Investors Misread ‘Star Wars: Battlefront 2’ Microtransaction Outrage, It’s The Progression System

INQ: Star Wars: Battlefront 2 has created a veritable firestorm of controversy thanks to how DICE and Electronic Arts went about implementing microtransactions and loot boxes in the PlayStation 4, Xbox One, and PC shooter. Consumer outrage forced the suspension of microtransactions last week after a reported call from Disney but investors and others from the business community are completely misreading where the outrage is coming from.

[Hardiman]

These people are just out of touch and they know exactly where the outrage is coming they just refuse to change course! Just make the game F2P and the outrage goes away.

[Jinger]

The game is way more than a f2p title though.

[Strafe]

How's life on the EA bankroll?

[Goldby]

fine, drop the price to 30 dollars for the campaign and make the mp free 2 play

[Ittoittosai]

This clown is on every article defends the games craptastic content.

[Artemidorus]

You haven't tried many games have you??

[OB1Biker]

https://twitter.com/agentbi...

[Jinger]

@OB1

Brian is right, but the haters still gunna hate

[Jinger]

@strafe

How about you play the game yourself before you talk shit.

[OB1Biker]

The twitter conversation is actually interesting. It's a shame gamers fail to remain civil in communities unless your a celebrity. Feels like people act like inquisition priests chanting their psalms to exhorts the devil instead of trying to have a proper discussion.

[Chexs1990]

Warframe begs to differ bro. In fact, the only thing setting Battlefront 2 apart from a f2p game, is the graphical prowess. The whole infrastructure of the game is designed based on f2p/mobile gaming.

[jacksmith56]

you are right its more the free to pay , at least when free 2 play shoves micro transaction and time limits its understandable shitty nevertheless but understandable , what ea did with battle front 2 is worse then that much worse they made it a triple A game with free to play play game mechanics where u have to spend to get any progress , cards and time limit and loot shoved in ur face, imagine just how much they would have made if they just made a decent game with no mt bullshit wish more publishers had cd red project ethics , o how i wish for the day no gamer buys micro transactions

[ossyc]

@Hardiman @Strafe

F2P? LOL you cheap bastards, get a job you peasants....

...and Strafe, you say 'How's life on EA bankroll?' So you don't buy any games then and therefore on no publisher bankroll?

Fuck off with your pathetic bullshit!

[notachance]

which one's the cheaper bastard though,

wanting a pay-to-win games to be f2p
or
putting minimal content plus pay-to-win on a $60 game

[RedKnightOH]

When all you have is insults and profanity... you have already lost your argument.

It's time you rethink your life.

[OB1Biker]

Do you realise asking the game to be f2p is actually supporting the idea of p2w?
Thats definitely not what gamers playing the game want.

[rainslacker]

Maybe the investors really don't understand where the outrage is. It's not like EA is really that forthcoming about what's going on with the consumer, so it's potentially possible they're downplaying it to the investors to help support them getting more money....which obviously the investors want. When investors start to see a reason that a revenue source becomes jeopardized they start to get shaky, and it causes stocks to drop.

Maybe it's time that investors be made more aware of what's going on though. Maybe they'll be more prone to keeping things consumer friendly, because I'm sure someone, somewhere, related to EA in some way, probably does believe in keeping your customers happy to some degree.

[Ashlen]

No it's not.

It was the pay to win the forced grind the duplicate items and just a general malaise towards the whole direction of the industry.

It's sad how hard all these sites are trying to push and defend the MT thing. And the sad fact is they come in two crap flavored opinions, those of the investors who just want to see their investments pay more and the other are sites that are taking checks from the industry to write these articles. Neither of them give a shit about consumers or gaming.

[Queasy]

The "pay to win forced grind" is what the article is referring to about the progression system if you bother to read it.

[EatCrow]

The pay to win is tied to the microtransactions. So if those are removed the pay to win is gone. At least for now.
So the title of this article is wrong.

The progression system was the way it was because of the MTs...with those MTs gone, for now, then they should reconstruct the progression a little but if they dont its up to them.

[fenome]

I think some people aren't understanding the full gist of the backlash here. It's not just about Mts or lootboxes, it's that the game was actually programmed around this crap.

They intentionally coded it like that on purpose and now they've changed some numbers around real quick trying to shut people up but they're actually going to have to recode it for it to be a properly balanced multiplayer game that will actually have appeal after a week or two. If they would have spent half the effort just trying to make it a good solid experience right from the start none of this would've happened.

[DillyDilly]

If it is pay to win it is not a progression system

[OB1Biker]

The article goes about the analyst bs already posted on N4G
He's right to criticize the analyst but Unlike he's saying, the progression is not completely dependent on loot crates. They could just remove them completely, get rid of credit and crystal and just have the craft pieces rewarding progress. You can craft your cards and upgrade them that way

[moomoo319]

Hearing investors call this an "overreaction" that shouldn't affect EA's stock, and hearing EA say that MTs will not even have a material effect on their bottom line...The hubris is blowing my mind right now. Its like a competition of who can be more out of touch. The optics and impact this situation will have on EA goes well beyond dollars and cents...

