Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Kanluwen wrote:
This is exceedingly wrong. You CANNOT speed up progression in any meaningful way with lootboxes. Someone who buys a bunch of lootboxes might get some good character cards, but they won't be able to upgrade them further without the actual player level and scrap to do so.

No its not. Characters are gated behind big in-game currency costs....someone thing like 30,000 credits for Luke Skywalker IIRC (at least before EA started changing things in response to feedback). You can grind for credits to unlock Skywalker...or you can gamble on Lootboxes and hope to get a Skywalker card.

That IS speeding up progression, you're paying money to unlock Characters and not have to grind for Credits.

I will agree with Shadow Captain on this(aside from the "tacked on" part). The Arcade mode is mostly there for you to be able to practice for playing Online and to set it up so that by the time you've gotten all 3 stars in all of the Arcade missions, you're going to have enough credits to have unlocked at least 4 other Heroes(aside from Iden Verso, who the game basically gives you as a reward for completing the campaign) for MP.

I think a pig just flew past my window.

By "tacked on", I mean that the Arcade and SP Campaign are not the core focus of the game. The game is still

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
This is exceedingly wrong. You CANNOT speed up progression in any meaningful way with lootboxes. Someone who buys a bunch of lootboxes might get some good character cards, but they won't be able to upgrade them further without the actual player level and scrap to do so.

No its not. Characters are gated behind big in-game currency costs....someone thing like 30,000 credits for Luke Skywalker IIRC (at least before EA started changing things in response to feedback). You can grind for credits to unlock Skywalker...

Just so we're clear:
Characters cap out at 15k credits now. 15k is for Luke and Vader.
10k credits can get you Chewbacca, Leia, or Emperor Palpatine.
5k credits gets you Iden(and the lootbox you get for completing the campaign gives you 2x Rare quality cards for Iden and 5k credits to unlock her).

Han, Maul, Boba Fett, Bossk, Yoda, Lando are for sure unlocked from the start. I don't know if Rey and Kylo Ren are unlocked from the start since the preorder bonus got you cards and an alternate skin for them so I can't say for sure.

You get 1k credits each time you level up your player rank.
Payout for challenges tends to be around 100 credits, with the last "tier" of challenges granting 1k credits or a lootbox for a specific skill.
Every day you get a Daily Login crate that grants you credits, scrap, and a random card.
Multiplayer matches tend to payout around 175 to 300 credits for mid-level play on the Galactic Battlegrounds playlist(longer matches) while Starfighter Assault can be around 500 since you get more kills/objective play points.

or you can gamble on Lootboxes and hope to get a Skywalker card.

That IS speeding up progression, you're paying money to unlock Characters and not have to grind for Credits.

You cannot unlock characters via lootboxes as far as I have seen.
You can unlock character cards for the locked characters, but you still need to unlock them with credits.
Even the lootboxes you get during the campaign related to locked characters(Luke and Leia specifically) did nothing but give upgrades for them while not unlocking them.

You can get credits via lootboxes however and duplicate cards grant you credits so maybe that is where this idea of characters unlocking via lootboxes is coming from.

Well, thanx for the quick responses. It's a lot to think about for my situation.
My kids get a meager weekly allowance to buy games as my wife and I do not buy them games at all to encourage good spending habits from them.
Loot boxes might corrupt that goal. If they really want the game, it will come with the condition that they cannot buy Loot boxes with real currency.
If that makes the "grind" hard for them, so be it. It could be a good lesson on patience and hard work.

-

 Galef wrote:
Well, thanx for the quick responses. It's a lot to think about for my situation.
My kids get a meager weekly allowance to buy games as my wife and I do not buy them games at all to encourage good spending habits from them.
Loot boxes might corrupt that goal. If they really want the game, it will come with the condition that they cannot buy Loot boxes with real currency.
If that makes the "grind" hard for them, so be it. It could be a good lesson on patience and hard work.

-

Truthfully, despite all the complaining about lootboxes...they don't do jack for you. They really don't. It, IMO, really is another case of people throwing a fit over something EA has in one of their games that won't affect your game.

You gain enough credits over the course of a few games to buy them using credits rather than real money.
The Arcade mode has all of the Heroes unlocked without you having to do anything since it's the Arcade mode. That kills the 'need' for people to buy them to complete challenges and the like via Arcade...which get you credits that can be used to unlock them for MP.

