Luke Plunkett, associate editor of Kotaku isn’t a big fan of our boycott effort, or our HUGE win. In response, he posted a rebuttal to our brilliant win over EA today. (Link) In his “rant” he argues that we achieved a hollow victory because, as a puts it, our efforts to stop EA from charging for guns, has done nothing because they’ll just ramp up their marketing campaign to make up for these lost profits, or simply attempt to sell the DLC again down the line.
Is this a news flash? EA will try to sell DLC again? Oh noes!
Read on for why I think Luke’s rant is a non-starter, after the jump!
Through the efforts of the gaming community, we were able to convince EA to stop charging for the five guns. We. Stopped. Them. April 9, 2008. Mark it.
Just think about that for a second… We stopped a multi-billion dollar company from attempting to exploit us.
Unfortunately, Luke simply ignores that fact, and without any evidence, blindly asserts that EA will simply try it again down the line and that our victory was just a hollow victory.
Specifically, He wrote, ”
“No, they’ll replace that “lost” money with the advertising dollars they rake in via the “marketing programs” anyone wanting the game’s better guns will need to sit through. Or with other DLC offered later down the line (premium grenades, perhaps?), when this has all died down. They’re not giving the money away, then, just shuffling it around a bit so you won’t notice it so much. This isn’t the end of stuff like this. The next EA game will have silly DLC, and the next one, and the next one.
Which means the boycotts (for a game you weren’t going to buy anyways), the anger, the petitions, they’re all pointless. This is a hollow victory. Why am I bringing this up, even though it will rain on more than a few people’s parades?”
Basically, he sees no merit in what we’ve accomplished. Why? Because he “thinks” that EA will just try to do it again. Too bad he doesn’t cite any evidence for his assertions.
Even if what he says is true, what he doesn’t realize is that we KNOW THIS MAN! We are well aware of EA’s intentions. This crap is the reason that we stood up and took notice in the first place. It’s unfortunate, but I don’t see any of the “big” web blogs leading a charge to keep this kind of stuff in line, so we, at Sarcastic Gamer were forced to.
We know that EA will keep trying to sell bogus DLC. This is the VERY REASON we stood up and did what we did, in the first place. His argument is a non_starter. He argues that what we did was meaningless because EA will just try, try again and apparently believes that we won’t try, try again either.
He believes that we should educate the people that buy the crap DLC. Aren’t our boycott efforts, that are plastered all over the web, educating those very same people? Please don’t tell me that those people never read Gamespot, or IGN, that’s just silly. We are educating those people, or at least trying to educate those people. We are making a difference. Sorry Luke, you can’t take today away from us.
How bout this Mr. Plunkett: How bout standing with us the next time this happens? Because I can guaran-damn-tee that if it happens again, we’ll organize another boycott, and we’ll get the job done.
That’s what we do. We did it once, we’ll do it again. Who knew Kotaku would be such party poopers?
![[Post to Twitter]](http://sarcasticgamer.com/wp/wp-content/plugins/tweet-this/tweet-this-small.png)
Tweet This| Related Posts:
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
56 responses so far ↓
1 NecrisJ1MM // Apr 10, 2008 at 2:08 am
Time will tell, i guess…
2 Chris B // Apr 10, 2008 at 2:13 am
It’s bizarre how the Kotakus and, to a lesser extent, Joystiqs have shown such bad faith on this issue. It’s almost like Kotaku dislikes being stood up by a site that does this for free, when they get paid per page view, or that someone else is stealing the limelight so they feel the need to rain on the parade. But surely they couldn’t be *that* petty and vindictive, right?
I thought what you did was incredible, not worth a Nobel maybe, but pretty good all the same. You reminded a multi billion dollar company that they can’t take their audience for granted. If Kotaku can’t recognise that then I can.
Oh, and isn’t Justin McElroy the one who said that Bungie would *never* be allowed to leave Microsoft just as the press release arrived in his inbox? If so, good to see he has kept to his normally highly accurate standard of punditry on this issue as well.
3 BAZ // Apr 10, 2008 at 2:22 am
I just read the article and was about to email you guys.
The article is incredibly stupid! Of course EA are going to keep trying to make more money, it doesn’t take a genius to work that out! But the Boycott campaign has shown EA that there are boundaries and that we do not accept weapons as downloadable content
4 cory // Apr 10, 2008 at 2:34 am
personally I see no problem with EA trying to make money (that’s sort of what they’re known to do). the problem lies in where that money comes from. if they make that money from marketing surveys or whatever, good for them. if they make the money by abusing their customers, that’s when we take a stand. why can’t kotaku or joystiq be proud of what we accomplished?
