Forums › Battlefield 3 Forum › Battlefield 3 Xbox 360 Forum › EA Switch's Off Free Servers for Battlef ...

EA Switch's Off Free Servers for Battlefield 3 [pay to host] No M26 fix ETA

Page:

This topic is now read-only on GameSpot.
To post new messages, please visit GameFAQs and log in using the same email and password that you use on GameSpot.

specialkid8

May 18, 2012 9:18 am GMT
Um, the fact that they catered to COD players and that is when EA first started trying to get the COD money. They increased bullet damage added perks and made smaller infantry focused maps, and of course regenerating health. I can't believe I forgot that one. I thought this was old information. I just looked up update 3 and I seem to remember it being a great patch and nothing on the list looks anything like COD. I don't know where you got that from.
sknmak

May 18, 2012 9:34 am GMT
From: specialkid8 | #161
They increased bullet damage

When?
---
NEW Video Game Remakes Uploaded
http://www.youtube.com/user/sknocturnal
specialkid8

May 18, 2012 9:40 am GMT
From Bad Company to BC 2. Admittedly Bad Company had hilariously weak weapons but they ratcheted it right up because people complained they couldn't kill people fast enough. And another thing i forgot to add was the streamlining of classes.
Jemas777

May 18, 2012 9:55 am GMT
Can't we all just go back and Play Frontlines : Fuel of War, and be happy?
---
Jemas777, Just another guy...by AnyOLName.
anvilone

May 18, 2012 11:10 am GMT
sknmak posted...
Oh there 's a game breaking glitch if you play on a server to long [Xbox freezes]

This has only happened to me twice. I wouldn't call it "game breaking" since it hardly ever occurs. Also, this isn't evidence of an EA/DICE fault, it could have more to do with the limitations of the five year old console that's running it. Even if it was squarely their fault, it's just not game breaking.

From: anvilone | #154
The MAV elevator?

sknmak posted...
Is that the best you got? The MAV elevator isn't even fixed so stop trying to get smart. If you don't understand what he's saying then you BF3 OR Bad Company 2 [update #3] must be the first BF title you ever played.

Is that the best I've got? It was a joke. Myself and Specialkid8 simply don't know what he was talking about. I don't know what "removing the best thing they had over the COD franchise" means. I've always thought there is a world of difference between the two franchises, so it isn't obvious to me. Neither of you have clearly stated what that one thing is and I still have no idea what you're talking about.

I thought the MAV elevator was fixed. I was able to do it after the patch, but I heard there was a hot fix (which may have only been on PC) a couple weeks later. I tried ONE TIME after I heard about the fix and was unable to do it. Also, I haven't seen anybody using the MAV elevator in weeks. If it isn't fixed, it's definitely not being exploited.

BF3/BC2 were not my first Battlefield experience. I've been playing BF since 1942, which is why I am in favor of rent-a-server, which has been available to PC players for ten years.

For the record, I have played the following Battlefield games:
Battlefield 1942 (and all of its expansions, and several mods, PC)
Battlefield Vietnam (PC)
Battlefield 2 (and its expansions, PC)
Battlefield 2 Modern Combat (which was a hot piece of ****, Xbox)
Battlefield 1943 (Xbox 360)
Battlefield: Bad Company 2 (and the Vietnam release, Xbox 360)
Battlefield 3 (Xbox 360)
___________________
BF3 Xbox Server: Close Quarters Training - CQ + TDM. Ranked. 200% Tickets. Hardcore mode.
sknmak

May 18, 2012 11:49 am GMT
^ Ok well I will let the original user anser you guys quesions okay >_>

From: anvilone | #165
I thought the MAV elevator was fixed. I was able to do it after the patch, but I heard there was a hot fix (which may have only been on PC) a couple weeks later. I tried ONE TIME after I heard about the fix and was unable to do it. Also, I haven't seen anybody using the MAV elevator in weeks. If it isn't fixed, it's definitely not being exploited

Well it wasn't. EA DICE also threatened to ban or reset stats for anyone using it from what I read. From what I've seen it's sill possible you just have to go prone on it at a specific angle something like that. I've never once did the MAV glitch personal. I only used it a few times to spot enemies and use it as it was intended to be used. So yeah it isn't fixed. I guess most thing it isn't possible.anymore. Also on the blogs there are plenty of comments about it NOT being fixed and people are still PO'd.

