Gaming Star Wars Battlefront II

[Zarlak]

600,000 people more like. And I'm not sure it's impacted a game before as much as this one. That's literally half the reason people buy the game, isn't it? They advertise it with Vader/Luke, so they're pulling you in with images that you're going to need to spend money on to realise. And yeah you can spend 5000 hours unlocking one hero, but when faced with that task, £6 on a crate suddenly looks appealing.

Fair enough, that accellerated in the last 24 hours. Also we can't overlook that a shit tonne of those down votes are just people jumping on the bandwagon for giggles to make it the most downvoted comment of all time. It was featured in a newspaper which will have accellerated the downvotes.

I also agree with everything you've said, it's shitty and it's shoddy of them but like I said, the vast majority either don't give a shit or are indifferent. This isn't the biggest game that this has happened to, the model has been around for a long time now and it's not going anywhere for the sole reason that it works and it's massively profitable and for every person who complains, there are others who do not and who pour money into it. Some of us hate it, loads of others don't. When we all get together and voice our displeasure it makes it look like 99% of people hate it but it's not true.

 

[Siorac]

Good article regarding the microtransactions in Origins:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/insert...the-antidote-to-loot-box-poison/#784237e74cb3

ACO actually puts things like map icons, crafting materials and skill points in a category called “time savers,” implying you can pay to skip grinding out XP or hunting wild crocodiles for their skins.

This is so utterly absurd though. They ask you to pay extra money so that you don't have to play the game! How perverse is that? Their goal is to make you not want to play their game - on the face of it, that should be a terrible marketing strategy.

I understand the writer's argument that flat out paying for shit when you know what you're paying for is better than paying for randomised loot boxes - but all in all, it's still a pretty fecking depressing thing overall.

 

[2 man midfield]

Fair enough, that accellerated in the last 24 hours. Also we can't overlook that a shit tonne of those down votes are just people jumping on the bandwagon for giggles to make it the most downvoted comment of all time.

I also agree with everything you've said, it's shitty and it's shoddy of them but like I said, the vast majority either don't give a shit or are indifferent. This isn't the biggest game that this has happened to, the model has been around for a long time now and it's not going anywhere for the sole reason that it works and it's massively profitable and for every person who complains, there are others who do not and who pour money into it. Some of us hate it, loads of others don't. When we all get together and voice our displeasure it makes it look like 99% of people hate it but it's not true.

It works, but there's something in there messing with your head I think. "Just a few more packs and I might get Ronaldo", you tell yourself handing over another tenner. There's something psychological there.

This is the first year I've spent nothing on FUT packs, and even as a strong willed grown up it's been tough on my resolve, never mind the kids who play it. It's essentially gambling, you're made to think that just one more could lead to Messi. As I said a couple pages back, they must curse the fact they didn't do this years ago.

 

[Zarlak]

It works, but there's something in there messing with your head I think. "Just a few more packs and I might get Ronaldo", you tell yourself handing over another tenner.

This is the first year I've spent nothing on FUT packs, and even as a strong willed grown up it's been tough on my resolve, never mind the kids who play it. It's essentially gambling, you're made to think that just one more could lead to Messi. As I said a couple pages back, they must curse the fact they didn't do this years ago.

Absolutely, I did it with Clash of Clans and Star Wars: The Old Republic. It's very easy to say 'ah it's only a fiver' and then two weeks later when you do another couple because 'it's only a tenner' and then it starts to add up. It works because millions of people out there are happy to do it. I'm glad I've been able to tear myself away from it now. The ability to add the cost onto my next phone bill makes it even harder to resist.

 

[Siorac]

It works, but there's something in there messing with your head I think. "Just a few more packs and I might get Ronaldo", you tell yourself handing over another tenner. There's something psychological there.

This is the first year I've spent nothing on FUT packs, and even as a strong willed grown up it's been tough on my resolve, never mind the kids who play it. It's essentially gambling, you're made to think that just one more could lead to Messi. As I said a couple pages back, they must curse the fact they didn't do this years ago.