Okay so I just tallied it up. Completing all of the challenges that award Credits? Across Campaign, Arcade, and MP will grant you 30,400 Credits.

The MP side only includes the challenges that can be completed using Heroes that are unlocked from the get-go. There is another 1250 credits at least in the form of challenges for Luke, Leia, Palpatine, and Chewbacca that award Credits.
There are also Challenges for MP and Arcade that award Crystals(which is the Premium Currency and can only, currently, be used to buy Loot Boxes) instead

 Galef wrote:
Well, thanx for the quick responses. It's a lot to think about for my situation.
My kids get a meager weekly allowance to buy games as my wife and I do not buy them games at all to encourage good spending habits from them.
Loot boxes might corrupt that goal. If they really want the game, it will come with the condition that they cannot buy Loot boxes with real currency.
If that makes the "grind" hard for them, so be it. It could be a good lesson on patience and hard work.

-

If you want to get single player experiences, I recommend some of the older Star Wars games. The original LucasArts Battlefront, and the two Knights of the Old Republic are fantastic single player experiences that hold up well to this day except in graphics and are still some of the best ever Star Wars games. Plus they're cheap and not demanding on system specs.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Galef wrote:
Well, thanx for the quick responses. It's a lot to think about for my situation.
My kids get a meager weekly allowance to buy games as my wife and I do not buy them games at all to encourage good spending habits from them.
Loot boxes might corrupt that goal. If they really want the game, it will come with the condition that they cannot buy Loot boxes with real currency.
If that makes the "grind" hard for them, so be it. It could be a good lesson on patience and hard work.

-

If you want to get single player experiences, I recommend some of the older Star Wars games. The original LucasArts Battlefront, and the two Knights of the Old Republic are fantastic single player experiences that hold up well to this day except in graphics and are still some of the best ever Star Wars games. Plus they're cheap and not demanding on system specs.

Also, depending on how far back you want to do, the Dark Forces series.

 LordofHats wrote:

 Azazelx wrote:


Interestingly, these "no price rise" arguments always conveniently manage to ignore the ascent of digital distribution, which is much, much cheaper for game companies to make use of then the traditional "game-in-a-box" retail model.

Digital distribution is really only a major thing on PC, where actually getting a game on disc is something I haven't done in like... 8 years? Everything on PC is digital now. Consoles in comparison have been much slower to adapt and even today most people who play console games still buy games on disc. There's a reason PC developed games are often $10 or so cheaper than their console equivalents, but with so many games coming from the same companies I don't think it's odd that those companies keep their pricing consistent across platform.

I think that that's changing but I'm not sure the cost savings there cancel out the costs of development. I don't know if there's any numbers out there that parse this out though.

Uh... no.

Digital sales on console have been WAY up since last year.

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2015-06-10-digital-only-games-account-for-66-percent-of-console-releases-eedar
https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2017/11/for-console-games-downloads-are-approaching-a-tipping-point/
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2017-05-10-ea-reckons-40-percent-of-console-game-sales-will-be-downloads-by-the-end-of-2017

We're also not talking about cancelling the costs of development, though either Skill Up or Jim Sterling found some numbers around that which was very interesting, but physical production and distribution costs are literally slashed, despite the digital infrastructure needed for digital.

This is an interesting, calm and sober look at loot boxes by Skill Up:
https://youtu.be/PTLFNlu2N_M




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Galef wrote:
Well, thanx for the quick responses. It's a lot to think about for my situation.
My kids get a meager weekly allowance to buy games as my wife and I do not buy them games at all to encourage good spending habits from them.
Loot boxes might corrupt that goal. If they really want the game, it will come with the condition that they cannot buy Loot boxes with real currency.
If that makes the "grind" hard for them, so be it. It could be a good lesson on patience and hard work.

-

I'm not going to get into a pissing contest with Kan, but unless your kids MUST have the Star Wars BF game, there are lots and lots of other very good quality games they could purchase. If you were to let the forum know what they're interested in (and their age range) then I'm sure you could get a lot of useful suggestions.

 Azazelx wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:

 Azazelx wrote:


Interestingly, these "no price rise" arguments always conveniently manage to ignore the ascent of digital distribution, which is much, much cheaper for game companies to make use of then the traditional "game-in-a-box" retail model.

