Star Wars Battlefront II

- Deleted -

Truth is always bitter., I'll leave this instead.

 

Not interested in this game.

I should be, but Im just not and it makes me a little sad.

 

there's some fps drops in the sp campaign.

 

My whole opinion on this game... DO NOT BUY THIS GAME UNTIL EA DEFINES HOW MICROTRANSACTIONS WILL BE IMPLEMENTED "AT A LATER TIME"

 

Whoa, Hawaii investigates loot boxes as gambling:

 

Damn. I usually have a "live and let live" mentality when it comes to "vices" like gambling, alcohol, and whatnot, but it's hard to disagree with the idea that big businesses shouldn't be able to take advantage of kids by getting them hooked on gambling. The comparison of EA to big tobacco companies is well made.

I'm not holding my breath, but if enough legislators get concerned about this, we might actually see the end of loot boxes. And I will shed zero tears.

 

That's great to hear! Lootboxes are bad, but P2W in a $60 game is an absolute EVIL and should not be tolerated nor supported in any form. In fact, P2W is absolutely unacceptable in ANY game, be it free to play or not. Just today I read news that the author of original Plants vs. Zombies was fired by EA solely due to his objection to add P2W elements in his game. Added to my frustration was this so-called "analyst" who actually claims games should charge even more:
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/20/gam...star-wars-game-firms-should-raise-prices.html

 

Apparently the CNBC 'analyst' Evan Wingren' was shown to be a heavy investor in EA.

Good for that PvZ guy to stand up. Sucks that he lost his job though. I really hope there's a massive class action lawsuit against EA that drains their bank account significantly. Heck, even worse, some of those crooks at the top need some jail time, honestly. If it's truly determined to be predatory practices.

 

Black Friday here and almost all of the PS4s are sold out... Except these

https://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/7f3nml/black_friday_here_and_almost_all_of_the_ps4s_are/

 

Beautiful!

 

Same here. In a local mall, this title just collects dust.

 

What a beautiful site to see on Black Friday.

https://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/7f6bvx/what_a_beautiful_site_to_see_on_black_friday/

 

Had to wipe away a tear after seeing that. Glorious.

 

What's more ironic is that the games sold out: COD:WW2, Destiny 2 etc. also have micro transactions.

So it's ironic and hypocritical.

 

And the field reports keep rolling in
https://imgur.com/gallery/LXe0a

 

You see failure of a game to sell, while I see a failure in the consumer.

Sent from my SM-T560NU using Tapatalk

 

I see hundreds or thousands of individual successes, based on people standing up for themselves, finally tired enough of being taken advantage of for so long, it finally happened.

The shiny game dulls next to the offensive treatment of the gamer by the publisher.

The other games slowly leading up to this were all testing the limits, BFII finally broke through and caused an epic reaction.

Hopefully this costly reaction will stop the blood sucking game dead in it's tracks. The other games offensive in their blood sucking will also see their game end.

 

But yet people still buy cod and destiny 2 which also have micro transactions and loot boxes. So, it's not a success because it clearly shows that consumers have double standards.

Sent from my SM-T560NU using Tapatalk

 

It's got to start somewhere, the reaction will spread based on people pointing out the similarities, so thanks for helping out

Loot boxes, if deemed gambling, are either going to be outlawed, or create another genre for adults... should be interesting to see how it "plays out".

So many people were looking forward to BFII, the disappointment is epic as is their individual reactions, hopefully Disney's IP protective reaction is big enough to stomp on EA Greed®, and shutdown these bad practices before they continue to destroy gaming.

 

I agree with you both, thegh0st and hmscott.
It is hypocritical that other games with MTX/LB are selling well (though to be fair BFII has the worst kind of MTX/LB). However I agree with hmscott that it's a start.

It's great and all, and more power to them, but it's kinda sad that if you want to accomplish something, you always have to use "think of the kids" defense...
What about grown-ups? Don't we deserve to be protected from greedy publishers?

 

While those games are also bad for that, EA is by quite a way the worst publisher when it comes to greed. Not only do they push for always-online, "games as services", microtransaction ridden ****e, they have cannibalised many well loved development studios over the years. What we are seeing now is not just a backlash against Battlefront 2, it's a backlash against years of EA's incessant greed. Its true that Activision or Ubisoft would be equally greedy if they were was big as EA are, and those publishers should face a similar backlash. For now though i'm happy to see EA get taken down a notch, the time will come for it to happen to the other publishers in due time.

