Boycotting Lootbox Games: Put Up or Shut Up

EA is no stranger to facing boycotts from consumers, with the latest PR disaster being a prime example. But does the gaming giant have anything to fear? Or will the gaming community fall back after a couple weeks of enjoying the outrage?

[uth11]

They will fall back.

There was just as much outrage over the last Battlefront

[fenome]

Unfortunately that's true, and they'll just try to cool the flames with PR spin and BS while they wait to see if it actually impacted sales, and even if it does actually impact sales they'll probably make so much money of the crap we're all bitching about that it won't matter to them anyways...

It would be nice if gamers actually stood up to this and it did mess with sales though, they only way they'll listen is if you mess with their money. That's all that matters to them, hard numbers.

The thing that bugs me the most is I wonder how many people are "up in arms" here tapping their keyboards while their pre-order is still in place :\

[Jinger]

The thing is the people on this site, the gaming enthusiasts, the "hardcore" gamer, are a pretty small percentage of their market.That's why you will see outrage for these things, but not much will change.

You can say "well look at all the downvotes that reddit comment got" Yeah well for one even if it gets a million downvotes, not all of those people are even planning on buying it or they are just jumping on the "Largest downvoted comment in reddit history" hype train. The sad reality is the people who are going to boycott are a damn drop in a bucket compared to the casual market who are the people who will buy MT's anyway.

[AspiringProGenji]

“That's why you will see outrage for these things, but not much will change.“

Then why are they fixing progression and discounting key heroes in this game? It is all thanks to the outrage that they aren’t getting away with their greedy practices. Regardless of how much this will still sell, this controversy will teach companies a lesson and not treat us all like we are all stupid. Gamers shouldn’t bend over and accept anythig like this easily. It doesn’t do this industry any favor

The uneducated and conformist consumer may let them get away, but the hardcore, educated consumers have spoken, and that won’t fall on deaf ears. Besides, EA should know better what happens when the hardcore says NO! Remember Crysis 3 and Dead Space 3?

[DillyDilly]

This wont impact sales but it will impact the game after people beat the story mode & the servers will be empty

[arkard]

Gamers are standing up. Including petitions to declare lootboxes as gambling, contacting news stations to run stories and much more. There is much more out lash at this then there ever was at BF1.

[fenome]

@AspiringProGenji

Yes, they lowered the cost of heroes/villains, which would be a positive step, but they also lowered the rewards from completing the campaign by around the same ratio. They just switched some numbers around to calm people down, it didn't really change anything.

And the whole adding cool downs "so people don't exploit" offline modes is just a load of crap when it's okay to exploit cards you pay cash for.

I'm sorry, but this company is just scummy and taking advantage of one of my favorite hobbies and I hate it. They've got so many talented devs and good IPS under them too, it would be amazing to see what kind of games they could really make if EA just backed off a little and really let them shine.

@arkard

You're right, this one is definitely raising a lot of eyebrows. It's good to see people actually get behind something. Anxious to see how this all plays out.

[ZeroX9876]

to be completely honest, I've put at least 30$ in Rocket league on PS4 to open some loot crates. Had some good draws and I don't really regret investing in it. This is the only game I've ever bought micro transactions though.

Only aesthetic unlocks, that's what micro-transactions should be for, so no gameplay impact.

I almost bought some microtransactions on the battlefield series (3&4). Got the game on Playstation to play it with some other friends on console, but I didn't have any unlocks since I was playing on PC before. It was damn hard to beat anyone with an aircraft, because they had tons of upgrades and you had none. EXCEPT if you paid like 12.99 and you would get the aircraft unlocks in one go. This for me is the wrong way to do it and looking at those Battlefront 2 articles, it seems it's exactly like this.

[morganfell]

Both the PS4 and X1 Editions are still in the top 20 at Amazon. Does that mean anything? Possibly, possibly not. Amazon claims their numbers are updated hourly but frankly this is misleading. I contacted them when I noticed items that were completely sold out - listed as Unavailable We Will Notify You When The Item Is In Stock and yet these items remained for days in the top 5. It does say though that the games at least peaked at their current positions though thus far for the month neither edition can break the top 20 on Amazon. Both versions also remain in the top 10 at Best Buy.

