Star Wars Battlefront 2 Update - Nothing changes with the changes!


#103

Don’t try to fuck us over?


#104

But that’s the thing, they aren’t, not really. Not in a burn this game and industry to the ground unless you do things our way kind of way


#105

Gamers are tired of microtransactions intruding on the gameplay, namely progression which is made to encourage people to want to try and buy a lootbox.
Governments are looking into labeling lootboxes like these as gambling.
EA is losing stock values.
News sites like the BBC are talking about it.

The message is clear, we are tired of this practice, find a new one that works and makes gamers happy. It’s not hard, Rainbow 6 did it, go free to play like Warframe, or just simply have a store for buying the cosmetic content.


#106

I still find this wording fascinating, since the microtransactions do not intrude on game play. You can directly unlock heroes through in game credit earnings (and I generally reject the notion that the characters being locked is an evil practice since games have for decades had systems for locking characters until you complete particular aspects of the game, this is just a variation on it), and the only thing you won’t get if you never opened a lootbox is the class/character progression which is not impeding on gameplay so long as they continue to factor in cards when doing their matchmaking.

Also interesting is that fundamentally RS6 and Warframe are significantly smaller initial offerings than this game is.

I don’t have any faith in the general gaming community to rest, they will always find another minor gripe to make into a mountain of shit on reddit. I file this under “don’t negotiate with terrorists” territory. :wink:


#107

Thing is, it’s not even close to being quite that bad. Yes, EA have taken a fairly big short-term hit from this, but they’ll bounce back. If this sends a message about the current state of microtransactions and the sense of hatred for them then that’s a good thing.


#108

Still, as IGN showed in their 100$ loot box video, if you only care for a class or two that you want to optimize, the grind is hard.

  1. Very low drop rate of rare materials. Only 1.4%. And that’s only for Rare (blue), which isn’t even the rarest item. (purple). To put it into perspective, that’s rarer than a legendary card in Heartstone.
  2. Duplicates barely give enough credits back (200 for very common [5% of loot box value], 400 for common [10% of loot box value]). On 60 loot boxes, the duplicates were only enough to buy 3-4 loot boxes more.
  3. The more loot boxes you purchase, the less value you get back from it. Not only do you not get more crafting cards (which you need at the end game to upgrade the rarity of the card), the amount IGN got from 60 boxes was only enough to upgrade 6-7 cards from common (white) to very rare (purple).

Take into account that, at this moment, there are players out there with very rare cards already that they received from deluxe editions, simply wrecking stuff. Which really bums the player experience even more.

It shows how players need to have good star cards and upgrade them, in order to stay competitive in multiplayer. Which just entices players more towards purchasing, instead of having to grind for it. This defines pay to win.

How you can stand behind this baffles me. It looks like a great game, but I’m sure that playing this after a while is just going to be a more frustrating experience down the line, especially for people who buy it later and suddenly want to jump in.


#109

Yes the do. The rate at which you get items like star cards is purposely slow, credit gain is made slow, arcade mode has a cap as to prevent people from farming for lootboxes, there is not if ands or buts about it. The game was made to have people be encouraged to buy lootboxes, it doesn’t matter if the boxes have loot in them that players want.

Evil would be exaggerating it, but saying it is okay is not accurate either. How come a game, by the same title about (i think over now?) a decade ago didn’t have heroes locked? All because it is a way of doing things, that does not make it right. Playing as Vader is not something I want a sense of pride and accomplishment over, I want to play as Darth Vader because he is menacing and cool. And I shouldn’t have to wait hours, upon hours, upon further hours to not just unlock him but then get the star cards necessary to make him competitive with the other players who already have the level 4 or whatever level it is star cards.

Credit gain was made to be slow so that people take a long time to farm for this stuff, prices were extremely high for heroes before the backlash started, star cards have levels and all the crappy stats like improved aim assist, health increase, or damage boost because it fuels the mobile game like nature of the game.


#110

Oh, and let’s not forget killcam. Which shows who kills you, but more importantly, with what.

“Oh shit, he killed me with that super rare card! I WANT that too now!”

How convenient.


#111

Which IIRC they took purples out because of gamer complaints!

Edit: P.S are they official drop rates, would love a link if you have it!

I’m not sitting here defending Lootcrates though, I’m saying that the need to use lootcrates to enjoy the gameplay is overstated by the gaming community.

This isn’t a description of microtransactions impeding on gameplay, it’s a description of a microtransaction system regardless of gameplay.

Gameplay is what you actually do to play the game. The closest that it comes is by creating a possible discrepancy between card levels of players however there are two reasons why I feel very relaxed about this personally and wouldn’t ever say it is an “impedence”.

  1. The devs have said they take cards into account for matchmaking, AFAIK
  2. All games that have progression have this problem, whether you progress by achievements, or playtime, or this system. Some people have their gameplay “impeded”. In fact, and like I say I’m not defending lootboxes because they are shit, but one consequence of this system is that actually you are LESS likely to meet disparity in game thanks to the random nature of upgrades given unless you spend real money to upgrade artificially quickly.

