JANUARY 2014 BF4/EA/DICE NEWS

EA and YouTube producers broke FTC rules with Battlefield 4 promotion
LevelCapGaming, FrankieOnPC, JackFrags, all took money from EA to say good things about BF4, without any disclosure.
January 24th, 2014
LINK  

Earlier this week it was revealed that EA paid YouTube producers to say good things about Battlefield 4 when it launched, and to hold off any criticism until November 29th — a month after release.

EA paid out $200,000 to these YouTube producers, many of whom have over a million subscribers. While it’s understandable that the YouTube content makers deserve to earn money for their work, they did no disclose that they were paid to say nice things about Battlefield 4.

After the reveal that EA sponsored these videos, the company released a statement where they specifically said that YouTube producers must follow FTC guidelines and disclose that the content is sponsored. But very few, if any of the big-time YouTube producers did that.

The list of big YouTubers who were part of EA’s campaign counts LevelCapGaming, FrankieOnPC, JackFrags, and many others. With millions of subscribers, they were perfect for EA’s sponsorship — all of them posted videos that meet specifically EA’s criteria (“Battlefield 4 launch” in the title, a link to the EA’s official site in description, and more). All of the videos also include exactly the same bit.ly link as EA specifies in the contract. None of the YouTube producers disclosed that they were paid by EA to do this.

LevelCapGaming, FrankieOnPC, JackFrags, and the rest have thereby broken FTC rules and could face serious fines from the government agency. EA could be in trouble as well.

Interestingly, after EA’s deadline on November 29, all of these YouTube producers started criticizing Battlefield 4 and its numerous problems. Up until then, they never said a word about the glitches, just as EA’s contract said.

Here are a few examples of videos that were sponsored by EA, but never disclosed it:

From FrankieOnPC (only says positive things, despite the game being unplayable at that time. He actually even says “I’m not paid to say this” in one of his videos):




From LevelCapGaming (specifically talks about Levolution, which is what EA was trying to push with the paid sponsorship):



From JackFrags, another popular Battlefield 4 YouTube channel:


Each of these three YouTube channels have posted numerous Battlefield 4 launch videos as part of EA’s campaign, and they have accumulated millions of views (and earned thousands of dollars for their creators). A simple “Battlefield 4 launch” search on YouTube reveals a ton of videos from many content producers that meet all of EA’s guidelines (see below). Yet, none of the videos disclose that they are sponsored by EA.

This is just one of the latest PR disasters for EA, one that could cause a lot of trouble not just to EA, but to YouTube content producers as well.

Here’s EA’s full contract that these channels had to comply with:



And proof that the videos are using exactly the same link as EA provided (via Reddit):

Disclosure can help Youtube content creators take the power back from the publishers
By Ben Kuchera on Jan 23, 2014 at 2:00p
LINK  



I’ve spent a decent amount of time in the past few days looking up YouTube videos by the campaign tags to watch the results of the for-pay advertising campaigns that have been all over the news.

I’ve learned that it’s very hard to do video content well, but some online personalities have mastered the art of playing a game and talking over the action, explaining what’s happening and why. I had fun, and began to understand why things such as Let’s Plays are becoming so popular. The content is fun and lighthearted in a way that’s hard to match in text.

It took a bit of education for me to know what videos had been paid for by Microsoft or EA. It’s not that disclosure past those tags is lacking, it’s that it doesn’t exist in large swaths of content. Once I understood campaign tags and the specific wording to watch for, it was surprising how many videos contained promotional material that was undisclosed unless you knew to look for that tag.

Viewers shouldn't have to dig for clues. It's time for better disclosure in video content, and this move will only help the people who create this fun and often informative content.

A new model, with new rules

Let’s start with two thoughts. First, video is a relatively new way to spread video game news, opinion and reviews, and the rules for how to do it well are still being written. Second, people who understand video and do it well for their audience deserve to be paid for their content. It’s important not to attack a new way of talking about games or to point fingers.

The argument that these agreements between publishers and video providers are just like most ad-supported content doesn’t hold up, however. Most sites have dedicated areas for ads, and those ads don’t change what’s written. This leads to some funny situations, such as when a negative story is surrounded by ads for the service being criticized, but the point remains the companies paying for the ads aren’t allowed to change what’s being said or how it’s framed.