And you don't actually know the odds! That makes it even more evil. If a casino does not cheat - let's not get into whether they do or not but I'm sure that cheating is illegal - then you are at least aware of the statistical odds of you winning at roulette (well, you can calculate it anyway, as all the information is available). Or with the lottery: you know what are the odds of correctly guessing five numbers out of 90. But with loot boxes, you are generally in the dark. You just assume you have a fair chance of winning but you cannot quantify that in most cases.

If there are some developers who actually published their formula then fair play to them, in a way. Though they are still evil.

 

[SteveTheRed]

I only like it on RPGs, probably because it's an integral part of the game. I don't usually bother/have the will with other genres, unless there's a reward actually worth something.



It actually got ~680,000 downvotes which is significantly more, but I agree with the point you're making. For every person giving EA stick, there's someone else willing to pay which sustains the model.

I remember playing MMORPGS where the currency genuinely had a value in the real world and it was only possible to get it from playing the game. People would grind to build up currency and then sell for real cash. It's probably where EA and the likes got the idea because you could still pay2win in those games but at least you were buying it off other players.

 

[Zarlak]

And you don't actually know the odds! That makes it even more evil. If a casino does not cheat - let's not get into whether they do or not but I'm sure that cheating is illegal - then you are at least aware of the statistical odds of you winning at roulette (well, you can calculate it anyway, as all the information is available). Or with the lottery: you know what are the odds of correctly guessing five numbers out of 90. But with loot boxes, you are generally in the dark. You just assume you have a fair chance of winning but you cannot quantify that in most cases.

If there are some developers who actually published their formula then fair play to them, in a way. Though they are still evil.

I mean, that strikes me as your first mistake. It should be very very obvious to everybody immediately that you have a very, very low chance of getting the best stuff. That seems as common sense to me as bread makers not having to write 'this does not contain LSD' on their packaging. It's just something that's implicitly understood and they shouldn't need to mention. When you go to the casino and you see the £1 million jackpot currently on the slots, nobody ever sits down and assumes they have a fair chance of winning. It's implicitly understood that you've got a very slim chance of winning, but you play anyway just in case.

 

[The Bloody-Nine]

And you don't actually know the odds! That makes it even more evil. If a casino does not cheat - let's not get into whether they do or not but I'm sure that cheating is illegal - then you are at least aware of the statistical odds of you winning at roulette (well, you can calculate it anyway, as all the information is available). Or with the lottery: you know what are the odds of correctly guessing five numbers out of 90. But with loot boxes, you are generally in the dark. You just assume you have a fair chance of winning but you cannot quantify that in most cases.

If there are some developers who actually published their formula then fair play to them, in a way. Though they are still evil.

You can find out the odds because in China they have to be made public by law. Obviously the game will have to be released in China.

 

[Marty1968]

With all the "we can't play with our heroes without playing for hours or spending more money" comments to one side......is the game as good as the trailers and anticipation hoped it would be?

 

[Ødegaard]

Why does anyone like a grind?

I understand people who enjoy specific challenges to unlock shit, like having to achieve headshots with a drum set that you control with your bollocks while singing one of the songs from Mary Poppins to get a new fancy skin for your spaceship or something. But how is mindless grinding rewarding?

I'm a weird case. I grinded so much over 3.5 years in a phone/tablet game that I recently sold myself out of that I got 19k nok from it (around 2k gbp).
I grew up loving grinding for levels and becoming "overpowered", so it's just natural for me to set a goal and go zombie until I reach it.
I know it's weird, but it's also something a lot of people who like jrpgs enjoy due to being introduced to the "almost a new level" feeling constantly during youth years.

I don't like shooter-games in general (enjoyed killzone 2 and another i can't remember), but always expected that some rpg elements would get into shooter games which might make them more enjoyable for me. These days, the grind is there but the way the different publishers are acting is holding me away from trying.
If there were no lootbox/micro transaction systems in place I'd probably try this one & destiny out of curiosity.

 

[Siorac]

I mean, that strikes me as your first mistake. It should be very very obvious to everybody immediately that you have a very, very low chance of getting the best stuff. That seems as common sense to me as bread makers not having to write 'this does not contain LSD' on their packaging. It's just something that's implicitly understood and they shouldn't need to mention. When you go to the casino and you see the £1 million jackpot currently on the slots, nobody ever sits down and assumes they have a fair chance of winning. It's implicitly understood that you've got a very slim chance of winning, but you play anyway just in case.