 

i have to agree with you here.
i think the quite obvious stand we the gamers/consumers have made again EA/DICE will have positive repercussions for all of us moving forward, even if its just a small impact, even if one developer/publisher pauses for a while before adding micro-transactions/loot boxes its a step in the right direction, moving forward perhaps these companies will think a little differently, maybe they will even think, 'hey guys if we make a top quality game with great game-play and story line we will make lots of money through sales and not need to find other means to get money for the piggy-bank'

 

Another positive outcome from push back on BFII micro-transactions?

Clicker Heroes Studio Ditching Free-to-Play for 'Ethical Reasons'
21 NOV 2017
http://www.ign.com/articles/2017/11...dio-ditching-free-to-play-for-ethical-reasons

"Playsaurus, the studio behind Clicker Heroes, is abandoning free-to-play for its next game citing "ethical reasons" over addictive behavior as a core reason.

When forced to choose between a paid upfront model, similar to traditional games, or a free-to-play model, as in Clicker Heroes 1, the studio will adopt the former for upcoming game. It will cost $29.99 and be fully refundable for a year after launch, according to a, one of the game's developers.

The reason for the change is concern that the players who spend the most money supporting the game may be victims of addictive behavior. Despite designing the game largely without the real-money shop in mind, the studio found that "some number of players spent many thousands of dollars on [paid currency] rubies" in the first Clicker Heroes.

Acknowledging that the studio "made a lot of money from these players," the post went on to say "I can only hope that these people could afford it, and that they were doing it to support us, and not to feed an addiction. But I strongly suspect that this is not the case.""
...
"Playsaurus is unable to change the payment model of Clicker Heroes 1, a game that has already been released, as Fragsworth says, "It would destroy our studio if we did." Looking forward to the change for Clicker Heroes 2, the post said "It may or may not work. It probably isn't worth nearly as much money, but at least we can do it with a cleaner conscience."
...
EA has also recently made changes to progression systems in both and after backlash about 'pay-to-win' systems."

 

The Untold History of EA's Long (and Rich) Pay-2-Win Love Affair


Long, but informative, interesting, and gives good background on how we got to where EA is today with PTW.

 

French senator adds further concerns to Star Wars Battlefont 2's 'gambling' controversy
http://www.pcgamer.com/french-senat...star-wars-battlefont-2s-gambling-controversy/

"A French senator has contacted France's online gambling regulator detailing his concerns about the micro-transactions in Star Wars Battlefront II.

According to The Nerd Stash (via GameInformer), French senator Jérôme Durain contacted ARJEL (as well as other advocacy groups, including the organisation that represents France's games industry), proposing that loot boxes could be harmful to children."

"While he stopped short of advocating new legislation—and seemingly took time to praise "the advancement of gaming as a culture"—he did specifically cite Battlefront II's recent controversy as a point of concern, stating the correlation between an in-game character's strength and spending real-life money needed further investigation.

In reply to the senator, ARJEL's Charles Coppolani stated that the concern he "had anticipated in 2016" presents "risks for our fellow citizens and in particular for the youngest. These risks are very close to those that characterise gambling addiction money; it is necessary to be very vigilant."

He further suggested that adding loot crates are a "totally random product that amounts to introducing a paid lottery game into a game," and because "almost mandatory transactions [...] are added to the purchase price", it also potentially presented a consumer protection concern.

This is just one in a line of high profile political statement about loot boxes, including Belgium's Justice Minister calling for loot box ban in Europe.

Last week, EA told its investors that removing microtransactions from Star Wars Battlefront II would not have "a material impact" on the game's projected earnings after it announced it had temporarily suspended Battlefront 2's premium currency."

 

Of course it will have a short term impact but they need to create a fair system that can prevent giving unfair advantages whilst allowing a stable financial support for their games. This system can then be replicated in Anthem, BFront3, Battlefield 2018, NFS etc.

They have to:
1° Unlink microtransactions from gameplay.
2° Create a new progression system 2.0, because the actual is flawed and linked to loot boxes.

I think it's too risky (financially speaking, in the long term) for them to re-activate the in-game purchases with two-three insignificant changes. They might lose some money on BF2 but if they don't fix it a big chunk of their customers base will look elsewhere for all their future games and affect all their long term financial operations.

Customer satisfaction, image, reputation, those are as important as profit when it comes to video games and gaming hardwares in general...that needs to be understood.

 

Problem is that most consumers have short memories and too forgiving. In a year if EA puts out another Star Wars game, people will still buy it. EA will just try to trickle it in over time anyhow. They just went full bore this time around. So many comments I've read "but the game is fun so I still buy it".