5 sp4ngle // Apr 10, 2008 at 2:36 am
I’m REALLY disppointed in Kotaku, one of my favourite blogs. I think they’ve completely misunderstood what the campaign was about…
6 RK1 WhiteKnight // Apr 10, 2008 at 2:42 am
What a douche.
Happy V-EA day everyone
7 Daikun // Apr 10, 2008 at 2:42 am
Kotaku is a Gawker blog. If you’re familiar with the Gawker family, you should know that their editors are compiled largely of assholes, so it doesn’t come as a surprise that they’d be arrogant of selfless efforts.
8 dazsly // Apr 10, 2008 at 2:54 am
Maybe its because they are scared to upset the big corps thats what happens when you get bigger.
Didn’t Sony get upset not long ago with Kotaku??
9 gory zj // Apr 10, 2008 at 3:23 am
@dazsly
I think so, there was some kind of fight when someone on Kotaku revealed information about Sony’s “HOME”, back when it was a secret project.
10 MrNood1e // Apr 10, 2008 at 3:32 am
I don’t understand why Luke would even say something like this? Think about anything that anyone has had to take a stand about in all of history. Of course the “bad guys” are going to try to do it again, but you shouldn’t stop trying to stop them.
Calling it a “hollow victory” is just the statement of a gamer who obviously would just like to roll over and take it and not have the guts to stand up against something that is clearly wrong. Doing nothing is just as bad as accepting it.
11 Shadders // Apr 10, 2008 at 3:58 am
What a twunt!
Some people, especially in this industry for some reason, just love to wallow in pessimism and negativity.
What SG has achieved is quite remarkable, and I honestly didn’t believe that we’d get such a good response.
The fact that they’ve done this before launch is even more of an indicator of how much of an impact we’ve had, post launch it could obviously be attributed to poor DLC sales, or even sold as an attempt to “give something back to the fans”, but now it’s pretty much a direct response to this campaign.
12 YogiB // Apr 10, 2008 at 4:05 am
I think EA is paying Kotaku too say that and hope people listen too them insteed of you guys and what have been writen in IGN & Gamespot so more will buy it and they begin with the weapon DLC again : O
13 II Defiant // Apr 10, 2008 at 4:21 am
Great work all!! I read the article and was surprised at the way he described the victory as “hollow” he’s probably feeling left out as his site never joined us like Joystiq and Destructoid in the end did! My prediction is that Kotaku will be covered in EA advertisements for Battlefield BFC .Of course the movement made a difference the blogs, emails ,podcast etc EA now know we won’t stay silent while they screw us out of our hard earned dollars!
14 ritterjcat // Apr 10, 2008 at 4:28 am
I take issue with this: “Which means the boycotts (for a game you weren’t going to buy anyways)”. This is patently false, as I most like _will_ buy this game now.
15 Keith K // Apr 10, 2008 at 5:48 am
I’d love to slap some negative comments on that blog.. but Kotaku banned me from commenting months ago.. *sad face*
Of course I could start another account to do so, but that would take a certain level of caring that Kotaku simply cannot produce.
16 sp4ngle // Apr 10, 2008 at 5:51 am
I think Kotaku are jealous because SG acts whilst they just report.
17 Quezcotl // Apr 10, 2008 at 5:53 am
KOTAKU SUCKS!!!
18 ktman // Apr 10, 2008 at 6:09 am
I don’t understand the post on Kotaku. EA may charge to sell horrible DCL but that doesn’t mean we won’t fight back. He also seems to not want to say the fact that, “we won.”
19 Kromax44 // Apr 10, 2008 at 6:36 am
You done good, boys. F*** Kotakscrew.
20 Adamski UK // Apr 10, 2008 at 6:48 am
Well done SGamers…was about to join in the fight after the last podcast…
..I was looking forward to some protest marches…I was gonna sell some special banners (which would in no way “unbalance” the proceedings).
10 out of 10.
21 krossmojination // Apr 10, 2008 at 6:49 am
Re: educating the people “that buy the crap DLC”, this is an interesting point, and one I might disagree with. Did you really educate the un-informed? No, you rallied the informed. The people who read your blog and your rss feed and listen to your podcast and watch your boycott video on youtube…are likely the same people that would not have bought the DLC beforehand. The people that would have bought these guns are, IMHO, a different breed of gamer, and one you won’t reach, almost by definition.
