EA Delays Battlefield 3 Review Embargo, Won’t Be Up Before Launch

The scandal’s only gotten bigger: after trying to manipulate Norwegian press for favorable Battlefield 3 scores, EA’s announced a delay of the Battlefield 3 review embargo, which means participating sites won’t be able to release their reviews until after Battlefield 3 hits the market.

EA has been sending out emails to publications asking them to “confirm” their email addresses, because Battlefield 3 will be sent their way, and will arrive “early next week”. Early next week might be Tuesday or Wednesday, and since Battlefield 3 comes out October 25th, a Tuesday, there’ll be no time for reviewers to do a thorough job.

EA’s own excuse for this is that DICE are “perfectionists”, and they just can’t seem to stop polishing the game.

“Copies are set to arrive on Tuesday because there is a Day 1 update. DICE are perfectionists — they will not stop polishing the game until it is in your hands. The Day 1 update incorporates real-time feedback from the beta, ensuring that the consumer experience on launch day is outstanding. It is the actual consumer experience that we wish to be reviewed. The game with the Day 1 update will be available for review on Oct. 25.”

Thanks, Gamespot.

You Might Also Like


  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Myspace
  • Google Buzz
  • Reddit
  • Stumnleupon
  • Delicious
  • Digg
  • Technorati
Author: Ernice Gilbert View all posts by
Ernice Gilbert here. Founder and Editor-In-Chief of Gamesthirst. Thanks for stopping by, make yourself at home!
Please recommend Games Thirst on Facebook

35 Comments on "EA Delays Battlefield 3 Review Embargo, Won’t Be Up Before Launch"

  1. bobromines77 October 19, 2011 at 6:40 am -

    All the more reason that I am confident in my decision of canceling my pre-order. I will continue to wait for the reviews (even if it is after the launch date). IGN is supposed to report their review on Friday, so we shall see what they think. I tend to view them as being somewhat generous with their reviews but still look forward to the read. “If you polish a turd….it’s still a turd”.

  2. benzo October 19, 2011 at 8:59 am -

    Anyone who has played Battlefield games before knows that DICE delivers. People only care soo much due to the rivalry between BF3 and MW3. Lets all relax a take a breath. Everyone was high on the game and the beta…yes BETA…changed everyones opinion.

  3. Ernice Gilbert October 19, 2011 at 9:08 am -

    @Benzo: it may be true that DICE knows how to make a good game, but that doesn’t give EA the right to do such things. What are they trying to hide? First they manipulate the press, and now this?

  4. CaribbeanCLANK October 19, 2011 at 9:12 am -

    DICE has a great reputation and I am confident that they will deleiver a great product. I do agree with what they are doing especially after some of the negative and uninformed criticism of the game’s beta. They simple want the gaming media to review the final product which will include the launch day update.

  5. Ernice Gilbert October 19, 2011 at 9:16 am -

    Wow, Clank. You agree with this decision? I know you’re BF fan, but even you should be weary when things like this plague the gaming industry.

  6. Ernice Gilbert October 19, 2011 at 9:26 am -

    Simply put, every game critic should have a review of a game a week prior to release.

  7. bobromines77 October 19, 2011 at 9:27 am -

    Don’t get me wrong, I hope it turns out to be an amazing game. I would love to see it take a little wind from mw3′s sails and continue to push the bar for FPS.

  8. Ernice Gilbert October 19, 2011 at 9:39 am -

    I hope it turns out great myself, competition is great for the industry, however truth is truth. Facts are facts, and EA’s actions are disturbing.

  9. bobromines77 October 19, 2011 at 9:45 am -

    I agree, it is suspicious.

  10. CaribbeanCLANK October 19, 2011 at 9:46 am -

    This is not a big issue for me and does not bother me in the least. Reviews have never meant much to me and I have never taken them too seriously. I know what I want in a game and do not need IGN, GameSpot, GameTrailers or Metacritic to tell me if a game is good or not. And this is the big problem…too many gamers today take these numerical scores given to games way too seriously. I say let the gamers play the game and let the feed back from gamers matter more than the media.

  11. CaribbeanCLANK October 19, 2011 at 10:09 am -

    Think of it from DICE’s standpoint. The reviewers recieve the game a week early without the launch update. They review the game that has issues that are supposed to be fixed and complain about these issues in their reviews. This will reflex poorly on the final version of the game which is in fact not the version that the media has recieved but the version the consumer has that includes an update. The average gamer reads or views these inadequate reviews and get the wrong impression of the game from them. And the bashing begins…

  12. Ernice Gilbert October 19, 2011 at 10:19 am -

    Ah, Clank, on your prior comment, your logic reeks of ignorance. You’re saying outlets like Gamesthirst should just allow their users to buy any game without giving them guidance? So they should simply waste money on a game, good or bad, just because it was hyped? That’s ignorance.

  13. Ernice Gilbert October 19, 2011 at 10:24 am -

    Also, why should gamers make blind decisions because of DICE’s incompetence? Seems to me you’re on the corporations side – and that’s okay, but myself and the rest of the GT crew will stand for gamers…including CaribbeanClank.