 

Not me, there are lots of fun games that don't have loot crates or pay to win and I won't touch either, I vote with my wallet. And yes I understand that some loot crates are strictly visual enhancements but they still have nothing to do with the game and exist for no other reason than to milk money from players, I am not a thing to be milked. Nope, I give them money and they give me a full and complete game that is exactly what they described, I'm not asking for more and wont accept less. And no, I'm not loosing sleep over some fat cat feeling all meloncholy because he thinks his day sucks if he didn't make a billion. Lots of guys are feeding their families just fine making smaller games that are no less fun for me to play and they don't insult me by treating me like a thing to be used, I choose to do business with them.

 

EA haven't got a penny from me since Mass Effect 3. None of their games now are worth buying even without the loot crate ebola.

 

Petitioning LucasFilm
Lucasfilm: Revoke EA's Star Wars License
John Hunt London, United Kingdom
12,371 have signed. Let’s get to 15,000.
https://www.change.org/p/lucasfilm-revoke-ea-s-star-wars-license

Spoiler: Long...

"EA have had the Star Wars video game license for the last 4 years, and in that time they've proven to their consumers that they honestly don't care about the gameplay experience or content, they'd rather rush out a game that will try and milk as much money out of consumers as possible.

Let's start with Star Wars Battlefront (2015), the game launched with barely any content whatsoever. If I remember correctly there were 5 multiplayer maps and 4 game modes, and that was it. This wouldn't have been a problem if the game was free to play, but it wasn't - EA were charging $60 for an unfinished, sloppy excuse of a video game that almost undoubtedly hurt the Star Wars franchise. The community died out very quickly due to the awful gameplay experience and lack of content, and just to make things worse - EA did what EA always does, tried to milk even more money out of its customers! They released a $50 season pass that actually included MORE content than the original game had! So to get the 'actual experience' you had to spend $110. This was a disgraceful practice at the time and still is to this day.

In 2016 we found out Visceral Games were working on a linear single player Star Wars game, this had a lot of people excited. At E3 2017 we got our first look at this game and again, people were excited. In October 2017 we found out that EA had cancelled this game and that Visceral Games were shutting down. EA told us that the reason the game was cancelled was because 'people didn't want a linear single player experience set in the Star Wars universe, they wanted something else that would allow the player to come back regulalary' - which is just nonsense. Pretty much the whole fanbase were excited for a new single player Star Wars story, however it became quite obvious very quickly why this game was cancelled. They would've struggled at monetizing a single player game, they've tried before and it didn't work because consumers are sick of getting ripped off and having to buy more content after spending $60 on a game. EA seem to think if they make something on a broader scale that has an online component then people will buy in-game content to stay relevant in the game, which again is so morally wrong and just shows how out of touch EA are with it's consumers. Then again, they don't care about their consumers, they only care about the money they can make from them. Yet again another event that will do more harm to the Star Wars brand than good.

And finally this brings me to Star Wars Battlefront 2 which releases tomorrow however some people have had early access since last week. To sum up the game in general, it's bad - actually no wait that's too generous - it's awful. EA has yet again pulled another anti-consumer move and shoved in infamous and unwanted loot boxes into the game, something nobody asked for. These loot boxes were very controversial during the Star Wars Battlefront 2 beta when people noticed that these loot boxes were giving people a huge advantage over other players who didn't purchase them, and since they could be paid for with real money (in the full game not the beta) it essentially made the game pay-to-win which is unacceptable in any video game regardless of the price or content, yet EA had the cheek to do this in a $60 video game. This causes a major backlash online which had such a strong effect that EA even had to comment on the matter saying they would 'rework and revise the system', and now we know that statement was a complete and utter lie.

We now know that the entire online aspect of Star Wars Battlefront 2 was literally built around microtransactions to try and squeeze every single dollar out of the consumer as they could. Let's start with the Star cards, these cards allow you to add upgrades to your character, such as extra health or quicker reload. This would cause a problem in any game as it can make the game unbalanced, however instead of allowing the user to choose what upgrades they want, the user has to unlock these star cards instead! And how does the user unlock these star cards? You guessed it - loot boxes! So yet again when someone pays real world money on loot boxes they can easily have an unfair advantage over players who are unlocking these loot boxes through in-game rewards - essentially making it pay to win. And this has 100% been noticeable while playing online, the game hasn't even fully released yet and people have an unfair advantage over others and it's very noticeable and makes the game so unbalanced that I've already given up on it. It's not just me who's noticed either, all you have to do is search online to see almost everyone who's played it is saying the same thing. The community on this game will die out faster than the original game because of this, people won't buy your stupid loot boxes EA, instead they'll sell the game and buy something else.

