• Register
  • TOS
  • Privacy
  • @NeoGAF
  • Like

BreezyLimbo
Member
(10-12-2017, 08:55 PM)
BreezyLimbo's Avatar
This isn't a response to their shitty loot crates more as it is an outlining of how they're implementing. Which is still bad?
cicatriz
Member
(10-12-2017, 08:55 PM)
cicatriz's Avatar

Originally Posted by SG-17

Doesn't seem like it.

In the beta your class level was determined by the number of star cards obtained for that class right? Seems like that could still be applicable here. I'm hoping this means that class levels (and main levels) are obtained via experience instead though.
Hippopuncher12
Member
(10-12-2017, 08:55 PM)
Hippopuncher12's Avatar
Just so know for sure, what is a Star Card?
Nabbis
Member
(10-12-2017, 08:55 PM)
Nabbis's Avatar

Originally Posted by Theorry

Then we would have a premium pass and people will complain about that. :D
There is some outrage and they respond on that. Nothing wrong with that.

I really don't get it. Why must i give companies money every time they come up with some bizarre shit? How is a premium pass a must when the game sells millions and paying for map packs is at most a ten year old scheme?

Like, some of you guys do get that if you stopped paying for that shit, they would still need to constantly improve games as to survive the competition.
Sanke__
Member
(10-12-2017, 08:55 PM)
Sanke__'s Avatar
WTF

that is in no way better

I thought duplicates upgraded the star cards
(Like getting 2 bronze made one silver)

This is complete bullshit
sugarman
Member
(10-12-2017, 08:56 PM)
If you can pay to have an advantage in a multiplayer game then seriously go get fucked.
FeD.nL
Member
(10-12-2017, 08:56 PM)
FeD.nL's Avatar
Uhm, isn’t this the system we were expecting in the first place? But now it limits whales from using the Star Cards they moby dick’ed on immediately? So basically they’re punishing the players that pay a lot by gating their items behind progression goals and the ones that pay just for the game with a shitty loot box system.
Majin Boo
Junior Member
(10-12-2017, 08:56 PM)
Majin Boo's Avatar
Want to make me buy your game? Remove the loot boxes...it's really simple, and you don't have to spend your time "balancing" them.
benicillin
Member
(10-12-2017, 08:56 PM)
benicillin's Avatar
It's a better system than what was shown in the beta, at least in my opinion.
Spartancarver
Member
(10-12-2017, 08:56 PM)

Originally Posted by Eggbok

I hope reviewers tear this game apart

Prepare to be disappointed, the gameplay was massively improved over SWBF1 and the game ran like a dream on PC even as a beta.
ebullientprism
Member
(10-12-2017, 08:56 PM)
ebullientprism's Avatar

Originally Posted by BreezyLimbo

This isn't a response to their shitty loot crates more as it is an outlining of how they're implementing. Which is still bad?

Yeah lol.
GearFourth
Banned
(10-12-2017, 08:58 PM)
No one will buy these consumables except the few rich people who suck at playing games or granddads playing this

People overreacting, also we get free maps etc no DLC with no player split which is great in return
Marcel
Member
(10-12-2017, 08:58 PM)
Marcel's Avatar

Originally Posted by GearFourth

No one will buy these consumables except the few rich people who suck at playing games or granddads playing this

So, a fair amount of GAF then? ;)
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
(10-12-2017, 08:58 PM)
Crossing Eden's Avatar

Originally Posted by SG-17

Its either incredible shortsightedness or a deliberate plan to not address the lootcrate system in the beta beforehand.

Probably the former considering the purpose of the beta was to be a stress test.
ASaiyan
Member
(10-12-2017, 08:59 PM)
ASaiyan's Avatar

Originally Posted by Theorry

Then we would have a premium pass and people will complain about that. :D

I guess it's fair to say I would be more upset by a Season Pass. It's sad that we've gotten to this place with AAA games though. Can we just, I dunno, have lower budgets and uglier graphics, and then when the game asks for my $60 that's it? Lol.
mysteriousmage09
Member
(10-12-2017, 08:59 PM)
mysteriousmage09's Avatar
That reads more like damage control and trying to spin it into not sounding like complete and utter shit to me.
Majukun
Member
(10-12-2017, 08:59 PM)
Majukun's Avatar

Originally Posted by Eggbok

I hope reviewers tear this game apart

they will not

users don't care,why should reviewers care?
Ristifer
Member
(10-12-2017, 08:59 PM)
Ristifer's Avatar
The fact that they even have to respond/explain already means it's bad.
DyslexicAlucard
Member
(10-12-2017, 08:59 PM)
DyslexicAlucard's Avatar

Originally Posted by Theorry

Then we would have a premium pass and people will complain about that. :D
There is some outrage and they respond on that. Nothing wrong with that.

