Overclock.net banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

[GameRant] Unlocking All Star Wars Battlefront 2 Content Takes 4,528 Hours or $2100

5K views 66 replies 49 participants last post by  Woundingchaney 
#1 ·
Quote:
Electronic Arts is still struggling to fight the flurry of negative consumer reaction for Star Wars Battlefront 2, a title with plenty of otherwise positive aspects like gorgeous visuals and a brand new focus on singleplayer activities. The company found itself in hot water earlier this week when gamers discovered it would take 40 hours of in-game playtime to unlock a top-tier hero, prompting a mass of negative comments about how the studio was seemingly forcing gamers into microtransactions if they really wanted to unlock the majority of content.

In response to a consumer reaction so negative that it spawned both the most downvoted Reddit post of all time and death threats to several game developers, Electronic Arts slashed the in-game currency cost of its top-tier heroes by 75%. Somewhat sneakily, however, it also cut down the coins awarded for completing challenges, and put a cap on how many coins could be earned in a certain amount of time through single player. Now, Star Wars Gaming has done the math and figured out that if a player wants to unlock all the content in Battlefront 2, they either must pay $2,100 or spent 4,528 hours grinding away at the game.
Source
 
#3 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blameless View Post

I can sink 5k hours into a game I really enjoy.

I don't think I could sink 5k hours into this game.
Not like you'd have to.
 
#4 ·
This is not the game I'm looking for...

Seriously though, I get the business side of this. Companies make games for 1 reason and 1 reason only...to make money. I dont have an issue with that as long as, just like anything else I buy, I know what I am paying for (what I get) and how much it will cost to get it (total cost to get x). Its this micro transaction, gambling trend that infuriates me. While I can look at something like that in the moment and stop myself, these companies are betting on there being enough people out there who cannot control themselves. Lets be honest, not many people are going to find value in spending $2k on a game in micro transactions as a rational choice.

The problem is most of these companies dont realize that if they were less greedy theyd likely make more money. Be honest and straight forward with your customers, charge fair prices, and most of all release complete and compelling quality games and content and the money will flow in. When are they gonna learn pay-to-win is a no-no (at least in the US). Micro transactions are fine as long as they are optional and cosmetic.
 
#5 ·
This is a shameful, and pathetic shake-down - the only way it will stop is if people don't buy it.
The numbers are what they're going to use as an indicator on all this, not what people say - but what they do.

Micotransactions for skins, customizing characters etc fine.
Microtransactions for things that give you a competitive advantage over others in game, not fine.
 
#6 ·
I'd just like to emphasize that there are ways of making mictrotransactions in games that don't feel this punitive. Overwatch is the best example. It has a quite reasonable $40-60 purchase price, and with that you get every hero, every map, every game mode that they have now or will ever make, included in that purchase price.

Aside from the core gameplay content of the game, there are the cosmetics, which come from loot boxes. Playing the game gives you boxes for free at a decent pace, a nice play session will reliably get you a box or two. They've recently made it so that the boxes are extremely unlikely to contain duplicate items, which has improved the reward feeling of the boxes. You can also buy boxes, with money, which is how they extract more money from people who care a lot about the game and want to further customize the cosmetics than what they have gotten just from boxes. You're also able to unlock any individual piece item, even the most expensive ones, at a relatively low frequency from credit drops in the boxes. To get EVERYTHING? Yeah, that will either take a while, or take cash. But it won't take anywhere close to as much as what is quoted for SWBF2.

Is it perfect? No, I don't think so. I'd like to be able to simply buy a particular item, straight up, whenever I feel like it. Boxes should be the most money-efficient way, on average, to buy the cosmetics, but for very specific and targeted items I'd like for there to be more direct options.

But NONE of that affects gameplay. None of that lets you buy power. Every game, every player is on the exact same footing. There are no number differences tied to player accounts, only to the character selected which is the same as everyone.

You should never be able to buy in-game power with out-of-game resources. Overwatch is an example of the modern microtransaction game done right, and SWBF2 is the epitome of ur doin it rong.
 
#10 ·
I love the people trying to defend this game (not here really, but on other sites) by saying "You don't need to unlock everything. You weren't meant to. You're supposed to pick a specialist playstyle and just unlock stuff that benefits you."

Not only is this blatantly Pay 2 Win (which is a cardinal sin in gaming as far as I'm concerned) but the time it takes to unlock things by just playing the game is laughable. Sadly, we've been headed this way for some time now. The Battlefield games have had packs that you can pay for to just unlock everything for a class/vehicle without having to actually level it for some time now. This is just EA toying with a version of that designed to milk those with deep pockets and addictive personalities.

I really am sad. When Battlefront II was announced, and they showed actual gameplay, I was stoked. They fixed nearly all the complaints from the first one, and it had so much more content. The announcement that all the future DLC would be free as well seemed too good to be true. Sadly, it appears that it was.

