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.
Right, let's acknowledge the "not gambling" gambling of it all, shall we? That is somehow unregulated and is shockingly predatory.
So when do we go after MMOs for not dropping loot every time, 100% of the time from bosses?
Oh that's a nice false equivalency. Luckily, Dreadwinter already pointed out the dishonest flaw in this.
Except there's not a "dishonest flaw" in the comparison I made.
People DID pay to get carried in high end raids just for the chance to get high end loot.
People DID buy accounts with high end gear on them.
If you want to talk about a false equivalency or dishonest flaws, it's you pretending that RNG in one case(MMO boss drops) is not the same as RNG in another case(lootbox drops) or forgetting that there was in fact a market for legitimately sold or stolen/hacked accounts with high end gear.
You mean the market that was completely against almost every ToS agreements and would get the accounts in question banned if you ever got caught? Farcical. That's like arguing the fact you can buy wargames products secondhand, and wargame products include RNG mechanics, means there's basically no difference between buying wargames and playing slot machines so gambling shouldn't be regulated.
Or hey, let's not forget Diablo's real money auctionhouse eh?
You mean the one that also had a pretty big backlash and got taken away in the end? Regardless, also not the same thing, since you knew what you were buying when you paid money.
As for the "you might end up on the other team" or "you have to earn enough points ingame to unlock the Hero anyway" lines - first off, the idea that someone willing to fork over 200 quid for an ingame advantage isn't the type of massive whale that will be buying if not all the heroes then at least several of them is a joke, those people are literally who this business model is built around. And secondly, you do have to earn reinforcement points in the game to get the Hero - something you can achieve with the same level of skill as a baby rolling their face across the keyboard, the game practically showers you with them unless you're so bad you spend half the match running into a wall and shooting the floor - but once you've done so you gain a HUGE advantage over non-heroes and for a good long while after release the vast majority of people competing to be the ones to unlock the hero in any given match will be people who bought the unlocks. If you can't grasp why normal, rational, sane folk who're not up for spending a thousand quid to unlock a reasonable selection of heroes(and of course make them even worse to play against by buying tons of gambleboxes to get the best upgrade cards for them) might take issue with that, I dunno what to tell you.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/11/14 22:57:22
"Your society's broken, so who should we blame? Should we blame the rich, powerful people who caused it? No, lets blame the people with no power and no money and those immigrants who don't even have the vote. Yea, it must be their fething fault." - Iain M Banks
-----
"The language of modern British politics is meant to sound benign. But words do not mean what they seem to mean. 'Reform' actually means 'cut' or 'end'. 'Flexibility' really means 'exploit'. 'Prudence' really means 'don't invest'. And 'efficient'? That means whatever you want it to mean, usually 'cut'. All really mean 'keep wages low for the masses, taxes low for the rich, profits high for the corporations, and accept the decline in public services and amenities this will cause'." - Robin McAlpine from Common Weal
As for the "you might end up on the other team" or "you have to earn enough points ingame to unlock the Hero anyway" lines - first off, the idea that someone willing to fork over 200 quid for an ingame advantage isn't the type of massive whale that will be buying if not all the heroes then at least several of them is a joke, those people are literally who this business model is built around. And secondly, you do have to earn reinforcement points in the game to get the Hero - something you can achieve with the same level of skill as a baby rolling their face across the keyboard, the game practically showers you with them unless you're so bad you spend half the match running into a wall and shooting the floor - but once you've done so you gain a HUGE advantage over non-heroes and for a good long while after release the vast majority of people competing to be the ones to unlock the hero in any given match will be people who bought the unlocks. If you can't grasp why normal, rational, sane folk who're not up for spending a thousand quid to unlock a reasonable selection of heroes(and of course make them even worse to play against by buying tons of gambleboxes to get the best upgrade cards for them) might take issue with that, I dunno what to tell you.
Well even if you "roll your face over the key board" and gain the Hero that's still no guarantee that you'll instantly win with said hero. They are good but not unbeatable and the heroes do require some skill to use. Further more, Vader and Luke aren't inherently better than any of the alread unlocked characters, so all you're doing is paying to unlock a character you want earlier. Much like many MOBAs give you the option to do. Then there is also the fact that you cant just get the best upgrades out of the gamble boxes, they've even come out and said so much after the huge backlash over said gamble boxes.
You do not have to spend any further money on the game once you have purchased it if you chose not to, and you really wont be at a great disadvantage despite what you might think.
They also lowered the rewards from the campaign at the same time. The intention is the campaign gives you enough to unlock Iden.
I haven't been able to find out whether credit rewards for MP, Arcade, or Challenges were cut as well--at least not with any degree of certainty.
Speaking for myself, I really don't understand why it's such a big deal that you need to have all of the Heroes unlocked right away. It'd be one thing if they were behind a paywall...but things being locked behind in-game currency doesn't really deserve this kind of nonsensical garbage.
If it was just a "play x long and it will unlock" it wouldn't be an issue. The fact is that someone, in the first instant, can go and drop $200, and get access to it, and then proceed to walk all over everyone who can't do something like that, that's where the whole pay to win thing comes into play.
Yeah, that's wrong. I'm already giving EA my money, but they're telling me my money is not as good as other peoples money.