  14. CaribbeanCLANK October 19, 2011 at 10:51 am -

    I am saying too many gamers rely too much on these gaming media sites and their reviews. The guidance of well informed and knowledgeable gamers matters a lot more to me than the media. I would sooner trust a well written review on a forum than a review from the gaming media. We learn a lot from many of these web sites and I am not saying they are useless. Daily news, strategy guides and much more. But reviews are at the end of the day opinions. Why should one opinion matter more than another…what makes you or anyone else from the gaming media more of an expert than me or another gamer? What makes your review of a game useful guidance and my own less useful? Isn’t gaining guidance and opinions from gamers with similar taste in games more useful to a gamer than from a website? I am on the corporate side?? What does that mean?? I have more faith in the voice of my fellow gamers and I am a corporate sell out?? I would like to see the voices of gamers matter more than the media but yet you think I am siding with the big business machine. So without the gaming media we are just a bunch of blind idiots wasting our money on trashy games?

  15. rpatricky October 19, 2011 at 10:52 am -

    Eh. I’m still getting it on day one. Bobromines77 doesn’t know his ass from a hole in the ground. Plus, I hear, he plays Pokemon a lot.

  16. Ernice Gilbert October 19, 2011 at 11:09 am -

    @Clank: You said “look at it from DICE’s standpoint”, and not from the gamers’ wanting to make a guided decision. You also simply called EA “silly” for trying to skew reviews of BF3 in another thread, as if to say it was nothing.. Also, game reviewers on websites are gamers and statistics show that consensus on a game is most tims shared by critics universally. This kills your argument.

  17. Ernice Gilbert October 19, 2011 at 11:11 am -

    @rpatricky: cut the guy some slack. Lol – you’re looking for trouble.

  18. rpatricky October 19, 2011 at 11:12 am -

    He is my brother. I got him hooked on GT.

  19. Ernice Gilbert October 19, 2011 at 11:18 am -

    Oh! Nice! Haha – I was anticipating a war, instead we get brotherly love. Welcome, Bobromines!

  20. Ernice Gilbert October 19, 2011 at 11:23 am -

    Does he really play Pokemon? :)

  21. rpatricky October 19, 2011 at 11:25 am -

    I’m just going to say yes…for now. HA!

  22. benzo October 19, 2011 at 11:27 am -

    @Ernice: I agree that it does look shady,we all know that EA is a big evil company. I just hope that they way EA is being doesnt reflect too badly on DICE because those folks work hard and deserve a fair shake.

  23. rpatricky October 19, 2011 at 11:30 am -

    @benzo. I agree. It seems like the publishers are the ones behind all the evil goings on when it comes to developers. Look at IW and Activision. It is a shame and I hope people are smart enough to know it wasn’t the doings of the developer.

  24. Ernice Gilbert October 19, 2011 at 11:31 am -

    @Benzo: I agree with you completely, bro.

  25. rpatricky October 19, 2011 at 11:32 am -

    @benzo. I forgot to agree before rambling.

  26. Ernice Gilbert October 19, 2011 at 11:33 am -

    @rpatricky: so he has a DS? Ha! Nothing wrong with owning one, btw.

  27. rpatricky October 19, 2011 at 11:39 am -

    I used to have a couple of the DS units. Honestly, Nintendo just hasn’t been that great since the Super Nintendo. Sure there have been good games but I couldn’t get into any of them… Didn’t keep me from purchasing them though.

  28. Ernice Gilbert October 19, 2011 at 11:42 am -

    True. I hope Wii U amounts to something special.

  29. bobromines77 October 19, 2011 at 1:57 pm -

    I look to the game review sites as a guide to making a more informed decision on my purchases. From what I have read over the years, I have been able to focus on the sites that tend to more closely resemble my views. Like I said in a previous statement, I feel IGN is often generous with there reviews(my opinion). The people behind theses sites are there because they are in the business and know (and love) games. The comments of other consumers(and even my brother) are just as important and represent a more broad spectrum of opinions. Both are tools for making my purchasing decision. And again, I will say, I hope BF rocks! I just cant afford to throw money at a game based on what I have read and played(i know…ITS A BETA) so far.

    And no, I don’t play pokemon. Maybe if we had access to more game review websites in 1999, rpatricky wouldn’t have purchased 2 copies of Superman for the N64. He still tears up over that.

  30. rpatricky October 19, 2011 at 2:20 pm -

    I tear up because Super Man 64 was awesome sauce! People don’t know how to play such a complex game. E.T. for the Atari was still better.

  31. Ernice Gilbert October 19, 2011 at 2:25 pm -

    Great points, Bobromines. Very thoughtful – plus, I agree fully.

    On another note, Superman 64, Patrick? Lol

  32. CaribbeanCLANK October 19, 2011 at 3:37 pm -

    @ Gilbert. This is pointless…as you are a part of the gaming media you will not see reviews from my point of view. You have totally missed what I have been trying to say.

  33. Ernice Gilbert October 19, 2011 at 3:40 pm -

    @If that’s the way you feel, it’s your opinion, and that’s fine by me, friend. But I believe I get exactly what you’re trying to say.

  34. CaribbeanCLANK October 19, 2011 at 3:48 pm -

    ….and what it it that I am trying to say?

  35. Ernice Gilbert October 19, 2011 at 4:03 pm -

    You’re basically saying gaming sites shouldn’t review games, or said reviews shouldn’t be taken serious because it’s just an opinion, like any other gamer’s opinion – and that you’d rather get “real” gamers opinions over on forums etc. I find that to be ridiculous. It’s like you’re saying I’m not a gamer…..Just because I own a gaming site, and is part of the media…… I find that extremely hypocritical. The users who come to gamesthirst appreciate the guidance we give them through reviews and previews, and it would be stupid on our part to stop providing our members with such an important service.

    I have done my best with reviews on this site, making sure I don’t get caught in the hype to give a genuine review. I’ve done that all the time, Battlefield 3 will be no different.

Leave A Response

You must be logged in to post a comment.