Digital distribution is really only a major thing on PC, where actually getting a game on disc is something I haven't done in like... 8 years? Everything on PC is digital now. Consoles in comparison have been much slower to adapt and even today most people who play console games still buy games on disc. There's a reason PC developed games are often $10 or so cheaper than their console equivalents, but with so many games coming from the same companies I don't think it's odd that those companies keep their pricing consistent across platform.

I think that that's changing but I'm not sure the cost savings there cancel out the costs of development. I don't know if there's any numbers out there that parse this out though.

Uh... no.

Digital sales on console have been WAY up since last year.

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2015-06-10-digital-only-games-account-for-66-percent-of-console-releases-eedar
https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2017/11/for-console-games-downloads-are-approaching-a-tipping-point/
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2017-05-10-ea-reckons-40-percent-of-console-game-sales-will-be-downloads-by-the-end-of-2017

It's interesting to note that it is something that Xbox was really trying to push towards during the initial development of the One.

 Galef wrote:
Well, thanx for the quick responses. It's a lot to think about for my situation.
My kids get a meager weekly allowance to buy games as my wife and I do not buy them games at all to encourage good spending habits from them.
Loot boxes might corrupt that goal. If they really want the game, it will come with the condition that they cannot buy Loot boxes with real currency.
If that makes the "grind" hard for them, so be it. It could be a good lesson on patience and hard work.

-

I'm not going to get into a pissing contest with Kan, but unless your kids MUST have the Star Wars BF game, there are lots and lots of other very good quality games they could purchase. If you were to let the forum know what they're interested in (and their age range) then I'm sure you could get a lot of useful suggestions.

I don't think it has to be a pissing contest, Azazel. I will wholeheartedly admit that I am being extremely argumentative on this topic--but it's something I feel that has had a lot of misinformation(whether maliciously or ignorantly) getting spread around with regards to this game specifically because of one aspect of it.

It's not a bad game. I don't know if I'd suggest it to someone who wasn't interested in it for a reason other than "It's Star Wars!". I'd probably suggest Titanfall 2 over this one to someone just looking for a scifi shooter and wanting something that isn't PC independent developer fodder.

*comes into thread to see who's the one defending EA*

Kan's defending the loot boxes huh?

Ok then...

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
*comes into thread to see who's the one defending EA*

Kan's defending the loot boxes huh?

Ok then...

Oh stop with the blind hate already.
Since when is giving facts and correct data "defending lootboxes"?

Lets all just quote some crap a random guy posted on reddit (of all places) instead of what actually is or else we're EA and lootboxes white knights and apologists.

 Macok wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
*comes into thread to see who's the one defending EA*

Kan's defending the loot boxes huh?

Ok then...

Oh stop with the blind hate already.
Since when is giving facts and correct data "defending lootboxes"?

Lets all just quote some crap a random guy posted on reddit (of all places) instead of what actually is or else we're EA and lootboxes white knights and apologists.

He IS defending lootboxes. His argument is that they aren't as bad as we think they are and that the game works perfectly fine without them.

After removing loot boxes they boosted exp because the game was not rewarding enough. Proof lootboxes are paid to win?

OgreChubbs wrote:
After removing loot boxes they boosted exp because the game was not rewarding enough. Proof lootboxes are paid to win?

They boosted the credit rewards from matches, not XP.

The update notes are here:

The end-of-round payout has been increased. This is an area we agree needed to be buffed a bit, especially when it comes to rewarding players for doing well in-game. We're upping the number of Credits you get for a match across the board, and specifically bumping the top players on each team by even more.

Earn 3X more Credits daily in Arcade Mode. It's been made clear that you were hitting the Arcade Mode Credit cap faster than we expected, so we wanted to alleviate that by increasing it to 1500 Credits. While we're still looking into ways to add more content into it the mode in the long-term, we think that this should help in the near-term for those who want rewards for completing the different scenarios.

Daily Login Crates will now provide more crafting parts than before. You'll notice the change right away when you log in. Crafting the Star Cards you want will help make sure you're progressing in the direction you want, and we absolutely want to empower that. This should help you get where you want to go faster when it comes to crafting and upgrading.

They did nothing to XP. Progressing various characters in BF2 involves having cards for those specific characters.

OgreChubbs wrote:
After removing loot boxes they boosted exp because the game was not rewarding enough. Proof lootboxes are paid to win?

Removing Lootboxes exposed what a tedious grind the player progression was.