But here the reward is not £1m. It's usually a somewhat rare item. For £1m, that very slim chance of winning makes sense; when it's for a sword that adds +2 Charisma, not so much.

And even so, what is a "slim chance"? Again, when it comes to the lottery, you can exactly calculate it and decide if it's worth it. Here, it might be 1% or 5% or 10% of you getting that particular item you want. And that's a huge difference.

 

[Zarlak]

But here the reward is not £1m. It's usually a somewhat rare item. For £1m, that very slim chance of winning makes sense; when it's for a sword that adds +2 Charisma, not so much.

And even so, what is a "slim chance"? Again, when it comes to the lottery, you can exactly calculate it and decide if it's worth it. Here, it might be 1% or 5% or 10% of you getting that particular item you want. And that's a huge difference.

The value of it doesn't really matter, it was just representing the top prize on offer. Nobody should expect the top prize anywhere close to remotely fair or easy. There's a reason it's the top prize, because it's extremely rare. It would be normal to expect less than a 1% chance for something like that. Your larger odds rewards would be for the more common stuff.

 

[Shane88]

That AMA will be a shitshow.

Every answer will be downvoted thousands of times and probably rightly so since it'll be done a battalion of lawyers and PR drones.

 

[Castia]

Probably the scummiest AAA game ever made. Congrats EA on yet another low.

The sad part is the gameplay and graphics are spot on, it could be a great game but they went and fecked it all up like usual.

 

[Zarlak]

That AMA will be a shitshow.

Every answer will be downvoted thousands of times and probably rightly so since it'll be done a battalion of lawyers and PR drones.

Did they agree to it?

 

[Siorac]

The value of it doesn't really matter, it was just representing the top prize on offer. Nobody should expect the top prize anywhere close to remotely fair or easy. There's a reason it's the top prize, because it's extremely rare. It would be normal to expect less than a 1% chance for something like that. Your larger odds rewards would be for the more common stuff.

You don't know the odds for the more common stuff either. You're not even arguing my point here which is that no matter what odds you have, companies should make those odds clear.

 

[ADJUDICATOR]

Did they agree to it?

Yeah, happening today 17:30 UTC.

 

[Zarlak]

You don't know the odds for the more common stuff either. You're not even arguing my point here which is that no matter what odds you have, companies should make those odds clear.

I responded to you specifically saying that you expect to have a fair chance of winning, which is common knowlege that this isn't the case. There's a lot that you can blame these companies for, but unrealistic expectations from their users when it comes to essentially gambling, isn't one of them. I didn't touch on anything to do with whether companies should make those odds clear which I'd be all for.

Yeah, happening today 17:30 UTC.

Nice, should be interesting. Although people will just mass downvote anything they say on sheer principle just for the lols because they think it's funny.

 

[DavelinaJolie]

I only like it on RPGs, probably because it's an integral part of the game. I don't usually bother/have the will with other genres, unless there's a reward actually worth something.



It actually got ~680,000 downvotes which is significantly more, but I agree with the point you're making. For every person giving EA stick, there's someone else willing to pay which sustains the model.

I was talking to my 14 year old stepson about all this. He has been obsessed with SWBF2 since it was announced, gave me money he had to pre-order the deluxe edition and all that jazz. Over the months I've explained my viewpoint on pre-ordering things being bad for the consumer, but he can't see past "if I pre-order then I get this bonus thing", and having ADHD he has some obsessive, autistic tendencies which make this kind of thing appealing. When all this kicked off he was mainly disappointed about the cost of heroes being so high and it taking so long, so was happy when they reduced the cost. I explained that, really, this is just a tokenistic offering to try and garner positive responses and press and the game is still fundamentally flawed in terms of its progression system being weighted towards encouraging the purchase of microtransactions. I think he understands this on some level, but (as I would expect from many a child/teen) he can't see past his desire to own it and play it. He can't even say he won't buy microtransactions (he has purchased them in Overwatch and Injustice 2, previously).

It was really worthwhile to have those discussions with him, because it exposed a significant naiveté and gave me that insight into the lack of a questioning mind when it comes to the question of "where is my money going?"