The star cards aren't even the worse thing, in Star Wars Battlefront 2 there are special characters you can use once you've earned enough score in game, however not all of them are unlocked. In fact the most common and most loved (debatable) characters are actually locked and need unlocking to use. So how do you unlock them? Does ranking up unlock them? Of course it doesn't, and you wanna know why? Because EA can't monetise the consumer that way. More evidence that EA clearly doesn't care about the consumer and would rather just focus on the money they could try and milk from them. So how do you unlock these characters then? Through an in-game currency known as credits which - you guessed it - can be brought with real-world money! So yet again you can use real money to gain an advantage over other players, yet again making it pay-to-win. But what if you want to unlock these characters through the in-game currency without using real money? Well on average to get enough credits it'll take you a whopping 40 hours - that's not a mistake - 40 hours to unlock ONE character. Just one. So let's be real here, if you want to play as your favourite character then you've either gotta get lucky in a loot box (which you can pay for with real money) or buy credits with real money.

And finally, the week reviewers got their hands on the game to review EA done one of the most scummiest things a game publisher could ever do, they tweaked their in game system to make it seem easier to unlock items in the game without the use of real world money so that journalists wouldn't complain about the awful monetization system the game is built on. You want an example of this? Well Luke Skywalker was 10,000 credits to unlock during this time period, which would take about 6-7 in-game hours to unlock. But when the game actually releases, he will be 60,000 credits which can take up to 40 hours to unlock! And like I said before, they did this to try and make sure journalists wouldn't slate their awful monetization system, they themselves even know it's awful yet they simply don't care because they don't care about their consumers - they only care about the money they can make from them.

All of this is starting to have a major backlash on EA in general, with hundreds of thousands now committing to cancel preorders and boycott the game and future games completely. EA made a reddit post answering concerns of the fan base and I can proudly say that in less than 24 hours of that post going live that it is now the most disliked post in the entirety of Reddit, with a whopping 230 thousand downvotes. This seriously shouldn't be surprising from the company that has won worst company in America for two years in a row. Lucasfilm, if you cannot see that EA is seriously abusing and harming the Star Wars brand then you are part of the problem. The longer you keep partnering and working with EA then the more damaging your famous brand will become. Do the right thing, do it for your consumers - end this nonsense once and for all and give the Star Wars License to a developer or publisher who will actually treat the franchise with care and quality, because if the last 4 years are anything to go by then it's pretty clear that EA doesn't care about either of those things...

Star Wars Battlefront II: Petition To Revoke EA's Franchise Rights Goes Viral
https://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/691087-playstation-4/76032388

Disney couldn’t let EA’s Battlefront 2 drama ruin Star Wars
As if the biggest biz in the world would have anyone ruin its cash cow
https://www.polygon.com/2017/11/17/16670758/star-wars-battlefront-2-issues-disney-ea

"It was surprising that EA, after several meager defenses that only riled up people further, caved to consumer pressures to change Battlefront 2’s paid economy. It was more surprising that the publisher did so at the eleventh hour, informing players that it would deactivate the option to buy currency at launch as it figured out how to retool the microtransactions.

But if we consider who owns Star Wars, none of this is surprising at all. Because Disney’s put a whole bunch of money into this series, and there’s no way anyone is going to ruin it for them."

 

The Great Lootbox Incidents of 2017: What to do?

 

Disney are actually the ones responsible for the loot boxes being pulled from BFII. However, from the looks of the shelves in the stores on Black Friday. They told EA to pull that **** too late.

 

EA's day of reckoning is here after 'Star Wars' game uproar, $3 billion in stock value wiped out

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/28/eas-day-of-reckoning-is-here-after-star-wars-game-uproar.html

 

this is really very good news, this is what will make change in the long run, losing billions in stock value will ultimately have a bigger impact on the direction devs/publishers take moving forward, im really happy we the average consumer have had a positive impact to some degree regarding the game models we want and won't accept.

 

Every "Meddling Kids" comment from Scooby-Doo, Where Are You!

 

I dont get how much stubborn they are. Even after all the hell they've been through, they say they're still going to insist on loot boxes.