Except spending the $200 to be able to have access to Vader and Luke isn't gonna equate to the player being able to walk all over other players. Just cause you have the option to play as them doesn't mean you will be able to. You still need to get the points in the match to be able to use them.
You must be playing a different franchise. Battlefront is a game where a single good player can walk right over everyone else, but heroes are purposefully game breaking in how powerful they are. Even mediocre players can walk over people with them. Unfortunately the mediocre rarely get the chance and it's just a matter of an already stomp inducing player being given a hand that lets them stomp even harder.
It probably wouldn't be an issue if unlocking the characters without paying didn't take so much time (something that is made worse by the very face that you get more credits for doing better in matches, which is hard to do when those already super good players are rolling heroes and crushing you). Frankly the entire design of Battlefront since EA took over. It wasn't exactly great for multiplayer under Pandemic to be fair but Pandemic kept it just balanced enough to be fun, a concept that EA seems to have thrown out the window and replaced with a game design that is blatantly tailored to push people to just buy lootboxes.
Now don't get me wrong. Players bitch and moan about these things left and right, sometimes with absolutely no sense whatsoever. I remember when Destiny 2 came out for consoles and everyone was whining about Bright Engrams. Now I'm playing it and I don't understand it at all. There's nothing in Bright Engrams that makes playing the game easier. There is an item that can be bought for Bright currency (which comes from Bright Engrams), but I've got over 100 of the damn things without paying a dime so at the end of the day I walk away utterly baffled what all the fuss was about. But this is very different. This is closer to what Star Trek: Online has become, with the most powerful ships and equippables hidden inside gamble boxes and sure you can technically get them for free, but the time and effort it takes to do so is so long that you're more likely to give up playing the game before you get there out of sheer frustration and boredom.
They also lowered the rewards from the campaign at the same time. The intention is the campaign gives you enough to unlock Iden.
I haven't been able to find out whether credit rewards for MP, Arcade, or Challenges were cut as well--at least not with any degree of certainty.
Speaking for myself, I really don't understand why it's such a big deal that you need to have all of the Heroes unlocked right away. It'd be one thing if they were behind a paywall...but things being locked behind in-game currency doesn't really deserve this kind of nonsensical garbage.
If it was just a "play x long and it will unlock" it wouldn't be an issue. The fact is that someone, in the first instant, can go and drop $200, and get access to it, and then proceed to walk all over everyone who can't do something like that, that's where the whole pay to win thing comes into play.
Yeah, that's wrong. I'm already giving EA my money, but they're telling me my money is not as good as other peoples money.
Except spending the $200 to be able to have access to Vader and Luke isn't gonna equate to the player being able to walk all over other players. Just cause you have the option to play as them doesn't mean you will be able to. You still need to get the points in the match to be able to use them.
You must be playing a different franchise. Battlefront is a game where a single good player can walk right over everyone else, but heroes are purposefully game breaking in how powerful they are. Even mediocre players can walk over people with them. Unfortunately the mediocre rarely get the chance and it's just a matter of an already stomp inducing player being given a hand that lets them stomp even harder.
Except heroes seem to go down easier in this game, maybe its just me though. But my point, stated in the post I made after that one, is that the characters you have to unlock from playing the game aren't inherently better than those that come pre-unlocked in the game.
It probably wouldn't be an issue if unlocking the characters without paying didn't take so much time (something that is made worse by the very face that you get more credits for doing better in matches, which is hard to do when those already super good players are rolling heroes and crushing you). Frankly the entire design of Battlefront since EA took over. It wasn't exactly great for multiplayer under Pandemic to be fair but Pandemic kept it just balanced enough to be fun, a concept that EA seems to have thrown out the window and replaced with a game design that is blatantly tailored to push people to just buy lootboxes.
You also get credits from opening the loot boxes, and you get loot boxes from doing specific in game activities, there are plenty of opportunities for even bad players to get loot boxes with out having to spend money on the game. You also dont seem to need to have everything maxed out in the form of your cards to be able to manage.
Now don't get me wrong. Players bitch and moan about these things left and right, sometimes with absolutely no sense whatsoever. I remember when Destiny 2 came out for consoles and everyone was whining about Bright Engrams. Now I'm playing it and I don't understand it at all. There's nothing in Bright Engrams that makes playing the game easier. There is an item that can be bought for Bright currency (which comes from Bright Engrams), but I've got over 100 of the damn things without paying a dime so at the end of the day I walk away utterly baffled what all the fuss was about. But this is very different. This is closer to what Star Trek: Online has become, with the most powerful ships and equippables hidden inside gamble boxes and sure you can technically get them for free, but the time and effort it takes to do so is so long that you're more likely to give up playing the game before you get there out of sheer frustration and boredom.
Some people might give up, some might not, like I said, the upgrades arent the be all end all. Do they make your abilities better? Absolutely. Do you need them to be good? No.