IMO, paid Lootboxes have NO place in a game that is marketed at Children. Battlefront is STAR WARS, and therefore heavily marketed towards Children. We restrict Children's access to violent, sexual and bad language content, and we should do the same for Gambling. And not just Children, Lootboxes are also exploitative of addictive personalities, they employ the same psychological tricks and mechanisms that actual Gambling uses to exploit vulnerable adults.

Lootboxes done right is Overwatch or Battlefield 1, which are Cosmetic only. I still don't like that parts of the game (Cosmetic skins) are being locked behind a paywall, but I can tolerate that because its easier to ignore. I don't care about decorating my character.

(Battlefield 1 does have Legendary Melee Weapons in Lootboxes, but Melee weapons don't really have a huge influence on the game so they don't bother me as much).

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Macok wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
*comes into thread to see who's the one defending EA*

Kan's defending the loot boxes huh?

Ok then...

Oh stop with the blind hate already.
Since when is giving facts and correct data "defending lootboxes"?

Lets all just quote some crap a random guy posted on reddit (of all places) instead of what actually is or else we're EA and lootboxes white knights and apologists.

He IS defending lootboxes. His argument is that they aren't as bad as we think they are and that the game works perfectly fine without them.

My argument is that you don't know what in the world you're talking about and have done nothing but parrot garbage arguments from the internet, usually from people who don't have the first clue as to how the game actually worked/works.

I've bought 0 lootboxes using real money purchases, everything I've gotten has been using in-game currency or awarded from Challenge completions and Daily Logins.
I've got the Specialist sitting at rank 23, Heavy at rank 25, Trooper at 12, Officer at 8, heroes sitting around 3-5 for most of the ones I've unlocked, and Bomber is sitting at 15 (my preferred fighter for Starfighter Assault) and just hit player level 22...

And yet I've never felt outclassed by anyone I've come up against. The closest I have come to that feeling is when playing Rebels versus Imperials and someone pulls out Vader or Maul since the Rebel heroes trend towards being support heroes rather than killy heroes.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

OgreChubbs wrote:
After removing loot boxes they boosted exp because the game was not rewarding enough. Proof lootboxes are paid to win?

Removing Lootboxes exposed what a tedious grind the player progression was.


IMO, paid Lootboxes have NO place in a game that is marketed at Children. Battlefront is STAR WARS, and therefore heavily marketed towards Children. We restrict Children's access to violent, sexual and bad language content, and we should do the same for Gambling. And not just Children, Lootboxes are also exploitative of addictive personalities, they employ the same psychological tricks and mechanisms that actual Gambling uses to exploit vulnerable adults.

By this logic, anything that is a "blind buy"(whether it be the Lego/Playmobil minifigures that come in a baggy, trading cards, etc) should be restricted as well.

Lootboxes done right is Overwatch or Battlefield 1, which are Cosmetic only. I still don't like that parts of the game (Cosmetic skins) are being locked behind a paywall, but I can tolerate that because its easier to ignore. I don't care about decorating my character.

(Battlefield 1 does have Legendary Melee Weapons in Lootboxes, but Melee weapons don't really have a huge influence on the game so they don't bother me as much).

"locked behind a paywall" != "lootboxes".

You understand this, right?
Locking content behind a paywall means you have to pay for the content in order to get it.
Also worth mentioning that Overwatch absolutely does the same garbage despite having cosmetic skins. They do it with their event skins, which have a limited availability during the event and they keep them in the "standard" loot pool. They make it very clear that you have X amount of time to get the event skins and then they get locked away until the event happens next year.

They basically took Warframe's idea of "Vaulting" items and ran with it.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Azazelx wrote:


Uh... no.

Digital sales on console have been WAY up since last year.

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2015-06-10-digital-only-games-account-for-66-percent-of-console-releases-eedar
https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2017/11/for-console-games-downloads-are-approaching-a-tipping-point/
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2017-05-10-ea-reckons-40-percent-of-console-game-sales-will-be-downloads-by-the-end-of-2017

It's interesting to note that it is something that Xbox was really trying to push towards during the initial development of the One.

The backlash against the XBone was much more to do with the "always-on DRM", locking discs to machines, an expensive kinect that the machine couldn't function without right until it absolutely could, and of course, sports, sports, sports, television, television, call of duty, television, sports, television. And that dill weed, Adam Orth. Less horsepower than the PS4 didn't help it on top of all that.

But the shift towards DD needed to be a gradual one that is consumer-driven rather than company-driven. gakky little 500gb HDDs certainly doesn't help, so having an external 4TB is pretty much a mandatory purchase for either machine.

