BF3 SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS
Earlier this year, EA offered PlayStation 3 players an extra incentive to pre-order Battlefield 3: a free copy of Battlefield 1943, the downloadable WW2 Battlefield shooter. Those plans were scrapped months later, after many PS3 owners had bought the game in hopes of getting BF 1943. Instead, they got one week early access to Battlefield 3 DLC. We can’t blame PS3 owners for being disappointed over this — we’d much rather have 1943 than a week of head start on DLC.
Some players have been so disappointed that they’ve now filed a class action lawsuit against EA, headed by the law firm Edelson McGuire, which alleges that EA was “making a promise they could not, and never intended, to keep.”
Honestly, we can’t say that we’re surprised by the lawsuit. EA promised gamers something if they pre-ordered, and they didn’t keep their promise. Even the announcement of the news that Battlefield 1943 won’t be included wasn’t an official one: it was just a tweet, and no direct contact with the customers who pre-ordered.
Not only that, EA didn’t reveal the truth about the lack of 1943 to PS3 owners until after Battlefield 3 was released. These are some real shady business tactics and we hope PS3 owners get their copy of Battlefield 1943.
Why would anyone need battlefield 1943 in the first place when you have battlefield 3?
That’s what I thought, but now they being sued over it…
They don’t, but since EA Falsely Advertised, its a good opportunity to profit from their BS. Its really much cheaper to just buy the Game if you’re really interested in playing it than to do a Class-Action Lawsuit.
EA will settle out of court by slapping them with a wad of cash and they’ll shut up and stop whining.
the only ppl that are goin to profit are the attorneys.
diversity?
whoops. i meant variety. i’m not a native english speaker. sorry
BF1943 is really, really fun though! I still find it really entertaining when I get pissed off at the abundance of players that do not even know how to use the controller, let alone coordinate (PS3). Now I am not the kind to really mind new players, but both BF3 and CS:S fall in the same trap of not explaining things properly to begin with, which kinda puts a damper on things.
Wow! Nice logic… of a monkey.
Think normally, dude.
It’s like you’ve pre-order the Limited Version of BF 3 and now they gonna say you “No Free Back to Karkand”. This is purely robbery, not just hoax.
I’m on PC and indeed, I got the Limited version. So far, I’m not complaining for anything, despite the Origin, Browser-depended, bugs, crashes etc. I truly don’t wanna experience such a situation.
u dont care , bec’z u are a pc player
and pc players are not getting BF 1943 .. so plz SHUT UP!
we were suppose to get 2 games at a time!
and we got only 1
and now we feel bad!
I have a PS3, I don’t play it much. I play PC primary. Here’s a Question though – What would you rather be playing, Battlefield 3 or 1943? Because if you’d’ rather be playing 1943, it costs what 10$? Go buy it and gtfo.
I must “shut up” because I’m not PS3 owner? Dude, that’s our mistake, that’s what companies want from us, to be in constant conflicts and not united as gamers as a whole… So we are weakened.
Let’s leave aside the disagreements between us ( PC, PS3, Xbox owners ) and stick together.
” to be in constant conflicts and not united as gamers as a whole… So we are weakened.” Genghis Khan quotes ftw.
In my opinion… its a very easy win for the customers who bought BF3 under the assumption 1943 was included. (not sure if there was any disclaimer about changing the rules.)
Either way, I’m hoping EA/DICE cancelled the offer so they could re-release 1943 as a BF3 expansion on the new engine. As a PC gamer, I didn’t get the 1943 offer, or 1943 in any form… so I’m hoping thats the case. I love WWII era over modern war.
I really hope they get the crap sued out of them.
it doesnt matter which is fun. EA screwed ps3 players with false advertising and this should be brought to justice. if EA didn’t care about money so much, and didnt push release dates to steal cod crowds, then we wouldn’t have day 1 patches, bad connection, un balanced guns etc. this is just another dirty tactic to gain some $
they should take away 1943, dlc access and b2k and just give us bf 2143 FREE!!