No that out of the way, having beaten the short campaign. I have this to say about it;
Spoiler:
While I did have fun, it was absolutely not what I was led to belive it was supposed to be. Maybe I misinterpreted things, its possible I mean everyone has the capacity to see or hear what they want to hear. But when a game is said to be telling things from the perspective of the Imperial side of things, I expect it to actually be about the Imperial Side of things. What I don't want is to play as an Imperial for about 3 missions (before playing as Luke for 1 mission), before Operation Cinder's most nonsensical development, of destroying a completely loyal world to send the message of "BE LOYAL OR ELSE!" Which then leads our main character, Iden Versio and squadmate Del Meeko to betray the Empire and their other squad mate Gideon Hask. The two that become traitors then seem to spontaneously develop a hatred of Hask because he doesnt abandon everything they have ever known. Also particularly silly considering that Hask and Versio have been close since childhood and that Meeko and Hask had to become as close as brothers for an undercover Op (covered in the not very good Inferno Squad book). Sure I had fun with the game, and I liked seeing old Characters come back (Lando was pretty good) and new characters, such as Rebel Inferno Squad's Duros teammate, Hask and occasionally Iden and Del were good. But damn it, I wanted my Imperial PoV. I did after reading Inferno Squad predict that Iden and Del would go Rebel, I just figured it would be at the end of the game, not pretty much at the start. Well at least Hask survives and joins the First Order, rather than dying for being the loyal one, like I thought he would.
I feared that would be the case about the Campaign. Given that confirmation, the likelihood of me spending more than about £20 or so on the game is non-existent at this point. Having played a few hours of the full game on the EA Access trial, I am convinced that despite this version being a technical improvement in almost all areas, I actually had far more fun with Battlefront 2015. I really couldn't give a damn about the lootbox thing, that's not something that ever bothers me, but there are a few major things holding BF2 back, I think. Spoilered as it's a bit of a rant!
Spoiler:
- The fact that every game mode aside from Heroes (which I never had any interest in, even on the last game) and Blast (team deathmatch) are set Attacker/Defender asymmetric missions I just find really boring. Compare it to Battlefield's flagship mode, Conquest, where it's just a standard 'capture and hold' affair; in Battlefield, there's an organic cut and thrust as one team gains dominance on one area of the map while the other boxes up around their last couple of objectives somewhere else, or a daring squad can push behind enemy lines, capture their 'home' objective and turn the whole layout on it's head...
Whereas in Battlefront 2, the objectives basically consist of some combination of 'funnel everyone towards 2 or 3 killboxes', 'blow up this series of things' and 'follow this big thing and make sure it doesn't explode'... It's all so engineered and thus doesn't feel like what you're doing has any impact on how the battle goes. I wouldn't mind if each map had a mode like that as a more narrative option,alongside more traditional CTF or Conquest style modes, but the fact that the main (and at this point only) 40 player maps all adhere to this dynamic just makes them dull. Once you've played Theed or Endor or Space Over Ryloth once, you've played it a dozen times, the next battle you play there is going to be exactly the same with the only variety being at what point the attacking team is stalled. There's no back-and-forth, no scope for tactical thinking, it's just a case of rushing the nearest objective with as many bodies as you can throw at it and hoping for the best.
- The fact that you can have all the Heroes across all the maps is a major obstacle to what the game is ostensibly trying to be, an immersive Star Wars battle experience. It's not so bad with the era-spanning guns ect as you can hardly notice that, but nothing takes me out of an intense fight in the Theed palace like Kylo Ren showing up to pick a fight with Han Solo, or trying to take down a Republic cruiser over Kamino and being shot down by Poe Dameron or the Millenium Falcon... Again, fine, have a free-for-all mode somewhere, but was it too much to ask for era-appropriate restrictions for standard gameplay?
- Aside from the space battles, which I concede are utterly wonderful to play with the advanced (ie. proper) flight controls on, the improvements in the controls and gunplay leave me cold... Whereas the last game was a little basic in its shooting, it did have it's own identity. It wasn't the run-and-gun of CoD and Titanfall, or the sniper's paradise of Battlefield, it was a nice, accessible arcadey shooter with decent feeling weapons and a nice array of them. Here though, it's taken influence from Battlefield One but comes off as a poor imitation; it's closer, but still lacks such fundamentals of a BF-esque shooter like aiming down sights on non-scoped weapons, leaning/peeking and prone functions, actual ammo counters... it's an awkward half way between the last Battlefield and last Battlefront, and to me comes off lacking both the punchy, kinetic feel of the former and the joyful simplicity of the latter...
At this point, I hope at least something of a player base sticks around for BF2015, as I'll likely go back to that in the near future. I'll pick up BF2 when it's at a price I'm willing to pay for Starfighter Assault then spend most of my time on that mode and ignore the rest. Stick Starfighter Assault onto BF2015 and I've basically got my perfect Star Wars shooter. It's a shame I've been put off so completely as I was very excited for this, but for all it's technical improvements I'm just not having fun with it, which is ultimately more important than anything else.
12 years on, and I guess the original Battlefront II remains the most complete Star Wars shooter package going... I'd happily fork over the £60 now for a straight remaster of that gem of a game.
So more and more keeps coming out. It's been discovered today that if you earn to many credits in a certain window, the game will auto stop giving you credits. There's been reports of 3 hour stoppages, to 24 hour stoppages in ability to earn credits.
To comment with some experience on the whole credit thing, with the new prices the 'controversy' is totally overblown. Having played for about 5 hours (let's say 20 or so online matches, a few daily crates and a few challenges) I'm sitting on 19000 credits, or enough to buy Luke or Vader and have credits left over to afford the Rey/Chewie version of the Falcon after a couple more games.
