highly disappointed, i was hoping they'd try to outdo MC2...i most likely won't be picking this up. it would be hilarious if gameloft released a map pack the same day or the day before battlefield comes out.
As I predicted, it seems like a half-assed effort and EA knows it. But of course it'll sell because of the name.
Gameloft's first attempt had 4 players as well. It's still disappointing though, I wish it had at least 8 players...
NO DESTRUCTIBLE ENVIRONMENTS? DISAPPOINTING MULTIPLAYER? INFERIOR GRAPHICS COMPARED TO mc2? man, talk about a game not living up to its hype...
I'm really not going to judge just yet. It's their first attempt, and I doubt they've fully acknowledged their competition, i.e. Gameloft. I can't wait till this game is released, and all of the comments will bash the game, then soon after once the whiners have sunk into it, they'll compliment EA.
You get what you pay for. This game WILL sell for 4.99. For 5 bucks, what the heck did you expect? This game will cost 7.5 percent of what the console version cost back when the console version first debuted. EA tried selling games for 9.99 back during the infancy of the iPhone, but not nearly enough people were willing to purchase games at that price for EA to continue down that road. If this was a $10 game, then perhaps you would get some of those things from the console version that have been omitted. If more people had purchased Need For Speed Shift or The Sims 3 back when those titles cost 9.99, then we probably wouldn't be recieving such watered down versions of EA games now. We have only our own cheapness to blame for the enevitability of what has happened here. EA believes that 4.99 is the sweet spot. This is the price point that will allow EA to maximize their profits on the Appstore. Naturally, they are going to budget accordingly when it comes to development of Appstore games. A game that sells for 4.99 will be allocated far less resources up front for the purposes of development then a game that sells for 9.99, or 59.99.
That's not going to happen. This is a very lame effort on EA's part, they obviously haven't learned anything from others attempts at a fps on the AppStore, from what we know about this game it sounds really good 3 YEARS AGO and I won't give into it. If they want my money then they will have to earn it and give me something worthy of playing. The campaing may end up being good but that's not what battlefield is all about. It just shows that EA doesn't care for what we want and their just gonna keep throwing junk on the appstor and give it a well known brand name.
You really need to get off this topic of getting what you pay for. Nobodys complaining about price, they are giving us a crap game that's nots suppose to be crap. I would gladly pay more if that's what it takes for them to put some effort into the game. Sure the campaing is worth 4.99 but nobody wants a campaing. Your continued argument comparing $10 vs $60 makes no sense at all and I'm not going to tell you why because many other people have already told you, maybe everyone is wrong and you are right but not likely
No-you missed his point. Your expecting this to be another game from the BF series, but he's expecting a 4.99 game. And there's no reason you should bd expecting a $60 game. And just because you would pay $10 , doesn't mean other people would. The whole app store is geared towards bottom of the barrel pricing.
Let's pretend the battlefield brand isn't slapped on. Is this game worth $4.99? Too many people are comparing this to the consol. Modern combat 2 didn't have that issue since it's native to iOS.
Yes but that argument seems to come up in every thread. I was expecting a battlefield game because it was said bfbc2 is coming to iPhone, at that time we just knew bfbc2 was coming to iPhone. Now we find out it only has 4 player online when mc2 has 10, and I can understand why there is no dustructable environments but your right, this is not a battlefield game so it should not bear the name
Multiplayer supports 3g wireless network play. And to me, that is definitely a plus. We'll see if it's stable, granted, but it doesn't matter to me how many players Modern Combat 2 supports, or how awesome the online is in Gameloft games. If it's wi-fi only, I'll never really play it. I'm not going to use my wi-fi at home to play an iDevice game online. I might actually play the MP here. Gameloft MP means nothing to me.
Yes. As soon as people hear a brand name, they instantly think of the quality associated with that brand. When you here Coca-Cola, you think of a cold bottle of soda, right? But you're really paying 1/12 of the price of that soda, so you get a lukewarm, flat bottle. That's how it works with this app. It is a great app for the price, but not for the series. And in a perfect world, this app probably shouldn't carry the BF branding, but that branding is huge money. There's no way a company would just let that name sit there.
I was really interested in this when I first heard of it since I'm a big big BFBC2 fan on PS3 and played the hell out of it. But now I'm not too sure. There where 4 main selling points that could have warranted a buy from me over MC2 (which I already bought anyway): - Destructible environment (Trademark of Battlefield) - Classes that we can choose from (Assault, Engineer, Medic and Recon) - Vehicules (Tanks, Choppers, Boats) - Big games (like at least 8 players to be able to do 4vs4 squad deathmatch, squad rush or squad conquest). Destructible environment was a long shot for iOS it doesn't surprise me that they couldn't do it, maybe in a latter sequel when the iPhone 5+ will be out. Classes are a must in any cases, that's what kept me returning to the game over and over, to level up my class and unlock new weapons. MC2 had the weapon unlocking, now just do it to specific classes. It can't be that hard to implement. If they can get the vehicules in the campaign, I guess they could probably implement it somehow, for at least the tank of the boat, since the chopper might be too hard. Finally, Archetype and MC2 have been able to squeeze 5 vs 5 matches, so I'm pretty sure EA can implement 4 vs 4 matches (with mic recognition for tactical purposes ).
I didn't get NFS:S or The Sims 3 on the iPhone because they sucked. Plain and simple. I probably wouldn't have bought them for 99 cents either. If a game is good i'll usually get it whatever the cost (>$70) but I know what I want and don't want, and I won't buy something for the hope of them making a better version (see Sim City Deluxe). I don't see how that's being "cheap".
