Star Wars Battlefront ;)

  • Thread starter Thread starter dice1998
  • 898 comments
  • 51,918 views
Akira AC
I don't get why someone would like pay to play a map where the people won't stick long, because usually children buy this thing out of a rush, and then stop playing when the next shiny thing comes out, rendering the ones that did want to play cheated as the half base won't be able to afford the rest, because the other ones can't afford it and it reduces the server population by accessible restrictions. Undermining the whole multiplayer structure.
Click to expand...
This is why gaming will crash pretty quickly. Too much stock is put into the fact that gamers are made of money when in truth, they operate on a hobbyist budget. This is why I pick and choose (or even create) my games. I know what I can afford, and it isn't much.
 
Sanji Himura
This is why gaming will crash pretty quickly. Too much stock is put into the fact that gamers are made of money when in truth, they operate on a hobbyist budget. This is why I pick and choose (or even create) my games. I know what I can afford, and it isn't much.
Click to expand...
I have a lot of hours, and very little money into my sim rig. I disagree that it will cause anything to crash though. Look at games like WT, WoT and the alike. They all have solid followings and you dont have to invest a dime if you dont want to. You may need to grind more, but that is it. Pretty much the rest of the game is open to you. And not everyone is jumping on EA's band wagon. DiRT Rally is releasing all of its content as patches, and not how some (iRacing!) where every new car or track costs money. Honestly, most of my games come from steam anyway. a treasure trove of inexpensive indie games left right and center. Along with new discounts on all sorts of games every week or so.
 
Rallywagon
I have a lot of hours, and very little money into my sim rig. I disagree that it will cause anything to crash though. Look at games like WT, WoT and the alike. They all have solid followings and you dont have to invest a dime if you dont want to. You may need to grind more, but that is it. Pretty much the rest of the game is open to you. And not everyone is jumping on EA's band wagon. DiRT Rally is releasing all of its content as patches, and not how some (iRacing!) where every new car or track costs money. Honestly, most of my games come from steam anyway. a treasure trove of inexpensive indie games left right and center. Along with new discounts on all sorts of games every week or so.
Click to expand...

I agree with most everything you say, but here is where you are wrong though, and I'll use Battlefront as an example.

- $60 for the base game [can we legitimately not call a game at that price a base game anymore, more like a barebones version?]

- $70 for the deluxe edition [which includes instant access to Han Solo's blaster, Ion Gernades, Ion Torpedos, Ion Shock emote, and the Victory emote (the first three you could, if Angry Joe is to be believed, obtain in a couple of hours at most.)]

- $120 for the Ultimate Edition [Which includes everything in the Deluxe edition, and adds the $50 season Pass]

- $50 for the Season pass [According to Angry Joe's Rant video, includes 4 DLC Expansion packs. General consensus based on available information was that this would be COD style DLC packs where you get a couple of maps per pack, but that is it.]

This that you would have to shell out the equivalent of $110 or more to have an experience, drawing this conclusion based on past EA experiences, that only last you until EA decides to take their game servers down since it is too difficult to allow for private servers on one of the biggest titles of the year. Add in the fact that there is NO Single Player at all in this game, if you don't want to buy the sequel to continue your experience online, you're screwed man.

I made mention of this yesterday, but Square Enix, a company that I used to respect, is putting over 300 microtransactions in the next Tomb Raider game. Yes, you read that right, over 300 of them. Breaking that game's effective entry price barrier down:

- $60 base game [To be a bit fair, it will be a bit cheaper on the 360, but not much]

- $30 Season Pass [According to the Gamestop website, it offers, "a range of content that will extend your single-player campaign, and also allow you to compete with friends." This could possibly mean that they hid multiplayer behind a paywall here]

- ??? 300 Microtransactions [to improve your multiplayer/single player experience. The ??? is the fact that the price for each individual microtransaction is not known.]

Assuming that the price for each microtransaction is $2 USD, if you really want them all, that is another $60 right there to add to the cost of the game, for a grand total of $150 if you want a complete experience.

If you wondering why AAA gaming is giving way to indie development, let's give you an indie title to look at - Undertale - Recently featured on the Jimquisition (gave it a rare 10/10).

$10 for the base game

That's it. The only "DLC", and I am using the term loosely here, that can be had here is the VERY optional game soundtrack.
 
Sanji Himura
I agree with most everything you say, but here is where you are wrong though, and I'll use Battlefront as an example.

- $60 for the base game [can we legitimately not call a game at that price a base game anymore, more like a barebones version?]

- $70 for the deluxe edition [which includes instant access to Han Solo's blaster, Ion Gernades, Ion Torpedos, Ion Shock emote, and the Victory emote (the first three you could, if Angry Joe is to be believed, obtain in a couple of hours at most.)]

- $120 for the Ultimate Edition [Which includes everything in the Deluxe edition, and adds the $50 season Pass]

- $50 for the Season pass [According to Angry Joe's Rant video, includes 4 DLC Expansion packs. General consensus based on available information was that this would be COD style DLC packs where you get a couple of maps per pack, but that is it.]