BF3/BC2 were not my first Battlefield experience. I've been playing BF since 1942, which is why I am in favor of rent-a-server, which has been available to PC players for ten years.
*List of Battlefield game*

That's nice and all, but that how many times have you ever had to pay to host a room o consoles? PC is one things, but the prices are MUCH better. Consoles on the other has always been FREE. Don't want to hear the whole "Dedicated servers cost money" debate. We know this and we know EA DICE has them setup. Do you know how much it cost EA to run servers? My bet would be either not that much or probably nothing. Especially if they are the middle man. Knowing EA that is the case. Bad Company 2 consoles had free servers that are still up and running and have been for over 2 years. So EA must not be hurting that much from dedicated servers. Charging console gamers to host rooms is low as you can get. I understand your point, but speaking from a console and PC gamers, just as yourself, you must clearly understand that no other console game charges for servers. This can be bad in the long run.
---
Forum is now up and running.
http://gamingpyro.omgforum.net/
specialkid8

May 18, 2012 12:13 pm GMT
Why don't you understand that they did rent a server because people wanted their own server? It isn't low at all. It isn't greedy. If anything it is very nice of them. They listened to their fanbase. They don't cost money to cover the cost of having dedicated servers. Like you said, they have had dedicated servers running for years. They cost money because that's what renting means. I really don't understand why you think this is some greedy ploy by EA.
Jemas777

May 18, 2012 12:26 pm GMT
"Well it wasn't. EA DICE also threatened to ban or reset stats for anyone using it from what I read."

Where did you read this please? Don't need to be specific.

As far as renting servers. Console game typically follow PC games, so it was only a matter of time before it happened. I doubt that any game maker would release a game without having servers running. Who would buy a game if you couldn't play it? It costs a lot to run servers. They are opening a Google Server building 20 miles away from where I live. They are hiring 25 tecks at over $75k per year. to maintain the servers. Not including support staff. Include in there energy costs(Servers need to be kept cool all year long), taxes, equipment updates, software updates, and infrastructure. It gets quite expensive. You just don't turn on a switch and let it run like a home computer. But the main point is that very few people rent servers. It's less than 2% across all platforms for this game. If that 2% disappeared next week one of two things would happen. The price to rent a server would drop to next to nothing, or EA woudl run them. As long as there is demand for people to play the game someone will supply a way to play. It would only hurt future sale if they let it die with any type of following.
---
Jemas777, Just another guy...by AnyOLName.
Clutch41007

May 18, 2012 7:14 pm GMT
Jemas777 posted...
But the main point is that very few people rent servers. It's less than 2% across all platforms for this game. If that 2% disappeared next week one of two things would happen. The price to rent a server would drop to next to nothing, or EA woudl run them. As long as there is demand for people to play the game someone will supply a way to play. It would only hurt future sale if they let it die with any type of following.

This raises the following question. Assuming even distribution, then 67% of that 2% are on the 360 renting servers. I don't know what the total number of players on 360 is, but I'd assume the number actually renting servers would be substantially low compared to those just playing. That said, I remember, pre-update, the number of pages for Rush servers being firmly in the double digits, and if I added Conquest to the search, I could easily double that number. Now, the number of pages are severely reduced, wildly fluctuates in number, and in the case of Rush, sometimes what is generated doesn't even break two pages. In addition, all or nearly all results are of the rented variety, and most are usually the high-ticket system-melters. The number of official servers has nosedived drastically, and in most cases, finding one can be akin to successfully hunting down Bigfoot.

So if very few users are renting servers and the game clearly had an abundancy of server space before hand...then where the hell did all the server space go?
---
"On topic: Eminem is the greatest rapper alive." - tarheelborn15
"Holy ****....How many rappers have died today????" - Luda848
huntersfightert

May 18, 2012 7:35 pm GMT
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if they only did it to the 360 servers...
and PS3 EA free servers are still up..

I would seriously laugh, if that happened...
sknmak

May 18, 2012 8:20 pm GMT
From: Jemas777 | #168
"Well it wasn't. EA DICE also threatened to ban or reset stats for anyone using it from what I read."

Where did you read this please? Don't need to be specific.