The video ad campaigns don’t offer that sort of separation. Not only is the ad inside the content, in many cases it’s the content itself. If the personality creating the video says negative things about the product, they lose their ad revenue if the agreement states only positive things may be shared. The publisher creating the rules has direct control over what is said, and what is allowed in terms of criticism.

They can instruct the person creating the video not to focus on glitches, and they can add requirements for specific wording. There is no separation of church and state; the capital building has simply been moved inside the church. This is a far cry from ad placement on traditional news outlets, or clearly marked pre-roll ads on video content.

In an ideal world there would be some kind of disclosure about who is paying for these videos, and what limitations they place on the content, but that’s not happening in practice. The FTC rules that are often discussed are toothless, at least when it comes to the person being paid. There is nothing to be lost legally by not disclosing that you’re cashing checks from EA or Microsoft to promote their products directly to the audience, or that you’re being paid to avoid saying negative things about certain products or services.

Why it’s important to know

Understanding who pays for the content you consume is important, especially after it has been proven that the companies paying for videos have such direct control over what is said and shown. If someone has a negative thought about the Xbox One, they know they can’t express it during one of these videos or they will forfeit payment.

It’s not a chilling effect, where writers worry about alienating companies so ads are pulled, it’s a direct effect: They know for a fact that negative statements will lead to a loss of revenue. These campaigns give publishers control over editorial content in a way that’s impossible in traditional publishing.

What I’ve been told by multiple people working in video is that this is simply the way things are done. They want to make a living creating content that is enjoyable to watch, and that’s a fine goal for anyone who creates value for the audience. So how do we create better trust between the audience and the content creators while limiting the power publishers have over the content?

Disclosure.

If EA is paying you to make a fun video about Battlefield, just say it! If you signed up to talk about the Xbox One and you like the system, and you honestly believe it’s a good system, simply tell your audience that Microsoft is supporting you when you deliver that message. This makes it clear that you have nothing to hide, and it also puts pressure on the person paying for the content: They are now also in the public eye.

If Microsoft creates strict rules for what can and can't be said by well-known video creators, it will hurt their brand as well. Disclosure helps content creators take back some of the power by bringing the audience into the know, and explaining what is being paid for, and what is being given in return.

If you feel like you have to hide who is paying you, you shouldn’t take the money. If you feel like there’s nothing wrong with it, being honest with your audience will build trust.

When someone goes to a gaming news outlet it’s easy to see who is advertising on the site, as the ads flank the content. Once the content becomes the ad, or the ads are seamlessly integrated into the video with nothing marking their existence, things become muddy. Simply saying, at the beginning of the video, who is paying for the content removes that issue. It invites the viewer inside the process and creates trust. It shows a level of respect for your audience and, after all, you're working for them, not the publishers. It's important to make that clear to everyone involved.

"The publisher creating the rules has direct control over what is said, and what is allowed in terms of criticism."

Disclosure removes the feeling that the content creator and the publisher are secretly trying to sell a game or system to the audience. Being honest upfront means the audience and the content creator can have an honest discussion about the product again, with everyone understanding the parameters of that conversation. Make sponsorship open, disclosed and discussed.

There is no scandal if a well-trusted video personality explains why they like Battlefield so much, and why they signed up to create videos to help promote the game. In fact, that makes the advertising more effective: It becomes an endorsement that's both promotional and personal. EA should be begging for more discussion of this nature.

The person who allegedly leaked the original documents wasn’t trying to "nail" Microsoft or EA, they were trying to educate the people who watch these videos to look for campaign tags, since that was often the only form of disclosure that publishers saw the video as an advertisement. They wanted to create a consumer of content who is better informed about who is paying for what you're watching, and how that process could suppress certain opinions.



And it's working. Microsoft has commented on the issue, and restrictions about what can and can't be said are now being openly discussed. They will likely be tilted slightly more in the content creator's favor if there is a fear of these agreements being made public. The situation has become better now that more people know what's going on, not worse. It's time for the people creating these videos to continue that process with full disclosure, on every video, every time their work contains sponsored content that's paid for by the companies they're discussing.

Video creators live and die with their audience, as does everyone who creates ad-supported content. Explaining how ads are being shown to that audience, or that the content itself contains for-pay content, allows a better relationship between the person viewing the video and the person making it. This isn't about pointing fingers, it's about making sure people who create content can get paid, retain control over the tone of their work and connect with an appreciative audience. Disclosure helps in all three ways.