22 zbiggie // Apr 10, 2008 at 7:12 am
hell in many ways he is right, anyone remember total annihilation, that game gave everyone loads of free units and maps, and then they released a expansion with hundreds more. Today your paying for 4 extra maps 10$. Don’t get me wrong but that is a blatant rip off.
But then he did say that they are just shuffling around the money so you do see their earnings. By that of course he means the company will make the money from advertising, but the game itself won’t make as much as it would by selling those guns. Since when it was selling the guns it got money for both the guns and advertisements. Now they only get the money for the advertisements.
23 andyg8180 // Apr 10, 2008 at 8:00 am
I completely agree and i hope the boycott will continue… The minute i heard they would be free but you have to do some “marketing promotion,” I knew it wasnt over…
You will need to give up your Email, gamertag, personal info etc etc to get these guns… I say, push on Sarcastic Gamer… We have found the chink in the amour and its time to strike hard… With our wallets…
24 What The Geek // Apr 10, 2008 at 8:21 am
Well yea, you made them back down - at least somewhat. And yea, if they try it again, hopefully it’ll be met with similar results
But stop the parade. EA has only pulled the DLC cock halfway out of the community bum. Regardless of whether you get the gold or standard edition of the game, you’ll still have to participate in a “marketing program” to actually use the guns you paid for. It’s not quite time for the victory party as far as I’m concerned. I’d rather not sign up for free junkmail just to make full use of something I already paid for.
So, yea, good job - bravo. But don’t start masturbating all over your success just yet - the job’s not done.
25 Tenudin // Apr 10, 2008 at 8:36 am
I think what this guy fails to see is that this isn’t some BS DLC like the horse armor for Oblivion. This was DLC that could potentially unbalance a game. If it was something like a pack of diffrent camoflauge styles I think we all would have just laughed at them like we did with the horse armor and we would have moved on.
26 Who's biased? // Apr 10, 2008 at 8:51 am
@krossmojination: My thoughts exactly.
Like bungie did with halo 
But I’d still definitely call this a victory. Now we’re just waiting for the mappack dlc that they already have ready but waiting 4 awhile to sell it due to this whole ordeal
27 marshallladd // Apr 10, 2008 at 9:24 am
boycott kotaku lol. j/k This is my first gaming site ever so i never knew about all these sites like kotaku and IGN until he boycott, but what a party pooper.
28 Clstirens // Apr 10, 2008 at 9:34 am
Yeah, I am actually quite baffled as to WHY he would be this way.
There is no goal, no moral to his article. He isn’t being any amount of constructive to a cause. No, it is merely an anti-boycott hate thread that, in my opinion, barely rises above the level of fanboy-ish whining.
I can only assume that, considering Kotaku NEVER EVEN RECOGNIZED THIS HUGE WAVE OF BLOGS BOYCOTTING A MAJOR RELEASE (sorry for caps), that they either are in Ea’s pockets, or….well I’m not sure what it could be.
Captcha: Devotion <-lol
29 Clstirens // Apr 10, 2008 at 9:37 am
Posted on Kotaku:
Clstirens:
Yes, but Dlc is fine. I have NO issue buying things extra for games.
On launch content that alters GAMEPLAY, yes I have a problem with taht.
Besides, Mr. High and mighty, I did go to those people. I DID convince my fellow gamers who don’t go to the blogs. I did convince my friends who don’t really even buy dlc (because not selling the game at all hurts more). I spread the word OFFLINE as well. Just because you didn’t and just because you didn’t HEAR of anyone else doing it DOESN’T mean it didn’t happen.
I would like to say that many of us did more than blog and post angry messages. I know of more than just I that went further. But yes, thankyou for the economy lesson.
Sorry for the rant Kotakuites. I love the site, but I am offended by this.
30 Fatal // Apr 10, 2008 at 9:40 am
I’m still not buying this game!! Just on principle, I believe highly in business ethics, and to think EA was trying to take advantage of me as a consumer, I dont care if they gave the weapons away FRE WITHOUT the marketing, you have lost a consumer, even if it is a loss of only $64.04 at least I know I can stand up for my principles as a person and not be taken advantage of!
31 doro626 // Apr 10, 2008 at 9:40 am
What the Geek makes a great point. What I feared and what has come true, is taht companies are now releasing incomplete software, because they can fix it through updates and DLC.