I'm not going to get into a pissing contest with Kan, but unless your kids MUST have the Star Wars BF game, there are lots and lots of other very good quality games they could purchase. If you were to let the forum know what they're interested in (and their age range) then I'm sure you could get a lot of useful suggestions.

I don't think it has to be a pissing contest, Azazel. I will wholeheartedly admit that I am being extremely argumentative on this topic--but it's something I feel that has had a lot of misinformation(whether maliciously or ignorantly) getting spread around with regards to this game specifically because of one aspect of it.

It's not a bad game. I don't know if I'd suggest it to someone who wasn't interested in it for a reason other than "It's Star Wars!". I'd probably suggest Titanfall 2 over this one to someone just looking for a scifi shooter and wanting something that isn't PC independent developer fodder.

As a heads up, "The Last Jedi" season starts on Wednesday.

Finn and Phasma will be unlocked for 0 credits if you sign in during the duration of "The Last Jedi" season.

I'd like to provide a casual player's perspective.

So, I have two young children. Too young to play games. I have little free time, so I never get to play online games long enough to get good at them, and to be honest my reflexes are not with it these days. I bought BF2 because it was half off, and because I'd just seen Last Jedi and had an urge for more new Star Warsy stuff in my life. I was not aware of the loot box controversy, or the "pride" in your accomplishment statements, or the general EA vrs Everyone that was going on.

Free of all of that, I booted the game up.

And... it is really, just intensely mediocre.

The graphics are splendid; I almost couldn't ask for better. But, the graphics in the last Battlefront were pretty spectacular. I can't see much of a difference, in fact.

The single player campaign is pretty much what I bought the game for, and it's fine. I'm enjoying it. It's like a Call of Duty single player campaign, I would say. I like seeing ships from X-wing miniatures in action. It's almost like getting a little Rogue One style side movie.

The arcade mode... is really limited. Load one of a handful of maps, kill a number of enemies, repeat. There's very little to enjoy here, other than the pretty environment. Even playing a light saber wielding special character falls apart for me when it takes multiple direct hits to kill a minion; it makes the saber feel like a wiffle bat. Is there a way to play with aircraft, or AT-ST type vehicles in this mode? If so, it's not readily apparent.

Multiplayer is fine... I'm not very good at it, but I'm the kind of person who can only barely be bothered with those dang star cards or crafting or whatever frippery they want me to do. Once I'm actually in a level, I honestly can't tell it apart from Battlefront 1. Did anything change? The only difference a casual player can see is that the ability to customize your character is gone. So, a downgrade. The worst, for me, is that we're still fighting over the Kamino clone farm or the streets of Theed with battle droids. It's like the prequels will never go away, and I don't see a way to pick an era or level.

So... I'm glad I like that single player experience, because that's all it has going for it. It's super pretty. But, load times are long on the Xbox One. Rest assured, I feel no temptation to pay EA for crates; I barely get what the contents of them are supposed to do for me. Crafting components? Neat.

I would recommend this game only on a steep sale, to enjoy the single player game. Multiplayer lacks features and concepts you would expect of games from twenty years ago, and is indiscernible from the previous game to me. Oh, and you better like the Clone Wars and Star Killer base, because you're going to see a lot of both.

Figured it was worth waking this thread up as there is a good bit of news about future updates swirling around...

There will be a few season that are “more or less locked” – mainly related to when something big happens in the movie world of Star Wars. But from then on out it will be mainly community requested stuff.
Career and progression is the first major thing they are looking to fix
All multiplayer planets added to Arcade for the next patch and whenever a new planet is added to the game, you will be able to play it in all core modes (including Arcade).
Next patch will include another balance patch on the Supercharged Sentry because of a overnerf
Era Select screen (starting with Galactic Assault as a test) in the near future.
They’re looking at expanding the graphics options.
Spectator mode later, but not a priority
Option for a non-holographic look for the menu
Seasons will vary quite drastically in content – some will large content drops with planets and heroes, while others might be more focused on overhauls and new game modes.
Some maps from Battlefront 2015 will make their return in the upcoming patches.
FOV slider on consoles
Fixing the delay between lightsaber impact and actual damage registration soontm
More flying maps, not all in space
Private Matches in the future
More campaign content not planned right now
Emote fix (Some emotes for heroes weren’t activating properly)
Arcade won’t get a direct port of GA (because of AI issues) but another big mode that will allow you to play big battles offline
Customization coming
Sometimes 0 heroes in a season, sometimes more than 2
An improved “play with friends” system that’s not unlike a Squad System. No ETA just yet.
Online co-op like in bf 2015 is planned but no ETA
Expanding the roster of announcers.
Lightsabers will get an update to make them look more like Battlefront 2015 (via a twitter reply from Dennis)
Jetpack cargo will be added in the next patch
Droidekas teased by Dennis on twitter but not confirmed in any official way
A client-side patch is going through QA right now (Quality assurance)