This that you would have to shell out the equivalent of $110 or more to have an experience, drawing this conclusion based on past EA experiences, that only last you until EA decides to take their game servers down since it is too difficult to allow for private servers on one of the biggest titles of the year. Add in the fact that there is NO Single Player at all in this game, if you don't want to buy the sequel to continue your experience online, you're screwed man.

I made mention of this yesterday, but Square Enix, a company that I used to respect, is putting over 300 microtransactions in the next Tomb Raider game. Yes, you read that right, over 300 of them. Breaking that game's effective entry price barrier down:

- $60 base game [To be a bit fair, it will be a bit cheaper on the 360, but not much]

- $30 Season Pass [According to the Gamestop website, it offers, "a range of content that will extend your single-player campaign, and also allow you to compete with friends." This could possibly mean that they hid multiplayer behind a paywall here]

- ??? 300 Microtransactions [to improve your multiplayer/single player experience. The ??? is the fact that the price for each individual microtransaction is not known.]

Assuming that the price for each microtransaction is $2 USD, if you really want them all, that is another $60 right there to add to the cost of the game, for a grand total of $150 if you want a complete experience.

If you wondering why AAA gaming is giving way to indie development, let's give you an indie title to look at - Undertale - Recently featured on the Jimquisition (gave it a rare 10/10).

$10 for the base game

That's it. The only "DLC", and I am using the term loosely here, that can be had here is the VERY optional game soundtrack.
Click to expand...

You don't need to buy the DLC to enjoy the game, none of the DLC (aside from the free Jakku maps) will come out anywhere near release so unless you stick around long enough you won't even be tempted to buy it. I have BF4 premium and still play the game but almost never play the DLC maps because only a couple of servers actually use them.

Also there is single player in the Survival game mode, but there is no campaign. This is a primarily multiplayer game so if you are looking for a story driven campaign style of game then this is not for you.
 
TiZzla
You don't need to buy the DLC to enjoy the game, none of the DLC (aside from the free Jakku maps) will come out anywhere near release so unless you stick around long enough you won't even be tempted to buy it. I have BF4 premium and still play the game but almost never play the DLC maps because only a couple of servers actually use them.
Click to expand...

You are missing my overall point, Cost vs. Overall Experience and how it creates a Haves and have nots atmosphere.
This post illustrates my point aptly:

CallmeDan
You should be. I won't buy Battlefield 4 because I hate that the player base has been divided by those who only own the base game, and those who own the DLCs.
Click to expand...

All paid DLC, in its nature, creates this atmosphere of Haves vs. Have nots whether intended or not. So that $15 map pack inherently creates a level of separation between the player base just because because a player has X map and the other does not.

Any season pass that promises early access to a map pack is even worse just because of that timed exclusivity over those who refuse to pay the $50 price of admission (mileage may vary) just so that you can get that early access over the other players (length may vary.) Call of Duty, for example, offers map packs to season pass buyers on the PS4 first, then a general release on the PS4, followed by a release to season pass buyers on XBO and finally a general release on the XBO. By the time that one map pack in COD reaches everyone, the next one is geared up and ready to go for season pass buyers on the PS4. Is it wrong? Absolutely! Then so is charging $110 for an experience that is best enjoyed for only a year. (Have to give Activision credit though, at least they don't shut down their servers on a glimpse of inactivity or a new version coming out unlike EA).
 
Its got to be said, if it wasnt a successful business model, it wouldnt happen. As much as we want to hate companies for it (and I have a deep seated, seething anger for EA) the consumer is at least as culpable for not only putting up with it, but in many cases accepting and nurturing it. You say its a seperation of "haves and have nots" and while true, it is also the difference between "the want it now, instant gratification" types and those who cant be bothered. The consumer has the power, its just that the companies are better unified.
 
Sanji Himura
You are missing my overall point, Cost vs. Overall Experience and how it creates a Haves and have nots atmosphere.
This post illustrates my point aptly:

All paid DLC, in its nature, creates this atmosphere of Haves vs. Have nots whether intended or not. So that $15 map pack inherently creates a level of separation between the player base just because because a player has X map and the other does not.
Click to expand...
When you use haves and have nots are you using it more along the lines that people that have it are some way feeling superior, creating a sort of stigma between the playerbase? Or is it more along the lines of being in the most literal sense? If it's the former, I would disagree. I never once thought myself different for owning a certain DLC. In fact, I don't think anything of it otherwise. I just download it, and I just play it. People not having it never come to mind, really. If I choose not to buy DLC, its the same scenario. I don't care either way as the reason for me not having it is likely to be because I thought it wasn't worthy of the price tag. No harm to me as it'll be much easier for me to find a room regardless.

In most cases with DLC that seperates user bases, it's the DLC opters that are left with the minimal amount of play, not the base users. The base users don't have to spend a dime, and their servers will be the most populated for the a much, much longer amount of time. This is the case with most Battlefield games, as the base servers are always much easier to get into a good game with rather then the DLC servers. The DLC servers spike at the time of release, but it really dwindles down afterwards. Battlefield packs usually consisted of 4+ maps, new weapons, new vehicles, new accesories, but I do agree that the price is a little steep for what you get, although, not by much.