[rainslacker]

@Jinger

Lets assume that the reddit downvotes somehow equate to boycotts. Not all of them will, but others in other forums might, but lets just keep it at 1/2 million for ease of making my point, since you often fail to comprehend anything.

500K sales X $30 in publisher revenue(average pull per copy sold) = 15 million dollars.

15 million dollars in initial game sales revenue. That's probably around 25-30% of the budget for this game.

Even if it's only half that, that's 7 million in revenue. That's 12-15% of the likely budget of this game.

No matter how you try to marginalize the impact the hardcore community has, that's a pretty significant sum of money. That's a lot of money to make up through $5-10 microtransactions, particularly when those microtransactions are purchased by less than 10% of the total user base.

Lets put it into more perspective. The last game sold about 13 million copies. Assuming this does that same, this means that at the high end, you'd have 1.3 million people buying MT. If we say the average purchase is $7.50, that's a grand total of another 9.75 million dollars. So, assuming the lower end, they made an additional 2.75 million dollars over what they could have done by just making a good game that people would be willing to buy.

But on the flip side, they're damaging their ability to make this game a long term GaaS, all because they want to milk customers and maximize revenues. To me though, the small gain here seems to not really be worth the grief and negative PR they are getting, which continuously puts EA in a position where more and more people are getting fed up with their practices.

Sure, overall, EA will still make out fine, they would have without putting in a single MT as well. But if you think EA doesn't care about that "small percentage" of gamers not buying their game, you'd be greatly mistaken. This isn't something where maybe a few thousand people stick to their guns and don't buy the game, but potentially hundreds of thousands. That is not an insignificant number, even if it's only a small portion of the total buyer base. There are plenty of games which would be successful or fail based on just a a couple hundred thousand sales. SW:BF isn't one of those games, but EA in no way just wants to lose that guaranteed revenue from the game sale itself. Why lose it over the potential sale? It's a dumb way to think, and EA is not dumb.

[fenome]

@rainslacker

That's the perfect way to put it in perspective. There are plenty of titles EA can choose from to do this with their games. I'm hoping beyond hope that there will (eventually) be enough impact that they won't see it as worth it to lease the rights from Disney anymore and a better company (or companies) will be allowed to give us a proper Star Wars game (or games).

Still gutted about what could have been from Visceral if they were just allowed to create what they wanted to.

[fiveby9]

@Jinger I'm not so sure it's casuals who support MT's. I'd say if your willing to pay2win and keep spending money you are somewhat hardcore. It's clearly important to that consumer to win and not necessarily by earning it through gameplay but by any means necessary. A casual doesn't care if they lose so much. They move on to the next shiny penny. And a whale, well that's another whole league of stupidity. Casuals want to pay a fixed cost and ultimately move off the game in short order.

Alienating the core gamer market who want to play the game will cause the long-term playerbase to dwindle. Leaving few people for the Whales to play but each other.

So I don't feel the public outcry is falling on deaf ears. However, I am not so sure EA's recent decisions are solely due to public outcry. I think EA sees lots of cancellations gaining traction. I also think EA has some concern over the investigation by a pair of EU countries looking into gambling concerns. You know EA has lawyers there right now trying to nip that in the bud. The last thing EA needs is traction on that front. And lastly, I think they see potential traction on public outcry in social media over staying away from this game.

Would EA make money? Probably. But far less than they projected. EA is making moves but nobody really trusts them.

[Scatpants]

They lost me as a customer with the last Battlefront, at least as far as Battlefront games go. Such a ripoff and this new one seems to double down on the ripoff concept.

[RommyReigns]

Two idiot members disagree-voting with your spot on comment. Battlefront 1 was an abhorrent rip off for being online only with barebones single player content, vastly casualised gameplay, that damn Han Solo blaster handed out to Deluxe players at launch, lack of heroes, on disc content held back on the season pass, no space battles (unless you get the season pass), I could go on and on. I am at least glad that Battlefront 2 is getting the shaft for the pay 2 win, EA yet again looking for ways to hide fallacies (and failing).

P.S - Overwatch got away with far worse in terms of content. And don't get me started on those lootboxes which started all this loot popularity/mainstream gaming nonsense we are now getting from loads of publishers, Thanks Blizzard, you sibling of Vivendi Activision for dooming us all!

[prankster101]

EA are to the West what Nintendo are to the East.