I feel statements like this just aren't true. For me, I'm fine with premium passes as long as the base game feels like it has a good amount of content (which BF1 didn't), and the game does a good job at separating the community -- ie: don't have a player enter a server, only to be kicked out when they don't own the DLC.

I also think a lot of DLC is overpriced, making players reluctant to buy passes. If a pricing compromise/balance can't be found, I think most players will tolerate cosmetic loot boxes.

But this idea that players wanted more content post-release, so this is the only possible solution, is rather silly to me. It's a clear attempt to move the blame to consumers for a publisher's decisions.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
(10-12-2017, 09:00 PM)
Crossing Eden's Avatar

Originally Posted by Spartancarver

I really wish they had come out with this earlier. Like, during the beta or even before it. Figured the crate system in the beta wouldn't be final but they probably lost a decent number of sales over it

We're getting a SW film in two months, this game is gonna sell a shit ton based on that alone.
Chezzymann
Member
(10-12-2017, 09:00 PM)
Chezzymann's Avatar
This was just their strategy, have it super shitty in the beta and then reveal its slightly less shitty and hope everyone says "oh thats not so bad". Hopefully people dont fall for it. Normalizing the ability to pay for upgrades that give you an advantage, no matter how insignificant, should not happen.
Last edited by Chezzymann; 10-12-2017 at 09:02 PM.
Vital Tundra
Member
(10-12-2017, 09:01 PM)
Vital Tundra's Avatar
My biggest issue is just how garbage progression is. Random progression for random classes? How is that at all fun?
Alexander DeLarge
Member
(10-12-2017, 09:02 PM)
Alexander DeLarge's Avatar
There's so much to work with cosmetically in Star Wars. They fucked up going this route.
fanboi
Proud Empress of Backstabbing, ruler of Oopsy Daisy
(10-12-2017, 09:02 PM)
fanboi's Avatar

Originally Posted by MissCauthon

Microtransactions should affect a games review score imo and hard.

Depends how it affect the game.
CSJ
Member
(10-12-2017, 09:03 PM)
You can't make a bad idea good.
Marcel
Member
(10-12-2017, 09:03 PM)
Marcel's Avatar

Originally Posted by Chezzymann

This was just their strategy, have it super shitty in the beta and then reveal its slightly less shitty and hope everyone says "oh thats not so bad". Hopefully people dont fall for it.

People will fall for it. Star Wars is massively popular across all age groups with expendable income so they will just lap up whatever and spend money on the video game of the franchise they like, especially for those hero cards or whatever so they can play as their favorite characters.
Gator86
Member
(10-12-2017, 09:03 PM)
Gator86's Avatar

Originally Posted by ASaiyan

"We see you've discovered our awful crate system. Here are some reasons why it's actually okay..."

Never give up, PR Department.
KarmaCow
Member
(10-12-2017, 09:03 PM)
KarmaCow's Avatar

Originally Posted by Audioboxer

Don't miss out the good part

Short on time

Man that is such an insidious way of framing it. It's even more subtle than the way publishers usually try to frame microtransactions as some sort of selfless act that's a favour to people who have too much gosh darn money.
FeD.nL
Member
(10-12-2017, 09:04 PM)
FeD.nL's Avatar

Originally Posted by Chezzymann

This was just their strategy, have it super shitty in the beta and then reveal its slightly less shitty and hope everyone says "oh thats not so bad". Hopefully people dont fall for it.

Except it’s not even slightly less shitty but the same shitty system except now it limits Whales, so it’s actually more shitty because it punishes both spectrums. Oh DICE please spin this some more.
Bl@de
Member
(10-12-2017, 09:04 PM)
Bl@de's Avatar
Those AAA titles sound more and more like mobile games or pachinko. All those different currencies, „rewards“,....
matrixman92
Member
(10-12-2017, 09:05 PM)
matrixman92's Avatar
Crates will include a mix of of Star Cards, Outfits, Emotes or Victory Poses.


Just take out star cards and the rest is good. Then make progression a normal ranking system
ZugZug123
Member
(10-12-2017, 09:05 PM)
ZugZug123's Avatar

Originally Posted by SG-17

https://www.ea.com/games/starwars/ba...thank-you-beta


I have no idea what they were thinking releasing that beta build without a word before. Absolute idiocy in my opinion.