Of course, we haven't seen every contract, and it's possible non-disclosure is part of the agreement. If that's the case there remains the possibility of running afoul of the FTC, and the more this is discussed openly the less power publishers will have to enforce or even ask for those sorts of consumer-hostile demands. The more popular video creators can simply deny their audience to advertisers by saying non-disclosure isn't an option, and that's the sort of move that helps tilt the power back in their favor.

There isn’t a scandal as much as its an opportunity to create a healthier ecosystem in video content, and that begins with talking about who is paying you, and what they get for that money. Shine a light on the practice and, not only can people see better, but the roaches flee.

Some games pay to be featured on Conan's 'Clueless Gamer' sketch
January 24, 2014 | By Alex Wawro
LINK    

   "One source familiar with the show's practices said about a quarter of the games that were featured on the [Clueless Gamer] skit were paid endorsement deals. None of these deals are disclosed to the public.”

- Re/code report on which games paid to be on Conan O'Brien's "Clueless Gamer" sketch.  

Newsbrief: Re/code reporters Eric Johnson and Amy Schatz published a story today detailing their investigation into when and why Conan O'Brien's talk show accepts payments for certain games to be featured as part of its "Clueless Gamer" sketch.

It's a good bit of reporting that includes information and opinions from a diverse array of sources, including opinions from publishers who paid to have games featured on the show and those who didn't, yet had their games featured anyway -- often to mocking, negative commentary from Conan himself.

This is troubling, because -- as the Re/code reporters point out -- Conan never discloses that roughly a third of the games featured on the show have paid for the privilege.

"These Clueless Gamer segments are not serious reviews nor endorsements — they are strictly comedic sketches," a Conan show spokesman told Re/code in an email. “We do not believe sponsorship identification is needed."

Read the full report for more details, including comments from multiple sources on the Conan show as well as people who paid to have their game featured on the "Clueless Gamer" segment and those who did not.

Battlefield 4 YouTube Personality Speaks Out, Responds to EA Advertising “Scandal”
13 hours ago David Veselka
LINK  



Last week, news of EA paying influential YouTube personalities to advertise their games, including Battlefield 4, broke out, causing quite a stir in the relationship between video producers and their followers, not to mention the ties between EA and its fans.

In an example posted on NeoGAF, via IGN, a leaked contract outlined guidelines that producers needed to follow in order to get paid a certain amount of CPM. It included requests like leaving out commentary on bugs and glitches and highlighting only specific platforms, like the Xbox One, PlayStation 4, or PC.

Few sites were quick to criticize producers without full knowledge on the subject matter, and so well-known Battlefield YouTube personality LevelCapGamer took it upon himself to further explain the situation and issue a personal response to the matter.

“I’m writing this response because someone needs to say something on the YouTubers’ behalf about what happened is happening with the situation regarding YouTubers getting paid to make videos of Battlefield and other games,” he wrote in a recent Reddit post. “This is not an apology.”

“Most of the recent articles I have read regarding this subject talks about EA buying positive reviews and asking us to lie to our fan base about the state of Battlefield 4. Nothing could be further from the truth, and unfortunately these articles have been written to grab attention, so have dishonestly portrayed this situation as a scandal.



“Having been a part of several EA Ronku campaigns, I can tell you that at no point was I asked to lie or falsify my opinion of a game. EA is aware that asking people to do this is wrong and if you actually read the assignment documents that were leaked, EA never asks us to misinform people by only saying positive things about the game. I would love to disclose the actual campaigns to the public so you could see just how tame the requests were but I don’t have the authority to do so.”

He goes into further detail about the ordeal, which you can read for yourself right here, but it appears that his primary takeaway is as follows: “Everything that I say in my Battlefield videos is genuine; no opinions are bought, and thus I didn’t feel the need to disclose that I was getting paid by EA to say what I want.”

“I don’t feel like I’ve cheated anyone or falsely influenced anyone into purchasing Battlefield or any other game,” he concluded. “And while I cannot speak for all my fellow YouTubers, I know that those with whom I work on a regular basis feel the same way.”

Popular YouTube personality Boogie2988 also commented on the state of advertisement on YouTube in an informative video posted on his channel. In a similar case between Microsoft and content creators, he noted that this type of advertisement might be more commonplace throughout the industry than expected.