Both hellbent on ripping off consumers with hidden sur-charges. EA do it through loot-boxes. Nintendo do it through shitty hardware.

You takes your pick and drink your poison.

[Segata]

trololol

[Omnislashver36]

I dislike Nintendo's hardware as much as the next guy, but to compare them with EA is a bit disingenuous.

[danitanzo2]

Through shitty hardware that's supposed to be cheaper than the competition so everyone can enjoy their games... so evil.

[tehpees3]

Did you seriously just compare the worst company in America to Nintendo?

[-Foxtrot]

I think Nintendo does it on the Amiibos not hardware.

[Jinger]

Nintendo has one of the worst MT practices I have ever seen. Who locks content behind a damn toy that are 1. sometimes very hard to find and 2. really expensive.

[TheFirstClassic]

My problem with nintendo is that their first party games take forever to drop in price, but that doesn't compare to EA's cancer.

[OnionThief]

To be fair Nintendo is a very anti-consumeristic company. And this is coming from someone who had owned every iteration of Nintendo hardware aside from the WiiU and also still to this day collects Gamecube games.

In the past they were notorious for price fixing and store intimidation. They had a very anti-developer stance, especially the smaller ones... This is one of the main reasons developers moved en masse to Sega and Sony.

Modern day Nintendo is still quite anti-consumeristic. They're the only company not to offer a loss-leader for their hardware and their currently supported handheld still utilises region locking (though this has been removed on the Switch). In addition to not offering any hardware value to the consumer, they artificially extend the value of games and accessories by creating limited supply. Although this is not true for all latest releases, price often seems to be maintained much higher than other systems. This is true for digital releases and preowned releases too, Fire Emblem Awakening for the 3DS released in 2012 is still full retail price on the eshop and barely and cheaper used.
However to compare to another system, Little Big Planet 2 for the PS3 now sells on the digital store for a fraction of what it released for. With a used copy even cheaper.
Factor in that Nintendo digital sales are both extremely rare and often mediocre, Nintendo offers both the worst value for money from both a hardware and a software perspective.

Although getting better with this, Nintendo created significantly less amiibos that they were aware demand for. By making demand much greater than supply, fans are forced to check in with the Nintendo website several times a day if they even stand a chance of picking up a new amiibo they want. Some like the new Metroid amiibos locking actual game functionality behind them settling out within minutes of going on store.

Nintendo may not milk as much in terms of software by the likes of EA, but in comparison to Sony and Microsoft everything they create has been designed to milk you the consumer.
From one perspective, one can liken them to EA. Especially if you're old enough to remember how bad they used to be.

[Many-hat5]

This is one issue gamers must win

[nitus10]

I agree but unfortunately, there will be people who will buy into the loot crates and others won't care. It will be interesting to see the status of this game after a few week but even if it flops I am quite sure EA will have made enough profit off the "whales" and "dolphins".

BTW. A "whale" is a term used to describe an addicted gambler while "dolphin" is a term used to describe a person who won't gamble as much but there are many more of them than "whales". Together they make up over 90% of gambling revenue. http://www.gamesbrief.com/2...

[Segata]

I don't own any games with loot boxes. I would never buy them even if I had a game with them. I'm hesitant to even spend 5 bucks even on actual DLC.

[nitus10]

The same is true for me but people like us are not the target of games that have a gambling component.

Personally, I don't have a problem with DLC if it expands on the game in a good (extra missions, story, challenges, ... etc) way. I am tentatively okay with microtransactions if they are cosmetic only although these can be the "thin end of the wedge" which make way for more so-called "must have" features.

I am definitely against "Pay to Win" and just outright refuse to participate but like I said previously people like me are not the target of this and you only need a small number of people (whales and dolphins) to make the appropriate purchases for the publishers to make additional money.

[Usperg]

I died at that picture - brilliant!

[opinionated]

The people who are bitching never bought lootboxes in the first place. This “outrage” changes nothing. The only reason they are addressing it is PR for the launch. Once they realize that massive amounts of people will dump money into their game they will forget about you like they always do. Gaming “boycotts” are a joke, a virtue signal.

[Bleucrunch]

If that is a true then the PR stunt by EA will be waste of time since the boycotts are a "joke" as your wrote. Your post is contradictory on its face. If you do not see why gamers are put off by MT's then you yourself are on EA's side and do not think we should have an issue with it and just buy the game for $60 and then spend dozens of dollars more because EA needs the money.