Well just to prove to you that I'm not lying I'll post the original Twitter feed for you.

https://twitter.com/#!/gustavhalling/status/185031960253562880

Yeah so basically banning players for exploiting something DICE has been trying to fix for about 7 months now. Also telling the community to kick them as well doesn't solve the problem. There was a lot of discussion about on the offical forums. Some people were mad as hell after being banned for a week or WEEKS.....and some even complained about having their stats reset. I admit that I don't like MAV glitching, but it's nothing my mortar couldn't handle. Instead of fixing the problem DICE took the easy way out. They need to just fix the broken things, but it's too late they have broken a lot of things.

--------

. They are opening a Google Server building 20 miles away from where I live. They are hiring 25 tecks at over $75k per year. to maintain the servers. Not including support staff. Include in there energy costs(Servers need to be kept cool all year long)

I know more than servers and IT than you could possibly know [unless you have went to college and have a ton of certifications.] I know exactly how servers work and how they should be managed. Keeping them cool is not as hard as you think. Most places leave their servers in hot ass rooms [not a good idea lol]. Look this is my point BATTLEFIELD 3 IS NOT GOOGLE. So you can drop that right now. BF3 will never need as much space and servers as google. Google moves millions of times the traffic as BF3 24\7. So I will repeat what I have been saying. There are no middle men for EA....EA is making all of the money. They manage the servers and aren't paying very much for them. With all of the money EA has made it's safe to say they managing their own servers at this point. More than likely remotely in some places. I'm not saying everything is free, but charging console gamers in order to lend your official servers is low. Once again this is a bad trend. It wouldn't make EA go bankrupt if they left it free. They simply see the sheep and profit. Nothing more. One thing I am never worrying about is EA financial standings. They don't have as much money as Activision and NIntendo, but they have a ton of it.
---
Forum is now up and running.
http://gamingpyro.omgforum.net/
Jemas777

May 19, 2012 4:33 am GMT
Clutch41007 posted...
Jemas777 posted...
But the main point is that very few people rent servers. It's less than 2% across all platforms for this game. If that 2% disappeared next week one of two things would happen. The price to rent a server would drop to next to nothing, or EA woudl run them. As long as there is demand for people to play the game someone will supply a way to play. It would only hurt future sale if they let it die with any type of following.

This raises the following question. Assuming even distribution, then 67% of that 2% are on the 360 renting servers. I don't know what the total number of players on 360 is, but I'd assume the number actually renting servers would be substantially low compared to those just playing. That said, I remember, pre-update, the number of pages for Rush servers being firmly in the double digits, and if I added Conquest to the search, I could easily double that number. Now, the number of pages are severely reduced, wildly fluctuates in number, and in the case of Rush, sometimes what is generated doesn't even break two pages. In addition, all or nearly all results are of the rented variety, and most are usually the high-ticket system-melters. The number of official servers has nosedived drastically, and in most cases, finding one can be akin to successfully hunting down Bigfoot.

So if very few users are renting servers and the game clearly had an abundancy of server space before hand...then where the hell did all the server space go?

People who rent servers set them up they way they like, so some maps suffer.

I I did some figuring on the 17th, this is what I came up with:

There are about 800 servers rented, and 30,000 players. That is less than 3% of all xbox players. 97% of people PLAY FOR FREE(outside the cost of the game). As of right now there are about 2050 Battlefield 3 server rented, with about 132,445 people playing across all three platforms. That converts to 1.5% of all players rent servers, less if you figure a few may have more than 1. Not to mention there still are DICE servers.
---
Jemas777, Just another guy...by AnyOLName.
MG42_CHEF

May 19, 2012 8:36 am GMT
What's the point of having the servers active if no one is using them? It is a way to save money for them and once no one buys servers anymore, they will have to switch them back on.
---
"I had an uncle named Ramus once. You know what I did to him? I beat the **** outta him." -CrimsonKane
sknmak

May 21, 2012 4:24 am GMT
Been a long weekend.

@ Jemas777

Did you get all the proof that you need? My point stands. Instead of fixing the problem DIC was\is banning people. There were complaints the official BF3 board for permanent banning on certain servers. I personally don't like the MAV glitch. I don't think telling admins and having DICE ban people will solve the problem. They to simply fix their damn game. They changed a lot of things, but didn't fix the most complained about glitch. Also the no sound glitch is still there and freezing Xbox's. Just saying.

From: MG42_CHEF | #173
What's the point of having the servers active if no one is using them? It is a way to save money for them and once no one buys servers anymore, they will have to switch them back on.

