Uodated - Want to progress in SW:BFII? You'd better be ready to spend money

[WereCat]

Good thing is that there are two Battlefront 2 games with working multiplayer.

I'll play the better and cheaper one.

[Master Disaster]

10 minutes ago, KuJoe said:

That's smart on their part, but getting mad at a game before it's release doesn't seem like a good idea to me.

You're looking at the situation backwards here...

 

This is a pre release so if anything EA will have loosened the requirements for the BETA in order to make progression seem easier than it actually will be in the final game.

 

This isn't the first time they've done it this way either, every single BF BETA EA have ever put has has been waaaaaay easier to progress in than the base game. I remember one of my friends achieving max level in the BF4 BETA in a single afternoon (think it was level 30) then when the full game came out in 3 days he was barely past level 10.

 

Don't expect EA to make this system fairer on release because thats never going to happen, it will either stay exactly how it is now or be made harder for players to progress. Remember we have no idea what odds system these loot boxes are working on for rewarding scrap so there's no accurate way to measure any changes in the system. Its entirely possible they make progression get more difficult as you get further through the game to the point where obtaining scrap is almost impossible without buying Gold Loot Boxes or some shit,

[KuJoe]

Just now, Master Disaster said:

You're looking at the situation backwards here...

 

This is a pre release so if anything EA will have loosened the requirements for the BETA in order to make progression seem easier than it actually will be in the final game.

 

This isn't the first time they've done it this way either, every single BF BETA EA have ever put has has been waaaaaay easier to progress in than the base game. I remember one of my friends achieving max level in the BF4 BETA in a single afternoon (think it was level 30) then when the full game came out in 3 days he was barely past level 10.

 

Don't expect EA to make this system fairer on release because thats never going to happen, it will either stay exactly how it is now or be made harder for players to progress. Remember we have no idea what odds system these loot boxes are working on for rewarding scrap so there's no accurate way to measure any changes in the system. Its entirely possible they make progression get more difficult as you get further through the game to the point where obtaining scrap is almost impossible without buying Gold Loot Boxes or some shit,

Sounds like EA knows their audience and their audience are masochists. LoL.

[mr moose]

8 minutes ago, KuJoe said:

Voicing your opinion is fine, but it won't do anything with a company like EA. Vote with your wallet, if a lot of people still purchase the game then they are telling EA they are fine with their business practices and thus EA won't care about the few people who aren't paying them.

A lot of people don't think about the money stuff or they are buying the game for their kids who'll just play it for a few months with their mates then move on to the next one.  EA will sell enough to make it worth their while, and as a lot of Pay to win games have shown us, there is no shortage of people willing to empty their wallets to be the best online.

[KuJoe]

Just now, mr moose said:

A lot of people don't think about the money stuff or they are buying the game for their kids who'll just play it for a few months with their mates then move on to the next one.  EA will sell enough to make it worth their while, and as a lot of Pay to win games have shown us, there is no shortage of people willing to empty their wallets to be the best online.

Exactly, and EA will not change their ways as long as they are still making money.

[Master Disaster]

10 minutes ago, huilun02 said:

If it wasn't already plenty obvious, that modern match based games with main focus on multiplayer can only go full competitive or pay to win.

 

By full competitive you look at MOBAs and CSGO where no pay to win element is tolerated and it all boils down to skill. These games are long lived and not meant to be superseded within 3+ years after release. 

 

The pay to win route is the only choice for EA if they don't charge us for DLC, because we all know the release cycle for Battlefield/Battlefront is 1-2 years and no one will be stupid enough to pay for just vanity items that lose relevance when the next game comes out. Also the # of players per match is too large for a competitive scene to develop. Imagine DOTA or CSGO with 32 players on each side, it would be a disaster if the aim was for high level competitive matches.

 

I'm not defending EA here. I hate the pay to win model to the core. If you have a better idea of how EA can rake in the $, I'm sure they will be all ears. BF4 was fixed. DICE LA exists.

The £55 price of the game isn't enough for them? I mean you make it sound like they're giving the game away for free and need to monetize to make anything but this is a full priced game, not a F2P game.

 

They already bumped the base price up from £45 for BF1 to £55 for SWBFII.

[Master Disaster]

Just now, huilun02 said:

Never was. I'm not part of EA but if you want to consider this a turn for the worse, remember that people had been asking them to do away with paid DLC and Premium. They got rid of the two evils. Now a new one takes its place. 

See my update, they bumped the base price up by £10 already compared to BF1. (Can't access the US Origin store so can't see the price in $)

[SImoHayha]

Honest EA should be taking some notes from bloody Ubisoft outta all companies. Jesus Siege was a diamond in the rough, but after the devs listened to the fans and started taking notes " OH WELL GOLLY WE SHOULD PROBABLY PLEASE OUR FANBASE TO GET MORE FANS" now Siege of one if not best video games out to date for Ubisoft currently. Amazing what listening to the fanbase does for you.