I would say you should purchase the game if you want, can't knock you for that but I will be with the other "jokes" gamers and stay away from this particular game and play other games. We gamers don't "joke" with our money as video games have become quite an expensive hobby.

[opinionated]

It is a waste of time. It’s mandatory before launch. Once the game launches and they are making a shit ton of money thy will no longer feel obligated to address the concerns of a loud online forum. Money speaks louder than words and history shows that gaming “boycotts” are a joke. I put boycott in quotes because they end up being all talk. Gamers blow a lot of hot air and then turn around and buy the product. Their window of effective “boycott” are the first few weeks before launch. They have a few weeks before the publishers like EA realize they are full of shit.

I don’t like MTs anymore than you do. You know what I hate even more? Fake ass people who run their mouth. The people who buy this kind of shit, they aren’t on reddit bitching. That’s all I’m saying. The people who are bitching never would have bought them to begin with. This doesn’t change the dynamic at all. The people who buy will still buy, the people who don’t won’t. Do you see what I’m saying?

[Chaosdreams]

This "outrage" does in fact, change something. But before I get into that obvious point I will address the fact that those who are pointing out the issues within the game, can/have purchased loot boxes. But those are generally cosmetic.

Now moving into this "outrage" that people are "bitching" about.

1. This outrage has already changed something. A hero can be unlocked at 75% lower than what it was initially.

2. "Boycotts" are not a joke.

While it's true many will buy the game, it's often those who are unaware of what's happening or simply don't care who end up purchasing it. Those who speak up generally form a vocal minority (in the sense they care enough / have the time) to speak up about it. The benefit is, if what's being said is factual - it informs and shapes the direction, however small, of what the industry does.

A game such as Battlefront 2 with its intense marketing, is going to sell regardless. There's no sense in arguing about that. Battlefront 2 is going to make bank - EA knows this, and that's why they've done everything they can to reap the profit which in turn, is what disgusts so many of us.

So for those speaking up, the hope is that its reputation (be it EA, the IP, etc) is tarnished in the process so that enough people get sick of it and want something better for their gaming pastime/enjoyment.

Battlefront 2 looks fun and from what I hear, is fun. But you know what I also hear? Even more so?

The fact it's a painfully bogged down PTW experience.

[TheMuffDiver]

Holy crap what a true statement! u nailed it. We know the game will sell well but like you said we also hope EA gets shame and downgraded for the greed that is bluntly shown.

[opinionated]

@chaos

It doesn't change much. Like i said, the window before launch has a mandatory PR push. Once they realize that the "outrage" doesnt match the revenue then they will forget about you. If the bitchers purchase lootboxes then they are part of the problem and their anger is unjustified. You give a pass on cosmetic lootboxes? You ushered in this new wave that is even being adopted by Take Two and Sony.

1. I'm sure you do think your bitching has accomplished something, that EA threw you a bone for your mental anguish. You're wrong. Yes the heros are 75% cheaper, you also get 75% less points for completing things such as the campagin. The economy hasn't changed, it costs less but you make less. It's a face value PR stunt before launch. They only people who made out are the people who purchase MTs, nothing has changed for the "in-game" users like us.

2. No, real boycotts aren't a joke. Real boycotts don't need twitter campaigns, real boycotts destroy businessses. Gaming "boycotts" are a joke, I can't remember the last time there was an actual boycott in gaming, just a whole lot of hot air from a tiny fraction of the community. Gamergate had "influence" but in the end the money talked and the bullshit walked. That's the laws of economics.

"While many will buy the game"
Yes exactly. Many will buy MTs as well. When this happens you will be forgotten along with your "boycott" just like every other time it's happened. This shit is not new to the gaming industry. We have gone through many "death of gaming" scenarios and it always works out. Bitching has very little or nothing to do with this process. If the bitching was accompanied by an actual boycott then you might be in business but I seriously doubt you will ever have the numbers to defeat MTs. If anything you will just drive devs back into the shadows where they don't do AMAs anymore. They will just release their shit games in silence. The infantile attacks on the industry are pathetic, mostly from our media that constantly trashes it with identity politics.

What i say to those "speaking up" is put your money where you mouth is. Your activism is a joke.