On one hand, though, there are games like Destiny where the new expansion(this new expansion completely changed everything about the game) all but crippled the base users. Players got locked out of the higher level end game content, the stronger gear was all but dropped from in game vendors while only offering low leveled items, random side quests that where active in the previous two DLC got removed, difficulty selectors removed. Those that choose not to opt up will likely just not be playing that game anymore.

DLC is just an option for those that want extra content, and find worth in it. There are some that are worth it, and there are some that are outrageous. You can't damn the whole subject based on how a certain company approaches it. You need to stay objective and take it at a case by case basis.

Rallywagon
Its got to be said, if it wasnt a successful business model, it wouldnt happen. As much as we want to hate companies for it (and I have a deep seated, seething anger for EA) the consumer is at least as culpable for not only putting up with it, but in many cases accepting and nurturing it. You say its a seperation of "haves and have nots" and while true, it is also the difference between "the want it now, instant gratification" types and those who cant be bothered. The consumer has the power, its just that the companies are better unified.
Click to expand...
I agree, but disagree about the instant gratification part. DLC is not that at all, but early access content falls right along with that. Still though, those early access things come at no price usually when purchasing DLC or season passes, and are more of a gift for the supporting of the game.
 
Last edited:
Keeping on topic here the DLC with BF4 or BF3 did not cause a long lasting divide of the community, and it will have even less of an effect on Battlefront because of the matchmaking system. I can't speak for everyone but in the AU/NZ regions there are barely any servers that use the DLC maps, so while everyone with Premium would have played the DLC maps for a month or so they will always come back to the vanilla maps eventually. And even if they didn't there is always loads of people with just the base game to keep those servers full.

The only thing the Premium/Season pass really gives you over the other players is exclusive weapons and in Battlefronts case emotes. There will no doubt be exclusive weapons as part of the season pass but they don't usually give you any advantage, they are just a gimmick like the extra maps.
 
In all honesty, I'm not even against all coiner tricks. Games like Planet Side 2, War Thunder and the WoT collection of games are great examples of how, in my opinion, a coiner system should work. You can play for free. And essentially the whole game is open too you, you may have to grind away to get any where. Or you can throw down some cash, buy a couple of neat items, but dont add a real advantage, or buy some form of coin, gold, XP, lions, tigers, bears, what have you, to level up faster, and progress quicker. That is a model that doesnt seem to unfair or unreasonable.
EA's model of selling a 50-60 dollar game, or rather, portion of the game, and then selling you the rest as expansions is underhanded. Not sure if anyone has read Ready Player One, but they the real life video game equivalent of IOI for sure. Merge them with Verizon or AT&T and they are the real deal for sure. Luckily their model hasn't expanded to far yet.
It has also got to be there is one AAA game making company that could make money hand over fist if they did adopt a model like EA's. And yet every new bit of badass expansion in that game has come as a free update. Rockstar and GTA 5. From heists to low riders, every bit of it has come free aside from the original purchase of the game.
Here is to hoping Fallout 4 avoids the EA example
.
 
Sanji Himura
Where Beth and EA actually differ is that Beth offers true DLC - I mean that they don't cut content out of the base game and try to shovel it as Downloadable Content like other AAA publishers do. Beth thinks themselves as developers first, not publishers, so they deserve a pass here.
Click to expand...

Since Bethesda's track record is given here, they're one of the better developers when it comes to DLC. I'd put them up with Evolution Studios as well for providing content (not in quotations) that I actually give a damn about, unlike EA and Ubisoft who shove out season passes well before release (Ubi is worse in this instance).

Bethesda have come a long way towards improving their DLC, and I'm glad they don't pull 🤬 like the horse armour controversy back in Oblivion...
 
That trailer was pretty awesome, I'm guessing 60% of it was DLC only?
 
Paulie
That trailer was pretty awesome, I'm guessing 60% of it was DLC only?
Click to expand...

Nah mate this is the launch trailer, we haven't seen any DLC stuff yet. Base game comes with 4 planets, Tattooine Sullust Endor and Hoth.
 
A game with 4 maps....

images
 
Don't get confused guys, 4 planets does not mean 4 maps. I have already seen 2 variations of both Sullust and Tatooine, and potentially 3 on Endor.

Edit: with absolute minimal effort it is easy to find that there are 12 maps total with 2 to come with the Jakku dlc to total 14 maps before Christmas.
 
Last edited:
MildAshers
Don't get confused guys, 4 planets does not mean 4 maps. I have already seen 2 variations of both Sullust and Tatooine, and potentially 3 on Endor.

Edit: with absolute minimal effort it is easy to find that there are 12 maps total with 2 to come with the Jakku dlc to total 14 maps before Christmas.
Click to expand...

Yes, DLC. EA just taking shedloads money off people.
 
I'm confused? Is there going to be an exploring aspect to this game, or just showcasing the planets available in game?
 
Damn this game is absolutely beautiful! Endor at night/raining looks stunning, same with Tattooine and the others. Can't wait to jump back into this game.
 

Latest Posts

Back