I can assure you they weren’t planning on giving away 1943 even when it was announced they would, just a marketing technique they tried to use. Not a surprise they are getting sued now over it.
Actually I am surprised it took that long! I was expecting EA to get slapped across the wrist the moment they pushed that announcement on the community. The guys being employed in customer protection are obviously spending their time just getting fatter.
Ya EA got what they deserved in my opinion.
We better get our copy because I am sure some people only ended up buying the game because of this deal (weren’t sure if they should get the game until they knew about the deal),or only brought it on PS3 because of it.
One of those…at least 3 or 4 of my friends as well and as you mentioned countless others.
am i the only one who got 1943 a looong time ago… ?
L O L
well well. honestly DICE has been very busy and they still have to release patches for bf3. i can understand why this is happening. i play bf3 in pc and ps3. it would be awesome if DICE makes up for it by giving us ALL bf1943!!!! =] too much to ask? maybe. but i trust DICE to make the right choices and make their fans happy in their pants!
It’s EA not DICE that has to give 1943
Wait, you actually WANT DICE to burn a ridiculous amount of time creating a PC Port of 1943, an almost 3 year old game, rather than creating Content for their current Game, which they just released, Battlefield 3?
Also lol yes, what he said – EA is the one that promised 1943 to PS3 Players, not DICE. Well, not that it matters as DICE is a subsidiary of EA, but why would DICE burn through Resources to make up for EA’s Loss?
And besides, EA will just pay them off and get it over with. I highly doubt anyone is suing because they’re actually disappointed that 1943 is missing from their Discs, its dirt-cheap (much cheaper than a Lawsuit) to just buy it. They most likely just want to cash in from EA’s BS.
Thanks for the catch. You guys have a point, but im sure the DLC for BF3 is mostly ready. I mean, they did announce Back to Karkand before the game even came out, and not to mention that we have yet to see those New York City maps that they said Multiplayer would have. From a consumer’s standpoint, I am very happy. While I think they should fix BF3 right away, I think DICE should take the opportunity to fix things up for EA and top it off by making 1943 a dlc perhaps for bf3. I dunno. I think simply remaking BF 1943 into the Frostbite 2 engine would make all of us happy.
The only issue now is that some Xbox 360 gamers will be quite unhappy since they will be stuck with the old version of 1943. (port pc version into 360?…) Ps3 players though nevertheless should be content with early access to DLC because PC gamers and Xbox 360 gamers just sit back and wait with envy. : C
You’re trying to generalize the BF Fanbase too much there. There’s always been a large (and vocal) portion of the Gaming Community that really just never liked WWII Shooters. I doubt that’ll change, even for a BF3 1943 DLC. Also, in comparison with the amount of Fans which I see asking for a BF 2143/BF3 2143 Expansion Pack, the 1943 DLC Fans looks minuscule (from Comments/Forums anyway, maybe that Fanbase is just more vocal). You’re also underestimating the amount of resources a 1943 Expansion Pack would take. I doubt they can just port everything over from Frostbite 1, and then even so they’d have to re-do Classes, Skins, update Textures, etc. Would take months of Resources people would rather see used on other things.
They had plans to “re-imagine” BtK for a long time, I wouldn’t consider it “cut content” or something (personally). While years back they’d have probably just Patched these Maps in for Free, DLCs have gotten so Mainstream now that they don’t do that anymore.
Personally I’m not too much of a DLC hater when it comes to BF though. If you stop and think about it, even with all the hate, the VIP System worked with BC2. It expanded the Game’s lifespan and kept people interested by pushing in new Maps all the time (solves the issue where Expansion Packs tended to have a high waiting time for them). You got Free Access if you bought the Game New, and only had to spend 10$ for access to 16 Maps if you bought the Game Used. It worked.