[Chaosdreams]

@opionated

I'm aware of the mandatory PR push and EA is pushing hard. But again, the game is going to sell. But as @PapaBop pointed out, this negativity surrounding the practices they are trying to pull - puts them in the crosshair of not only gamers, but the stockholders. Disney is certainly eyeing this closely.

Personally, I've done no such thing as ushering in the "new wave." I'm not fond of lootboxes/MT's, which is why I discuss there negative impact on the industry. However, and where I open up, is when the lootboxes/MT's are simply cosmetic. Specifically, it's content that can/or is unique, to the lootbox itself. Do I think it's fair? No, I don't. But I do understand that those who love the game, won't mind spending a little extra leftover change towards getting a costume. I get it, but I don't support it. And that's because I only acknowledge its existence in Free-To-Play games.

I acknowledge the fact that accepting cosmetics does open the door to this current wave.

1. My mental anguish? My bitching? Stop wasting your time being rude, it waters down your point. I know the economy hasn't changed - hence the further and consistent outcry from the community. I pointed out that EA did something, they just didn't do it for us. It was a change that was result of people pointing out what's wrong. Their deceptive practice goes to show more outcry is needed, not less.

2. Do I think most gaming boycotts fail? Yes. But does that mean we should all of a sudden just be quiet and accept everything? Never communicate about what's wrong? Never discuss and point out the flaws? I understand your pessimism but I don't see your logic.

3. The relevance of me being forgotten is fine, it equates to me also "forgetting" EA's existence, thus not purchasing any content published underneath their name. Actions have consequences. You focus on the majority and think the individual has no power. But it is the individual that gradually becomes the majority.

I can tell you hate MT's, but you also hold resentment for those who speak up - which does nothing but put up an additional barrier between those who want change, and those who don't care.

I personally won't be supporting this game. The question becomes, will you?

[opinionated]

@Chaos0000
"negativity surrounding the practices they are trying to pull - puts them in the crosshair of not only gamers, but the stockholders. Disney is certainly eyeing this closely."

Yes, my point is that they eye the spreadsheets even closer. These people couldn't give a crap about gaming. They make games to make money. You're coming at it from an ethical angle but they don't care about that.

"Personally, I've done no such thing as ushering in the "new wave."

I was speaking in general to those that have. Everyone has announced that they are looking into MTs. It's here to stay regardless of how much we bitch.

"I acknowledge the fact that accepting cosmetics does open the door to this current wave."

Not does, it did. The damage has already been done. Pandoras box.

"Stop wasting your time being rude, it waters down your point."

Lol that's just how I talk, I didn't mean to be insulting. I apologize. Nothing I said was directed at you personally, when I say "you" I'm usually talking in general sense.

"I know the economy hasn't changed"

Yet you used that as an example of positive change from the outrage.

2. "Do I think most gaming boycotts fail? Yes."
"I don't see your logic."

Yes you do, you agree with my logic.

"The relevance of me being forgotten is fine, it equates to me also "forgetting" EA's existence, thus not purchasing any content published underneath their name."

That's good. I can appreciate a firm stance on principles. I do it all of the time. The last one I remember, I didn't buy far cry 4 when the developers went out trashing people who didn't agree with their dumb views. I didn't take to reddit to share my anger, I just didn't buy the game. Most people probably couldn't care less why I didn't buy far cry 4. I expect that and I don't try to pretend they're breaking some civics code with their creations. It's just not my thing.

"I can tell you hate MT's, but you also hold resentment for those who speak up - which does nothing but put up an additional barrier between those who want change, and those who don't care."
I resent the way they try to influence. I support free markets, not torch mobs. I can't stand protesters in general lol, the most useless individuals around lol.

[Chaosdreams]

@Opionated

I see where you're coming from now. I'll just elaborate on two points to clarify for what I said prior.

1. When I mentioned the economy in the initial post, I was aware that they also changed how much is earned. I should have clarified but instead I focused on the change itself. It should've had the initial context. You're right to point that out.

2. As for agreeing with your logic. I do, for the most part. But where we differ is in how we display it. Basically you stand firm on putting ones money where their mouth is (I agree on that front), but I also believe that the words are necessary, that being, if it wasn't for those speaking up about it - others wouldn't have known.

If I hadn't come across this information, I may (a very small maybe) have purchased the game, only to find out it had a manipulative system set in place. At that point I've already given them some of my money. But knowing the information prior (hearing it / researching it) I'm able to make more of an impact with my wallet.