 

Siege = Free operators, Maps, updates and improvements without having paywalls so all players can play with everyone and any operator they wish to play with enough grinding
 

Battlefront = DLC fest and apparently didn't listen to their fanbase.

[Centurius]

Now, this is basically why I'm going to wait for EA to add it to Origin Access in like 6 months.

[Master Disaster]

4 minutes ago, huilun02 said:

Yes now imagine BF1 premium + all DLCs for a flat £10 upfront. Sounds too good to be true? It is...

That's a fair point however what they're doing is forcing everybody into the monetisation model rather than just those that wan't to pay more.

 

Buying a seasons pass was always optional, if you wanted it you bought it and if you didn't well, you didn't. With this system the progress restrictions affects all players and its like an underhanded way of forcing players to spend money that otherwise might not have done so.

 

Its very clever marketing but for the consumer its a very shitty business practice.

[Dabombinable]

Expectorating Assholes strikes again!

[OmJo93]

Honestly, until gamers (this goes for all consumers, but relevance) start complaining with their wallets, crap like this will continue to happen. These companies don't give a flying sh!t about opinions, they only care about the money in your wallet. So just stop purchasing these games.

 

Better yet, purchase STBF2 instead. The original. On the release day of this knockoff by EA. Now that would send a message to EA. 

[Misanthrope]

5 minutes ago, huilun02 said:

No one is forced into paying extra in the new model. Yes the thousands of hours to unlock everything is unreasonable but for the first time we get the possibility of unlocking everything without paying extra. Previously people had been complaining about DLC-only maps dying off because a huge chunk of the playerbase that did not buy DLCs could not or had no incentive to play those maps. Premium made things worse as it put content behind a second hard paywall. With the new model there will be no more playerbase fragmentation.

So you're using a problem EA themselves created, over-priced DLC, as a justification to introduce a new problem? Do you seriously not realize EA is in full control of both situations and can change both if they wanted to?

 

Bottom line is EA doesn't thinks even their darling franchise Starwars is strong enough to justify an AAA release on it's own. So first they make the game less attractive with lack of content because they were too fucking cheap to actually create more of it. Now they have more content but they still think players who paid 60 fucking dollars do not deserve that much content, content we used to get for this price, less if adjusting for inflation because well, fuck you: Our game looks great and has lots of optimization and we spend a lot of cash on this blockbuster franchise so pay more.

 

This is akin to just defending a wife beater by saying "Well she just provokes him all of the time, if she would just shut up and do what she's told she wouldn't get beat up it's her own fault really".

 

Quit your victim blaming.

[suicidalfranco]

i'll just stick to Warframe, where the f2p model doesn't require days to find the material for a new weapon/frame, and when you know what you want, you're not stuck with RNG loot crates

[AlTech]

I'm sticking with CS:GO. Probably done with Battlefield and EA as a whole.

[Teddy07]

Glad I quit recently video gaming except for a few LoL matches in the week. Not worth it anymore and I even sold my GPU.

[yian88]

I stopped playing since BF4, it had the same system just not as ridiculous as this, anything with loot crates and pay2win is uninstalled and forgotten from my life.

[Bananasplit_00]

yay for this shit. how are the companies getting away with this shit? how are people still buying the games...

[Cookybiscuit]

Got bored of the game after two matches anyway, looks pretty though.

[suicidalfranco]

27 minutes ago, Bananasplit_00 said:

yay for this shit. how are the companies getting away with this shit? how are people still buying the games...

blame the casual player for encouraging them by giving their money away regardless of how shitty the business model is

[Morgan Everett]

It just looks like another case of the acquisition of in-game items being accelerated if you’re prepared to spend money. I guess I don’t see the controversy: if you don’t want to spend money on those items, don’t spend it. If acquiring those items is then too slow for you, and you’re that concerned by this, you’re free to quit playing, or never play in the first place.

[MadyTehWolfie]

Im I the only one who played the older battle front games and miss that you only get 3 maps and non of the features. EA took out all the good game modes like galactic conquest. FAIL

[TVwazhere]

2 minutes ago, MadyTehWolfie said:

Am I the only one who played the older battle front games and miss that you only get 3 maps and non of the features. EA took out all the good game modes like galactic conquest. FAIL

You're definitely not

[MadyTehWolfie]

Just now, TVwazhere said:

You're definitely not

Dont know why they didnt just build the old game in their engine and then add the new order battles to it. so bad.

[TVwazhere]

Just now, MadyTehWolfie said:

Dont know why they didnt just build the old game in their engine and then add the new order battles to it. so bad.

Because then people would complain that it's just a re skin and nothing new or original was truly added. 

 

(Not us, just people in general)