system for their sake (and ours too)

    • Walsh says:

      Um, Red Orchestra 2 was buggy as shit on launch. Then there was the whole server stats reset, which also reset your unlocks, which were a tremendous bitch to unlock in the first place.

      But since spewing your ill informed rants, I’ll respond to a few items. There are servers with class limits, especially sniper and DMR. DMRs don’t have 7x scopes or magnifiers, at best they have 4x which can’t be used with the magnifier. The magnifier is only 2x and only works with a 1x red dot. The basic rifle scope 8x for sniper rifles is useful on most of the maps, you can even use the iron sights only if you wanted. All sniper scopes are unlockables, there aren’t any you pay for.

      Weapon unlocks count for shit since even the basic weapons are still viable. Team work counts for all and a well balanced squad who sticks together tends to dominate the scoreboard and the maps.

      Try playing the game for a few hours before spewing your bullshit next time.

      • Joshua says:

        There is a 14x magnification available for (non-)standard sniper scopes, actually – but again, not on DMRs.

        For the uninitiated: That magnification is not cumalitive, you can’t combine the 40x scope with teh 14x scope and then get a 560x zoom, you can just freely switch between those two magnifications, Arma style.

      • DrollRemark says:

        Do they still give you fuck all weaponry in the vehicles before you level up in them? Because that was easily the worst thing about BF3.

        Want to get in a jet? Aww tough luck, because you’re going to get taken to pieces without missiles, or flares to divert enemy missiles. Better get grinding for those upgrades! Oh, how do you get them you ask? Why, by getting kills in the jets of course!

  20. newguy2012 says:

    Nonono, microtransactions in a 60$ game. EA, if you throw your trash where you sleep you will eventually drown in it. A horrible practice.

  21. Kinch says:

    Woah, that’s disgusting and sad. The game was pretty expensive to start with, multiple editions and what not. Plus it has the “Premium” service which IMO is simply a preorder/subscription scheme.

    So glad I stopped caring about this franchise at BF3 (demanded a return and got it).
    I wish they had taken another route, I really loved Bad Company 2 and spent about 90 hours in it (which is a lot for me in a competitive FPS).

  22. lucasdigital says:

    I absolutely love playing BF4, to the extent that it is almost the only thing I’ve played since its release – up until 2 weeks ago when I went back to Arma 3 to complete the campaign. Still I do a google search every other day for news on the Dragon’s Teeth maps (next DLC due).

    Really this is nothing to get angry about. If someone has more money than time then why not let them throw it at EA. The previously mentioned unlock packs, whilst more expensive seem like a more controlled and meaningful way of quickly expanding your murder-palette. As stated battlepacks don’t unlock weapons, only add-ons and XP boosters – so you’d get very little for your money.

    I bought Landmark when it hit Steam and have enjoyed a few sessions of house building, but not before spending about five pounds on dirt, yes DIRT. If I wanted to be angry it would be with Sony for making me pay for the privilege of contributing to their game content creation efforts without needing to grind hours away. I really blame my 18-month old son and the sleep and game-time deprivation that he has cast upon me. He reminds me that there could be a tiny mote of sanity to the notion of paying money for a game, then paying more money so you don’t need to play the game.

    • Bull0 says:

      Good christ, how do you manage? With the near-constant errors and stuff I’d go insane if I tried to play Battlefield 4 exclusively for a weekend, let alone months

      • Walsh says:

        What near constant errors? I’m serious, I’ve got over 160 hours and I haven’t run into most of these ‘issues’. Launch was frustrating and the server lag issues about a month ago were my major problems, that’s it.

        • Shooop says:

          Found the apologist.

          • Wisq says:

            Oh knock it off. Different people have different experiences. Me, I had a mostly crashless experience when I played. My friend and co-worker who introduced me to the game, he was crashing constantly. The fact that someone’s setup happened to be okay with the game does not make them a “coporate apologist”.

            Saw it phrased best earlier this week on Twitter: “Hate something big, you’re a hipster poseur. Like something big, you’re a corporate stooge.” It’s a double standard and it’s ridiculous.

            Now if someone were actively denying that anyone else had those issues, that would be an issue. But from a single point of view, it’s possible to play the game without any issues, if you luck into having a stable setup.

      • Joshua says:

        Similarely to Red Orchestra 2, the game has improved significantly since it’s launch. Also, the game is just really really really fun, so the errors are worth sitting trough IMO.

        DICE QA defnitely needs improvement though. Recently they have started to do a public beta testing initative; since most of their issues are related with networking problems (Latency compensation, the infamous “shot behind corners” issue is a result of client-side hit registration and the information that the other player shot you not having been sent to you untill you got behind the wall (or just a leg sticking out)) that is probably the best course of action.

        It, however, absolutely beats me why they did not do this sooner.

  23. Darth Gangrel says:

    Whoa, Nathan brought out his pun gun at the end of the article there, so I think I need to battlewield a battleshield until I’m battlehealed. That shield comes in a number of colours, but I chose one that was battleteal’d.