What’s your take? As a viewer, do you feel you are being swayed by money-fueled opinions, or is it a fair-and-square way for content creators to earn a living?
Update

Shortly after publishing this piece, we noticed a video from yet another popular Battlefield 4 YouTube personality JackFrags discussing similar points. It’s a bit on the long side, but we think it’s hearing out what Battlefield producers like JackFrags have to say.
______________



5 Reader comments

J4K5

I enjoy their youTUBE channels and am not bothered if they are getting money...these guys need to make a living. Im all too aware how stories are written to get people to pick up their pitchforks and as such always read a post with a pinch of salt..... lets move on chaps.


TI_21

Still feel like Youtubers should put a box, where they disclose that a vid is sponsored by company X, into a corner at the beginning of the vid for a few seconds.


Tommygun921

I heard another popular BF YouTuber during a Twitch stream talking about this and as.he said they were asked to showcase certain aspects of bf4 and be eligible for a higher cpm. Like levolution or other new features to the BF series. The only issue I had with any of this was the CoD commentators that took advantage of this for a quick buck. Im glad to see that my favorite BF commentators received this as they have been loyally producing BF vids for years.


marpla78

Is someone believe the big time youtube producer dont recive money from the companies like EA is really living a bubble. I dont mind that, they have to make money for living is like the rest of us with our jobs. Is clear that all the hype before the game was a little to much...now that the game is broken and with a uncertain future for me i think we can see more different opinions from the youtubers or more close to the "fans" if you want to go that way.

I follow Matt, Jack, Rival, Level and Westie and i enjoy the channels learn a few tricks from them, probably hard to them to give a 100% real feedback of the game without messing up some of the part of their contracts...so i undersand them.

For me BF4 is the point break for EA with all the problems and bad management, either they go really bad or they start to rise from the ashes (doubt it).



Jason Lane

If someone gets paid to endorse a product then what's the big deal? It's the responsibility of the public to weed out which YouTube personalities are unbiased. George Foreman put out that grill that promoted healthy cooking and he was still a mountain of a man. I'm not sure where I was going with that.

EA Addresses Battlefield 4 Post-Launch Issues, Calling it ‘An Amazing Game’ Despite Complaints
10 hours ago David Veselka
LINK  



Members of EA are calling Battlefield 4 “an amazing game with massive innovation”, despite not-so-positive reactions coming from the game’s hardcore and more vocal audiences.

In a recent financial earnings call involving head figures of the publishing company, Executive VP of EA Games Label Patrick Söderlund along with CEO and director Andrew Wilson answered a few of the tougher question regarding Battlefield 4′s troubled launch.

Walking listeners through the events surrounding the game’s launch, Söderlund explained that “it was a very complex game, launching on 2 entirely new console platforms, as well as current-gen and PC. We were pushing innovation heavily and we’re delivering 60 frames per second gameplay for 64 players plus the ability to connect via mobile tablet as a commander into the product, coupled those with some very innovative features in the gameplay side.

“Based on our prelaunch testing, our beta performance, we were confident the game was ready when it was launched. Shortly after launch, however, we began hearing about problems from our player community, and the development team quickly began to address the situation. So what have we done since we encountered the problems is we were fortunate to have an architecture in place that allows us to adjust and update the game rapidly, and that’s actually what we’ve done. We released multiple software updates across all platforms to resolve the primary issues and game stability has significantly increased.

“The challenge that we’ve faced with Battlefield 4 were different from anything that we’ve seen before with other games. There were different issues that only manifest its scale in the post-launch live environment. We’re taking multiple steps to evaluate what occurred and incorporate those learnings into our development process for future products, so we don’t experience the same problems again. I would close on the fact that Battlefield 4 remains an amazing game with massive innovation, and we’re confident that gamers will be logging on to play for a long time to come.”

Wilson added that “The Battlefield team acted swiftly to address the issues through game updates, and they continue to make refinements as part of our live service to ensure a great game experience for all Battlefield 4 players. Battlefield 4 is an amazing game in size, scope and gameplay, and we’re confident that gamers will be playing for a long time to come.”