 

Making paltry millions will not be enough EA, the bottom line is that for them games are not a labor of love, they're vehicle to produce profit. They're sure this will all go away soon enough and to them a few billion dollars that never really existed being erased today is not all that big a deal, a year from now it can all be back and then some. Have loot crates declared gambling and those laws wont get made without "industry input" which will water them down so far as to make them pointless other to appease people who are too stupid or disconnected to understand that nothing changed. During the time that process is going on people who have become slaves to the next Facebook notification (another industry using what amounts to the same feedback loop to addict users) will forget all about it anyways. This is the reality. Market caps and stock values are really just numbers, no one that mattered got poor in that 3 billion dollar devaluation and those that are rich are playing the long game.

 

And their new handheld console:

 

I absolutely love the game, one of my favorites.

 

After spending $10,000 on microtransactions, a gambling addicted teen speaks out
http://mashable.com/2017/12/01/19-gaming-gambling-addict
"In a powerful open letter to the video game industry, a 19-year-old gambling addict gave a first-hand account of how in-game microtransactions and loot boxes can tempt young players into spending hundreds or even thousands of dollars for content.

Reddit user Kensgold, who asked us not to use his real name, shared his story on Reddit in November.

The post, aimed at the developers and publishers of Star Wars Battlefront II — and all other companies in the industry — explained how, at the age of 14, he spent well over $10,000 over the course of a few years thanks to microtransactions and, admittedly, his own addiction to gambling.

Spoiler: Details...

He name-dropped the companies involved with Star Wars Battlefront II because of the controversy surrounding the recently released game, the loot boxes for which contribute to at least a portion of the game's progression system.

Loot boxes can be earned from playing the game over time, or can be purchased with real money to get those helpful upgrades, new abilities, and credits (in-game currency) faster.

Although he enjoyed playing the game's beta, Kensgold was disappointed to learn that it used a loot box system and microtransactions. He's had to avoid games with these features after he came to terms with his gambling problem.

"It makes me disappointed to know I wont be able to play those games," he said in an email. "I loved Star Wars as a kid and still do. It sucks to see the passion and sheer man hours the developers put into the game to have it ruined by executive-level choices. Other games too. For example I am worried about the upcoming vanilla servers for World of Warcraft that Blizzard announced."
...
"In the beginning I began playing a game on my phone," he wrote on Reddit. "It was a normal city builder clone. The goal of the game was open ended. It started off fine, but slowly changed to favor those who purchased large quantities of their equivalent to [ Star Wars Battlefront II] credits."

People he played with — adults with full-time jobs — could afford to stay on top by buying hundreds of dollars of helpful content in the game, and Kensgold didn't want to fall behind, he said.

"I began to spend some of the money I had saved over my early years in an attempt to keep up with my friends," he wrote. "At first it was 10 bucks every other week. Then the game shifted again. They introduced the premium token chest. It had better gear for your heroes, new and better heroes, resources, experience, etc."

The spending grew out of hand and not only emptied Kensgold's savings but strained the relationship between him and his mother. He worked at near-minimum wage jobs and nearly 100% of his income went toward in-game purchases. He started getting into more and more games that offered loot boxes and other in-game purchasing opportunities."
...
Finally, Kensgold realized he needed help and started seeing a therapist, confronting his addiction. But he wrote that some other young players may not receive the support that he received and end up worse off."

Star Wars Battlefront II User Forums
[Megathread] AFK Farming
https://battlefront-forums.ea.com/discussion/comment/825278/#Comment_825278

"This game just completely sucks now! I knew I should have waited to buy it! I went through every painful patch of the first battlefront. It just seems amazing that they could screw this up so badly this time around"

Spoiler: Details...

"I've seen it done. A guy a know had 4,000 credits then 7 hours later had 16,000 just from spinning around"

"Lets be honest. Even if the game gave you 1,000's of credits after each match, people would still do this trick. The credit amount is just an excuse to justify it. Here is what is really funny, people complained about it being pay to win, but won't hesitate to cheat and get the same results as someone who spent money. Paying to win is some big deal, but cheating to win is ok? Lol"

"Seeing a lot of players (sometimes 5-6 on a team) farming points by setting a jump or shoot macro for their characters and then just spawning and getting killed over and over to farm points. Can we get a fix for this? It sucks when your team is 15-v-20 because some people are trying to circumvent the grind the rest of us are putting up with."

"We are aware of the AFK farm exploit in SW:BF2 and are working on a fix."

"It's all because those ****** youtubers, the best way to earn credits is to play HvS and do nothing, they destroyed my favorite game mode, you get sometimes 2 guys, who do nothing, how are you supposed to win a match with those ****? It's a joke, to start a game and not playing it, just because of credits. EA/Dice people who do nothing, should get nothing or be kicked out of the match, the only solution for those ****!"

