To call the battlefield franchise "well made" is a bit of an insult to high quality fps games. BF2 was released CHOCK full of bugs (if you played it, you'll know) and was left unmaintained. Certain game-breaking bugs were left in for months and months at a time despite ruining huge aspects of the game. On top of the bugs that were not fixed, new content was released and promoted - that ALSO contained bugs. Even when bugs were fixed, new bugs were introduced. And many of the fixes involved changes that negatively affected other aspects of play! How can this be called "well made"?

I consider myself an experienced gamer. I enjoy many genres, and have been playing for ~18 years. I don't just play huge titles, but i do play those too. I play indie games, casual games, you name it. The only company that i go out of my way to avoid is EA and that's due to bad experiences with their games. I am not "just a hater", as i did play dragon age and sang its praises once i'd come to accept that it wasn't simply another standard EA title.

Take bioware for example. Before they were 'bought' by EA they made some of the (arguably, but almost universally accepted) best games of their particular genre. Baldur's gate 1 and 2, neverwinter nights.... we're talking sweeping epics that involved in depth and original story lines that carried the game single handedly (i mean, it was only isometric, the story was everything). Then suddenly, EA get involved and bioware produce mass effect - instead of being able to choose from a plethora of moral and immoral dialog options, actions, we get a good/neutral/evil meter and equivalent options. I'm not going to tell anyone mass effect is a bad game; it is up to the public to decide and they have decided it's good. But i insist that, but for the dated graphics, their earlier RPGs were better in every single other way, and what they provide in their modern RPGs falls short on any RPG checklist you care to make when you put it up against Baldur's gate, icewind dale, etc.

I was very excited when dragon age was released, but then immediately disappointed again when dragon age 2 was released - and who can honestly claim that 2 lived up to 1? Can anyone deny that it was shat out at maximum velocity to cash in quickly on the success of the first? It was a completely different game!?

I hope i have managed to not sound like an anti-fanboy cock; i have spent hundreds and hundreds of pounds on game flops by EA which were underhandedly promoted by reviewers that i then learned not to trust. I feel utterly cheated by them but that is why i don't buy their games now, and that's why you'll find more and more people expressing the opinions herein and in the video. So yes, it's very easy to say "lolz u shudnt buy there gamez u foolz", but when there's several teams of people working together to try and trick you into doing something it may take you a few goes before you learn what the shape of the turd looks like. It's underhanded and i would have thought you could understand why people get annoyed by that.

I'm not surprised piracy has increased with the steady decline in VALUE FOR MONEY. I payed £30 for half life 1 and i still play it to this day. I'd gladly pay £100 for it in retrospect. The first installment of a battlefield game costs me £40, and £15 for an extra few maps or guns they add. Valve are still giving me stuff for free, and i cannot thank them enough for putting pride in their work, and for that they will have the kind of brand respect that EA will never get.

@Fletch hit the nail right on the head. I don't think people who disagree are stupid, or wrong, or anything. But if you haven't experienced the old AND the new (that goes for everyone, not just fans of the new or just fans of the old), then you are not in an ideal position to put forward arguments about whether or not games have increased in value for money, or decreased in value for money; i'm glad you enjoy modern games, but i feel disappointed and cheated by them and that's a perfectly valid thing to express, and it is not your place to tell someone they're over reacting or being a baby. If you haven't tried it yourself, you can't know for sure.

I think that is what this guy was trying to say in a humourous way, probably didn't do the best job of it ever but it was at least funny. And do remember it was meant to be funny. I think some people in this thread in favour of EA have looked more foolish in their pro-EA arguments than this guy did in his anti-EA exaggerations. Remember it was meant to be funny.

TL:DR - i don't blame you

One of the best CRPG's ever made, IMHO. Planescape, Icewind Dale... fantastic. They don't make CRPG's these days like they used to, unfortunately.

My one complaint about BG2... Yoshimo! Yoshimo was just plain awesome and had the best random comments next to Minsc.

"Hiiiii-ya! Tourists love that stuff."

And then he gets perma-killed half-way through the game which seriously gimps your party since he was the only decent thief NPC available. I remember how pissed I was the first time through the game since basically I was tripping every trap and having to leave locked chests behind since Imoen and Nalia were such piss-poor substitutes. The second time through I purposely rolled a thief just to make sure I got all the loot in the game.

Seriously, the game allows you to return your vampire-cursed girlfriend (who you wind up having to destroy) back from the dead but not some poor thief who got insta-gibbed? What's up with that?