EA Tweaks Star Wars Battlefront 2 Loot Boxes

M

monkeymagick

[H]News
Joined
Jun 22, 2008
Messages
480
Following the beta for Star Wars Battlefront 2, EA received more criticism for how it handles its loot boxes. The company have taken suggestions and plans to change the loot crate system. The biggest tweak are Epic Star Cards not appearing in crates, which would have given players an extra ability and weapon over other competitors at launch. Players will need to rank up through playing the game instead. More specific changes can be found at this recent post.

"The Beta gave us a welcome chance to test all of our systems in action and tune things up for better balance," the blog post reads. "A few weeks back, we mentioned we were going to take another look at how the progression system works."
 
pay to win games dont seem to go over well or last too long these days

what ever happened to buying a full game for 50-60 bucks and 20-30$ xpacs once or twice a year?

now you buy a game for 60$ that isnt finished, need to buy loot crates/booster packs just to do well then buy DLC all the time

World of warships is one that comes to mind, free to play, but each ship you want to buy cost as much as an entire game or you play for weeks just to upgrade one ship and after rank 5 or so you are pretty much there forever

i dont mind the approach world of warcraft uses, you get the entire game and pay a small sub, pay for each xpac once a year. anything you buy with real money is purely cosmetic
 
Last edited:
Putz said:
pay to win games dont seem to go over well or last too long these days

what ever happened to buying a full game for 50-60 bucks and 20-30$ xpacs once or twice a year?

now you buy a game for 60$ that isnt finished, need to buy loot crates/booster packs just to do well then buy DLC all the time

World of warships is once that comes to mind, free to play, but each ship you want to buy cost as much as an entire game or you play for weeks just to upgrade one ship and after rank 5 or so you are pretty much there forever

i dont mind the approach world of warcraft uses, you get the entire game and pay a small sub, pay for each xpac once a year. anything you buy with real money is purely cosmetic
Click to expand...

This, so very much this. I will never support any game that uses a Pay 2 Win model. I don't mind microtransactions so long as they are strictly cosmetic. This insanity of selling incomplete games for full price then trying to sell me the rest of the game as DLC later has to stop though. I've bought fewer games in the past 3 years combined than I did in any 6 month period prior.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Putz
like this
Dekoth-E- said:
This, so very much this. I will never support any game that uses a Pay 2 Win model. I don't mind microtransactions so long as they are strictly cosmetic. This insanity of selling incomplete games for full price then trying to sell me the rest of the game as DLC later has to stop though. I've bought fewer games in the past 3 years combined than I did in any 6 month period prior.
Click to expand...

same here, ive pretty much went back to and stuck with world of warcraft, as more games take this stupid approach. at least as i get close to being bored i can either play an alt, or a new raid or expansion comes out.
 
Putz said:
what ever happened to buying a full game for 50-60 bucks and 20-30$ xpacs once or twice a year?
Click to expand...

What ever happened to buying a full game for $50 that you did not have to unlock weapons, got twice as many maps, had mod tools and a expansion every year or so
 
‘I don’t want to pay $60 one time for a game, I want to pay $15 a month for a game — forever’

^ Words of a crazy person.

I have several friends who started playing World of Warcraft at launch, who at this point have spent multiple thousands of dollars on that game.

I want nothing to do with that business model.
 
Archaea said:
‘I don’t want to pay $60 one time for a game, I want to pay $15 a month for a game — forever’

^ Words of a crazy person.

I have several friends who started playing World of Warcraft at launch, who at this point have spent multiple thousands of dollars on that game.

I want nothing to do with that business model.
Click to expand...

someone has to pay for the servers, maintenance, content patches, bandwidth, etc. 60$ one time games fade out pretty fast. considering how many millions still play and how reliable the servers have been for so many years, for the price of a lunch combo from McDonald for a month of entertainment I cant complain. each content patch every quarter or so is pretty much a new game in itself
 
Things like loot boxes and having to rank up in an FPS before you can get the same stuff other people have is why, after having played the WWI Battlefield, I won't be buying another Battlefield game. Battlefield games are like heaven for casual gamers who don't know and don't care what the hell they are doing.
 
Putz said:
pay to win games dont seem to go over well or last too long these days

what ever happened to buying a full game for 50-60 bucks and 20-30$ xpacs once or twice a year?

now you buy a game for 60$ that isnt finished, need to buy loot crates/booster packs just to do well then buy DLC all the time

World of warships is one that comes to mind, free to play, but each ship you want to buy cost as much as an entire game or you play for weeks just to upgrade one ship and after rank 5 or so you are pretty much there forever

i dont mind the approach world of warcraft uses, you get the entire game and pay a small sub, pay for each xpac once a year. anything you buy with real money is purely cosmetic
Click to expand...