"If I may pop in on this, a few things:

» Killing AFK farmers is assisting them, because each time they die, they are getting 100 Credits. You are literally helping them by killing these AFK farmers, I think that is what duvelsuper was alluding to.

» An exploit is an unfair advantage, one that not everyone can have. This is not the same as "taking advantage of their behaviour", because anyone can outsmart someone else; but taking advantage of someone that is not even at their keyboard (the definition of "AFK") is something not only uncommmon, it is something that is "unfair" (sort of like hitting someone when they cannot defend against it). This makes the killer of someone unable (literally unable to defend themselves), the 'exploiter of exploiters', as it were.

» Your third conceptual ("another thing") is answered by the second point, above: it is not fair, hence wrong. (Note that there is a difference between an AFK player being a Target/Objective assigned randomly by the game, and an AFK player 'being AFK' and shooting at a wall getting killed repeatedly by someone knowing they are killing an AFK player easily)

[Note that these three points are merely clarifications on the points I believe the above posters were trying to make. They are not necessarily concepts that I adhere to personally. I am just trying to help by clarifying concepts for those following (and answer your queries, to some extent)]"

Done with Battlefront
https://battlefront-forums.ea.com/discussion/87081/done-with-battlefront

" Whitefly425_ December 2, 2017 6:28AM
I bought this game for the promise of a great campaign. Instead I got 4.5 hours of story telling that was about as deep as the Battlefront 2015 single player modes. Star Wars is not a difficult concept. Most people love the stories, characters and the adventures in a casual and accessible way. That’s why the movies are successful. All that I was looking forward to was a 40+ hour campaign with a great story, meaningful collectibles and full emersion into the Star Wars universe through the holiday season, plus a great lead up to The Last Jedi.

So now that the story is over I’m left with multiplayer, which has become a time consuming race to collect meaningless parts and pieces just to compete. Battlefront 2015 multiplayer was great. It was easy to understand and everyone started each match equally. The only thing you could save up for were new skins and emotes, simple and fantastic. This new multiplayer is overly complicated and ridiculous...and it didn’t have to be. I just don’t have the time or energy any more to collect crafting parts and credits to change colors on star cards and “unlock” heroes that are essential to the Star Wars experience and should be open from the beginning.

Then there’s the arcade mode which feels incomplete and an after thought. It’s like it was thrown in at the last minute with no thought or care. Battlefront 2015 had a skirmish mode. Although it was added late to the game it had walker assault and a star fighter mode which were great to get your Star Wars fix for the day.

To conclude I wish the game had reached my expectations. The graphics and sound are amazing, but that’s all I can say about it. Beyond that it seems to be yet another shallow, competitive, exploitative and anxiety driven experience. I realize that multiplayer/service based/micro transaction games are the future but this game was the final straw for me. I forgave EA for wrecking Mass Effect, but this is Star Wars. I hope everyone who enjoys the game continues on and has many great experiences, but for me I’m done after only three weeks..."

Yup, the game looks like a blast

Retailers are already starting to panic, nobody is buying the game:

Star Wars Battlefront 2 (PS4/XBO) will be $39.99 at Target starting this coming Sunday 12/3
https://battlefront-forums.ea.com/d...l-be-39-99-starting-this-sunday-at-target-usa
https://twitter.com/wario64/status/935964167072129024

" Michael Holiday‏ @formalcloud Nov 29
Replying to @Wario64
That's a crazy discount for a game that has been out for two weeks."

 

EA continues it's downward trend, down from 6 month high of $121.97 to $100.66 right now...
https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/?symbol=EA

 

I missed this last week. Maybe the whole industry will take note. https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/29/video-game-stocks-drop-as-wall-street-debates-industry-future.html

"Activision Blizzard, Electronic Arts and Take-Two shares all fell 6 percent, 3.6 percent and 4.1 percent, respectively, Wednesday as investor concerns mount on the issue."

 

If you look at ATVI and TTWO, they've both had a great 52 week run up in value, so it might also be EOY profit taking per usual. EA as well. PMAE - Pretty much any excuse, to take a profit

 

EA is gonna have a lot of re-coding and game re-design to fix this before release:

EA SPORTS UFC 3 - The Single Most Egregious Implementation of Microtransactions to Date
November 29, 2017
https://www.astutegaming.com/single-post/EASPORTSUFC3BETA

Spoiler: Details...