 

[RedMist99]

With all the "we can't play with our heroes without playing for hours or spending more money" comments to one side......is the game as good as the trailers and anticipation hoped it would be?

Watched my housemate play on the campaign last night and it looks incredible.

Multiplayer looks good, if a little frantic

 

[AXVnee7]

I was talking to my 14 year old stepson about all this. He has been obsessed with SWBF2 since it was announced, gave me money he had to pre-order the deluxe edition and all that jazz. Over the months I've explained my viewpoint on pre-ordering things being bad for the consumer, but he can't see past "if I pre-order then I get this bonus thing", and having ADHD he has some obsessive, autistic tendencies which make this kind of thing appealing. When all this kicked off he was mainly disappointed about the cost of heroes being so high and it taking so long, so was happy when they reduced the cost. I explained that, really, this is just a tokenistic offering to try and garner positive responses and press and the game is still fundamentally flawed in terms of its progression system being weighted towards encouraging the purchase of microtransactions. I think he understands this on some level, but (as I would expect from many a child/teen) he can't see past his desire to own it and play it. He can't even say he won't buy microtransactions (he has purchased them in Overwatch and Injustice 2, previously).

It was really worthwhile to have those discussions with him, because it exposed a significant naiveté and gave me that insight into the lack of a questioning mind when it comes to the question of "where is my money going?"

That's exactly the kind of audience they target, and I'm naïve like that too. You're correct in that the game is designed to encourage players to "get better" by gambling for better gear rather than actually practising and developing their skills. Most kids aren't going to have the attention span or will to grind for hours, so they go for the micro-transactions, because that's how they're conditioned to think. Better gear = better performance. I've been there.

The way they market it is crafty too. If you go on Fifa Ultimate Team for example, it'll have a big heading each week "Latest In Form players available for a limited only!". Interesting you bring up Injustice 2 as NetherRealm Studios are one of the worst for this too. I remember on Mortal Kombat X there was an advert and complementary link to purchase micro-transactions on the main menu screen

 

[Siorac]

I responded to you specifically saying that you expect to have a fair chance of winning, which is common knowlege that this isn't the case. There's a lot that you can blame these companies for, but unrealistic expectations from their users when it comes to essentially gambling, isn't one of them. I didn't touch on anything to do with whether companies should make those odds clear which I'd be all for.



Nice, should be interesting. Although people will just mass downvote anything they say on sheer principle just for the lols because they think it's funny.

Speaking of SW BF II specifically, there should be a fair chance that the loot box includes a Star Card for the Assault class, for example, so that I can progress. It's not one rare, top item, it's lots of common items. But I have no idea what are my chances. 10%? 20%? 30%? It's very relevant when my progression in the given class is tied to those Star Cards that randomly show up in the loot boxes.

 

[SteveTheRed]

I was talking to my 14 year old stepson about all this. He has been obsessed with SWBF2 since it was announced, gave me money he had to pre-order the deluxe edition and all that jazz. Over the months I've explained my viewpoint on pre-ordering things being bad for the consumer, but he can't see past "if I pre-order then I get this bonus thing", and having ADHD he has some obsessive, autistic tendencies which make this kind of thing appealing. When all this kicked off he was mainly disappointed about the cost of heroes being so high and it taking so long, so was happy when they reduced the cost. I explained that, really, this is just a tokenistic offering to try and garner positive responses and press and the game is still fundamentally flawed in terms of its progression system being weighted towards encouraging the purchase of microtransactions. I think he understands this on some level, but (as I would expect from many a child/teen) he can't see past his desire to own it and play it. He can't even say he won't buy microtransactions (he has purchased them in Overwatch and Injustice 2, previously).

It was really worthwhile to have those discussions with him, because it exposed a significant naiveté and gave me that insight into the lack of a questioning mind when it comes to the question of "where is my money going?"

That's terrible really. Totally understandable for a 14 year old to think like that and the companies doing it are blatantly exploiting it. It's the same with these kids on Fifa Ultimate Team, they have a team full of players they've clearly spent real money on, but they are usually crap at the game. They completely ignore the idea that practice will make you better and just go for the best equipment/players.

