So what I am getting from a lot of people here:
- EA should "learn" that f2p predatory lootbox mech...I mean surprise mechanics are the only way to go these days because battle royal games exist
- Battlefield should totally have a single player campaign, because thats the only way to justify full price. No way a multiplayer only game should charge full price ever. Because that has never happened. Never, ever, ever.
- 7 maps the size of a battle royal map is not enough. Even though BR games usually ship with only one
-3 games modes is somehow not in enough in a BF game. Though it seems fine in all their other games
Please let Battlefield do its Battlefield thing. Its bad enough that they focus so much on cosmetics, because people rather spend 10 bucks on 2 new hats and a pair of shoes for their virtual character, than actual new content like maps and modes, that take much more work. But buying maps that the team took months to create is somehow a rip of, but buying stupid looking cosmetics is cool. Only makes the game look ridiculous but whatever right...
Most Battlefields have shipped with a single digit number of maps. And those which did not had usually some very shitty maps along with them.
3 game modes is fine, as long as they are all good. BF doesnt need new modes for the sake of having new modes. Its core gameplay is usually strong enough to carry it.
Having a "battle pass" or whatever is fine as long as it comes with substantial content. I personally was fine with buying new maps as long as the maps are good. Because I think spending money on content that a lot of people worked hard on is a decent thing to do. Because I also want to get paid for my work. People expect too much free things these days. Nothing after the initial release should ever be charged for, but also prices need to stay the same for decades. This is just a very entitled way of looking at it. Everything becomes more expensive over time. So do games. But of course publishers "listen" and then come up with different monetization methods. This is why lootboxes exist. This is why so many game are plagued with cosmetics that ruin any kind of aesthetic. This is what you wanted. People should be happy that EA now gives all the actual content away for free and only want to charge for cosmetics. But still, people are bitching and moaning about it. Nothing is ever right.
You are literally saying this game should have
- more maps and modes
- have a single player mode
- be 60 bucks (in the USA, before taxes)
- get more content over time, without extra payments
And that all at the same time. Ignoring inflation, ignoring higher production cost, ignoring harder competition. Ignoring the fact that some of these claims are just completely random (like having a SP campaign in a Battlefield. This has never worked out and still people want it, just because. Just like people wanted multiplayer modes in SP games just because and publishers tried to shoe horn in stupid unnecessary MP modes in games that didnt need it).
Look, I dont like EA just like the next guy. I want this game to be good, because I had great times with the older Battlefields. But I dont trust EA and DICE enough these days to deliver on their promises. But I also think that what they are offering so far is reasonable, when looking at the current market and consumer behavior.
Content wise its similar to older Battlefields, which is fine. They promise of further content free of charge, unless you want to dress like a clown. 70 bucks is reasonable in the year 2021. Thats my opinion, even if the game is multiplayer only (of course this only counts if the game is actually good, if its just decent, you might want to wait for a deal or not buy it at all).
I just want a good fucking Battlefield game again. Yes I pay 70 bucks for it. Just let me have some good old Battlefield moments again and dont get distracted by how to monetize the game EA.