Given that I'm pretty poor at the game itself, and can still afford the top tier of heroes, it seems to be the case that if you're actually playing the game, you can afford stuff. It's really a non-issue.
Paradigm wrote: To comment with some experience on the whole credit thing, with the new prices the 'controversy' is totally overblown. Having played for about 5 hours (let's say 20 or so online matches, a few daily crates and a few challenges) I'm sitting on 19000 credits, or enough to buy Luke or Vader and have credits left over to afford the Rey/Chewie version of the Falcon after a couple more games.
Given that I'm pretty poor at the game itself, and can still afford the top tier of heroes, it seems to be the case that if you're actually playing the game, you can afford stuff. It's really a non-issue.
And here we have the next step of this. The "well it isn't THAT bad so stop complaining" line, as if this experience alone somehow makes the predatory practices all okay.
But is it predatory if, after a couple of afternoons being totally mediocre at the game, I can amass enough points to easily afford the top tier of characters that everyone is complaining about? Predatory implies that the game is structured so that attaining these rewards through just regularly playing the game is prohibitively difficult, which is demonstrably not the case. If it was still 70,000 you'd have a point, but at 15000 points, you can afford Vader after a solid afternoon's play if you set your mind to it.
The crafting parts I agree are a problem, those do seem too limited for how infrequently you get them, but the credits are not a problem unless you want to unlock everything without playing the game at all.
Paradigm wrote: I feared that would be the case about the Campaign. Given that confirmation, the likelihood of me spending more than about £20 or so on the game is non-existent at this point. Having played a few hours of the full game on the EA Access trial, I am convinced that despite this version being a technical improvement in almost all areas, I actually had far more fun with Battlefront 2015. I really couldn't give a damn about the lootbox thing, that's not something that ever bothers me, but there are a few major things holding BF2 back, I think. Spoilered as it's a bit of a rant!
Yeah the promise of that story was initially the reason I was excited for the game in the first place. And like I mentioned after reading the book I expected it to happen, but at the end and in a much less i don't know, forced I guess, way. My roommates have both beaten or seen the game beaten and all the story and they are both in agreement, that it seems forced, the reason it happened was stupid and they both better empathize with Hask, knowing what they know of the team's background, than the other two.
Spoiler:
- The fact that every game mode aside from Heroes (which I never had any interest in, even on the last game) and Blast (team deathmatch) are set Attacker/Defender asymmetric missions I just find really boring. Compare it to Battlefield's flagship mode, Conquest, where it's just a standard 'capture and hold' affair; in Battlefield, there's an organic cut and thrust as one team gains dominance on one area of the map while the other boxes up around their last couple of objectives somewhere else, or a daring squad can push behind enemy lines, capture their 'home' objective and turn the whole layout on it's head...
Whereas in Battlefront 2, the objectives basically consist of some combination of 'funnel everyone towards 2 or 3 killboxes', 'blow up this series of things' and 'follow this big thing and make sure it doesn't explode'... It's all so engineered and thus doesn't feel like what you're doing has any impact on how the battle goes. I wouldn't mind if each map had a mode like that as a more narrative option,alongside more traditional CTF or Conquest style modes, but the fact that the main (and at this point only) 40 player maps all adhere to this dynamic just makes them dull. Once you've played Theed or Endor or Space Over Ryloth once, you've played it a dozen times, the next battle you play there is going to be exactly the same with the only variety being at what point the attacking team is stalled. There's no back-and-forth, no scope for tactical thinking, it's just a case of rushing the nearest objective with as many bodies as you can throw at it and hoping for the best.
- The fact that you can have all the Heroes across all the maps is a major obstacle to what the game is ostensibly trying to be, an immersive Star Wars battle experience. It's not so bad with the era-spanning guns ect as you can hardly notice that, but nothing takes me out of an intense fight in the Theed palace like Kylo Ren showing up to pick a fight with Han Solo, or trying to take down a Republic cruiser over Kamino and being shot down by Poe Dameron or the Millenium Falcon... Again, fine, have a free-for-all mode somewhere, but was it too much to ask for era-appropriate restrictions for standard gameplay?
- Aside from the space battles, which I concede are utterly wonderful to play with the advanced (ie. proper) flight controls on, the improvements in the controls and gunplay leave me cold... Whereas the last game was a little basic in its shooting, it did have it's own identity. It wasn't the run-and-gun of CoD and Titanfall, or the sniper's paradise of Battlefield, it was a nice, accessible arcadey shooter with decent feeling weapons and a nice array of them. Here though, it's taken influence from Battlefield One but comes off as a poor imitation; it's closer, but still lacks such fundamentals of a BF-esque shooter like aiming down sights on non-scoped weapons, leaning/peeking and prone functions, actual ammo counters... it's an awkward half way between the last Battlefield and last Battlefront, and to me comes off lacking both the punchy, kinetic feel of the former and the joyful simplicity of the latter...
At this point, I hope at least something of a player base sticks around for BF2015, as I'll likely go back to that in the near future. I'll pick up BF2 when it's at a price I'm willing to pay for Starfighter Assault then spend most of my time on that mode and ignore the rest. Stick Starfighter Assault onto BF2015 and I've basically got my perfect Star Wars shooter. It's a shame I've been put off so completely as I was very excited for this, but for all it's technical improvements I'm just not having fun with it, which is ultimately more important than anything else.