In this instance I learned through research before seeing any comments, but for others they see the comments first and then hopefully, do their research.

As for the purpose of protest. Lol, I'm just going to agree to disagree with you on that one.

[opinionated]

@chaos

"As for agreeing with your logic. I do, for the most part. But where we differ is in how we display it. Basically you stand firm on putting ones money where their mouth is (I agree on that front), but I also believe that the words are necessary, that being, if it wasn't for those speaking up about it - others wouldn't have known.

If I hadn't come across this information, I may (a very small maybe) have purchased the game, only to find out it had a manipulative system set in place. At that point I've already given them some of my money. But knowing the information prior (hearing it / researching it) I'm able to make more of an impact with my wallet."

There is nothing wrong with words. I don't trust what many people say though, especially on the internet. I don't read reviews, I go straight to the source with dev diaries or gameplay videos to base my decisions on purchases. I wouldn't have known about what the far cry 4 devs were saying unless it was circulated. I'm not "anti-information" lmao. I just laugh at hostile opinions because that's not news, that's something we all have lol. "Being rude waters down the point" is a good phrase to go by in boycotts too. How many people do you bring to your cause by lighting dumpster fires and demanding government regulation. As a free market guy, I find it ignorant and appalling. That's just my own personal perspective.

[PapaBop]

Have you taken the time to see just how far the damage has spread? Even if the sheeple and whales do dump money, this problem isn't disappearing any time soon. More and more authorities taking an interest in the gambling angle, investment sites warning against buying into EA stock, multiple major news outlets covering the story and not to mention EA are now the proud record holders of the most downvoted comment in reddit history. This isn't going away overnight and don't forget The Last Jedi is less than a month away from release and Disney can't possibly be best pleased with seeing EA dragging the Star Wars name under the mud just as they want to start ramping up the promotional stuff. Regardless of the money, it's not a good look for Disney having their brand linked to children gambling.

[opinionated]

The gambling angle is pretty pathetic and desperate. The whole "means to an end" approach is highly scumbagish and disappointing to me. It's the new Jack Thompson only Jack Thompson had the decency to take it to court and get his law license revoked when he couldn't get a clue. This new torch mob mentality where you take to the streets and get as loud as possible to make it look like you are bigger than you are, the sending shit to bureaucracies and begging for regulation. This has gone beyond gaming at this point, the idiocy amazes me. It disappoints me more than lootboxes because I love this industry and hate to see it torn down by ignorant people who don't know shit. "armchair developers" is right.

[2cents]

I remain committed to my decision. No Buy.

[kevinsheeks]

Also no buy I won't support gambling addiction

[tehpees3]

In all my years of viewing clickbait....... this has to be the clickiest clickbait I've ever seen. To think this is just going to be people on Reddit and Twitter throwing little tantrums is nuts. There will obviously be some kind of sales hit for this.

[Jinger]

Even if a million people don't buy it... Battlefront 1 still sold 13mil and that game was critically panned and had barely any content. I can't see this one do much worse, but I'm willing to be wrong.

[rainslacker]

I'm sure EA and Disney will be happy to simply give up approximately $30 million in revenue for the sake of making some money back on micro-transactions.

Do you ever consider just how counter-intuitive this is to actually maximizing profit?

While a million copies going unsold is a rather high number to hit, even if it's half that, or even a quarter of that, that's still a pretty significant amount of revenue to lose just because they have potential to make it back in much smaller denominations through what will amount to less than 10% of the people that do actually buy it. Yes, it is always less than 10% of a player base that actually purchases MT or DLC. More often than not, it's less than 5%. That's true for popular mobile games, all the way up to the biggest AAA games.

[Jinger]

Regardless how you feel about them, they aren't going anywhere. Not when we are seeing that Ubisoft has DOUBLED their MT transaction since last year, weren't people still hating these even last year? Yet their revenue has freaking doubled. Their MT's make them more than their digital sales.

The thing that needs to happen is to find a suitable middle ground here. I don't mind MT's or Lootboxes that only have cosmetics in them. Battlefront 2 crossed that boundary and while the star cards can give you a slight edge, from my time with the game they don't seem overpowered, but EA has been dancing on that thin line and they finally stepped too far with battlefront 2 and that is why we are seeing the uproar.