That's not completely true. After awhile EA will probably turn them off while continue to charge people to play\host servers. So when another BF3 game releases the support for BF3 will gradually go away and the game will be left in the people purchasing the servers hands.
---
Forum is now up and running.
http://gamingpyro.omgforum.net/
Jemas777

May 21, 2012 5:03 am GMT
sknmak posted...
Been a long weekend.

@ Jemas777

Did you get all the proof that you need? My point stands. Instead of fixing the problem DIC was\is banning people. There were complaints the official BF3 board for permanent banning on certain servers. I personally don't like the MAV glitch. I don't think telling admins and having DICE ban people will solve the problem. They to simply fix their damn game. They changed a lot of things, but didn't fix the most complained about glitch. Also the no sound glitch is still there and freezing Xbox's. Just saying.

From: MG42_CHEF | #173
What's the point of having the servers active if no one is using them? It is a way to save money for them and once no one buys servers anymore, they will have to switch them back on.
That's not completely true. After awhile EA will probably turn them off while continue to charge people to play\host servers. So when another BF3 game releases the support for BF3 will gradually go away and the game will be left in the people purchasing the servers hands.

It does and it doesn't. It says that he will ban people on servers he Admins. It doesn't say it's an official stance of DICE/ EA. Yes, I know he is a high ranking designer. But that doesn't translate into a policy.

Personally, I could care less if they fixed that or not. I'm actually kinda upset that they did. I used to love shooting people off the tops of buildings, or waiting till the were just about to the top and shooting them and dropping mortars on them.

A lot of people don't follow that closely to what game designers do/say. I'm willing to wager a vast majority of people even know of this comment, I didn't. But the original point to this was that MAV riding was rampant. They patched and it stopped. Can you still do it? Maybe. But since the patch to the Xbox, I haven't seen anyone do it, and I have some friends who knew early on about the indestructible/inadvisable glitch.

No one is arguing that the games doesn't have glitches, and needs fixing. The point all us "Fanboys" are trying to make is that's it playable. There is no one glitch/weapon/class that gives an unbeatable advantage to anyone in the game. Some of the things we have been talking about may be working the way they were supposed to(suppression) but need to be refined. Some things may have been over powered(frag rounds), some things may need to have their range adjusted(M26 dart), some things make have been nerfed too much(Stinger range/tanks). But you can work with them with a little thought. Things they should fix that make so scene are things like falling to you death from 5 feet, being sucked out of you heli by brushing against a tree(and having the heli keep flying away), not being able to jump over a fallen tree. Things like that. But for all it's flaws, it's a good play. Almost all games these days are released with problems, because they can now "Patch" them. Where in the past this couldn't be done.
---
Jemas777, Just another guy...by AnyOLName.
anvilone

May 21, 2012 11:56 am GMT
In coming giant post.

tl;dr version:
1. Would a situation where players have creative admin control but weren't charged for servers be too chaotic?
2. Official servers were removed, then reinstated. High ticket Rush is stupid.
3. My opinion on the MAV elevator + link to the update page where it was supposedly patched. It is against EA TOS to use it either way.

sknmak posted...
Charging console gamers to host rooms is low as you can get. I understand your point, but speaking from a console and PC gamers, just as yourself, you must clearly understand that no other console game charges for servers. This can be bad in the long run.

Excuse my ignorance, but which console games allow players to admin their own servers and control the settings in both ranked and unranked play? I'm curious how they can implement this without charging and without having a run on free servers. I would admin a free server just for the hell of it. In our present case on BF3, I've had to consider whether I want to pay for a potentially unpopular server.

I'm getting the impression that you do approve of players having some creative control of servers, since you're main point is that they shouldn't be charging. I agree that I'd rather not pay (because disagreeing with free would be somewhat silly), but I wonder if having to pay ultimately creates a better server environment by limiting unnecessary server spam, or else corralling players into more populated servers so that there aren't mostly empty servers. Either way, it's hard for me to imagine that things wouldn't be even more chaotic if the option were free.

Clutch41007 posted...
Now, the number of pages are severely reduced, wildly fluctuates in number, and in the case of Rush, sometimes what is generated doesn't even break two pages. In addition, all or nearly all results are of the rented variety, and most are usually the high-ticket system-melters. The number of official servers has nosedived drastically, and in most cases, finding one can be akin to successfully hunting down Bigfoot.