It's funny you mention that, because I'd say it's really the opposite on PC. Any time there's an xpac with maps and whatever that require all participants to have that to play, it just splits the community. Look at the battlefield games, since BF3 by the time they're on the third pack the number of people who bother getting it is next to nothing and after the first couple of weeks it may be next to impossible to even start games with the new maps once the initial rush is over. Same thing with CoD on PC, don't expect to play much other than TDM and maybe S&D on base maps more than two months after launch.

As far as WoW? That has basically been a worthless model for years as the gaming community as a whole does not seem to be willing to sub for $10-15 a month, but if you can find a whale willing to drop $10-15 a month on microtransactions that can cover the difference of 10 other "normal" players. Sure, WoW gets away with subscription fees still but I can't think of any other MMO that does. Eve online only does because of the in-game currency trading, RMT on the side, and other things. FF14 has a joke $13 sub and then a standard $15 sub but it's numbers aren't exactly through the roof. Pretty much every other MMO I can think of has gone F2P if it isn't dead already. But trying to apply MMO subscription fees to an FPS? Not a chance the current market would support that.

Back to shooters, the map packs turn the community into a fractured mess, they don't work. The only other method to get post-sale revenue is microtransactions, which definitely works. Cosmetic only and I wouldn't care since it doesn't affect the game no matter how much people on youtube cry about crates for skins in Overwatch(I never assumed I lost a fight in Overwatch because another player had a cooler skin than I did for a character), pay 2 win crates that do affect the game... pisses me off but much like how the game community as a whole can't stop blowing money on pre-orders and then bitching about games being crappy at launch, they can't stop throwing money at pay 2 win microtransactions either.
 
EA and UBI would go broke trying this shit 10 years ago. Its astonishing how fkn stupid people are these days.
 
PeaKr said:
EA and UBI would go broke trying this shit 10 years ago. Its astonishing how fkn stupid people are these days.
Click to expand...

while we can't really play coulda woulda shoulda... I could argue against your comment. If that were the case we wouldn't be here today...

Microtransations are like politics, advertisements and x.99 cent pricing... EVERYONE says they are smarter, informed blah blah blah but ALL of those items work as marketers intended despite all us "smart" people. It's human nature, sure some people can be focused enough in some areas to not be fooled/manipulated, but most can rarely keep their BS defenses up indefinitely and in all areas.

Fact of the matter is Fifa made 800 million in microtransactions... Bioware I think reported billions in cosmetic only transactions... Every f2p mobile game I have seen has a $99 dollar option which in of itself tells you they get enough bites to warrant the realestate...

Just the same as every person says they are not fooled by negative political ads yet they freaking work and work well...
 
I opened $100 worth of loot crates in Guild Wars 2 this month.

But I used in-game gold to buy the e-store currency to do it.

They let people buy the e-store currency (gems) with dollars, then sell it to other players for gold.

I find it to be a reasonable business model because it's the exception and I never have to spend real money to get account upgrades or cool items.

As much as I like Battlefield, any game that charges me full price and then charges me for DLC and then wants me to buy loot crates is DOA.

Dead to me. Dead.
 
rudedog said:
What ever happened to buying a full game for $50 that you did not have to unlock weapons, got twice as many maps, had mod tools and a expansion every year or so
Click to expand...

What happened? Consoles.
 
DoubleTap said:
I opened $100 worth of loot crates in Guild Wars 2 this month.

But I used in-game gold to buy the e-store currency to do it.

They let people buy the e-store currency (gems) with dollars, then sell it to other players for gold.

I find it to be a reasonable business model because it's the exception and I never have to spend real money to get account upgrades or cool items.

As much as I like Battlefield, any game that charges me full price and then charges me for DLC and then wants me to buy loot crates is DOA.

Dead to me. Dead.
Click to expand...
In this circumstance(battlefront 2) the whole justification from EA/DICE for the crates was that they weren't going to charge for the content because that unsurprisingly splintered the community to the point of it being largely unplayable until they handed it out for free to everyone. BF4 had the exact same issue.
 
Putz said:
pay to win games dont seem to go over well or last too long these days
Click to expand...

I think the real problem is they are doing too well, or at least well enough to justify to these companies that they should keep pushing it further and further.

Many people seem to think, "Oh, I'll just buy the game but not buy the microtransactions!"...that's not enough to deter this behavior.

A larger overarching issue is that not all of these games nowadays need to have "progression" and leveling systems.
 
Merc1138 said:
In this circumstance(battlefront 2) the whole justification from EA/DICE for the crates was that they weren't going to charge for the content because that unsurprisingly splintered the community to the point of it being largely unplayable until they handed it out for free to everyone. BF4 had the exact same issue.
Click to expand...

I think I'd be fine with that approach, but you know it's not going to hold - the ratchet effect is in full effect.
 
DoubleTap said:
I think I'd be fine with that approach, but you know it's not going to hold - the ratchet effect is in full effect.
Click to expand...
We'll see. Although the loot boxes here are still problematic since they're p2w and affect gameplay balance instead of just being cosmetic like overwatch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top