Different time, different scope, different realities of budgets involved. I imagine.

Cynics, the lot of you :slight_smile:

Edit: P.P.S

I’ve played the campaign and about a dozen starfighter mode matches. I’ve played a leisurely 10 hours of this game, and I have enough credits to unlock Darth Vader. Now to get skilled enough that I can gain enough battle points in a match to even get to use Darth Vader!

Edit: Edit: P.p.p.s Totally kidding by the way, will unlock Leia before Vader. Syke.


#112

Right.

I jumped into Battleborn like 2 months ago when they released their free to play trial, and I can assure you, it wasn’t fun.

All it takes is 1 person with a very rare or legendary card to really impede the gameplay experience. I’m absolutely sure this is going to happen with Battlefront II as well.

“Oh look, I got killed…by the same person again…for the 5th time. Lovely.”


Another thing to note is that games CAN be made without ANY loot boxes and still be successful.
Like Doom for example, great story line and has multiplayer mode. No upgrades from loot boxes to be found there.

Star Wars also only has a 4 hour story campaign, which is nothing in comparison to Doom, with multiplayer maps and classes. That’s all the game needs really. Why they just have to add loot boxes with upgrades for classes just doesn’t make sense.


#113

With EA, it comes naturally.

Ah but what about getting all the rest of the heroes? And then the stare cards for the heroes, and getting them to max rank?


Eventually the well taps out.


#114

How do we define successful? Evolve was deemed successful by 2K, and look where that ended up.


#115

I think you understand that certain names, such as Doom or Star Wars, will already sell just with the name alone.
The fact that loot boxes was added to a game lots of Star Wars fans want, just shows intent to milk more money out of the fans, not to make a great game.

That’s where the hatred comes from. If EA just re-made Battlefront II in a similar fashion as the original BFII, perhaps even with loot boxes that adds cosmetics, that would’ve been A-OK.


#116

I’m just gonna leave this here for you all to watch, mainly about the developer position update


#117

I mean… are we having a discussion here about progression systems in general… because all games have this issue regardless of how you attain them. We can’t pretend SWBF2 has suddenly invented the problem of there being an imbalance between teams thanks to “gear” that they have. Counterstrike literally had that imbalance built in as a game mechanic. If DICE are doing anything to try and minimise this problem through matchmaking then it’s going to be on the fairer end of the scale, not the less fair.


#118

No one has said BF2 is the worse example of anything it is doing.
It is just the boiling point of having things people are tired of.


#119

But my point is this… BF2 technically handles that imbalance better for the wider community. The people that it most disadvantages are the minority of hardcore gamers with lots of time on their hands. Is it any surprise they then, when their ability to just get up to the top of the skill tree the quickest is taken from them, are the ones now complaining?


#120

How so does it hurt hardcore gamers the most?
I know some people who play only on weekends, or maybe just a few hours per week who won’t buy the game because of one reason. It’ll take too long. Once you run out of challenges and do the campaign and all the things that get you extra credits, you are just left with the credits per match. It takes way too long to get all the content, randomly for the most part.
And it was even worse before the heroes were reduced in price, I knew some people who plain gave up on ever being able to play as Luke or Vader because it would simply take way too long when they could be getting things like star cards and weapons, or cheaper heroes (at that point).
It doesn’t matter if other games do it worse, or if EA made changes so it is now less horrible, it is still a bad system that deserves every bad comment it deserves. Even IGN for crying out loud made good points on why the progression system is terrible.


#121

And that is no different from any other game that has progression systems. Progression eventually gets slower, the initial rewards get left behind after their initial bounty. If you don’t play as much then you don’t progress as quickly.

However because this system is randomised actually there is a case that overall those people who play lots more than you won’t progress as quickly past your level. Then throw in match making considerations for star card levels and such and you’re definitely entering a realm where this game gives a more likely balanced encounter for you as a less frequent player than others where there are no microtransactions involved.

In fact in the same breath as all these complaints you will have gamers, maybe some of the same, maybe a different portion, who complain when there isn’t anything to work towards. The bizarre state of our community and the tightrope devs have to walk.


#122

Yeah but it isn’t randomized in most other games, so players can actually work towards something. In battlefield 1 you don’t spend in game money on a weapon crate for a random weapon, you buy the gun you want to buy. In Warframe you get credits to buy the bp, farm resources which you can consistently get from planets that have them, and then build the item. In most games, you at least can set yourself a goal to play and grind for something you want.
In battlefront 2, unless you wait to get a specific item through the rarer resources, you are left to the whim of RNG.

I can explain that one. Some gamers feel like they can’t farm effectively for star cards, so once you get the weapons and heroes, then all you have is star cards and emotes which are mostly random. So basically they aren’t working towards anything, they are just waiting for things to come to them.