Finding specific maps and game types has become a bit difficult, but I expect that the community will sort this out on its own. Can't find something you like, make it yourself.

EA removed all of its official servers two weeks ago. One week ago, it restored some of them due to player backlash.

High-ticket matches of Rush make absolutely no sense.

Jemas777 posted...
It does and it doesn't. It says that he will ban people on servers he Admins. It doesn't say it's an official stance of DICE/ EA. Yes, I know he is a high ranking designer. But that doesn't translate into a policy.

It is the official stance. It is in the TOS that players are not allowed to use known exploits or glitches. They just have no way of enforcing. Similarly, you're not allowed to prohibit weapons in ranked matches, but people still do it.

Halling's tweet came immediately after the 1.04 patch, actually the day after it dropped for PS3. As I said before, there was an update a couple weeks later that supposedly fixed the problem, but it may have been PC only. In any case, I haven't seen anybody do it since (as you pointed out too). I myself was unable to do it after the second update, but was successful after the initial rent-a-server/1.04 patch came out.

Here is the entry about that second update:
http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf3/news/view/2832654781254560301/

Personally, I could care less if they fixed that or not. I'm actually kinda upset that they did. I used to love shooting people off the tops of buildings, or waiting till the were just about to the top and shooting them and dropping mortars on them.

I agree with this. Also, on any map with aerial assets, players can still parachute onto the tops of buildings either by bailing out of a vehicle, or using the radio beacon.
___________________
BF3 Xbox Server: Close Quarters Training - CQ + TDM. Ranked. 200% Tickets. Hardcore mode.
sknmak

May 21, 2012 1:03 pm GMT
From: Jemas777 | #175
It does and it doesn't. It says that he will ban people on servers he Admins. It doesn't say it's an official stance of DICE/ EA. Yes, I know he is a high ranking designer. But that doesn't translate into a policy
*sigh* You also forget to mention how he urged everyone else to ban people for exploiting a problem they have failed to fix in over 7 months. Also do some more google searching and you'll find the blog\article and possibly the topics on the official board. Also I'm sure EA DICE doesn't give a damn anyways. As long as they are paying the glitches can stay for all they care. Hopefully they at least fix things that has been broken for over 7 months. There's nothing that can be done until the next DLC patch anyways.

There is no one glitch/weapon/class that gives an unbeatable advantage to anyone in the game. Some of the things we have been talking about may be working the way they were supposed to(suppression) but need to be refined. Some things may have been over powered(frag rounds), some things may need to have their range adjusted(M26 dart), some things make have been nerfed too much(Stinger range/tanks).
Yeah that's for proving a few of my points. Air vehicles are OP if the pilots have the correct setup since the range has been dropped. Tanks are easy ass targets now. M26+Dart is the new USAS\ W Frags [the damage is just rediculous thanks DICE ]. The Support Class plus Suppression is clearly Overpowered. Especially on smaller maps. Also if you have enough LMG's spraying at choke points you'll be suppressed before you even peek around a corner. You are right there sin't one. It's scattered out. DICE fixes something and something else is glitched or screwed up. At this point I'm not surprised. Let's see if they can get it right 7-8 months after
release.

From: anvilone | #176
Excuse my ignorance, but which console games allow players to admin their own servers and control the settings in both ranked and unranked play?
Well don't flame me for this. Also the unranked and ranked makes no difference. A host IS A HOST. I can give you three games right of the back:
Bad Company 2 [ranked]
Rainbow Six: Vegas [ranked and unranked]
Rainbow Six: Vegas 2 [ranked and unranked]

Also pretty much every other game that offers a "host" no matter if it's P2P or dedicated is 100% FREE. Online pass is one thing, but paying to host on console gaming is another. I know you know plenty of other games that allow you to change the settings of your lobby\host. Are you trying to be a smart ass or something? It can't be all ignorance. I understand that you are trying to defend EA DICE and prove a point, but what exactly is your point? Servers aren't free or some crap?
---
Forum is now up and running.
http://gamingpyro.omgforum.net/
sknmak

May 21, 2012 1:03 pm GMT
I'm getting the impression that you do approve of players having some creative control of servers, since you're main point is that they shouldn't be charging. I agree that I'd rather not pay (because disagreeing with free would be somewhat silly), but I wonder if having to pay ultimately creates a better server environment by limiting unnecessary server spam, or else corralling players into more populated servers so that there aren't mostly empty servers. Either way, it's hard for me to imagine that things wouldn't be even more chaotic if the option were free.

