EA messed up - the huge backlash about SW : BF2

J. Marston

wes wrote: »

Not just referring to Sterling, and its not just a bit of extra money:



Seems even some of the whales think its gambling.

The design is pretty clearly psychologically manipulative. They have people whose entire jobs are to get you pay money for micro transactions.

It's exactly how it is in Ultimate Team.

For instance, if you open a pack and get a player rated 83 or above, you get some glitter, fireworks and the slow reveal of the player.

Except 999/1000, the player is more or less worthless so you'll always feel like you were so close to packing an amazing/expensive player.

Hugely manipulative.

marcbrophy

kunst nugget wrote: »

Lung cancer?

No, no! Not at all!

I meant nicotine!

You're an awful bollix :mad:

ShadowHearth

Actually one major thing that rubbed me wrong way about lootboxes and micro transactions in full priced games that I noticed last night.

I installed Battlefield 4 on my ps4 to mess around a bit. Installed all new updates and community patches. After joining to empty servers for a few times I gave up. Went to server browser and there was feck all. Player base shrank so much that only few servers have decent amount of players.
Obviously everyone moved on to next battlefield, then next one. Player base at some point will shrink and move one to next sequal of series.
So lootboxes werent that big of a thing in BF4, but look how big they are in Battlefront. So here is a major issues.
In free to play game like Warframe, I spent money and had a lot of fun, then I havent played it over a year. I came back now, got all new content and money I spent still relevant, as Items I got back then still here and useful. Now spend 100eu on Battlefront on top of 60 quid. In 2 years new battlefield comes out and everyone moves on to next one. All the money you spent means **** all. You need to buy new game again and new loot boxes.

So basically lootboxes and these microtransactions are waaaaaaay worse then just good old free 2 play.

Stone Deaf 4evr

ShadowHearth wrote: »

Actually one major thing that rubbed me wrong way about lootboxes and micro transactions in full priced games that I noticed last night.

I installed Battlefield 4 on my ps4 to mess around a bit. Installed all new updates and community patches. After joining to empty servers for a few times I gave up. Went to server browser and there was feck all. Player base shrank so much that only few servers have decent amount of players.
Obviously everyone moved on to next battlefield, then next one. Player base at some point will shrink and move one to next sequal of series.
So lootboxes werent that big of a thing in BF4, but look how big they are in Battlefront. So here is a major issues.
In free to play game like Warframe, I spent money and had a lot of fun, then I havent played it over a year. I came back now, got all new content and money I spent still relevant, as Items I got back then still here and useful. Now spend 100eu on Battlefront on top of 60 quid. In 2 years new battlefield comes out and everyone moves on to next one. All the money you spent means **** all. You need to buy new game again and new loot boxes.

So basically lootboxes and these microtransactions are waaaaaaay worse then just good old free 2 play.

according to bf4stats.com there are about 16,000 people still playing on ps4. That server browser interface is notoriously buggy. Xbox has less than 10,000 playing and there no problem getting a game, but you will see pages upon pages of empty ones in the browser. I was playing all weekend and its still a fantastic game.

Yea, anytime I play BF4 on the PS4 it's rare to get a server that isn't busy.

ShadowHearth

Stone Deaf 4evr wrote: »

according to bf4stats.com there are about 16,000 people still playing on ps4. That server browser interface is notoriously buggy. Xbox has less than 10,000 playing and there no problem getting a game, but you will see pages upon pages of empty ones in the browser. I was playing all weekend and its still a fantastic game.

There are vanilla ones, but my favourite maps where always classic bf3 maps and that china ones. Couldn't get a game in any of them.
Point is, that sooner or later that 15k players will disappear too.

Venom

Belgium's gaming commission has found that lootboxes are gambling.


http://www.pcgamer.com/belgium-says-loot-boxes-are-gambling-wants-them-banned-in-europe/


I wonder if other countries will now launch similar investigations?

dreamers75

Venom wrote: »

Belgium's gaming commission has found that lootboxes are gambling.


http://www.pcgamer.com/belgium-says-loot-boxes-are-gambling-wants-them-banned-in-europe/


I wonder if other countries will now launch similar investigations?