It really proved that DLCs could be done right, if only Publishers didn’t abuse them, which is where the issues start (Activision-CoD for example). In this regard, the VIP System covered all the usual pits with steel plates, but dug it’s own grave as well, when some idiot figured it would be a smart idea to ship the Game with the Maps locked on the Discs, basically shouting to the Community “Hey Folks, Content is ready. But you can’t have it. TR0L0L0!”
EA hasn’t said anything about a new VIP System. They have however said we’ll be getting 6 months of “Aggressive DLC” and I’m assuming 2-3 more months of “toned down” DLC after. I for one however will not pay 10$ every 2 weeks for 4 Maps, even if it is for Battlefield 3. So if EA falls into the pits they so well managed to cover with BC2′s DLC System, I’ll be going FU but have a nice day, even for a New York City DLC.
I’m pretty sure they’re mostly ready, or as I hope, were. Since there’s absolutely no chance they’re going to modify and “fix” the broken Vanilla Battlefield 3 Maps (Bugs and Map Fixing separate Teams, and they don’t exactly have a very good Track Record with Bug Fixing lately, BC2 just got another Patch more than a year after release), I hope they at least take the time (since a different Team is working on BtK) to “fix” whatever they need to “fix” in the DLC Maps instead, because if its more broken stuff, I’ll just stick to my 4-Map BtK Rotation and waste money on DLCs elsewhere.
EA is getting sued over lack of 1943 with the PS3 Disc, rather than the Origin Spyware Clauses which people have caused a much bigger ruckus about? Wow….
Maybe us PC players should also sue EA for their Origin spyware crap
we would have no case because in the end we either agreed to it or didnt use their service.
Most Courts (least the ones that still retain Common Sense) don’t accept a Digital Box (“I Agree To These Terms of Service” or “I Agree To This End User License Agreement”) as binding usually. Its happened before, ToS/EULA Agreements have been dismissed.
Although yes, I doubt you’d have a Case in the US. DoJ managed to prosecute someone (successfully) for infringing MySpace ToS in 2009/2010 IIRC.
Just so you guys know, my post was sarcasm, lol
Ofc I know that we wouldn’t have a case, they should just remove Origin completely !
Implied its obvious that a PS3 user is suing if you PC players are having trouble with Origin then why don’t you guys file a law suit against EA.
…you can’t sue if you’re given the option to decline. And it’s all spelled out in the Term Agreements.
That question is a bit too broad, you’d get a bunch of mixed replies.
For one, here are my reasons
- I’m broke.
- I believe people blew the thing out of proportions
- I’m pretty sure Digital Rights groups are already checking the facts using fancy expensive Lawyers I couldn’t care to afford even if I could afford them in the first place.
Also BwK, some US Courts accept a ToS/EULA as Binding (DoJ successfully prosecuted (and wasted a bunch of money doing so) a woman for infringing MySpace ToS in 2009/2010), however most EU Courts have thrown those out in the past, not accepting a digital check box as “binding”, even if you agree that you forfeit your rights to participate in a Class-Action Lawsuit. The fact that people don’t actually read the 10-20 Page ToS/EULA factors in greatly in that decision.
Don’t get me wrong, I dislike Origin as much as the next guy…but come on. “Spyware” in programs has been around for a long, long time and should be no surprise at this point. If you played any game that is punkbuster protected, or any game that uses anti-cheat software in general, then it has “invaded your privacy”.
Even non anti-cheat programs can invade your privacy. Something as simple as software for a keyboard could collect personal information about you. Point being that everyone’s privacy is invaded in many ways through various commonly used programs, but then someone points it out in a terms of use and a massive shitstorm breaks out.
If you don’t want the “spyware” that comes with origin, punkbuster, or any other anti-cheat program for that matter, simply don’t use their products.
I have nothing to hide. Scan away.