Earlier, DICE announced this coming February as a Player Appreciation Month as a way to show appreciation towards dedicated fans while also outlining a few incoming stability and performance improvements.
______________


9 Reader comments


   VEX_VEHIX
   • 2 hours ago

   "There were different issues that only manifest its scale in the post-launch live environment."

   Blah.

   Excuses, excuses. Everyone knows issues can happen after launch, as a massive amount of people are logging in.

   This is exactly why they should release a PROPER Beta months in advance. So they can catch those challenging issues which were "different" from anything that they’ve seen before with other games.

   Just stop releasing "marketing stunt" betas with pre-order..weeks before launch. Yes?

   Enough is enough. This "acknowledgement/cop-out" is BS.

   Games are rushed, plain and simple. Now-a-days we purchase the actual Beta, then wait a year to play a patched up "final" build + DLC. Yay!
   

       Just saying VEX_VEHIX
       • 43 minutes ago

       It's our mistake that we let them take our money for an unfinished product. EA is fighting with Activision for sales and we're giving them the money to do this.
       


   Andrew Schroeder
   • 32 minutes ago

   Innovations like random, luck based "features" in a skill based game? Random optic sway, random Battlepacks that allow some people to rank to max level in a weekend, while others it takes months with the same skill. Things like Battlepacks need to be linear, not a random effect. Skill based games will not survive on random "features". Players do not find it fun to be affected by luck in a skill based FPS shooter. Many people play the game only because there is no good alternative, not because it is actually a good game, myself included. If there was a competitor, you better believe I would be exploring it, and I can also guarantee DICE and EA would be way more on their game because their sales would be in the toilet if someone rolled along with a fully stable high tick rate game with 50% of the "features" of BF4. Please, some other developer make a vehicle based game and show DICE how BF4 should have been done. PLS

   BTW, I used to play BF3 daily, now I play BF4 1-2 times a week and my friends list (almost all competitive, skillful players) is normally completely empty. No one to team up with makes BF4 dull and frustrating.
 

   Timothy David Medric
   • an hour ago

   I honestly haven't played this game in close to a month and a half because of the bugs and glitches, and I was a hardcore BF3 player. Can someone tell me if this game has improved, or should I just keep playing FIFA?
   


       marpla78 Timothy David Medric
       • an hour ago

       the game is not a the his best shape...could be better after the patch so until that keep playing FIFA
       


   marpla78
   • an hour ago

   So basically this people think we are idiots? never stop to amaze me how the companies behave when the real thing is so different.

   Sad.
   

   Orcun Acik
   • 2 hours ago

   Innovation my ass! it is same as BF3 and it also have the same bugs ! It is constantly crashing in 3 or 4 rounds of gameplay. They didn't fix BF3 sound problem, crashing problem nearly in 3 years. So same problems remains in BF4. Why? Because of FrostByte and they can't fix it. Because core developers gone!
   Btw on current-gen consoles when you play 12 vs 12 multiplayer, the game only renders 8 vs. 8 actually. This is a scam!
   


       Just saying Orcun Acik
       • 41 minutes ago

       I find myself playing BF3 on my PS3 way more than BF4 on PS4 because of its issues.
       


   Kyle Jackson
   • 6 minutes ago
       −

   They had the chance to dethrone COD in terms of sales, and they blew it because of their own greed. Pre-ordering from EA is a no-no for me now.

So.... EA is back to blaming SONY and it's new PS4 console on BF4's new game issues and customer's issues with their new game??  Didn't they do this with BF3 and it's launch in 2011?  Is EA setting the table... to not fix the major problems with BF4 and just blame SONY to get you off their backs?  Will BF5 in 2015 be successful with it's sales if BF4 isn't fixed and finished?

I know some SoF Members are not happy with BF4's problems being address in our forums almost everyday... but we will not blow smoke up your ass and tell you how great the game is... when you must deal with BF4's problems each time you play it. We will report the good in BF4 if it happens.... and we will bring you the bad when it's reported.
_________


EA Says Battlefield 4 Sales Unaffected by ‘Quality Issues’
Yesterday David Veselka
LINK  



Despite quality concerns surrounding DICE’s flagship shooter Battlefield 4, publishing company EA says any decline in sales can be attributed to the next-generation console transition, rather than a perceivably under-performing product.

During a recent third quarter 2014 investor call, EA president Peter Moore noted that Battlefield 4 sales are unaffected by ‘quality issues’ and will continue to ‘sell effectively throughout the next fiscal year’.