Hell no it wouldn't be chaotic. For a game like BF user created or purchased servers should not be ranked anyways. Also your point is invalid. There are already tons of unnecessary server spam. Unfortunately the server spam consist of limited official servers and a ton of crappy rule servers. I'm sure you'll find a few decent servers until you kill the host and get kicked. Or the admin needs to make room for friends. Also ever care to think that if the servers were free EA DICE should've added a filter for non-official servers? Yeah that would've been toooooo smart and to "free" for EA. So yeah EA is making a killing from the sales I bet.

Finding specific maps and game types has become a bit difficult, but I expect that the community will sort this out on its own. Can't find something you like, make it yourself.
AKA PAY EA TO PLAY THE GAME correctly or else deal with the one sided matches. Where are the official servers? All of them are full I suppose. Guess people are still renting them. What do you mean a "bit difficult"......it's ridiculous. A simple filter is all that is needed. Or WAS needed. EA has already said that they will continue to rent out official servers as people continue to pay.
---
NEW Video Game Remakes Uploaded
http://www.youtube.com/user/sknocturnal
Jemas777

May 22, 2012 3:54 am GMT
sknmak posted...
From: Jemas777 | #175
It does and it doesn't. It says that he will ban people on servers he Admins. It doesn't say it's an official stance of DICE/ EA. Yes, I know he is a high ranking designer. But that doesn't translate into a policy
*sigh* You also forget to mention how he urged everyone else to ban people for exploiting a problem they have failed to fix in over 7 months. Also do some more google searching and you'll find the blog\article and possibly the topics on the official board. Also I'm sure EA DICE doesn't give a damn anyways. As long as they are paying the glitches can stay for all they care. Hopefully they at least fix things that has been broken for over 7 months. There's nothing that can be done until the next DLC patch anyways.

There is no one glitch/weapon/class that gives an unbeatable advantage to anyone in the game. Some of the things we have been talking about may be working the way they were supposed to(suppression) but need to be refined. Some things may have been over powered(frag rounds), some things may need to have their range adjusted(M26 dart), some things make have been nerfed too much(Stinger range/tanks).
Yeah that's for proving a few of my points. Air vehicles are OP if the pilots have the correct setup since the range has been dropped. Tanks are easy ass targets now. M26+Dart is the new USAS\ W Frags [the damage is just rediculous thanks DICE ]. The Support Class plus Suppression is clearly Overpowered. Especially on smaller maps. Also if you have enough LMG's spraying at choke points you'll be suppressed before you even peek around a corner. You are right there sin't one. It's scattered out. DICE fixes something and something else is glitched or screwed up. At this point I'm not surprised. Let's see if they can get it right 7-8 months after
release.

You missed the point on the banning. I will say you are 100% correct in what they had to say about banning people and that it's policy. That wasn't the point. Would the average gamer even know about this? Probably not. Despite this, exploits like the MAV elevator are non extistant since the patch.

Proved your point? Maybe combined they would make one player unbeatable,. But scattered, they work just fine. Suppression is here to stay, get used to it. LMGs just change the way you need to play. Can't just run around haphazardly like in CoD. Tanks die a little easier, go slower and pay attention.. Planes OP? I don't think so, I just would like the range on the stingers a little further so I can maybe get a lock when they fly over. None of those are glitches, just poor playing, and can easily be worked around. The DART is a glitch. It's damage is fine, you shouldn't be able to use it at great distance and have the same affect. That's the difference. You seem to view challenges as glitches because they must interfere with the way you think the game should be played. Just because you don't like how a game plays, doesn't mean it needs to be fixed.
---
Jemas777, Just another guy...by AnyOLName.
RBEM

May 22, 2012 5:09 am GMT
I view all this as a massive **** you to the community. EA include a multiplayer element to the game but by forcing someone somewhere to rent we are being forced to pay twice. Future BFs may be like this at launch. And now they're basically saying they can't be *rsed fixing glitches either. And to top it all i see now you can buy all the unlocks for huge amounts of MSPs - i know EA is a business but this is pretty ridiculous.
---
GT: x Pearl o