Maybe the beta was a reflection of how they wanted it to work and they are toning it down after really bad feedback? Can't trust some of these publishers anymore.
Brandon F
Well congratulations! You got yourself caught!
(10-12-2017, 09:05 PM)
Brandon F's Avatar

Originally Posted by DyslexicAlucard

Sounds like pretty much what we already knew, except that some things are locked behind rank. While that's "better," it still introduces a fundamental imbalance where people who have played more have a no-compromises advantage. So, while not completely "pay to win" in the strictest sense, I feel it's still not a great choice.

So like every competitive video game?

At what point shall we just chastise progression unlocks in any online game? It’s kind of where this is eventually going.
Spartancarver
Member
(10-12-2017, 09:05 PM)

Originally Posted by Ristifer

The fact that they even have to respond/explain already means it's bad.

Damned if they do, damned if they don't?

Are people glossing over the part where the best stuff is in-game unlock only and the part where if you get a really good card from a crate you still have to level up in game to use it?

Do people prefer a SWBF1 situation where hugely overpowered heroes, weapons, and abilities are locked behind a Season Pass pay wall that costs almost as much as the base game?
Saty
Member
(10-12-2017, 09:06 PM)
Saty's Avatar

And lastly, you have to earn the right to be able to upgrade Star Cards and unlock most Weapons. You can only upgrade or unlock them if you have reached a high enough rank, which is determined by playing the game.

Umm..the usual pub\dev justification for having MTs like that is for people who are in short in time but not in money. So what's the point of Mts to quicken progress if they then have to play to reach a specific rank, assuming it is actually a significant amount?

Can't wait for people to spend real money on a box, get a star card and then be greeted with 'your rank isn't high enough to use what you paid for' message.
Kane1345
Member
(10-12-2017, 09:07 PM)
Kane1345's Avatar
Tentatively back on the purchase train. Still keeping a massive eye on this though.
NastyBook
Either. That shit that make your soul burn slow, or not.
(10-12-2017, 09:07 PM)
They really explained it like it was going to go over well. When will one of these developers grow a spine and admit "we fucked up" when this shit inevitably occurs again?
Pastry
Member
(10-12-2017, 09:08 PM)
Pastry's Avatar
We’re here with DICE because people spent a decade complaining about Premium so this was their monetization solution to avoid paid DLC. Hopefully whatever they learn here can be applied to the superior DICE franchise for 2018 holidays.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
(10-12-2017, 09:08 PM)
Principate's Avatar

Originally Posted by Bl@de

Those AAA titles sound more and more like mobile games or pachinko. All those different currencies, „rewards“,....

Learn from the best.
VichoCardenas
Member
(10-12-2017, 09:09 PM)
VichoCardenas's Avatar
Well, that statement actually doesn't fix anything, just explains how they are gonna milk people's wallets. At least they are kind of honest and this bums to no end, had so much fun with the Beta.
DyslexicAlucard
Member
(10-12-2017, 09:09 PM)
DyslexicAlucard's Avatar

Originally Posted by Brandon F

So like every competitive video game?

At what point shall we just chastise progression unlocks in any online game? It’s kind of where this is eventually going.

This was not always the case, and was really introduced in CoD4. Even then, most weapon unlocks were "sidegrades," ie: they weren't definitively better than other weapons. For instance, you started with the M16, which couldn't go fully automatic like the M4, yet was more accurate. Things like that.

In this game, there are flat-out DPS and health advantages unlocked via Star Cards that are a complete, total upgrade. That is where the issue is to me. If a player wins a shootout because they are better than me, or had a more fitting loadout, I'm fine with that. If they only won because they unlocked an upgrade I haven't yet, that just feels shitty.
B1G_A1AN
Member
(10-12-2017, 09:10 PM)
B1G_A1AN's Avatar
They need to put out another BETA with these improvements and weapon/character nurfs/buffs.

I am still on the fence on to cancel my pre-order or not, it is on the cancel side really though.

The real issue I can see is that the players on the original game dropped off quite quickly after launch, there were people still getting the game and taking part, because you only really had to learn the maps, the starting weapons were some of the best in the game and the character you played as didn't make any difference, but this sequel if you join the game months after release everyone else is going to have upgraded their weapons and characters, they will be able to do more damage to you and take less damage from your weapons, everybody knows that Rainbow Six: Siege has a steep learning curve, but you only have to learn the maps, all the weapons are default and the characters have default abilities, so its going to be a real issue for people coming in late to Battlefront 2.