 

[Zarlak]

I was talking to my 14 year old stepson about all this. He has been obsessed with SWBF2 since it was announced, gave me money he had to pre-order the deluxe edition and all that jazz. Over the months I've explained my viewpoint on pre-ordering things being bad for the consumer, but he can't see past "if I pre-order then I get this bonus thing", and having ADHD he has some obsessive, autistic tendencies which make this kind of thing appealing. When all this kicked off he was mainly disappointed about the cost of heroes being so high and it taking so long, so was happy when they reduced the cost. I explained that, really, this is just a tokenistic offering to try and garner positive responses and press and the game is still fundamentally flawed in terms of its progression system being weighted towards encouraging the purchase of microtransactions. I think he understands this on some level, but (as I would expect from many a child/teen) he can't see past his desire to own it and play it. He can't even say he won't buy microtransactions (he has purchased them in Overwatch and Injustice 2, previously).

It was really worthwhile to have those discussions with him, because it exposed a significant naiveté and gave me that insight into the lack of a questioning mind when it comes to the question of "where is my money going?"

It's a difficult situation, because at the end of the day people are free to do whatever they want with their money. We can all have our opinions on what is a waste and what isn't, but if something brings you joy then it's valuable to you. If he wants to buy microtransactions, let him. If he can't afford them then that's a different story but he should be able to spend his money on whatever brings him joy. It's a little bit ignorant to say that somebody who purchases microtransactions is either naive or lacks a questioning mind (I can't speak for your 14 year old son, but in general). Some people are fully aware and simply accept it, think that it represents value to them personally or are actually happy to pay the price for the potential reward. Especially if the cash is disposable.

 

[bucky]

With all the "we can't play with our heroes without playing for hours or spending more money" comments to one side......is the game as good as the trailers and anticipation hoped it would be?

Yes, it is. Watched it on one youtuber's channel and his opinion basically was that the loot crate system is unfortunate, since they designed a very good game.

 

[Bojan11]

It’s good that this crazy shit is getting criticised.

The gambling commission or whoever needs to get off their arses and regulate this shit. I know these companies will argue that you are definitely getting a item from the loot box so it’s not gambling.

This is ruining online gaming. Nintendo and Sony are the only ones who don’t seem to do it.

Take two are basing their whole business around it sadly. 80m plus sales for GTA V weren’t enough. I shudder to think what RDR is going to be like online. Probably have to pay to buy better horses.

EA and Activision are not surprising. Remember these two were behind MS trying to block used game sales. They never been consumer friendly. EA were decent for a short stage last gen when they had a few new IPs and Fifa was decent. Now they are worse than ever.

 

[Hammerfell]

I get the frustration as well, but sending death threats? Or boycotting the game because you can play a hero in a certain era they are not supposed to be in? It's a game for fecks sake. Being able to play Yoda against Vader or Vader during the Clone Wars maps isn't really something you need to complain about IMO. And I really hope they add someone like Mace Windu to the mix.

The whole pay to win argument doesn't work for me either, since it doesn't appear to be game breaking. You can pay and have an advantage, that much is certain and they messed up the loot crate system in correlation to your rewards in-game, but they made adjustments to the 2015 version as well. IMO they shouldn't have reduced Vader's price, but instead should reward you more, if you do well in the game. Doing the challengs was something I enjoyed during the previous game.

Not true.

https://kotaku.com/the-curious-case-of-the-ea-game-dev-who-said-he-receive-1820474458

 

[Runner]

It's a shame origin ID's are unique or you'd see hundreds of people called: BiggSean66

 

[bucky]

Not true.

https://kotaku.com/the-curious-case-of-the-ea-game-dev-who-said-he-receive-1820474458

FFS. Why would you make that stuff up.

 

[Redlambs]

Who'd pretend to be an analyst or in QA?

 

[shaggy]

Not true.

https://kotaku.com/the-curious-case-of-the-ea-game-dev-who-said-he-receive-1820474458

 

[Runner]

some people crave attention and others have weird obsessions. this guy was lucky not to get jail time for impersonating a soldier.

http://nationalpost.com/news/canada/fake-soldier-franck-gervais-pleads-guilty/amp

 

[arthurka]

EA and Activision can suck balls, my son wants this more than anything and I am not sure I will be ready to give him 60+ $ plus 2000-4000 bucks more to play darth vader..

