criterion-sm dice-lg ea-starwars-lg instagram lucasfilm-lg motive-lg twitch you-tube
Forest of Endor

New DLC makes online unfair and indirectly pay to win

If I interpreted the new DLC coming out correctly, those who paid for the DLC will have access to weapons and cards that the non-payers won't have. I'm not against DLC and I know some players have been asking for more weapons (I disagree, but not my point), but what this does is it not only changes the battlefield but becomes indirectly "pay to win" or really "pay to have more options to help you win." Skins, maps, customizations, etc. are fine. But getting new weapons and cards that some of us might not have is like playing Madden online and but you can't be the Chiefs or Seahawks because you didn't pay.

Replies

  • I'm pretty sure that you have to have the dlc turned on to use the weapons so when u have it turned off u won't be able to use them and play with players who have it on
  • No one is gonna pay $25 for "skins and maps", just because something is new doesn't mean that it is better and if the new stuff isn't better than its in no way "pay to win". Welcome to 2016.
  • Do you mean that you can only use the new weapons with other players that have the DLC?
  • Piscettios
    6013 posts Member
    edited March 2016
    BlowMeow wrote: »
    But getting new weapons and cards that some of us might not have is like playing Madden online and but you can't be the Chiefs or Seahawks because you didn't pay.
    Nope, not really the same.

    They also announced LONG ago that this was the set up for the DLC.
    Knights of Gareth
    XBL- JsOnMyFett 13
  • DLC has always worked in this way. Players with DLC can use their extra content against non-DLC owners in almost any game.
  • Lonnisity
    1953 posts Member
    I look forward to leeching off my DLC partner and using his DLC star cards without buying the DLC lol.
    "Yeah, I'm responsible these days. It's the price you pay for being successful."
  • snakebro25 wrote: »
    DLC has always worked in this way. Players with DLC can use their extra content against non-DLC owners in almost any game.

    Nope. It hasn't "always" worked this way. Battlefield Bad Company 2 (another DICE effort) gave more maps and Vietnam, but no extra weapons or perks. So, there you go...
  • No one is gonna pay $25 for "skins and maps", just because something is new doesn't mean that it is better and if the new stuff isn't better than its in no way "pay to win". Welcome to 2016.

    INDIRECTLY "pay to win" is what I said. And more specifically, " "pay to have more options to help you win." Also, is it $25 for the first round of DLC? I thought it'd be more around $15. And yes people do pay that for skins and maps just like we did with the DLC for Bad Company 2 (another DICE effort).
  • Lonnisity
    1953 posts Member
    BlowMeow wrote: »
    snakebro25 wrote: »
    DLC has always worked in this way. Players with DLC can use their extra content against non-DLC owners in almost any game.

    Nope. It hasn't "always" worked this way. Battlefield Bad Company 2 (another DICE effort) gave more maps and Vietnam, but no extra weapons or perks. So, there you go...

    Oh man, Vietnam. THAT was an expansion.
    "Yeah, I'm responsible these days. It's the price you pay for being successful."
  • Piscettios wrote: »
    BlowMeow wrote: »
    But getting new weapons and cards that some of us might not have is like playing Madden online and but you can't be the Chiefs or Seahawks because you didn't pay.
    Nope, not really the same.

    They also announced LONG ago that this was the set up for the DLC.

    How is it not the same? Let me give you an example. I use gun X. DICE comes out with a DLC that has gun X2. The X2 has slightly less range (no big deal) but better cooling power. So, if I had that gun, I'd mop up even more. But I didn't pay for the DLC. But the guy who just killed me did. This would be like if he got to use the Broncos in Madden and I can't....because I didn't pay.
  • Lonnisity wrote: »
    BlowMeow wrote: »
    snakebro25 wrote: »
    DLC has always worked in this way. Players with DLC can use their extra content against non-DLC owners in almost any game.

    Nope. It hasn't "always" worked this way. Battlefield Bad Company 2 (another DICE effort) gave more maps and Vietnam, but no extra weapons or perks. So, there you go...

    Oh man, Vietnam. THAT was an expansion.

    Not much difference here with a new mode and maps, but I'll give it to you. Still DICE had DLC maps for BC2, but NO weapons or perks.
  • Lonnisity
    1953 posts Member
    edited March 2016
    BlowMeow wrote: »
    Lonnisity wrote: »
    BlowMeow wrote: »
    snakebro25 wrote: »
    DLC has always worked in this way. Players with DLC can use their extra content against non-DLC owners in almost any game.

    Nope. It hasn't "always" worked this way. Battlefield Bad Company 2 (another DICE effort) gave more maps and Vietnam, but no extra weapons or perks. So, there you go...

    Oh man, Vietnam. THAT was an expansion.

    Not much difference here with a new mode and maps, but I'll give it to you. Still DICE had DLC maps for BC2, but NO weapons or perks.