I loved the first game and picked it up at launch and I only really stopped playing it every other day or so in about February this year, I am not sure I can commit enough time to this with the other games I have/want to play but I feel if I don't get it at launch a couple of months down the line there will be no point in me getting the game for the reasons in my paragraph above.
Seyfert
Junior Member
(10-12-2017, 09:10 PM)

And lastly, you have to earn the right to be able to upgrade Star Cards and unlock most Weapons. You can only upgrade or unlock them if you have reached a high enough rank, which is determined by playing the game.

What's the point of that ??? That's mean you have to get that specific item from lootbox before you can use them by rank milestone. Isn't this practice is normal back in the day except they were automatic unlock without have to gambling to get that specific card in order to use.
TL21xx
Member
(10-12-2017, 09:10 PM)
TL21xx's Avatar

Originally Posted by Eggbok

I hope reviewers tear this game apart

Agreed, there are significant issues with the games design beyond even just the lootcrate economy (shooting physics, overemphasis on asymmetrical scenario designs, etc.). The thing that gets to me to this day is EA/DICE's unwillingness to put in a conquest-type mode because of the optics of it being too close to Battlefield (and from what I've heard from friends that worked at other EA companies, it's a policy from EA themselves). Boggles my mind, because the entire reason the original Pandemic games were popular was because they were essentially arcade-style Star Wars re-skins of the Battlefield game modes.

The real bummer is that the single-player looks decent and I've heard nothing but good things about the spacecraft side of things, so it's a shame that they've screwed up the historical bread and butter of the franchise that much.
Valar Morghulis
Member
(10-12-2017, 09:10 PM)
Valar Morghulis's Avatar
It's still a horrible system. Nothing that isn't cosmetic should be locked behind those damn crates.

Originally Posted by WickedLaharl

still sounds like a shit system

Originally Posted by ShadowSoldier89

its slightly less shit though!

Yeah, that didn't take long.

Originally Posted by Ferny

But not as bad as before. I think it's a little easier to take seeing as how just having the card doesn't mean you can use it right away.

Falchion
Member
(10-12-2017, 09:11 PM)
Falchion's Avatar
The rank requirements for certain star cards will curb people immediately buying the game and dumping a ton of money in crates to get superior gear which is good. Star cards still shouldn't be included in the crates at all though.
Gully State
Member
(10-12-2017, 09:13 PM)
Gully State's Avatar
Who here is honestly surprised that there would be a shit storm monetization tactic from a AAA EA game? I feel like it's always been this way to the point where I'm looking at these videos and trying to figure out what's the catch rather than actually looking forward to an exciting well made game. Loot crates, season passes, day 1 game passes, day 1 micro transactions, DLC horse armor, the list goes on and on. It's to the point where I would be shocked when EA and their ilk release a full priced game without any post game monetization.
Gravemind IV
Member
(10-12-2017, 09:13 PM)
Gravemind IV's Avatar
Doesn't really seem like a statement akin to understanding that the system is wrong, but rather some vague attempt at validating it?

The game is really good, would be a shame if this controversy preemptively kills the population for it..
Theorry
Member
(10-12-2017, 09:14 PM)
Theorry's Avatar

Originally Posted by DyslexicAlucard

I feel statements like this just aren't true. For me, I'm fine with premium passes as long as the base game feels like it has a good amount of content (which BF1 didn't), and the game does a good job at separating the community -- ie: don't have a player enter a server, only to be kicked out when they don't own the DLC.

I also think a lot of DLC is overpriced, making players reluctant to buy passes. If a pricing compromise/balance can't be found, I think most players will tolerate cosmetic loot boxes.

But this idea that players wanted more content post-release, so this is the only possible solution, is rather silly to me. It's a clear attempt to move the blame to consumers for a publisher's decisions.

It is to be fair. Everytime something like it gets announced. Everyone complains about it. Or when BF1 announces new dlc people also complain. Even when they trying to "fix" it with Premium trials and Premium friends. Those threads got the same reaction.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthre...ield+1+premium

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthre...ield+1+premium
Tylercrat
Junior Member
(10-12-2017, 09:17 PM)
Tylercrat's Avatar
A pay-to-win $60 dollar game (not free to play). I never thought I'd see that in my lifetime.

Thread Tools