 

[berbatrick]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Ekkie Thump]

It's a difficult situation, because at the end of the day people are free to do whatever they want with their money. We can all have our opinions on what is a waste and what isn't, but if something brings you joy then it's valuable to you. If he wants to buy microtransactions, let him. If he can't afford them then that's a different story but he should be able to spend his money on whatever brings him joy. It's a little bit ignorant to say that somebody who purchases microtransactions is either naive or lacks a questioning mind (I can't speak for your 14 year old son, but in general). Some people are fully aware and simply accept it, think that it represents value to them personally or are actually happy to pay the price for the potential reward. Especially if the cash is disposable.

Absolutely correct. There is and should be a cost associated with all manufactured joy and any company failing to exact the maximum dollar value per unit of jollies provided is clearly failing in its duty to its shareholders. EA exists first and foremost to suck as much money out of the pockets of the population as it can. If equality of opportunity doesn't buy a company exec that extra lunch no-one can rightfully expect equality of opportunity to be provided. If micro-transactions are a profitable innovation it can only be noted that other gaming companies have been at fault for being far too magnanimous in failing to rinse their own clientele in a similar manner. In reality we should respect and perhaps even applaud EA and like minded companies for their pioneering business acumen.

Gamers have been getting a free lunch for far too long.

 

[Zarlak]

Absolutely correct. There is and should be a cost associated with all manufactured joy and any company failing to exact the maximum dollar value per unit of jollies provided is clearly failing in its duty to its shareholders. EA exists first and foremost to suck as much money out of the pockets of the population as it can. If equality of opportunity doesn't buy a company exec that extra lunch no-one can rightfully expect equality of opportunity to be provided. If micro-transactions are a profitable innovation it can only be noted that other gaming companies have been at fault for being far too magnanimous in failing to rinse their own clientele in a similar manner. In reality we should respect and perhaps even applaud EA and like minded companies for their pioneering business acumen.

Gamers have been getting a free lunch for far too long.

I have no idea if that's sarcasm or not.

 

[Runner]

Game is pretty damn good but I can see how the credits thing would take an eternity before they reduced it by 75%

 

[Ekkie Thump]

I have no idea if that's sarcasm or not.

Seems a fairly jaundiced but still reasonably accurate summary of EA's business plan. Admittedly words like rinse and suck might be pseudonyms for the industry standard.

 

[NM]

Absolutely correct. There is and should be a cost associated with all manufactured joy and any company failing to exact the maximum dollar value per unit of jollies provided is clearly failing in its duty to its shareholders. EA exists first and foremost to suck as much money out of the pockets of the population as it can. If equality of opportunity doesn't buy a company exec that extra lunch no-one can rightfully expect equality of opportunity to be provided. If micro-transactions are a profitable innovation it can only be noted that other gaming companies have been at fault for being far too magnanimous in failing to rinse their own clientele in a similar manner. In reality we should respect and perhaps even applaud EA and like minded companies for their pioneering business acumen.

Gamers have been getting a free lunch for far too long.

Not sure if serious if serious

 

[SteveTheRed]

Absolutely correct. There is and should be a cost associated with all manufactured joy and any company failing to exact the maximum dollar value per unit of jollies provided is clearly failing in its duty to its shareholders. EA exists first and foremost to suck as much money out of the pockets of the population as it can. If equality of opportunity doesn't buy a company exec that extra lunch no-one can rightfully expect equality of opportunity to be provided. If micro-transactions are a profitable innovation it can only be noted that other gaming companies have been at fault for being far too magnanimous in failing to rinse their own clientele in a similar manner. In reality we should respect and perhaps even applaud EA and like minded companies for their pioneering business acumen.

Gamers have been getting a free lunch for far too long.

Brilliant

@Zarlak you seem to forget that you used to be able to buy a full game for a price...and everything was included. Just because it gives people joy, doesn't mean they should milk people for their hard earned cash. I know the rest of the world is that way, but we should at least try and put up a fight. Rather than just bend over and say well if people want to buy it, they are free to do and happy to pay the price (I think they would also be happy not to pay the price)