Not enough time to finish those last four maps before it ships? No problem, we’ll release it as DLC, but Microsoft doesnt allow many developers to release free things. Didnt EA charge for unlockables in Tiger Woods that you could get by simply playing through the game?
32 TheRemedy // Apr 10, 2008 at 9:47 am
What is with all the gawker people getting on SG’s case? First Leigh (while not technically officially working at kotaku yet, will be shortly) now Luke.
33 Minbad // Apr 10, 2008 at 9:55 am
In fact I added kotaku to my favorites owing to you guys. One word from you and I take them out! People will prevail!! Boycott EA!! :p
34 ajnokia // Apr 10, 2008 at 10:07 am
Im expecting EA to release more weapons as DLC at some point. Not on launch but later on. This will be NEW weapons they make after the games release. It will offer more weapon options to the people who wish to have this option.
If they do this Im ok with it
35 MightyA // Apr 10, 2008 at 10:12 am
It’s impossible for EA to create “premium grenades” later down the line unless they can guarantee everyone is going to have them. Otherwise, they may just have a red box instead of the grenade, and have it say “if you buy premium grenade pack 2 for 250 MS points, this grenade can be yours!”
36 balaamsafe // Apr 10, 2008 at 11:39 am
I’m sorry to be immature but plunkett is a stupid name
37 NoneOfYourBusiness // Apr 10, 2008 at 11:47 am
Well if EA does that down the line, it would technically be considered regualr DLC.
Instead of Lono’s cookie anaology with you buying a broken cookie, you are now buying the whole cookie and paying for some chocolate chips. Unless the marketing s compeltely unreasonable..
38 Ninja256 // Apr 10, 2008 at 11:54 am
If anyone is familiar with Luke’s posts he’s known if being a dick and just saying what he feels. It’s what makes it fun to read his posts; for his opinions. I think it’s funny that because of his opinions everyone is putting down Kotaku. Going as far as to say that EA paid them to read up that post. When Kotaku is the site that led me to the boycott started by SG.
I think when you’re speaking about a boycott which is your opinion you should be prepared to tolerate another person’s views. Does he completely disagree with the boycott? No. Is he worried that it wasn’t effective enough? Yes. He’s wants more to be done, then just the boycott.
I may not agree with his opinions; I personally think the boycott was a huge success, but there is still more that needs to be to stop EA from thinking that they own the industry.
I believe that it was a great start, we’ve stopped them momentarily. I think now we need to start going on the offensive and get together as a community and try and start some sort of manifesto of what it appropriate to sell as DLC and what is not.
The advantage the big two(EA and Ubisoft) have on use is they think as one mind not a million disgruntled gamers.
39 Clstirens // Apr 10, 2008 at 12:05 pm
I don’t really think they are being paid off by EA. But why would there be such hostilities?
Perhaps it is more of a ‘lets not get on their bad side TOO much, we have our integrety to ensure’ situation.
40 Lono // Apr 10, 2008 at 12:08 pm
@Ninja256: I agree somewhat with your comments.
I’ve got to say though that when the Kotaku article was published, Luke was nice enough to shoot me an email and give me a heads up. I’m sure he knew that he would be poking a bee’s nest with a stick with his rant, but at the end of the day and several email conversations later, I didn’t think he came across as a ” dick” at all. He was actually came across as a nice guy.
At the end of the day, Luke’s rant seemed to me to be more of an attention grabber for Kotaku, than something he really believed in, but that ’s just my opinion.
41 WU GAMB1NO // Apr 10, 2008 at 12:11 pm
I’m gonna show them a thing r 2
42 Shabatoge // Apr 10, 2008 at 12:54 pm
Haters, kotaku has a bunch of them. I think you guys did a good job and agree with you when you say that you will boycott again if another jokey DLC pops up such as the five guns. As far as kotaky goes, they banned me from commenting and gave me no reason why, while whenever i read an article of theirs, there are complete morons posting comments…usually the typical “i know everything about videogame and its development” kid in his mothers basement. anywho, I just want to say thanks for the boycott and any future boycotts by sarcasticgamer.com that has good intenetiong (as did this one) I will be behind you guys 100%. I just joined yesterday and already feel at home.
PEACE!
43 LJ // Apr 10, 2008 at 1:43 pm
He’s probaly felt left out. Hey have some sympathy for the poor guy. If he was apart of the Resistance he ould have a jiant banner over his site too saying “we won!”