https://wccftech.com/star-wars-battlefront-2-get-new-offline-mode-fov-slider-console-additional-graphics-options-new-flying-maps/

I have also seen some stuff about some Clone Wars content (hopefully Rex!) which would be pretty cool. Apart from that I look forward to a larger range of offline maps as while I am really enjoying the multiplayer, it is nice to feel like a super powered hero once in a while and cruise through the enemy ranks!


Microtransactions are also returning soon but I doubt they will be as aggressive as before and if it means we get free DLC I am fully on board with it. Some people get to spend $200 on some skins or new powerups and I don't have to spend $70 on a season pass, works for me.

 Commander Cain wrote:

Microtransactions are also returning soon but I doubt they will be as aggressive as before and if it means we get free DLC I am fully on board with it. Some people get to spend $200 on some skins or new powerups and I don't have to spend $70 on a season pass, works for me.

As of right now, we're right about where it is that DICE usually releases "shortcut" kits for their Battlefield games. They're like $9 DLCs that let players unlock a bunch of stuff for a specific class/vehicle so they don't feel overwhelmed in MP--it also usually coincides with a drop in the game's price or a 'repackaging' of the game to include a code for the shortcut kits.

Let players buy MTX bundles of skins where the contents are fixed and clearly advertised; and Class Kit Shortcuts like in Battlefield so new players late to the game can catch up. I happily tolerate MTX where the contents are fixed and advertised, I don't feel like I'm being cheated when I know what I'm getting.

Do NOT push gambling mechanics into video games, its anti consumer.
Do NOT let players buy in-game competitive advantage, whether in Lootboxes or direct MTX. Thats just Pay-to-Win. The game should be Free-to-Play if the Developer wants to go down that route.

And if EA insists on continuing pushing Lootbox gambling in their games, then I think its long past time that it be regulated and marked clearly on the box so customers, parents etc are fully informed. Games carry warnings for foul language, violence, sex, they should carry warnings for Gambling too.

Either the gaming industry does this voluntarily (the PEGI board) or Governments will step in and intervene directly before long, which is never good for the industry.

And, if rumors are to be believed, this may be EA's last hurrah with a Star Wars license. According to rumor, Disney is asking around to other AAA developers to see who else might want the Star Wars IP.

 curran12 wrote:
And, if rumors are to be believed, this may be EA's last hurrah with a Star Wars license. According to rumor, Disney is asking around to other AAA developers to see who else might want the Star Wars IP.

Yeah, I wouldn't believe that.

Respawn Entertainment(owned by EA) is working on a Star Wars game, saying they're aiming for 2019 for a launch.

If anything, I'd believe they might lose exclusivity on the license. Which would be fantastic.

 -Loki- wrote:
If anything, I'd believe they might lose exclusivity on the license. Which would be fantastic.

Yeah, let's get Actiblizzard releasing Call of Star Wars every year!

With that snark out of the way, I think there was something about EA's deal being limited to certain eras/films? It apparently impacted the first EA Battlefront pretty heavily.

Total War: Star Wars would be pretty tempting.

 curran12 wrote:
And, if rumors are to be believed, this may be EA's last hurrah with a Star Wars license. According to rumor, Disney is asking around to other AAA developers to see who else might want the Star Wars IP.

There's honestly nowhere to go but up. EA's efforts thus far, regardless of whether you like them or not, are so mundane. A whole universe to play with and in three years they've produced nothing but two Battlefront games, both heavily criticized for various things and dead within a year. It's not really a stellar track record or taking full use of the license.

 Riquende wrote:
Total War: Star Wars would be pretty tempting.

I don't think Total War's model works for Star Wars. Warfare is just not rigid and formational enough past the 19th century.

Could totally get Empire at War II tho.

What we really need is another Masters of Teräs Käsi or Demolition.