The EU will and the others probably wont.

jcd5971

Venom wrote: »

Belgium's gaming commission has found that lootboxes are gambling.


http://www.pcgamer.com/belgium-says-loot-boxes-are-gambling-wants-them-banned-in-europe/


I wonder if other countries will now launch similar investigations?

This is great news, if there's one thing the EU loves its harmonization, I`d expect a raft of other countries to follow suit now.

EA truly screwed the pooch on this one.

Cookie_Monster

dreamers75 wrote: »

The EU will and the others probably wont.

Given the way the US react to online poker, I'm surprised they haven't said anything about this.

CatInABox

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Given the way the US react to online poker, I'm surprised they haven't said anything about this.

Yeah, they react that way to online poker because the casinos lobbied to have them banned. Can't have online poker keeping the suckers punters from the casinos.

The EU is just about the only regulatory body that has the power and more importantly, the will to take this on. It may have some weird side effects though. Are the card games that you can buy in shops gambling? You don't know what is in each pack, so it's essentially a physical loot box.

One thing that many people seem to hark on about is how Battlefront 2 is a kids game and that it is marketed exclusively to children, it's not. It's a game aimed at adults and kids under the age of 13 aren't allowed to access the online aspect of the game unless of course, their parents allowed them to enter a fake date of birth to bypass the age gate.

As for the whole, we have to protect the vulnerable members of society who may be addicted or get addicted to gambling thing goes, I don't see people on here pushing for bookies to be closed or online gambling to be outlawed. Surely if you are this concerned about kids and vulnerable people you can't just stop with games.

My Betfair account doesn't masquerade as a lootbox system pretending it's not a gambling system.
It's a gambling account plain and simple. And it has the ability to put mitigation in place on said account so that I don't spend too much money in a month and I have clear visibility have much money I have won and lost throughout my account lifetime.

Can't imagine a parent going ahead and setting up their credit card and providing a gambling account for their child.

It's a game that's aimed at 13 years olds only due to it's age rating. I was at the last two Star Wars movies in the cinema and it was full of kids under the age of ten.
Amount of kids under the age playing COD reflects that this would be a huge percentage of the audience.
I wouldn't imagine many a parent gives a toss about some EULA associated with an online component.
And anyway, the lootboxes are part of every aspect of the game even the credits received for the campaign.

kunst nugget

Deleted User wrote: »

One thing that many people seem to hark on about is how Battlefront 2 is a kids game and that it is marketed exclusively to children, it's not. It's a game aimed at adults and kids under the age of 13 aren't allowed to access the online aspect of the game unless of course, their parents allowed them to enter a fake date of birth to bypass the age gate.

Is everyone over the age of 13 an adult?

Deleted User wrote: »

As for the whole, we have to protect the vulnerable members of society who may be addicted or get addicted to gambling thing goes, I don't see people on here pushing for bookies to be closed or online gambling to be outlawed. Surely if you are this concerned about kids and vulnerable people you can't just stop with games.

So, if we accept shítty and shady practices in one area, we have to accept them in all areas? We, as consumers of game, have the power to reject these shady practices and highlight the underhand techniques companies are using to extract more money from people.

I played a bit of Battlefront when I got the Ultimate Edition for a fiver on the PS Store but I'd not touch BF2 or Shadow of War because of what the publishing companies were trying to do with them in terms of loot boxes. Anyone buying these games is enabling these companies to continue with these practices.

boom

****ing delighted for EA haha

gimli2112

presumably legislation will come in making it harder to implement these kind of things, game companies will decry the increased costs and seek to increase the price of games. I find it difficult to feel sympathy for companies that measure their annual profits in billions.

