Kit Upgrade DLC coming to Battlefield: Bad Company 2

This DLC is the right thing, because i can’t stand the same uniform and the same face.

DICE are only interested in “trying” to get free maps out there it seems. Letting EA rip people off with over priced skins dosnt seem to bother them.

Well, i’m sure not going to buy this, but this DLC is a really what this game need. When i see the same face and the same uniform… Shock…

There we go.

So, fanboys: How is charging just under 10 bucks for four weapon and four player skins better than charging 30 for five maps?

PC Players will Get it for Free

@5 Oh this could be sooooo cool

@4 Easy. If you are a fan you can support DICE and buy these if you want. If you don’t want, you still going to play Free maps and no one is taking them from you.
They did right thing. Basically its not important to buy this DLC, but if you want, go get it.

If Videocompany don’t force you to buy it to play the game, then thats ok. Activision force people to buy maps, because without them, you won’t enjoy something new.

@6 I knew there would be excuses, but I didn’t think they were gonna be that bad.

EA is selling you something that the community would gladly make for free in about a weeks time, for just under 10 bucks, whereas Activision is selling you something that has actual value for 30.

And you still don’t have to purchase those maps if you don’t want to. A week ago just over 20% of the installbase had bought the stimulus package according to analysts, so technically not buying it would still leave you a greater selection of lobbies.

Nobody’s talking about forcing anyone to do anything here, it’s all about value. Skins ain’t it.

@7 Yes, of course if i want, i could purchase MW2 maps but without buying you can’t play them. Because i don’t have them. I need money for that to unlock content to play.

Here you can not buy ANYTHING and still you will play all the maps for free. Customization DLC don’t affect your gameplay.

DLC for skins is a long stuff since first DLC came out. Uncharted 2 uses that, AVP uses that, Resistance 2, Bioshock 2 and e.t.c.

Stop fucking trolling. Its a standard DLC since long ago and if you don’t want to purchase it, you still can play all maps for free.

Please, stop fucking trolling. Seriously. Over standard DLC he calls everybody a fanboy. Maps should be always for free and please don’t say nothing about modding because you don’t know shit about modding.

I have plenty of BIG mods for Crysis 1 and to make a model you can’t use editor for this. you need absolutely new textures and skin editor that is included only in developers editor with 3D studio max.

Apparently with Doctor Pepper codes you get this for free, but who doesn’t have those..have to pay? Ah well, i don’t give a rats ass about skins and all that. Just new maps is where it’s at for me.

During the Xbox days, DLC used to be free. I remember the Ghost Recon games and the last one had some DLC and it was all free, great times. These days, we are actually happy to find free DLC. And praise Dice for giving away free maps…but hey , it is what it is. X360 came out, and wow..all of a sudden DLC cost lots of points. And sometimes it’s beyond just a few points. *Cough, MW2 *

And yet again you’re all missing the reason why this is premium DLC – achievements, plain and simple.

@8 Well I’ll admit to trolling a little bit in this case, but that’s just because EA are so insanely guilty of hypocrisy that you really can’t help it.

And you’re basically saying that DLC is great as long as it doesn’t add anything to the game? Isn’t that the only purpose of DLC? If it doesn’t improve the game, why on earth should you have to pay for it?

A map pack actually extends the lifetime of your game, and a Stimulus Pack map only costs three times as much, as one of EAs skins. That’s making it look like a bargain to me.

Map packs have never been free as standard. Look at Battlefield 2 if you need a reference. It’s quite obvious that the only reason why EA decided to pledge free maps is because they’re desperate to gain on MW2s marketshare.

As I wrote on the forum, it’s the oldest trick in the book. If you’re trying to sell a car that’s less in demand, throw in the extras for free.

They’re not being nice to you, they’re bargaining with you. That’s their job, and in this case, they’re just blatantly ripping you off.

Battlefield 2 maps were free, Battlefield 2142 maps were free, Battlefield 1942 maps were free.

Maps must be always free and DICE wanted it to its product. DICE was always like that.

DLC is not adding only skins, it give you achievements (if you care), camouflaged weapons and medals.
DLC is about: If you care, go and buy, if you don’t care you can ignore it but will recieve Content to play with others in the future for FREE.

MW2 – if you care about playing more you need to buy maps anyway.

I will not buy skins and will play free maps that are much BIGGER then MW2 maps.

+ Stimulus is a serious rip off, they are bringing old maps. Thats of course not a rip off, right? Explanation about: the teh best maps from MW1 to MW2 is cool.
I saw at Gametrailers videos about old maps versus new one. thats a blatant rip off. With their engine they can make a crossover and add some stuff. WOW… Such a big work.

I’m interested in what maps will bring DICE to the table. all i know that they are going to be bigger, but how much is another story. Still its free and i’m not going to pay a penny for it.

You are paying to unlock data that is already on the disk!! I hate this kind of crap. Why should I have to pay for something I have already bought!

“Battlefield 2 maps were free”

Not quite. Euro Force and Armored Fury -whilst they did add abit more then maps- were mainly maps you had to pay for.

“I will not buy skins and will play free maps that are much BIGGER then MW2 maps.”

I think its abit early to assume that ALL of the BFBC2 maps will be free (infact i’m sure EA will charge nearly the same price for them as Acti is with the MW2 ones). As for size as an argument; I can easily say that even without the Stimulus pack, MW2 has more maps. So you dont need to even buy the map pack to get more then BFBC2 has to offer.

I’d rather have the option to pay for skins and customisation than having to shell out for maps. When paying for DLC alters how the game plays, it turns in to a case of the ‘haves and have nots’ and that simply isnt right.

Right now, its a pain because this DLC isnt on the pc yet

@12 Haha, DICE certainly weren’t, and aren’t, like that. Actually Battlefield 2 had some of the most expensive extra material I can remember seeing. It cost about 5 dollars less than a full game and all you got were a few models, a few guns and a few maps.

Sure, the “booster packs” were free, but they came so late in the game they couldn’t have sold them anyway.

For the record I do think Activision are squeezing the lemon, especially with the old maps, but the fact is that they’re still keeping within the limits of disposable income, as their sales figures quite clearly show. And as opposed to the competition, they aren’t wanting money for something the community would gladly make for free, if DICE would let them.

Also, in contrast to DICE, they aren’t using a template machine that just spits out identical buildings and streets, they’re actually putting the maps together quite meticulously.

And as Gekidami says, I really wouldn’t be surprised if they somehow managed to make you pay for maps through an “expansion pack” or whatever. That’s just my theory, and it remains to be seen, but they aren’t going to make a lot of money simply selling skins, even if they are asking insane prices for them.

@15 Welcome to the free market, comrade. Those who buy, get, those who don’t, watch.

Since when should developers and publishers be doing free work for you?

@16 – i didnt say they should. but recall the back lash EA got over paid for content/weapons with original Bad company title?

Customisation – paid for? Sure. But better weapons/maps? Naaaa – Its not an MMO and as such, shouldnt be treated like one