Tessian wrote:There's a line to be drawn between developers wanting to give more product to those who are willing to pay more, and giving people who are willing to pay more an unfair advantage. It's right there at the line, but it isn't crossing that line. Bad Company almost did that, but they changed their minds. Originally in BC you could buy the CE and get access to a special weapon in each class that no one else would get. After the outcry they changed it that you could get those weapons without the CE, but you'd have to work harder for them.
I don't fault the developers for offering it, and it's a pretty cool deal if you like the game that much. The people who are more likely to get the CE are the same guys who would outpace you quickly anyway. And really Zeus... you consider those who are willing to drop $20 more on a game to be "the rich" ?? Let's not get carried away here.
Again, it was an extreme comparison to make a point. $10 or $20 extra ain't gonna break no one but it's the same principle as have an unlevel playing field that rewards the rich. Look out for this "principle" thing in my posts, you'll be shocked how often it pops up.
I personally think this one crosses the line a bit. Not huge but enough to be irritating. Give them a special costume, a cool looking gun that is the same damage and functionality as another, maybe even an extra map to play on. Sure, I can see that (that's why I waited 'til I got a used GotY edition of Call of Duty 4, so I can take advantage of the multi maps during my one month of free online play when Gears 2 comes). But to give them an advantage like being stronger or a more powerful weapon? At least one foot is clearly over the line on this one IMO