M!Ck^

M!Ck^ wrote: »

My Betfair account doesn't masquerade as a lootbox system pretending it's not a gambling system.
It's a gambling account plain and simple. And it has the ability to put mitigation in place on said account so that I don't spend too much money in a month and I have clear visibility have much money I have won and lost throughout my account lifetime.

Can't imagine a parent going ahead and setting up their credit card and providing a gambling account for their child.

It's a game that's aimed at 13 years olds only due to it's age rating. I was at the last two Star Wars movies in the cinema and it was full of kids under the age of ten.
Amount of kids under the age playing COD reflects that this would be a huge percentage of the audience.
I wouldn't imagine many a parent gives a toss about some EULA associated with an online component.
And anyway, the lootboxes are part of every aspect of the game even the credits received for the campaign.

You can quite easily see how much you spend on a game, it's not like you do not have access to the information. Also, both Sony and Xbox will put a stop on an account if they notice large amounts of purchases occurring. Someone I know spent £1160 on the Xbox in a weekend and Xbox blocked him from making any more purchases till he contacted them.

Just because kids play it and it's a license that kids enjoy does not mean that it is for kids.Battlefront 2 is a game aimed at older teenagers and adults, your argument is akin to saying that kids watch superhero films so any 15 or 18 superhero film should not have any content in it inappropriate for kids as they may watch it.

Saying that loot boxes are part of the campaign is fair enough but at no point in the campaign is there any need or emphasis on purchasing loot crated. There are plenty of games in which at the end of a level you get points you can spend.

In fact, Mario Odyssey has a slot machine in it, in which you spend coins you collect for the chance at prizes? Should we be putting pressure on Nintendo to remove it as that is a game aimed at kids in which you can gamble. Or is that different to the manner in which Battlefront 2 allows you to purchase items using credits earned in-game?

If a parent allows their child to enter a fake date of birth on a game rated for 16+ and then allows their child to use a credit card to make ingame purchases then that is the parents failing, no one elses.

kunst nugget wrote: »

Is everyone over the age of 13 an adult?

So, if we accept shy and shady practices in one area, we have to accept them in all areas? We, as consumers of game, have the power to reject these shady practices and highlight the underhand techniques companies are using to extract more money from people.

I played a bit of Battlefront when I got the Ultimate Edition for a fiver on the PS Store but I'd not touch BF2 or Shadow of War because of what the publishing companies were trying to do with them in terms of loot boxes. Anyone buying these games is enabling these companies to continue with these practices.

The game is rated for 16 and above and while 16 is not quite an adult it's not far from it. The point is that saying that this uproar is to protect kids is the political version of click bait.

By all means, reject a business practice you disagree with, don't support the titles which utilize loot crates. Do people want to see a return of paid for season passes as the most likely outcome to the banning of loot crates outright is an increase in game base prices and season passes making a come back.

I find loot crates to be the worst thing that has happened to gaming in a long time but I made the decision not to support any title which uses them in an underhanded manner. I don't even play that many games in which Loot Crates offer only cosmetic items as I find that titles like Overwatch may use the system well but they are also normalising the idea of Loot Crates in game. I would love to see a return to games free from all in-game purchases but at the same time I don't want to see games cost more or have to pay for season pass content but the reality is that with budgets for Triple A games ofter hitting the half a billion figure it's one or the other.

Penn

Deleted User wrote: »

I find loot crates to be the worst thing that has happened to gaming in a long time but I made the decision not to support any title which uses them in an underhanded manner. I don't even play that many games in which Loot Crates offer only cosmetic items as I find that titles like Overwatch may use the system well but they are also normalising the idea of Loot Crates in game. I would love to see a return to games free from all in-game purchases but at the same time I don't want to see games cost more or have to pay for season pass content but the reality is that with budgets for Triple A games ofter hitting the half a billion figure it's one or the other.

Yet you support Battlefront 2. You don't play Overwatch because it normalises lootboxes even though the items are only cosmetic, yet you say you've played Battlefront 2 on PS4, XB1 and PC (so I'm presuming you own the game on at least on of those and perhaps played the others elsewhere), even though Battlefront 2 is one of the worst and most egregious implementations of lootboxes (hence the huge backlash).