[tehpees3]

"Regardless how you feel about them, they aren't going anywhere"

I haven't read the rest of your comment (as of yet) because your first sentence intrigues me. You see some companies have proclaimed this kind of thing before. Capcom with their Super or Ultimate releases making people buy the game again. Microsoft making us pay a fee to unblock used games. Sony claiming rumble was last generation tech.

They aren't going anywhere? Says EA and who else? Gamers have actually shown in the past they won't just sit thre and be told "you are buying our Super edition or not getting the content", "you are paying a fee when you play games pre-owned on our system and thats final" or "rumble is last gen tech get over it". So the market doesn't always like what they tell it to like.

[Jinger]

@Tehpees

"They aren't going anywhere? Says EA and who else?"

Hmmm lets see:

EA
Ubisoft
Activision
WB
MS
Sony (Believe it or not TLoU and UC4 have MT's and they recently came out saying they are looking more into it)
Konami (MGSV and I'm sure MGS Survive)
Square Enix
Take Two
Blizzard
Bethesda

So yeah, I don't know, maybe almost every major publisher?? Especially when you're seeing examples like Ubisoft doubling their sales from last year in MT's, in one year, doubled. they make more on MT's then digital sales.

So no, its not hard to fathom why they are around and why they are becoming more and more. Recently the dev who made Resogun came out saying they are looking to do their next game with an online focus because single player shoot 'em ups just don't pull in enough cash.

[tehpees3]

This is what I'll say in the matter. You are right there are A LOT of companies trying to push it but despite them paying off journalists and internet users to make us look like the villains they want to pay attention to what is going on around them.

Which market currently out there right now is the most corrupt because of the companies involved? Video games. Those capitalistic dictators sit in their office chairs ruling above us, looking down on us and outright insulting us when we call them out. But you know what this kind of thing does get noticed and spread around the outside world.

All it will take is one government to tweak entertainment software laws to stand on behalf of the customer and then the truly "entitled" ones (the game companies) will show themselves for what they are. People DO rally campaigns with governments you know?

If one successful group out there successfully manipulates the law so physical media can be used without internet access they have had it. In that instance they have no legal right to complain because standing against that kind of thing shows that they believe themselves to be above the law.

[Jinger]

@Tehpees

If you think that video games is the most corrupted market then you know nothing about the world haha I'm just going to stop this convo here because that may be the dumbest thing I have ever read.

[rainslacker]

Regardless of them not going anywhere, it doesn't mean people aren't going to keep expressing their discontent for the practice, and continuously fight to try and make them less of a thing.

Just because these companies are going to do what they're going to do doesn't mean people should just accept whatever these companies are throwing out there without a single criticism. That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard, because as consumers, we are more than free to express what it is we want, and tell other companies they're doing things wrong. Whether the companies agree or not, and adjust to give those consumers more of what they want is up to them, but it doesn't change that the consumer should very much express their concerns, wants, and needs to those making the products we spend OUR MONEY on.

Anyways, remember last gen when people bitched all gen about online passes? Guess what....they went somewhere. They're no longer a thing. not that this new replacement to get money is better, but complaining does indeed change things when it's done enough, and for long enough.

[TechnoGoat]

Stop using OW lootboxes for thumbnails, they don't count.

[Kiwi66]

But no doubt people will buy the game anyway instead of sticking to their guns

[pingthing]

Eventual Abstinence

[HyperMouse]

Despite the perceived outrage this game will sell millions and there will a BF3 which will most certainly sell just the same and will have more than likely the same controversy, there is a reason MT's and loot boxes are around and its because all this complaining doesnt work, people are still buying the game and the MT's and EA know this and wont change a thing with their business practices.

[Crazywhitie]

Overwatch loot boxes are what they need to be and the way they need to stay....

I won't Touch Battlefront 2.

[jc12]

Micro transactions or not, I'm still going to get Battlefront II...albeit probably used and not new, but still.