Lootboxes that contain cosmetic items are okay. I don't like the idea of randomized items for real money, but at least with cosmetics it isn't affecting the gameplay in any capacity. It's also more acceptable when, like Overwatch, you're bringing out all future gameplay content for free. Game companies are continually getting ballsier and are looking for the next way to milk consumers, and sadly I feel like despite all the backlash, there are enough people out there without common sense that will shell out thousands on loot crates in Battlefront II that EA is going to call it a success anyways and keep doing it, which in turn will have other companies doing it too until it becomes the norm, and we all begrudgingly accept our fate like the good little cash cows we are.
 
#12 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by CallsignVega View Post

Only $2,100 for a game that will be dead in three months? SOLD!
Only $2,100? You noob
tongue.gif


A real fan would Quadrouple dip: PC, PS4, XBOX & Switch = $8,400 FTW!!!
 
#13 ·
I really don't know what is you all's issue.

Players should have a sense of pride and accomplishment for wasting 4.5k hours of their life on an EA game. Alternately that same sense of pride and accomplishment can come from having so much more money than thy neighbor that one can senselessly waste it on pay to win items for a short lived game.
 
#14 ·
The majority of AAA gaming is dead, and has been for some time. The recent full priced games + microtransactions trend has been the nail in the coffin for me. I won't be upgrading my computer anymore.. what's the point? Indie games are where it's at, and they run on potatoes half the time.

On the bright side, I am down 20 pounds, hit the gym 4-5 times a week, and went out and got a GF because real life has become more fun than gaming. I'd rather spend my money hanging out with her/my friends, than spending it on the mindless cash cow that gaming has become. Highly recommended.
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: Ghoxt and DesertRat
#15 ·
Between the ongoing hardware fleecing combined with the morally bankrupt gaming industry, they are presenting me with zero insentive to upgrade my now 4 year old computer for what looks like the foreseeable future.
 
#19 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidiaftw12 View Post

I really don't know what is you all's issue.

Players should have a sense of pride and accomplishment for wasting 4.5k hours of their life on an EA game. Alternately that same sense of pride and accomplishment can come from having so much more money than thy neighbor that one can senselessly waste it on pay to win items for a short lived game.
1. making a product
2. selling for an already high price
3. coding it to disable some of that content unless/until you play for thousands of hours or spend thousands of dollars

...this doesn't seem problematic in any way, and you don't know what issue people are taking?
 
#20 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malinkadink View Post

They disabled buying the currency to buy loot boxes until further notice, if they readjust the loot boxes to being just cosmetic items i may actually then pick the game up when it goes on sale.
After the change it will take only 1899 bucks. But everyone fall for this news even tho tehy didnt say a single word on what they plan to change.
 
#21 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Murlocke View Post

The majority of AAA gaming is dead, and has been for some time. The recent full priced games + microtransactions trend has been the nail in the coffin for me. I won't be upgrading my computer anymore.. what's the point? Indie games are where it's at, and they run on potatoes half the time.

On the bright side, I am down 20 pounds, hit the gym 4-5 times a week, and went out and got a GF because real life has become more fun than gaming. I'd rather spend my money hanging out with her/my friends, than spending it on the mindless cash cow that gaming has become. Highly recommended.
I perhaps understand that you feel this way, but that doesnt mean that there hasnt been some very good AAA titles released this year or soon to be released. The reality of it is, is that the AAA titles push the industry as a whole. If the majority of gamers completely move away from AAA titles then the face of gaming completely changes.
 
#22 ·
That is stupid. Games like this would need to be able to unlock everything ~ 500 hours for average gamer or ~ 250 hours for experienced player.
 
#23 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zer0CoolX View Post

Companies make games for 1 reason and 1 reason only...to make money.
I disagree. Some companies make games for 1 reason and 1 reason only, to make money. Some of them do it for love of their craft and love of video games. And of course they need money in order to continue to exist. But if the passionate ones had all the money they'd ever need, they'd still be making good games. There is no excuse or justification for what EA does. Its bad business to deliver an inferior product that is overpriced. And to become one of the most hated companies on the planet.
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: ibb27
#24 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by m4fox90 View Post

1. making a product
2. selling for an already high price
3. coding it to disable some of that content unless/until you play for thousands of hours or spend thousands of dollars

...this doesn't seem problematic in any way, and you don't know what issue people are taking?
I think that post was in Jest.. you know a /s
 
#25 ·
Remember that game Evolve, the one that was built from the ground-up as a platform to sell DLC? Remember how it completely tanked? Surprised developers like EA didn't take notice of this and realise that most consumers can tell when they're being milked, and aren't OK with it.
 
#26 ·
Companies like EA will always test, push and prod, to see what they can get paid with. Thank the horde of micro transactions introduced with Mobile phone gaming that proved this business model was insanely profitable. I would not expect ANY EA game going forward to exclude itself from this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top