[PapaBop]

What they say publicly and whats going on behind the scenes are probably completely different things. I'd say no loot crate purchases is costing EA a lot of money right now, the entire game is designed around people casually dipping into buying that one loot crate for their "sense of pride and accomplishment" and there are a lot of older people who won't think twice about dropping the odd tenner here and there.

[kevinsheeks]

This game was going to make money regardless . . EA isn't staving they paid the CEO 20 million last year. . .

Also I had no idea during the previous EA battlefront game they bribed reddit mods to censor certain things . .sheesh EA

[MetalGearAlex]

This is the second "financial analyst" report I've read about Battlefront II just now. And it's clear, they are only seeing and talking money. To the point, they don't know what they're talking about -- even if they proclaim themselves to be "gamers too". No... prices should not be raised on videogames. and no, microtransactions/loot boxes/gambling should not be in videogames. but I do agree... none of that -- should be tied to any progression system. forcing you to "pay to win" in a basic sense. Analysts and lawyers can use all their legal and business jargon they want to defend themselves and this greedy schemes... but in the end... they are just evil money-grabbing practices.

[DillyDilly]

It is not progressive when its pay to win & either way the customers have spoken so either get in line investors or lose out on business

[Jinger]

It's still progressive because the MT's were optional anyway.

[DillyDilly]

Optional but still giving people willing to pay advantages over others. Perhaps having two different servers for those that pay & those that don't would be something they could do to combat this ? Otherwise the customers have spoken here. They gotta meet their customers half way somehow if its gonna be pay to win for a full priced game

[Pennywise138]

How's about they give us an epic and fun single player story driven game and these conversations don't have to be hadn't. I'm sure EA would still find a way to screw that up.

[notachance]

they already did, the Visceral SP Star Wars game was cancelled and the studio was shut down.

[kevinsheeks]

typo

[datriax]

What a shock. The sludge of humanity refuses to acknowledge and adjust up their crusade of greed.

[execution17]

Didn't they almost try something like this with Bad Company 2 where they were going to put weapons behind a paywall

[Jinger]

But.... even when the MT's were there, nothing was locked behind a paywall...

[81BX]

Day 1. Happy with the gameplay

[Ricegum]

Sad. People like you are ruining gaming, and you're so oblivious to it.

[81BX]

I have an extra $50 to pump into this game.... because I can.

[DFresh]

The game is just rushed even with the loot box system.
Graphics have not improved since the beta.
(No Anti-Aliasing, Jaggies shown on the screen, No Super Sampling even at 1080P, Grainy Textures, Slow Frame Rate, Controller Dead Zones on console, etc.) = There's no excuse for the poor visuals knowing the console power of both PS4 Pro/Xbox One X.
The game is built primarily as a 1st person shooter and plays horribly as a 3rd person shooter.
Weapons are unbalanced and so nerfed that the only good classes to use are the Heavy (LMG)/Specialist (Sniper) Classes.
Not sure how the flying mechanics are but it can't be that much better after seeing the regular gameplay.
Though I heard the single player is good.
Knowing all of these results this should be a bargain bin game $20 max.

[GamerSoS]

When you break it down you can see how this is just greed and extortion and nothing more.

Regarding the price of games. So many games that come out are not up to scratch and not worth the £50 price tag. While the lies Hello Games told about No Man's Sky were unacceptable, the gaming comunity wouldn't have been so upset if the game wasn't a full priced game. We were over charged for it if you got it early on when it was really only worth about £25. The Order 1886 is another example. A 6 hour single player campaign and no MP option. Full price? Get real. Over charged again!

Dev's and Publishers are not losing money selling games at £50 they are making millions/billions. You can see by looking at their annual reports. Or doing the math yourself with sales figures, game price and production costs. Share holders have just realised they can implement mobile free to play tactics into their full priced games to get more money. They don't care about your gaming experience or a "sense of pride and achievement". They want to make more money.

They want MT's in games now. So they start developing their games around these MT systems. Purposely developing the game to be long and tedious to play without paying extra. Funneling people down a path to paying more. Encouraging it, and making loot crates random so introducing gambling elements to our video games.

Just look at BF2. When someone kills you it shows you some of the gear they had. In an attempt to make you jealous and think that you need that gear to win. So you might buy the loot crates which give random outcomes. So you might not get what you want and spend more.

I'm completely fine with optional cosmetic extras which do not impact the gameplay or progression in any way. I wouldn't personally purchase anything but it doesn't offend me the way EA does with their games.

It's completely ruined our games. The glory days of gaming are over. It's been a favourite hobby of mine my entire life it never used to be so popular but since gaming became more main stream greed has corrupted it completely.

[RedKnightOH]

Sorry... the only 'Update' SWBF2 needs... is to be taken off the game market and for the game stores to return the game to EA for refunds.

God... this game is so screwed up!

[About30Ninjas]

Gamers just wanna game not be milk like we 🐄