"Over the past few days EA opened the floodgates and sent out beta invitations for select players to test out the latest iteration in MMA video games, EA Sports UFC 3. Boasting a plethora of supposed improvements over earlier releases, UFC 3 primarily aims to elevate the sophistication of the animation systems in play, subsequently improving the fluidity and seamlessness of the many aspects of MMA on display. In reality, the many new animations and overhauled gameplay systems feel incredibly detrimental to the fighting experience overall and the unflinching reliability upon microtransactions may be the most absurd and disgraceful implementation in contemporary gaming,

a new low for EA, hot off the heels of the Battlefront 2 crisis."

Spoiler: Details...

Whilst EA Sports UFC 2 featured many similar microtransaction mechanics, it truly feels as though the online competition has reached a new level of inconsequence. Bear in mind that the microtransactions and all systems in effect, are part of a beta test. Despite this, it is equally significant to consider that the release date of February 2nd is looming ever closer, thus, it may be too late for drastic changes to be effectively implemented.

With this knowledge in mind, UFC 3 promotes an incredibly unhealthy online culture of expenses, wherein, the more a player invests into their account the better their performance will be in game. Certainly, an argument can be made for individual skill and barriers of entry negating newcomers from dismantling veterans of the series in online battle, these arguments go out the window however, when the game is so overtly littered with microtransactions to the extent that the very core of the experience is hindered. The fundamentals, striking, grappling and submissions, can all be significantly improved with the purchase of rare boosters, acquired solely through loot crates. These loot crates don’t just contain different techniques or abilities, they promote maneuvers that outright boost player statistics in moment to moment competition.

Every single technique, ability, fighter, and stat roll, is entirely acquired and upgraded through the loot box system. A brand-new player fresh out of the tutorials, can dump $1,000 into the game, acquire the rarest loot drops and immediately jump into online competition with a beastly custom fighter that has an exceedingly large health pool, vastly improved endurance, and substantially stronger strikes than the average player who simply pays the $60 price of admission. The higher the rarity of the item, the more significant the improvement overall. Pressing the square button to throw a punch at an opponent, quite literally the simplest and most obvious mechanic in an MMA game, perfectly exemplifies the absurdity of the microtransactions in question. A base level jab will do minimal damage to online opponents, however a fighter that purchases a loot box and acquires a five-star rarity level jab, will not only have a more efficient and powerful technique in combat, but will also be treated to a host of stat increases in all regards, making their player undeniably better in every scenario.

Furthermore, UFC 3’s Ultimate Team mode has added the ability for players to unlock real fighters and use them as part of their group online. Yet again this system Is bogged down by the implications of microtransactions as the rarer fighters have the higher base-level statistics and will outright perform better.

This is yet another example of detestable game design practices on behalf of EA.

Spoiler: Details...

Microtransactions are also the only means of acquiring perks and boosts. Perks are powerful abilities that can be equipped for a small number of fights before expiring. They can range from a low-level stamina improvement during a certain phase, whether that be striking, grappling or ground game, to a significant hit point increase during pivotal health events, wherein your opponent has damaged you enough to potentially end the fight. Boosts on the other hand are similarly temporary enhancements that offer endurance boosts and durability bonuses. It is clear to see that in combination with technique enhancements and overall stat increases, EA has taken every single aspect of genuine competition and buried it.

Onto the actual gameplay itself, shifting away from the faster pace of previous iterations, UFC 3 feels incredibly clunky and inauthentic. Distance control used to be a key element of battle, however with player movement speeds seemingly doubled it is nearly impossible to land a flurry of consecutive strikes. The blocking system has been changed for the worse as counters are no longer even a function and absorbing strikes consumes a very minor amount of health, recharging to full health in a matter of seconds. This new system severely impacts arguably the primary reason audiences want to engage with UFC 3 in the first place, to knock one another out. The knockout system in this iteration is bogged down by the health regeneration systems at play. In the heat of the moment, landing a one-punch knockout is an unobtainable accomplishment as players must be dropped to the ground numerous times before a knock out blow can be delivered now. Whilst in theory this should limit the annoyance that comes from being knocked out of a fight rather early, it also feels unauthentic and slows down the pace of fights quite drastically, leading to boring exchanges in the pocket with no real payoff.

On top of this, the input delay is humorously bad this time around, an issue that was all but resolved with UFC 2. Countless times in my few hours of playing did I attempt to strike three or four times to the head, block, then strike two or three times to the body. Whilst this would have been a relatively simple engagement in the past, it now takes an absurd amount of time for these actions to register in game. Players could input their commands, put the controller down for a few seconds whilst they check Twitter, come back to the game and their fighter will still be mid-way through the sequence.

No hyperbole, it is genuinely that bad. These concerns are only further exaggerated in online play.