[DillyDilly]

Its simple Lootboxes & Microtransactions have no business in full price $60 games as these are free to play models

[r3f1cul]

unfortunately these things always seem to be more bark than bite ... just like the black market black out on blops 3 ... all these idiots continue to dump money on this and it in turn continues to make the games coming out more and more cancerous because they know they can get away with this shit :/ i dont buy any game that has these models ... at all... not even purchasing the game and then not the loot boxes as that seems like a bullshit half measure to me :/ sadly the games i buy each year are becoming less and less ... i used to think there wasnt a time i would quit gaming but my morals just wont allow me to stand by this garbage so my mind is being made up for me slowly but surely ... thankfully i get gems every once in a while like wolfenstein 2 and south park but its getting harder and harder every year and nothing is getting better as even SP games are victims to this shit so im a pretty sad gamer

[MisterRay]

I still remember that depressing/hilarious image of players in the "Boycott Black Ops 3" Steam group, nearly all of which were noted as currently playing the game.

[EazyC]

Battlefront II could be the turning tide, ultimately gaming media could quell this apalling practice of it puts more effort into naming and shaming publishers/devs in articles and reflecting it in review scores. Hurt them where it hurts - the wallet!

[MisterRay]

The major turning point was this controversy being picked up by mainstream news, not just gaming websites. While the regular Joe might not know what the hell they're talking about, or care because he doesn't play game, the casual player may be finally catching on. These calls-to-action typically happen on niche forums, so mass action never happens. Thankfully, Reddit is large enough that even their niche subreddits can be noticed by those on the outside looking in.

[Artemidorus]

I refuse to buy these type of games on principle, sometimes I cave in if it's a heavy discount but still would not buy season passes.

These current game schemes are criminal in my eyes and everyone has a right to vent and cause damage to a company by ignoring them and pointing out the faults.

We are not slaves to a system, it's about choice and EA doesn't like it.

[Knightofelemia]

I avoid EA any ways maybe the odd NHL game only game that interests me is Anthem but after this loot box Star Wars screw up I am going to wait on Anthem now

[Vectrexer]

SWBF got my money day one reluctantly...
SWBF2 only when it's in the bargain bin.

[nitus10]

It is possible that SWBF2 may go down the same path as "The Division" so you may see it in the bargain bin sooner than you think. Of course, if it goes in the bargain bin fairly soon you really have to ask yourself why.

[Vectrexer]

Very true ..

[CDbiggen]

I haven't bought any game like this, ever. Because they make the whole experience so unsatisfying and boring. Who wants to buy a full price "triple A" title that has a free-to-play model to it?

[rainslacker]

That's how I look at it. Even if I was into MP, the endless grind just doesn't appeal to me in the long term. I don't mind some grind to achieve a final goal, but an endless grind to just randomly get stuff to try and keep me engaged is not that much fun after a while. There are some rare SP games which do this as well...typically open world games which just have a lot to do to achieve everything. There are some JRPG's which do the same thing, and despite some people loving to sink a hundred hours into Hyperdimension or Persona, they aren't anywhere near the norm. But in those kinds of games, at least the grind is fair and you know what you'll achieve, without the randomness that means your grind may go unfulfilled.

I know there are some people that can really sink that kind of time into a game, but the very vast majority move on from a game after the first 20 hours. Even in MP, although they'll come back to MP more often for usually short stints. It's just the nature of the beast.

Putting in an endless grind does not really entice people to keep playing, although it could encourage people to buy more to get what they want to get to the stuff they want to get to.

[81BX]

If it doesn't affect the game then it's fine

[MisterRay]

Unfortunately it does, though. The "as long as it's cosmetic, it's fine," has been the go-to excuse for years ever since microtransactions were first introduced. A detestable annoyance that was always in the peripheral, whispering promises of a better experience for as little as $2. It was the compromise that was made. Then $60 games got loot boxes, but they were still cosmetic, so as annoying as they were, they still weren't required to be on the same playing field as everyone else. SWB2 loot boxes contain items that upgrade your ships and heroes, giving you a considerable advantage over others if you're willing to drop some cash.

[81BX]

Cool... cool... Cool. I don't see the issue with cosmetics.

[MisterRay]

The issue with cosmetics is that it's content that, if loot boxes (and dlc) didn't exist, would just be rewards you could unlock for reaching certain milestones in a game. Time was you could get an alternate costume by collecting enough orbs, or pretzels, or whatever the game had scattered around.

[Elda]

Love the pic..lol! Put up or shut up & move on is right.

[PatriotOfIron]

We as gamers wont win because there are too many retards who say things like "well you should be happy they atleast they made dlc!"