I for one think people have blown it out of proportion really, but since there was a bigger scandal about that rather than the lack of 1943 with the PS3 Version of BF3 I figured they’d get a Suit over that, not False Advertising.
Yeah, Anti-Cheat Software, Anti-Virus Software do deep System Scans to check for modifications to Game Files in the form of Cheats, or Files with the intent to cause harm etc.
Only problem I personally have with Origin is that EA is forcing us to use it, whether we like it or not in an attempt to show off what I consider “false” User Base Numbers. “X Daily Active Users.” Ok, well how many of those X would like to NOT be using Origin? Factor in those and the X suddenly becomes F.
Personally I have nothing to hide either, although I do enjoy my high level of Privacy (outside of the Internet, as the Internet barely has any these days). Although, if EA tries to sue me, I will more than willingly Counter-Sue with this “Spyware” whatever.
I´m going to file a class action lawsuit because Frostbyte2 has been really dissapointing on consoles.
better than paying 60$ for a copy-and-paste mappack.
“Frostbyte2 has been really dissapointing on consoles.”Really???I assume you are playing it on xbox 360 and did not install the hd texture pack.A lot of people are complaining about xbox 360 graphics without installing the texture pack.
you are a complete idiot. I play on xbox 360 and i am more than satisfied with “Frostbyte2″
And you are an ass for not accepting different opinions. Frostbyte 2 shoud have been called 1.5-
Frostbite (note the “i”) 1.5 already exists, they used it for BC2. Frostbite 2 is a completely new Frostbite Engine however, so they couldn’t have called it Frostbite 1.5 anyway.
Frostbite 2 doesn’t run well on Consoles because their Hardware is too old. If you want to take it up with someone, take it up with Sony and Microsoft who are still flaunting their ridiculous “10-Year-Lifespan” BS in our face. They need to understand that the Next-Gen Engines which are due between 2-3 years from now will never run on these Consoles, so they need to hurry up and release new ones so they can stop holding the Industry back (for a while at least).
We’re already seeing evidence of that as Frostbite 2 barely runs at 30 Frames, 702p “HD” on these Consoles. Time for Microsoft and Sony to get over themselves already.
when i bought BFBC2 6 months ago i got my free copy of BF 1943… seriously though are you ever going to play it…? if you say the issue is the fact they PROMISED you… than your just bitching over something your not going to play…get over it people
I’m a PC gamer, and I’m not going to get over this even if this only affects PS3 players. EA gave a false promise, lieing to their consumers, and it can happen again. This is EA, after all. If they get sued, good. Let this greedy company get a painful lesson they deserve, and hopefully it won’t happen again.
lieing to consumers is all part of the job.. its how big coporations get their money
i was actually hoping that when BF3 released, more people would play 1943 as well. 1943 is a really fun game, hope every ps3 user who pre ordered will get it for free, not too many players on the servers
Sueing EA over £8.. BF1943 isn’t even good anyway, I bought it a little under a year ago and have regretted it ever since. Not to mention the fact I’ve not considered playing it since buying bf3.
It’s honestly no massive loss.
What you think is a loss or not is not relevant. The cost of the item is not relevant. What’s relevant is that when they clicked the purchase agreement, that created a contract that EA did not honor.
Saying “I will give you X product if you give me $Y.” and then refusing to do so after collecting the money is illegal. It’s that simple. They broke the law and now they’re going to get sued for it.
You have BF3. why would you play 1943 anyway?
thankfully I already have 1943. It was my first intro to the bf world actually. I remember playing the demo on 360. And now I have it on my ps3
too bad you never played 1942 vietnam or bf2 on the pc.
Why isn’t someone suing Activision for supposedly creating a “new” Call of Duty? LOL
Seeing as they never advertised as anything better, I think they are safe for now.