12 years on, and I guess the original Battlefront II remains the most complete Star Wars shooter package going... I'd happily fork over the £60 now for a straight remaster of that gem of a game.
I like the new controls and the new gun mechanics, they were fine in BF2015, but I dont know to me atleast they feel better, particularly being able to cool the gun down at will.. But when it comes down to it the guns are essentially the same, the still have their different listed ROF, damage and what have you. So they are probably more alike than we realize, though the blaster bolts do seem to travel faster. Plus I like the return to the classes of OG BF and BFII. Star Fighter Assault is probably one of the best modes, though while admittedly I wasnt doing to great with it, I like the Strike mode, smaller objective based game play without the over saturation of Heroes. I think the large game mode definitely suffers from Hero over saturation. Even limiting it to Eras wouldn't help in that regards, at least with the Galactic Civil War period, because thats where most of the heroes are from. How ever I've never really cared much for the heroes, even in the days of the OG franchise I much prefered to play as the Basic Troopers or their specialists. The same is true now, I would rather play as the Jet Troopers or Enforcers (Death Troopers, Wookies, Flametroopers, ect) than the heroes. Still was able to drive off the heroes, but once you kill one, someone else will take their place.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/11/16 17:04:18
To be fair, I'm being picky with the gunplay simply because I am holding it to the standards of DICE's last game, Battlefield One, which I reckon is probably the best shooter on the market at the moment (Titanfall 2 being a close second, though very different). You can see elements of it in Battlefront 2, like the names and sound effects when you score a kill, or the fact there are proper, non-Star Card sniper rifles now, but a lot of it just seems half-baked to me (though as I say, I am being particularly critical).
If you're giving me a sniper rifle and class, I want the ability to go prone so I'm not standing round like a lemon any time I use the scope or scanner. If you're going to introduce the option to reload at any time (a good step), then why not introduce actual limited ammo and give the Officer/Heavy classes a resupply role? It's the little things like that that just add up. Admittedly, though it definitely goes into the 'fine, but could be better' category, whereas I feel the limited mission types and cross-era hero saturation actively detract from the game.
Re. the campaign...
Spoiler:
I was really looking forward to a proper Imperial story, I've been wanting something like that ever since Disney announced new Star Wars stuff was happening, hence my disappointment with that resolution to the campaign. I appreciate that Star Wars is black and white and the bad guys are the bad guys without exception, but that doesn't mean we can't see a story from the Empire's perspective and still enjoy it. If they weren't going to do it in a film, this game would be the perfect place with a less mainstream audience, but alas they seem to have copped out a bit which is a real shame. I can't say I'm surprised, but definitely disappointed.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/11/16 19:31:45
So some pretty interesting news from Belgium. The games of chance/gambling commission has started an inquiry into if Battlefront 2 loot crates could be considered gambling. Of course it might end up nowhere, but if it is gambling EA might have to pay hundreds of thousands in fines and have their game removed from sale in Belgium. Might be the first pebble in an interesting avalanche. Source is only in Dutch sadly, but google translate should easily provide back up for what I said in case anyone is sceptical:
Sorry for my spelling. I'm not a native speaker and a dyslexic.
1750 pts Blood Specters
2000 pts Imperial Fists
6000 pts Disciples of Fate
3500 pts Peridia Prime
2500 pts Prophets of Fate
Lizardmen 3000 points Tlaxcoatl Temple-City
Tomb Kings 1500 points Sekhra (RIP)
Disciple of Fate wrote: So some pretty interesting news from Belgium. The games of chance/gambling commission has started an inquiry into if Battlefront 2 loot crates could be considered gambling. Of course it might end up nowhere, but if it is gambling EA might have to pay hundreds of thousands in fines and have their game removed from sale in Belgium. Might be the first pebble in an interesting avalanche. Source is only in Dutch sadly, but google translate should easily provide back up for what I said in case anyone is sceptical:
It probably will end up going nowhere. There have been stupid attempts to go after EA's products with nonsense like this before; including an attempt to sue BioWare for the ending of Mass Effect 3...
Paradigm wrote: To be fair, I'm being picky with the gunplay simply because I am holding it to the standards of DICE's last game, Battlefield One, which I reckon is probably the best shooter on the market at the moment (Titanfall 2 being a close second, though very different). You can see elements of it in Battlefront 2, like the names and sound effects when you score a kill, or the fact there are proper, non-Star Card sniper rifles now, but a lot of it just seems half-baked to me (though as I say, I am being particularly critical).
If you're giving me a sniper rifle and class, I want the ability to go prone so I'm not standing round like a lemon any time I use the scope or scanner. If you're going to introduce the option to reload at any time (a good step), then why not introduce actual limited ammo and give the Officer/Heavy classes a resupply role? It's the little things like that that just add up. Admittedly, though it definitely goes into the 'fine, but could be better' category, whereas I feel the limited mission types and cross-era hero saturation actively detract from the game.
I definitely see your point
Re. the campaign...