44 SidearmS // Apr 10, 2008 at 3:07 pm
And here is the point everyone missed, including Kotaku:
You can buy the NORMAL, REGULAR game, PLAY IT TO COMPLETION, and get the stuff ingame.
Yes, this is kind of like having to achive Elite in RB6V2 and then getting the starter pistol, but this is where victory is actually gained.
You can just play the game to completion and you will have the same guns as the collector edition.
You DO NOT have to shell out an extra ten dollars for it. You DO NOT have a portion of your game ripped out.
YOU JUST HAVE TO PLAY IT. This is what the true purpose of a video game is, right?
EA’s definition of “DLC” is to rip apart everything in their game and sell it piece by piece, just like Asia.
Last time I checked, I DO NOT LIVE IN ASIA, OK? In the USA, like Europe, we expect our games INTACT if we are to pay such STUPID prices for them. Europe gets my love because that Rock Band pricing is such a joke. VAT my a$$…
DLC is supposed to be the “extra” content for a game, extra creativity that adds to what could be a complete product unto itself. DLC IS NOT taking your complete game and smashing it into BREADCRUMBS.
That is the issue here. If this had gone on further, IT ONLY WOULD HAVE GOTTEN WORSE.
Way back when on Major Nelson, we had this debate. One brilliant user actually predicted FIFA being a $5 dollar game, but all you get with that is a dude in normal clothes on a dirt field with a used ball. EVERYTHING ELSE WAS TO BE DLC.
I made a “DLC List” for what you could do with Superman in this regard. While funny, the fact that people think this is an acceptable business practice is NOT FUNNY.
Software developers and publishers SERIOUSLY need to take a moment and redefine what DLC is supposed to mean. Because what was described by MS is not what the other companies are doing.
But then again, themes and gamerpics cost money and you can not design ONE OF EACH for your own use.
Yesterday on 1UP, there was even a story about how Sony is using games like Warhawk to draw users into DLing bigger chunks of DLC.
There was also a story last week about how Gamestop pretty much makes it money on USED products from four companies - three of which are EA, Sony, and MS.
Add all the details up, and its pretty simple to see - money. ALWAYS MONEY. Wipe away the words, the pompous articles from pompous people, and you are left with the fact it is just about money, and who wants it more.
ARE YOU NOT JUST F**KING SICK AND TIRED OF BEING A WALLET?
I know I am. ESPECIALLY FROM JACKA$$ES who roll in perks and skinned AD REVENUE GENERATING blogs/skinned pages/micro ads.
Here (SLAPS WALLET ON THE TABLE). There it is. MY wallet. What do I get in return for the “privilege” of a company raping it whenever they feel X quarter is going to fall short of profit expectations? Tell me now so I can HONESTLY laugh in your face and find another game that won’t do this.
SO WHAT if I wouldn’t played BF:BC much anyway. But I also will not play other EA games now as well. The new Burnout sucks, so I play Paradise still. A COMPLETE GAME not ladden with microads and slaved to DLC. Now that I have ALLPro Football and 2K5 working on the 360 now, I DO NOT NEED MADDEN ROSTER UPDATE 2009. This is how we have to fight this now. Find what works, and support THAT. Everything else must go.
Do not buy it. Do not touch it. Do not buy a game that has its servers die less than 18 months in. Do not fall for this again. EVER.
You know what else? Anything these “experts” say is GOLD now, I will be sure to THROUGHLY CONSIDER NOW before buying. OBJECTIVE opinion meant more to me than page hits. Kotaku and Joystiq seem to believe otherwise. Take that as you will. Also notice where Destructoid sits on this issue. As for the rest, once you see who signs their checks, it is pretty easy to see where “THE BUSINESS” side of things lies.
Consider your journalistic integrity TRASHED. I don’t want to read anymore pompous “LIKE I SAY, NOT AS I DO” editorials anymore. I don’t want to hear how someome had A BLAST AT PIXAR when Pixar’s last licensed game was Ratatouille. I don’t want to hear about VAT. You dig? ENOUGH!
XBox 360 - Is really about the “GAME” anymore?
45 SidearmS // Apr 10, 2008 at 3:11 pm
EDIT - Revenge is the old EA burnout game, not PARADISE. Arrgh.
XBox 360 - Urge to game fading…
46 thefriendlyghost // Apr 10, 2008 at 3:22 pm
screw them there just jealous
47 Black-Eye Brick // Apr 10, 2008 at 3:23 pm
-10 respect points for Mr. Plunkett.
Considering I had no idea who he was, that puts him at -10 points total.