  24. YeGoblynQueenne says:

    The soldier in that image. Is that Joey from Friends doing his making-sums face?

  25. Don Reba says:

    Waiting for Mirror’s Edge 2 with microtransactions. Face it, it’s going to happen.

  26. Senethys says:

    Dear EA,

    F*ck you.

  27. Chuckleluck says:


    Ever since I heard about the notion of battlepacks I told my friends, “Just wait, this is going to be a microtransaction system eventually”.

    EA seems to be more money grabbing than usual – DLC and premium, possible yearly Battlefield releases, AND microtransactions? Games that touch EA’s fingers shall never touch mine.

  28. Banjo-Tuesday says:

    Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a battlecrap…. And now I am going to have a premium battlenap.

  29. derbefrier says:

    Hmmm I wonder. Basically they turned BF4 into a F2P games with all the usual microtransactions. I wonder if this means a F2P future for BF4 or maybe its a test bed for a F2P BF5?

    • Nathan says:

      I don’t see why? Battlepacks aren’t exactly rare for people playing the game, they don’t provide any meaningful competitive advantage; for the most part they’re entirely cosmetic. Buying a vague equivalent of them has also been possible in every BF since BFBC2, and there’s no indication that BF4 is any closer to F2P than that.

  30. velocerator says:

    They’ve been selling weapon unlocks for months too, though I can’t imagine anybody is actually stupid enough to waste their money on the weapon unlocks or Battlepacks.

    Just another example of how out of touch EA is with their customers. I really wish they would stop thinking they can charge $120 (or $60) for a game and still do micro-transactions.

    Regardless BF4 is most likely the last EA game I buy, I just don’t trust them anymore.

  31. nimbulan says:

    Wait you can kill people with defibs in BF4? You could have fooled me because it worked fine in the previous games but in 4 you could just stand there zapping them repeatedly without anything happening.

  32. Wisq says:

    Glad I stopped playing when I did, then.

    I suppose I can uninstall Origin now. It’s clear that EA’s plan with every single game is to produce an intentionally grindy game (and/or buggy mess), bind it tightly to their servers, then introduce microtransactions as soon as they think they can get away with it.

    Time to stop holding out hope that maybe some franchises are sacred; they aren’t.

  33. Press X to Gary Busey says:

    I’m sure EA has thought long and hard about micro transactions in BF (unlock packs has been around since Bad Company 2 AFAIK). This is just some testing the waters to see if they can get away with it. More will come in the future as a minority will throw huge piles of money at their screens as always.

  34. SuicideKing says:

    How do you feel about the word battlepack? Personally I think DICE should just go all the way and preface everything with “battle.” Hungry? Have a battlesnack. Tired? Take a battlenap. Feel an overwhelming need to weaponize an otherwise docile mountain creature? Have this battleyak. I can do this all day, which means I should probably stop now and never speak of it again.

    This paragraph is battletacular.

    No, nothing to do with breakfast.

  35. Danda says:

    Another strong reason to avoid this game like the plague.

    • velocerator says:

      It’s a fantastic game, it’s easily the best Battlefield game for any game mode that isn’t TDM or SDM. Also I haven’t seen a single issue or bug since around Christmas when they were updating it almost every day.

      Regardless, buying Battlepacks grants you nothing in the end except more xp boosts which are barely worth using, I don’t even really know why EA thinks selling them is worth while. I guess some people have more money than they know what to do with…

  36. Aardvark_Man says:

    I still play BF4 when my mates are on. Still enjoy it, although the bugs still get me annoyed. I think it’s probably the best since BF2, now a lot of the issues are fixed.

    Purchasable battle packs rub me the wrong way, though. It’s already a poor progression method (Hey, have stuff you’ve already got, but it looks different if you can notice while reloading! And some 25% xp boosts!”) To weaken it even further by making it a microtransaction when the game still has so many issues, and already set me back AU$150 (including the DLCs) is just a slap to the face. At least I can still get them in game, but my mates figured out that at their level of 110 or so, they’ll need to win about 25 rounds, with a good average score, to level and get a battle pack. Getting them through class service stars is even more painful. Or, for the chance at that last knife they need, $3! It just seems scummy.

    Also, I would like a battle yak. I’d pay for that.

  37. Megakoresh says:

    Let’s update our dictionary.

    (Gamer English) Refers to the process of significantly reducing the quality and value of the game with the intention to milk people for money without any addition developer or publisher effort or any value provided to the players for the additional profit.

    “Battlefield 3 has been EAficated. They released it broken at full price, never fixed all the issues and then added micro-transactions without even dropping the price of the game, the fuckers.”

    I wonder how does it feel to have your company name be in a word like this. Not that it’s a real word, but it might as well be. I mean anyone just a little familiar with gaming industry will immediately bring up an association like this whenever someone mentions EA.

    As usual: fuck you, EA. We all hate you. Or at least those of us who care about both our money and artistic and quality values of games. And no, making the game free for a few days, does not help.