Spoiler:
I was really looking forward to a proper Imperial story, I've been wanting something like that ever since Disney announced new Star Wars stuff was happening, hence my disappointment with that resolution to the campaign. I appreciate that Star Wars is black and white and the bad huts are the bad guys without exception, but that doesn't mean we can't see a story from the Empire's perspective and still enjoy it. If they weren't going to do it in a film, this game would be the perfect place with a less mainstream audience, but alas they seem to have copped out a bit which is a real shame. I can't say I'm surprised, but definitely disappointed.
Spoiler:
I'm right there with you on that, being a long time fan of the Empire. Its really bother some that they had a good chance to show that perspective, that again they advertised the game repeatedly as, and then decided to cop out and make it about the Rebels. They could easily have written the story in such a way where Iden and Del could have remained Imperials up to Jakku and then had them go pro-Rebel or even just anti-Imperial. Admiral Versio even goes as far as to point out that Jakku was just the Remants way to wipe the slate clean and start the First Order fresh anyway. He even goes on to tell Iden that he wants her to live a happy life after this, even though for the past while they've been trying to kill one another, suddenly no thats not there (but feth her best friend Hask, no she still hates him) and then she leaves. Why could that talk not have been to her as an Imperial, with him telling her to get out and let go rather than fall into the First Order? Then if they still absolutely needed Hask to be a villain in the future, they could have just took a page from Republic Commando and have him have been shot down, or left behind for some reason or another. In which case he still developes his resentment and hatred of Iden and Del for having 'abandoned and betrayed him.'
Keeping them loyal would remove my major plot issue with the game, Operation Cinder targeting Vardos. I mean the world is fething described as an "Imperial Paradise" and seems to only be targeted as a reason to force Iden into joining the Rebels. Simply blowing planets up obviously isn't enough to convince her that the Empire might be evil. She was on the DS1 when it blew up Alderaan.
At least Hask gets some revenge 20 years later when Kylo hands him Del. Setting up the sequel where you either play as a more mature Iden getting revenge for her husband, or their daughter getting revenge. Also sets up something for the new movie, because apparently Hask has something to do with Project Resurrection.
Disciple of Fate wrote: So some pretty interesting news from Belgium. The games of chance/gambling commission has started an inquiry into if Battlefront 2 loot crates could be considered gambling. Of course it might end up nowhere, but if it is gambling EA might have to pay hundreds of thousands in fines and have their game removed from sale in Belgium. Might be the first pebble in an interesting avalanche. Source is only in Dutch sadly, but google translate should easily provide back up for what I said in case anyone is sceptical:
It probably will end up going nowhere. There have been stupid attempts to go after EA's products with nonsense like this before; including an attempt to sue BioWare for the ending of Mass Effect 3...
You can't seriously be comparing a government agency investigation with a hateful fanbase? Also how is this stupid, this is the job of the organization. If loot boxes break gambling laws according to them that is a serious issue.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/11/16 19:43:24
Sorry for my spelling. I'm not a native speaker and a dyslexic.
1750 pts Blood Specters
2000 pts Imperial Fists
6000 pts Disciples of Fate
3500 pts Peridia Prime
2500 pts Prophets of Fate
Lizardmen 3000 points Tlaxcoatl Temple-City
Tomb Kings 1500 points Sekhra (RIP)
Disciple of Fate wrote: So some pretty interesting news from Belgium. The games of chance/gambling commission has started an inquiry into if Battlefront 2 loot crates could be considered gambling. Of course it might end up nowhere, but if it is gambling EA might have to pay hundreds of thousands in fines and have their game removed from sale in Belgium. Might be the first pebble in an interesting avalanche. Source is only in Dutch sadly, but google translate should easily provide back up for what I said in case anyone is sceptical:
It probably will end up going nowhere. There have been stupid attempts to go after EA's products with nonsense like this before; including an attempt to sue BioWare for the ending of Mass Effect 3...
You can't seriously be comparing a government agency investigation with a hateful fanbase? Also how is this stupid, this is the job of the organization. If loot boxes break gambling laws according to them that is a serious issue.
You're mistaking my point.
There have been attempts on the part of said hateful fanbase to get government agencies to take action and more often than not it ends up being garbage investigations that just take up money.
Disciple of Fate wrote: So some pretty interesting news from Belgium. The games of chance/gambling commission has started an inquiry into if Battlefront 2 loot crates could be considered gambling. Of course it might end up nowhere, but if it is gambling EA might have to pay hundreds of thousands in fines and have their game removed from sale in Belgium. Might be the first pebble in an interesting avalanche. Source is only in Dutch sadly, but google translate should easily provide back up for what I said in case anyone is sceptical:
It probably will end up going nowhere. There have been stupid attempts to go after EA's products with nonsense like this before; including an attempt to sue BioWare for the ending of Mass Effect 3...
You can't seriously be comparing a government agency investigation with a hateful fanbase? Also how is this stupid, this is the job of the organization. If loot boxes break gambling laws according to them that is a serious issue.
You're mistaking my point.
There have been attempts on the part of said hateful fanbase to get government agencies to take action and more often than not it ends up being garbage investigations that just take up money.
Problem being that this is an independent investigation by the Belgian agency into the social pressure on children to spend money on the loot box lottery system. If it can be categorized as gambling then the consequences are pretty serious. This isn't any attempt by a fanbase but an independent decision by authorities, its their job to do this, so its neither garbage nor does it take up money, they're simple doing the task they were funded for.
