@Trokey66 wrote:
@lzilchetlI also pre ordered gold and am annoyed that it is delayed but the weeklies are not part of that, are free and going ahead as scheduled.
Are you suggesting that they should have stopped the weeklies too?
Hi Trokey.
Nope, not suggesting that at all, quite the opposite in fact. Point of fact though, I don't give two hoots about them really. I just like to use the weekly challenges to stop me gravitating to the same loadout all the time, but I tend to try and swap things around anyway, it just makes the decision easier. (Never understood charms, who gets to see them unless someone picks up your weapon?)
The point is that last week EA announced, as you say, that the battle pass will be postponed until the summer. We, you and I, have paid for four battle passes in the first year. After which we have to pay for additional battle passes. I'm not sure that both of these can now be true., and actually I'm not sure what it will be like working through 4 battle passes in 6 months. Whether that is something to think about nor not (not worry about, I don't worry about any of this nonsense) it feels to me that EA are outside the terms of the consumer contract I (we) have with them.
Also, EA have withdrawn into their shell. We don't know if they are reworking the game to meet the concerns aired or (possibly implied in the investor meeting) are writing the game off. Or indeed, buying time to complete the game as they initially intended - we can all agree, for instance, that there was always an intention to include VOIP, and failure to include it is an indication that they did not finish the product as intended, and we can assume this will be true of other features.
So we are all looking for clues as to which of these scenarios are most likely to be the case.
One of the most prevalent concerns aired by users the loss of grittiness and a drift aware from the milsim ethos towards the hero genre. So, if EA were addressing user concerns as one of the possible scenarios above, we would not expect to see them compound the problem by introducing clown skins etc - but in my view the Mcay Woody suit is very close to the clown skin where, they might have considered introducing a skin that more more in line with a new remit to "dirty-up" the game. So this clue implies that they are not remodelling the game, or at least they did not take the opportunity to signal that they were moving in this direction. Similarly, in a week where we have had a delay of content announced and with no communications about what may be happening next, or what EA are doing now, they had one opportunity to signal a change of direction via the weekly challenge - and we got a beamy hat with a claim that it was a reference to BC2 (even though beamy hat is already part of Sundance's kit)
So, I'm not making any demands, or whinging. Just pointing out that EA is not taking any opportunity to signal to the community that their direction of travel is towards meeting consumer demand. There may be reasons, technical, PR and marketing or naivety that may account for not taking this opportunity, but right now, without any definite signals, we cannot assume that reworking the game is any more likely that retaining the current trajectory or dumping the title.
What might the community be saying and thinking if this week's challenge (free gift) gave us a milsim/bf4 type skin? Didn't need to be for all specialists, but if I was in their shoes and wanted to signal intentions to the community I would have issued a "treat", if not a skin something along those lines, if not only to say sorry for the delay in content.