I don’t know about the majority of the boycotters, but I have many friends who play games. There’s a large social gaming network at the school I go to. And guess what? Maybe 5 or 10 of them actually stay up on the news at gaming sites like Kotaku and SG.com.
But does that mean that the rest of the kids we play with aren’t part of that boycott?
Hell no.
A couple of us did the math and estimated that EA (almost) lost more than $3600 worth of copies of BF: BC. People that said they would’ve bought it if it didn’t have the ridiculous boycott scheme. And those are just the regulars that we asked about it. Who knows how many other friends they influenced over XBL and in their own gaming networks?
That’s the point of this grassroots campaigning. It starts small, but has the potential to get huge.
48 Lono // Apr 10, 2008 at 3:25 pm
There’s a lot of capital letters in that rant SidearmS… but the support is appreciated!
49 Lono // Apr 10, 2008 at 3:26 pm
thanks Black-Eye-Brick!
50 EPIC C0VERT // Apr 10, 2008 at 4:27 pm
They are just jealous that a smaller site, with a dedicated following showed them up. I don’t care what they say because yesterday was a monumental victory.
51 endejas // Apr 10, 2008 at 7:29 pm
Really? If anything, EA just totally stole free marketing from the internet. This “controversy” spread about the internet. Thanks to this whole hoolabaloo, they probably saved money.
“Which means the boycotts (for a game you weren’t going to buy anyways)[...]” That line perfectly describes the situation. Now the positive publicity of EA “giving away” weapons will bring more people to the game.
GG, Sarcastic Gamer.
52 The Truth // Apr 10, 2008 at 7:52 pm
While some of Luke’s points are not exactly valid, I agree with his main ideas. He just stood back and said, “OK, what’s gonna come out of this?”
Meanwhile, the guys here are still in a drunken haze over the “victory”, screaming “WOOO, %#$K YEAH WE DID IT!!!11!!”, almost as if they’re surprised that the petitions/boycotts worked.
53 darkkn1te // Apr 10, 2008 at 10:39 pm
Well… let me start by saying I am not a sarcastic gamer reader. I’d heard of the site a few times when people would link stories, etc. But it was people from this community or others like it whose comments proliferated throughout the web and made me understand the abuses of EA’s DLC scheme. So this effort did, in fact, educate the dullards like me who might have been willing to pay for EA’s extra guns like it was any other DLC. Thanks guys! FIGHT ON!
54 Brushi Tundra // Apr 11, 2008 at 12:30 am
I am befuddled at Mr Plunkett’s comment regarding the recouping money lost will be by later sales of DLC. It’s as if he thinks people will be unable to recall this whole fiasco. If anything, people will be more cognizant of this problem. I have no problem with DLC that adds to, or enhances the game play. New maps or expansion packs are great. I do have a problem with DLC that alters the gameplay for those who purchase the content. I have, and will continue, to buy map packs and expansions packs for my games. I will never buy any DLC that alters the basic mechanics of the game for those who choose to buy. IMHO anything that changes the game play so much, like additional weapons, should be earned, not sold.
How could EA not see this coming? Maybe they just wanted to see how far they could go. It’s awful close to a slippery slope argument, but I think this could have been a very small step down a very ugly and expensive path. Companies are well within there rights to get what the market will allow. In this case, the market won’t allow. I am satisfied the good guys won. Hollow? I think not. For shame Mr. Plunkett. For shame.
55 Lono // Apr 11, 2008 at 7:45 am
@endjas: At the time we decided to boycott, I know that I was really stoked for the game and would have purchased it on day one. I know that a lot of people on this site felt the same way.
The only kind of publicity we brought to EA was bad pub, which is why they changed course. If you can’t recognize that now, there’s nothing more I can say. Other than:
You’re argument makes no sense.
56 Alfred "GamerHusbands" // Apr 19, 2008 at 11:18 am
I think it’s funny how these corporate gamer blogs act like they are aristocrasy. Maybe they will realize that we are all in the same boat here, becuase we are all gamers. It’s great that someone stood up to EA. I don’t hate EA, and I’m sure that you guys don’t either. I play many of their games, but gamers aren’t idiots either. that $59 dollar game becomes a $69 dollar game automatically. It’s basically a bait and switch. You pay $59 dollars in the store, and have to pay another $10 when you get home just to compete. Some of these paid writers need to take a step back and realize why they got into the games industry anyways, because I’m sure it wasn’t because of the pay!
Leave a Comment