I am mind boggled as how they managed to sell so many copies. On one hand its good as it introduces a lot of people to gaming and from MW3 onwards, chances are it can only get better. However it is also bad, because it doesn’t educate them as players and encourages fanboy behaviour in order to keep its fanbase.
it would be way better if BF 1943 had all the 1942 maps instead of a handfull
it amazes me how far people will go to be stupid. there’s plenty of things i could sue people over, but decide i have better things do to and it’s not worth it. i mean, come on! this is just ridiculous. some people just jump on any oppertunity they can to feel important, it’s retarded…
*opportunity
I’m inclined to believe Activison is somewhere behind this action, who would want to play a tiny budget game like 1943 after playing bf3.
Every time I hear any news about BF 1943 I cry inside. Why didn’t that awesome game come to PC.
I really hope someday they make something similar.
If it was a full game like bf3 id agree with you, the way i look at it EA pulls the strings of dice yet they decided not to release 1943 on the pc even tho it was nearly finished, you’d think EA would have been into making some money flogging it off yet they didnt or was the game just *not that good* by pc standards.
I hope they do revive it at some later date with more maps, vehicles, gadgets etc, it had promise even as it was.
When did BF1943 for the PC ever go beyond being a simple rumor/fanbase speculation?
and this is why ps3 cannot have nice things…
i really dont get what it means .. so ps3 owners with limited edition will have this 1943 battlefield? correct me if im wrong :0
They were supposed to, but it got scrapped. Instead they have a 1 week head start on DLC. Honestly, just someone that wants some attention, nothing of substance in this lawsuit.
Yeah they’re claiming they replaced the 1943 with 1-Week Advance Access to DLCs. Really, its amazing how they think we don’t know they did that for the money Sony is dishing over for the 1-Week Exclusivity.
i got 1943 with bfbc2
ea/dice also promised to release pc version of 1943 but it did not happen
No they didn’t…people were hoping they would announce something saying they were making a PC version but they said they weren’t going to.
Actually, they did, considering I had it pre-ordered from the EA store at one point before receiving an e-mail saying that plans for a PC release had changed.
I dont need BATTLEFIELD 1943 if i have BF3,i need DLC earlier
Why don’t half the retards understand the situation? EA promised 1943 and ps3 players didn’t get it, they have every god damn right to sue EA’s asses off. Its like If I bought a car and they said it included heated seats and then it turns out there aren’t heated seats I’d sue them
Which is exactly why the US is known for their Sue-Happy attitudes. Most people would just return the thing and not waste their time (and even more Resources) on it.
Their actions hardly warrant having their “arses sued off”, god America is so messed up when it comes to that kind of stuff.
Really? Class action lawsuits are a rediculous waste of time and do nothing for the consumer. So you get a whopping $5, ok so maybe $15, while the lawyers who are running the suit take the rest. Mind you, these ALWAYS end up in the millions of dollars in return. I remember getting a $3 check from Microsoft for supposed “refunds” for software bundles or something lame like that. It’s only a matter of time before all companies follow AT&T and put a no class action clause in their TOS/EULA.
And I agree with others, why the hell would you buy a $50 advanced game, for a sub-par game. You have to give a little, you lose a little.
EA already has a No Class-Action Lawsuit Clause in their EULA. While some US Courts will uphold it, EU Courts have dismissed ToSs/EULAs many times in the past however, so that won’t accomplish much either way.
I agree about class action lawsuits just making the lawyers rich and doing very little for the consumer. I almost purchased BF 1943 this summer while waiting for BF3, but held off since it was supposed to come with the game and now I’ll probably never play it.
What is important is that the consumer was lied to and that is illegal. Pretty soon on this path, you will buy a game only to find out later that you just purchased an empty box.
They said “BF3 will have the largest maps we’ve ever made”.
Do we need to sued that too ?
At least we still get B2K maps, eh?
Sooo?
Since this promise was “broken” and the DLC access was to make up for this. Then
PS3 loses early access to DLC since they now have 1943.
I’m fine with that.
(Not jealous in anyway over early DLC)