“We obviously saw some decline in current-gen software that wasn’t picked up by the increased anticipation that gamers had and the sales thereof of next-gen. Battlefield 4 was no different than FIFA or Need for Speed in this issue, but this was focused on current-gen rather than, we believe, any issues with the game itself,” he said. “This game has got a long tail, as you well know, and we will continue to be able to sell this effectively throughout the next fiscal year.”

“So yes, we did see some impact of the current-gen softness that was indicated by Andrew and Blake in their prepared statements, but this is not, we believe, a link to any quality issues.”
___________


   22 Reader comments



   Xfactor
   • 14 hours ago

   Peter Moore is delusional if he thinks that all of the negative publicity regarding the less than stellar state of the game at launch, most of which is still seen today, did not affect sales in a negative manor.
   
       Xfactor Xfactor
       • 10 hours ago

       My friends list, which is made up of mostly competitive players from Battlefield 4, is an absolute ghost town. These are people that were active nightly in BF3 up until the release of BF4. Some have not even purchased BF4 yet and many have uninstalled or simply moved on to something else. All of this is an indicator of the financial state of Battlefield 4. If you cannot sell those who grew up in the BF franchise and RETAIN them that is a horrible indication of a large scale issues.


           DerpSlayer Xfactor
           • 7 hours ago

           Ditto. I was in a clan that was pretty active in BF3, 20-30 people. We played in 16v16 and 8v8 tourneys like Alienware Arena & others, we had guys that were Top5 in jets, tanks, had the #1 MAA guy (Slaughter), we'd play literally every single day. Excitement could not have been higher in the run up to BF4.

           When I look at my friendlist now I reflexively hit refresh thinking there's something wrong with my browser or battlelog because nobody's ever playing. I'll randomly click on their profiles to see if I'm just missing them and they're on at different times. Nope. Guys that were gods in BF3 will show as being Lvl8 and their last round was "3 months ago". Sure, there's the BF burnout factor. But all of them? No way. There's more than burnout at play here. And there's more than bugs at play here.

           In the course of catering ever more to casuals and console kids, the game stopped being fun.
           

           Aria68 Xfactor
           • 8 hours ago

           They may have had another reason to move on xfactor ... A real BF player that played BF3 for a long time cannot simply change his habits and move on to some other games. It's BS. You Know that and I Know that when you play Battlefield with your heart, no other game can give you the same satisfaction. Nothing can replace it! but it is your duty as a BF vet to msg them and tell them to come back once updates take place ;)btw Love your video!
           

       Bandwidth Bandito Xfactor
       • 14 hours ago

       When your job is to sell the spin, and REALLY sell it despite the mess around you, you might be forgiven for starting to believe what you're trying to sell. Like a Stockholm syndrome for captives to their own falsehoods. BF will recover with time but there can be no doubt that damage was done and was done due to greed and mismanagement by EA. I don't have much time for shareholders generally as they often have agendas that are counter to the ultimate good of the companies they own stocks in, BUT the shareholders do seem to be on the money (pun!) on this one. The spin was high and EA seems to be suggesting that a buggy release is a "normal" thing now. Let's hope this trend reverses as this is not good value for anyone (shareholders included).
       

       dieger Xfactor
       • 13 hours ago

       He should work for the MS PR
       

       Kyle Jackson Xfactor
       • 14 hours ago

       I didn't buy it or premium, I don't think I'm the only one. I will get it, only when I feel it's ready.
       

           Call Of Duty 2 4ever <3 Kyle Jackson
           • 11 hours ago

           I Didn't buy it and im still happy
           

           dieger Kyle Jackson
           • 12 hours ago

           I got it free so its no biggie to me
           

   sd94
   • 14 hours ago

   I wouldn't say unaffected, since I refuse to buy the game as a result of all this, but I'm sure the difference isn't enough for them to notice.
   

       Wrathchildx666x sd94
       • 14 hours ago

       I haven't bought it yet either for the same reason
       

   MegaMan3k
   • 14 hours ago

   No surprise here. Gamers have big mouths and weak wallets.
   

       Katana67 MegaMan3k
       • 13 hours ago

       Unfortunately there's no real way for a buyer to actually try the product without making a full purchase. Sure, you can read some reviews or listen to some Youtubers, but the reviews are inherently either biased or short-sighted. And the Youtubers often don't know what the hell is good in the first place.