    In my opinion an expansion has always been about adding something new to the game that was never there before. Adding the vietnam era to a modern era war game would be very similar to adding clone wars to this game. Galactic Battlegrounds from way back when had an expansion that added Ep II. Empire at War had an expansion that added a whole new faction with its own story, new maps, new units, etc. An expansion really should be, again in my opinion, a big game-changer. Not just adding in little bits that honestly should have been there to begin with.

    Basically, everything they have planned for expansions now should have been part of the free content program, and the expansions should have been Prequel and Sequel based.
    "Yeah, I'm responsible these days. It's the price you pay for being successful."
  • YodaWyatt wrote: »
    I'm pretty sure that you have to have the dlc turned on to use the weapons so when u have it turned off u won't be able to use them and play with players who have it on

    I'm pretty sure that only affects the map rotation, not what weapons are available to you.
  • Bazmann
    348 posts Member
    For this to be 'pay to win', directly or indirectly, the new weapons and cards would have to be more powerful than what is available. What makes you think they are?
  • LobSeahawks12
    24 posts Member
    edited March 2016
    Buy the season pass if you're worried you won't be good enough without it.
    [Moderator Note: Edited per our Community Guidelines]
    Post edited by EA_Afista on
  • xJstarx00
    499 posts Member
    edited March 2016
    Buy the season pass if you're worried you won't be good enough without it.

    Well... I wouldn't of worded it like him but the season pass or even just buying the DLC alone is optional you choose to have it or not if you don't have it you should expect people to have things that you may not some games are like that if you are very concerned feel free to buy the DLC otherwise learn how to counter the newer things you will be going against. (By the way I don't have the Season pass Im just saying what I thought on the subject.)
    [Moderator Note: Edited to match moderated quote]
    Post edited by EA_Afista on
  • firemcd
    105 posts Member
    edited March 2016
    Buy the season pass if you're worried you won't be good enough without it.

    ^ THIS.
    DLC giving people special advantages has ALWAYS been a part of online gaming and WILL BE A PART of games coming up not released yet. It makes the developers and ergo, the shareholders money and always has. What other facts of life are you unhappy with? Santa Claus is'nt real? Rich people rarely go to jail for things poor people spend life in prison for?
    Grow up!
    Most people who were truly unhappy with the game have moved on to other games.
    I cannot even count how many games I bought at full price that sucked balls and never improved at all, and getting a refund was never even an option.
    Remember Medal Of Honor Warfighter?
    It released at full price with much fanfare about being written by real military special operators, and bleeding edge graphics and gameplay.
    I can go to my local Half Price Books and buy a brand new copy for .99 cents USD
    All the whining and hysterics during the first year of that game yielded ZERO palpable changes, and it remains the ***** it was at launch.
    Perspective people!
    Full disclosure, I was whiner on here too, until a few mature thoughts about what the game actually cost in today's money and what I normally get for $110 USD.
    They are actually improving upon things we complained about, they just are not doing it at light speed, and the communication about release dates HAS been lackluster to say the least. The communication situation is not enough for most of us to give up on a fun game. The only time it is not fun for me is when the hackers are present in my game. I believe once they have fleshed out the core mechanics of the gameplay itself, they will focus on the hackers with a serious resolve.
    My 2 cents here, I am no better or worse than any one else in this community.
    [Moderator Note: Edited to match moderated quote]
    Post edited by EA_Afista on
  • DomariNolo7
    190 posts Member
    edited March 2016
    BlowMeow wrote: »
    If I interpreted the new DLC coming out correctly, those who paid for the DLC will have access to weapons and cards that the non-payers won't have. I'm not against DLC and I know some players have been asking for more weapons (I disagree, but not my point), but what this does is it not only changes the battlefield but becomes indirectly "pay to win" or really "pay to have more options to help you win." Skins, maps, customizations, etc. are fine. But getting new weapons and cards that some of us might not have is like playing Madden online and but you can't be the Chiefs or Seahawks because you didn't pay.

    This kinda sounds like my ex wife complaining that she doesn't get to live in as big of a house as me, or have her own car, or be able to take vacations. I have these things because I chose to get a degree and choose to work and make my own money. I do not lay about complaining about the things I do not have because I choose not to pay for them, I either pay for it or am happy with what I have.
    [Moderator Note: Edited per our Community Guidelines]
    Post edited by EA_Afista on
  • i have massive server problems. after the update, the game is very unfair. matchmaking is a mess.
    to play with the pulse canon is a joke, its a fluke to hit.
  • Mountain/molehill... The dlc weapons and star cards are not good enough to gain any advantage over the vanilla content :-)
  • @BlowMeow
    What a load of garbage. I don't have the DLC and I'm doing just fine. I don't feel underpowered or that it is necessary to have the new stuff to play well or that DLC owners have an advantage over me.


    ฯGreatVegetableฯ

  • DO2L
    129 posts Member
    Lonnisity wrote: »
    I look forward to leeching off my DLC partner and using his DLC star cards without buying the DLC lol.

    Did this last night while playing Walker Assault.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!