Spoiler: Details...

The AI systems appear to be a downgrade from years prior as well. Not that they were anything remarkable in UFC 2, however opponents would at least attempt to play to their strengths, set up various counter-attacks and actually offer some real dilemmas. Unfortunately, the AI in UFC 3 typically stand in front of you and repeatedly engage in the same simple combinations of strikes, barely altering their timing in between sequences. Perhaps just a glitch but during my time I also noticed that it was quite literally impossible to land any form of body kick on an AI opponent. Regardless of their stamina, health, or timing, the opponent would grab my kick and throw a straight right to my dome without fail.

Another gripe arises when focusing on UFC 3’s commentary systems. Jon Anik is introduced here for the first time and for the most part, his delivery is unrivaled. Detailing a character’s backstory and recent performances as they make the walk to the octagon feels just as dynamic and genuine as when Anik is cage side for the biggest spectacles of them all. The same can not be said for Joe Rogan this time around however. In all honesty it appears as though EA thought they could get away with not recording fresh voice lines with Rogan. He rarely interjects during moment to moment combat, his delivery is incredibly robotic and the audio is of a noticeably different recording quality to that of Anik, something that is truly off-putting during a fight.

Ultimately, UFC 3 feels like an embarrassing step back for EA Sports as nearly every mechanic has been subject to alteration so that microtransactions can slide in. In lieu of recent controversy surrounding EA’s Star Wars Battlefront 2, one can only hope that the MMA gaming community rallies their efforts in a similar fashion to change UFC 3 for the better.

I was excited for the beta and considered UFC 3 to be an obvious purchase for any die-hard MMA fan. After having played for only a few hours however, I can safely say that UFC 3 is not worth the price of admission, let alone the considerable amount more that players will need to spend to be competitive online.

 

Was watching the awards stream on steam last night. That was pretty funny.

 

after 3-4 games of galatic assault I pretty much just uninstalled the game and I am not even going to bother finishing the single player campaign.

 

EA May Permanently Dump Battlefront II Microtransactions
December 8, 2017 at 10:47 am
https://www.extremetech.com/gaming/...ont-ii-microtransactions-loot-box-legislation

"EA’s entire corporate response to the Battlefront II controversy should be taught in future marketing and corporate communication classes as an example of how to never handle a problem.

The company ignored increasingly angry player feedback, poor reviews, and mathematical analysis of its own microtransaction-fueled, pay-to-win progression system.

Even to remove MTX just hours before the game launched was reportedly driven by a phone call from Disney, as opposed to EA CFO Blake Jorgensen realizing the Death Star’s shields were still up.

But now, at last, an inkling of self-awareness has penetrated the corporate mothership."

" Meanwhile, At the Hall of Justice in Hawaii
During the fracas, Hawaii state legislator Chris Lee made waves when he declared that loot crate mechanics constituted gambling and used predatory practices. In the video below, Lee lays out his ideas for limiting the proliferation of loot crate mechanics, which use exactly the same reward system (variable ratio reward) as roulette, slot machines, and the lottery.

Lee proposes that the sale of these games be limited to individuals 21 years of age or older, that qualifying titles would be games that sold a percentage chance to acquire an item rather than simply buying the item for a set amount of money, and that the rules would apply to games sold both in stores and online. (Games sold digitally don’t have to concern themselves with an ESRB rating.) Lee also proposes that game publishers be prohibited from adjusting your chance of winning a particular item invisibly without telling you about it (this is sometimes called a “pity timer,”) and wants to force game publishers to disclose what the chances of winning a given item or items from a loot crate actually are.As PCGamer , China began requiring precisely this type of disclosure earlier this year."

Next steps: What you can do to fix the gaming industry
Published on Dec 5, 2017
Chris Lee

"If you want predatory gaming practices to change, join us and spend a few minutes to take action:

1. Take 5 minutes to write to one or more of your elected officials: Governor, State Legislators, Mayor, and City Council members. Their email addresses can be found online.

2. Ask them to consider taking action to protect local families and particularly underage youth from predatory gaming practices. Tell your story in your own words or feel free to use or build on this example letter to get going: http://textuploader.com/dqn4s

3. Connect a link to a news article about this issue to add an additional perspective, and thank them for listening. That's it!

Predatory gaming companies are waiting for people to quiet down. Don’t let that happen. Speak out and help us change the gaming industry for the better."

Star Wars Battlefront 2 - Loot Crate Update! Microtransactions NOT Coming Back?

 

You do realize it's a stinking game. It's a game nothing more nothing less