Sorry for my spelling. I'm not a native speaker and a dyslexic.
1750 pts Blood Specters
2000 pts Imperial Fists
6000 pts Disciples of Fate
3500 pts Peridia Prime
2500 pts Prophets of Fate
Lizardmen 3000 points Tlaxcoatl Temple-City
Tomb Kings 1500 points Sekhra (RIP)
The article also makes mention of looking into the lootbox system of Overwatch.
And if this amounts to anything, in the worst case it could be nothing more than a fine of a couple hundred thousand Euro's, something that EA will fight and even if they lose, they can easily fork it over as they're rolling in money.
Disciple of Fate wrote: So some pretty interesting news from Belgium. The games of chance/gambling commission has started an inquiry into if Battlefront 2 loot crates could be considered gambling. Of course it might end up nowhere, but if it is gambling EA might have to pay hundreds of thousands in fines and have their game removed from sale in Belgium. Might be the first pebble in an interesting avalanche. Source is only in Dutch sadly, but google translate should easily provide back up for what I said in case anyone is sceptical:
It probably will end up going nowhere. There have been stupid attempts to go after EA's products with nonsense like this before; including an attempt to sue BioWare for the ending of Mass Effect 3...
You can't seriously be comparing a government agency investigation with a hateful fanbase? Also how is this stupid, this is the job of the organization. If loot boxes break gambling laws according to them that is a serious issue.
You're mistaking my point.
There have been attempts on the part of said hateful fanbase to get government agencies to take action and more often than not it ends up being garbage investigations that just take up money.
Problem being that this is an independent investigation by the Belgian agency into the social pressure on children to spend money on the loot box lottery system. If it can be categorized as gambling then the consequences are pretty serious. This isn't any attempt by a fanbase but an independent decision by authorities, its their job to do this, so its neither garbage nor does it take up money, they're simple doing the task they were funded for.
So why weren't they looking into Overwatch or COD?
Face facts:
This is a publicity driven investigation. Dollars to donuts they were sent complaints from a "fanbase" that still hasn't even likely played the damned game.
Disciple of Fate wrote: So some pretty interesting news from Belgium. The games of chance/gambling commission has started an inquiry into if Battlefront 2 loot crates could be considered gambling. Of course it might end up nowhere, but if it is gambling EA might have to pay hundreds of thousands in fines and have their game removed from sale in Belgium. Might be the first pebble in an interesting avalanche. Source is only in Dutch sadly, but google translate should easily provide back up for what I said in case anyone is sceptical:
It probably will end up going nowhere. There have been stupid attempts to go after EA's products with nonsense like this before; including an attempt to sue BioWare for the ending of Mass Effect 3...
You can't seriously be comparing a government agency investigation with a hateful fanbase? Also how is this stupid, this is the job of the organization. If loot boxes break gambling laws according to them that is a serious issue.
You're mistaking my point.
There have been attempts on the part of said hateful fanbase to get government agencies to take action and more often than not it ends up being garbage investigations that just take up money.
Problem being that this is an independent investigation by the Belgian agency into the social pressure on children to spend money on the loot box lottery system. If it can be categorized as gambling then the consequences are pretty serious. This isn't any attempt by a fanbase but an independent decision by authorities, its their job to do this, so its neither garbage nor does it take up money, they're simple doing the task they were funded for.
So why weren't they looking into Overwatch or COD?
Face facts:
This is a publicity driven investigation. Dollars to donuts they were sent complaints from a "fanbase" that still hasn't even likely played the damned game.
As BrookM said, they are also looking into Overwatch.
Face facts: Who cares if its driven by just publicity, if the findings turn out to say its gambling it can have much wider implications. Nowhere do they say this is because of complaints. Regardless of why they do this it is a good thing.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrookM wrote: The article also makes mention of looking into the lootbox system of Overwatch.
And if this amounts to anything, in the worst case it could be nothing more than a fine of a couple hundred thousand Euro's, something that EA will fight and even if they lose, they can easily fork it over as they're rolling in money.
True, a fine is not very serious, but pulling the game from sale might be. What if other countries might follow and such. Its an interesting case after the CS:GO gambling mess. Also will they be able to keep fining EA in Belgium until they remove the loot boxes if they deem it gambling, I'm not sure but something like that would likely be the case.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/11/16 22:04:51
Sorry for my spelling. I'm not a native speaker and a dyslexic.
1750 pts Blood Specters
2000 pts Imperial Fists
6000 pts Disciples of Fate
3500 pts Peridia Prime
2500 pts Prophets of Fate
Lizardmen 3000 points Tlaxcoatl Temple-City
Tomb Kings 1500 points Sekhra (RIP)
As BrookM said, they are also looking into Overwatch.
Face facts: Who cares if its driven by just publicity, if the findings turn out to say its gambling it can have much wider implications. Nowhere do they say this is because of complaints. Regardless of why they do this it is a good thing.
Actually, if it's driven by "just publicity" then it means nothing.
BrookM wrote: The article also makes mention of looking into the lootbox system of Overwatch.
And if this amounts to anything, in the worst case it could be nothing more than a fine of a couple hundred thousand Euro's, something that EA will fight and even if they lose, they can easily fork it over as they're rolling in money.