       So your only choice is to buy the game to try it out. Which is all the companies care about. You can be dissatisfied with it, but as long as buying their product is a part of the equation, it doesn't matter.

       Point-being, gamers are inherently at a disadvantage in not being ABLE to speak with their wallets, unless they make assumptions (because there's always the chance that the next installment of a game could improve).

       I can't decide whether I like a movie or not until Ive payed my $9.50 at the theater and sat through it. The same applies to video games. Sure, with a movie you can check out aggregate reviews. But, if you're a self-minded individual who draws his/her own conclusions, your ONLY option is to spend money to buy a product just to see if you like it or not.
       

       theplantain MegaMan3k
       • 14 hours ago

       you're right...with the exception of BF I didn't buy EA published games...and the next BF may not be a day one purchase, i might not buy it at all
       

       Bandwidth Bandito MegaMan3k
       • 14 hours ago

       Shut up and take my money....oh wait... yeah ok you're right *sobs*
       

   dpg70
   • 2 hours ago

   I think they'll see the biggest impact with BF5 sales.
   1
   

   ali jackson
   • 13 hours ago

   fact of the matter is the game is FUN AS HELL at this point since the recent fixes and updates to the game..
   

   ali jackson
   • 14 hours ago

   Activision said that thing about GHOSTs.... THIS IS NOTHING DIFFERENT FROM WHAT ACTIVTION SAYS.. THIS IS WHAT PUBLISHERS DO.. maybe its some truth to it since BOTH publishers said that same thing.
   

   theCarbonite
   • 14 hours ago

   I'm personally advising people to boycott BF4 and all other DICE / EA products until the "quality" issues within BF4 are fixed; as a Premium user too I am extremely disappointed with the state of the game I have paid through the nose for which was a good 6 months away from completion. EA think their sales are unaffected? Think again. COD smashed BF4 (even in the dire state that game got released in as well...) in terms of numbers over ALL platforms so if EA and DICE were planning on getting a march on the competition by releasing their game early and patching the crap out of it to make it playable whilst people wait around for the other competing FPS games to come out it certainly back-fired spectacularly. Next time finish the game off properly; delay it, do what they did with Watchdogs and make sure that what you release is going to live up to the hype you created. EA are voted worst company of the year, have multiple lawsuits and stockholders up in arms against them and figure their numbers aren't going to be affected? Good luck. I won't be buying another EA / DICE product without having first seen that they're capable of making a game that works without crashing constantly and with netcode that works, you know rather than the dross we've been handed which feels like it'd be better suited to play Pong over a network rather than a modern FPS.
   

   henry
   • 8 hours ago

   just hope they dont mess up titanfall
   

       Marcus Roue henry
       • 7 hours ago

       It's already messed up.

       Only 720p and 6v6 matches.
       

   Avatar
   jj16802
   • 14 hours ago
       −

   I would think that the 10 dollar upgrade deal would also contribute to the lower sales. If it didn't exist, imagine how much more profit they would have made...

Battlefield 4 player appreciation month in February
Players will get battlepacks every day in February, plus weapon shortcuts, and more.
January 29th, 2014 IN News
LINK  



DICE has announced a Battlefield 4 “player appreciation” month for the month of February. As a “thank you” from DICE to all Battlefield 4 players, the player appreciation month will include free Battlepacks, community missions, and more.

For the month of February, players will get a free bronze or silver Battlepack every day. All they have to do is to login to the game. Battlepacks include weapon unlocks, camouflage options, XP boosts, and more.

Furthermore, DICE will give players a shortcut bundle: all players will unlock all Battlefield 4 pistols and all grenades. Premium players will get two additional shortcuts: all DMRs and shotguns will be unlocked as well.

DICE will also be running a double XP weekend for all players in February. Finally, DICE will launch community missions, where players have to work together to reach a certain milestone in order to unlock a gold battlepack.

The final bit of news — and perhaps the best news — is that DICE is working hard to fix the netcode, which will be patched in an update released in February as well.

While all this is a great gesture, we’d still prefer patches instead of Battlepacks. Or maybe a free map or two as a token for all the trouble we’ve had to go through.

I wi be taking advantage of this to stack up on some boost and to get my shortcuts though I have almost all the guns