I was planning to give all the different classes a good amount of playtime in the long run regardless, so doesnít bother me that much, tho I admit there were better ways they couldíve encouraged players to use the other classes more. I know thereíll be a good amount of class specific challenges in the missions and stuff at least, like there was for the officer class in the beta.
My last reply was mainly in regards to them quelling the concerns about the pay2win shtick, hence my reaction.
It's only temporary and another article said that when they bring them back they will be tied to progression (AKA, not just cosmetic stuff). They're likely attempting a bait and switch, here. They want to save face for a month or two and get some gamers to say "oh ok I can buy this game now". Then after launch, and after christmas, when all these people bought the game under the guise of decent business practices, they will reintroduce the predatory practices and things will revert to how they were.
In short, if you have a problem with the practices EA was attempting with this game before this temporary removal, you should still not buy this game.
I definitely don't think they're stalling microtransactions just to wait and then implement a "faux" fixed system or not change anything at all. I know this position is certainly popular but it borderlines on conspiracy, for me. It's mostly what I see in the more run-of-the-mill criticisms of how this game is handling it's microtransaction system.
The reasonable question is perhaps whether or not they will make enormous changes to the progression or minor ones. This almost depends on what type of changes they make. The exploration into merely cosmetic microtransactions is not likely going to be what the overhaul is.
I think EA definitely made a myriad of mistakes when designing how this game's progression works and focused far too much on purchasable crates, etc.
However, this does not mean the changes they make in the coming weeks (and months) will necessarily be modest. A lot could really happen, considering a backlash of this size is foreign to EA, despite their reputation and backlashes they have previously encountered from the past. No one probably saw that hero prices would drop by 75% from what is, according to many, essentially the Nazi regime of video game companies. We will have to see.
If you had said it was best to wait to purchase microtransactions in the future if there are good permanent changes to microtransactions in the future? I'd agree. The rest of the game itself? I can't. If the gameplay looks intriguing enough to someone and they wish to play with friends, it is not a big deal.
Yeah, some responses to what I'm saying will likely go in the direction of, "If you buy it, you're contributing to them doing it in the future! Vote with your wallet!"
DICE has over 700 hundred employees and EA has almost 8000. Most of these individuals, particularly at DICE, worked hard toward making a fun and enjoyable experience in their game without much thought put into the microtransactions (I imagine it was a handful of dudes in a boardroom making decisions concerning game income and microtransactions). Disney is already frustrated due to the timing of the backlash (close to TLJ release) and that's likely harmed the exclusivity deal. Also, they've sharply reduced hero costs (as mentioned before) and pulled microtransactions to make alterations. Also, DLC in the future is going to be free.
To address the gaming community's response to this in general? The cost of the game itself is the standard price of a triple A title in the industry and, at this point, what you're getting isn't so bad. I'd advise against anyone purchasing microtransactions in the future if changes aren't convincing enough and did before they were removed, sure, but warding off on the entire game (even with the absurd din in the tooooootally non-toxic gaming community) when they are doing something, regardless of whether it is because they care or it's attrition? It's not the greatest chasm of difference for what effect it produces.
However, if people don't wish to buy, it's obviously not a big deal. I totally get why and respect that decision. The thing that is primarily bugging me is the shaky arguments and patronizing high-horse bullshit that some who are telling others not to buy are exhibiting. It's unsurprising, anyway. This is how the gaming community is and it's always why this controversy will generate more laughs than enormous overhauls to the industry and then people will forget in a few weeks. These people are isolating those who actually agree with them.
Yeah if someone doesn't really care about the microtransaction shit and just wants to play the game, and will have fun with it, then they should buy it and enjoy it. More power to them, I don't care. My initial point was towards those who might have been against the predatory microtransactions to the point that they were withholding their purchase. Those people should continue holding off on their purchase until we see what alterations EA decides to make to the microtransactions when they re-implement them.
Personally, I wasn't going to buy the game anyways. I had no interest in it. I'm just watching the shitshow from the sidelines. I am happy that a lot of professional reviewers are dinging their scores so significantly over the predatory practices, though. Other publishers need to learn that this kind of stuff is not okay and won't be accepted. If they see this game earn a low score, and have sales that suffer, then that makes it less likely they'll try to utilize a similar scheme.
No doubt the microtransactions are ill-conceived. I'd say most people agree with that. What I had a problem with, as I explained, was that the community is lashing out in all directions against people who might agree with them regarding the microtransactions but still purchased the game. Some have labelled it rationalizing, some have said people are stupid suckers, and others have even claimed those who are purchasing are "mentally ill."
What I am saying is that this will drive away a larger potential audience who might question and/or second guess an EA preorder in the future. It reminds me, a little bit, of the demographic increase of atheists back in the mid 2000s. These people likely weren't incorrect and were thinking reasonably but it lead to obnoxious highfaluting and infighting amongst people who basically didn't disagree. Basically, the dude said it best when he claimed "you're not wrong, you're just an asshole."
At just about every corner of social media, I've been essentially told I don't have enough of a problem with it because I purchased the game, even though I haven't touched a microtransaction. "You're supporting the company who implemented it!" Yeah, that company with thousands of employees who did more than just throw together a system to purchase items in-game. They, well, made a game.
Like I said when we first discussed this, there's gotta be consistency with the community who wants to sit firmly on their pedestal. No more cheap clothing, no more Walmart, Amazon, Google, Nestle, Apple, etc... Otherwise, you don't really take issue with predatory practices. You're likely just on the bandwagon for the ride, another reason that could undercut taking this issue with legitimate seriousness. (Not you specifically, obviously. I know you're not like that and, for the most part, I agree with you. Just speaking to the more toxic elements of the gaming community).
TL;DR: The moral indignation of the gaming community is self-destructing what it's trying to do.
Nothing ever ends.
Last edited by Gehenna on Nov 19th, 2017 at 11:54 AM
I usually don't have a problem with microtransactions. Sports games have been doing it for years and if somebody wants to pay money to get leveled up quickly....no problem.
However, how they did these types of microtransactions is pretty damn brutal. Take 40 hours to get a hero you want? Bullshit. Can't get credits after doing too many hours in arcade mode? More bullshit.
But I'm not surprised EA has done this with Battlefront. They probably paid 500 million or more for the rights to make Star Wars videogames and probably spent 30-50 million bucks making each game (or more!) so EA has to recoup it's cost somehow. It's just shitty they did it in this style.
But I do agree regarding the video game community. A community destroyed Andromeda before it was released. It wasn't a fantastic game but it wasn't terrible...5-10 years ago, it would of considered a "good" game and done reasonably well. Now, games are either terrible or fantastic without any middle ground and one of the reasons why singleplayer games are not selling as well. It's a shame.
I think it would have been considered good, or at least better, simply had it come out before Inquisition. And then that would have been considered the uninspired knock-off of the Bioware game that proceeded it.
Oh I absolutely agree. Andromeda had high expectations and many, many problems but it's not terrible. Far from it. There is a lot of good in it.
Single player games are never going to be dead. Even AAA titles. It's just not something people want anymore because there has been 10 years of fantastic single player games that have been released and people want something different.
For instance, Destiny style games are the rage right now but it's basically a Diabo style game from 20 years ago. Online shooters were something everybody wanted but now....a game like Lawbreakers can't even get 500 people to play it.
More and more game developers will make clones of what's big right now and 5 years from now, one company will make a dedicated AAA singleplayer game and people will buy tons of them and the cycle will repeat.