True, a fine is not very serious, but pulling the game from sale might be. What if other countries might follow and such. Its an interesting case after the CS:GO gambling mess. Also will they be able to keep fining EA in Belgium until they remove the loot boxes if they deem it gambling, I'm not sure but something like that would likely be the case.
Then they'll just remove it from sale in Belgium or remove the ability to buy lootpacks via real money there.
Which in either case is not really a Big Deal. If you truly truly think people are going to be dropping hundreds or thousands of dollars into a game at launch for an advantage, you're as delusional as the twerps who think they deserve to be able to file a lawsuit against a game company for an ending they disliked.
As BrookM said, they are also looking into Overwatch.
Face facts: Who cares if its driven by just publicity, if the findings turn out to say its gambling it can have much wider implications. Nowhere do they say this is because of complaints. Regardless of why they do this it is a good thing.
Actually, if it's driven by "just publicity" then it means nothing.
BrookM wrote: The article also makes mention of looking into the lootbox system of Overwatch.
And if this amounts to anything, in the worst case it could be nothing more than a fine of a couple hundred thousand Euro's, something that EA will fight and even if they lose, they can easily fork it over as they're rolling in money.
True, a fine is not very serious, but pulling the game from sale might be. What if other countries might follow and such. Its an interesting case after the CS:GO gambling mess. Also will they be able to keep fining EA in Belgium until they remove the loot boxes if they deem it gambling, I'm not sure but something like that would likely be the case.
Then they'll just remove it from sale in Belgium or remove the ability to buy lootpacks via real money there.
Which in either case is not really a Big Deal. If you truly truly think people are going to be dropping hundreds or thousands of dollars into a game at launch for an advantage, you're as delusional as the twerps who think they deserve to be able to file a lawsuit against a game company for an ending they disliked.
Cut it with the delusional crap, you're being facetious as hell. Some people actually do spend hundreds of dollars into games for nothing more than cosmetics let alone actual benefits in games. That's why the system was designed in the first place, not for people who buy it once or twice, but people that buy dozens of packs.
Games like Overwatch and World of Warcraft, along with the Call of Duty franchise, played a big part in raising Activision Blizzard’s digital revenue for the year. The company said that it pulled in a record $3.6 billion of revenue from in-game content, up 125 percent year-over-year (excluding King, the figure was still up 30 percent). That includes sales of items such as Overwatch loot boxes, Call of Duty supply drops and World of Warcraft pets.
3.6 billion in a single year. Even if were to assume that combined they have a 100 million players without overlap every single one would have to spend 36 dollars a piece on stuff. And not every single one buys things in game. This is a massive industry with individuals that do drops hundreds or thousands of dollars on these games.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/11/16 23:22:08
Sorry for my spelling. I'm not a native speaker and a dyslexic.
1750 pts Blood Specters
2000 pts Imperial Fists
6000 pts Disciples of Fate
3500 pts Peridia Prime
2500 pts Prophets of Fate
Lizardmen 3000 points Tlaxcoatl Temple-City
Tomb Kings 1500 points Sekhra (RIP)
LunarSol wrote: People drop hundreds of dollars into games like this every day. I'm probably being naive not including thousands into that number.
Eh. And if it were a different generation they'd toss that money at a series of guitars they never really learn how to play, which get dumped off in pawnshops to pay bills.
'people waste money on things other people don't value' should come as a shock to no one post Great Depression.
Dice admits they got it wrong (ie EA told them to do it and they're taking the blame) and have removed the ability to use real money until a later date.
Rumour is Disney threatened to pull their exclusivity deal if they didn't fix the mess.
Disney almost had to have stepped in, I just cannot fathom EA giving up this potential cash cow.
And the comments above about some people spending tons of money on these "micro" transactions is spot on. Generally something like 80%+ of the money made like that comes from less than 2%-3% of their customers. I've heard them referred to as "Whales" like the term sometimes used by Casino's to describe their big spenders.
vonjankmon wrote: Disney almost had to have stepped in, I just cannot fathom EA giving up this potential cash cow.
I can. I've said this before and will say it again:
EA is why we had free DLC for Titanfall 2 and Mass Effect 3 and Andromeda.
And the comments above about some people spending tons of money on these "micro" transactions is spot on. Generally something like 80%+ of the money made like that comes from less than 2%-3% of their customers. I've heard them referred to as "Whales" like the term sometimes used by Casino's to describe their big spenders.
Yeah, and most of the time it's done with stolen credit card information on accounts set up in Eastern Europe so it ends up having to get refunded.
I'll get this game when the Lootboxes are limited to Cosmetics only, or removed entirely.
tl;dr: I'll never get this game.
Automatically Appended Next Post: The ESRB needs to get on this ASAP. Lootbox gambling rely on predatory mechanics that exploit addictive personalities. We shouldn't be exposing children to gambling any more than violence or sexual content, so I say Battlefront 2 should include gambling in its ESRB labels and carry a higher adult only rating.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/11/17 15:13:36
1750 pts Blood Specters
6000 pts Disciples of Fate
3500 pts Peridia Prime
2500 pts Prophets of Fate
Lizardmen 3000 points Tlaxcoatl Temple-City