As for Triple A often hitting a half a billion figure to make, that's not true.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_video_games_to_develop

Even though Destiny is often touted as costing half a billion, that's not strictly true, and much of that cost was based on a projected 10 year life-span of the game where they invested more than usual at the start. Obviously, the 10-year life of the game went out the window, but even then Destiny 2 wouldn't have cost nearly as much to make as development and marketing would be less as it's already off the same game engine, enemy design etc. Plus, even if we did take Destiny as costing $500m, it also had more than one seasons pass as well as microtransactions.

So somebody with a gambling addiction should be fine in picking this game up and ignoring the predatory progression system?
A bit of self control eh?
That's like telling an alcoholic to head to a wine tasting but make sure you don't drink the wine.

Comparing Mario Odyssey lol
You can't spend real world money that is all that should matter here.
You can spend it in Battlefront and the whole games mechanics are centered around it coaxing you to do so, like comparing apples to a biscuit.
Spending a grand and notifying you is part and parcel of Microsofts policy. Nothing at all got to do with EA. Until EA start to admit that it's gambling in their game then the can **** right off. But looks like regulation are going to take over and do it for them.

Legal Age of Gambling in the UK & Ireland is 18, the games age rating is wrong.
It's 21 in most states in the US.
Needs to be displayed on the box, as well as indications like gambling warnings from http://www.gambleaware.ie/ that you see on all gambling adds.

Stone Deaf 4evr

M!Ck^ wrote: »

Can't imagine a parent going ahead and setting up their credit card and providing a gambling account for their child.

My sister is a teacher, you'd be amazed about the amount of stories where kids have run up credit card debt with Fifa Ultimate Team.

Stone Deaf 4evr

Stone Deaf 4evr wrote: »

My sister is a teacher, you'd be amazed about the amount of stories where kids have run up credit card debt with Fifa Ultimate Team.

I was specifically talking about a Betfair account. An actual admitted gambling account.
But yea, I'd well imagine. That game is just as bad. But looks like it might also get nabbed now. Again, your average parent wouldn't have a clue until they realize there credit card bill is massive.
Fifa is a football game too. You would imagine no parent an issue picking up Fifa for them at Xmas or whatever.

Sonics2k

Deleted User wrote: »

It's a game aimed at adults

I'd challenge this bit. My 8 year old son has seen all the ads for the new game and has asked me to buy it numerous times.

He loves Star Wars through and through. Now, he's 8 so there's not a bloody chance in hell I'd buy a game like that for him, but the marketing is absolutely pointed towards kids too.

It's a certainly a game that knows a large part of it's buying audience is adults, but also it'll largely be teenagers, 14-15 years old.

Billy86

Deleted User wrote: »

As for the whole, we have to protect the vulnerable members of society who may be addicted or get addicted to gambling thing goes, I don't see people on here pushing for bookies to be closed or online gambling to be outlawed. Surely if you are this concerned about kids and vulnerable people you can't just stop with games.

There is some truth in that, but I won €150 on Sunday gambling on the NFL. If I win some 40 player game in BF2 on the other hand EA don't give me money, and if I win with stuff I bought from lootboxes they don't give me further money again.

More importantly though, you can't make a Paddy Power account or put a bet on in the bookies until you are 18 (they don't ID very often in my memory though), while for this game it is 13.

kunst nugget

Penn wrote: »

As for Triple A often hitting a half a billion figure to make, that's not true.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_video_games_to_develop

It's crazy to see that the marketing costs of COD:MW2 were 4 times the development costs.

And when you see the total cost of Witcher 3 for the quality of that game…

Deadpool cost €100 million? It really is a crock of poo considering the money pumped into it…

kunst nugget

Billy86 wrote: »

There is some truth in that, but I won €150 on Sunday gambling on the NFL. If I win some 40 player game in BF2 on the other hand EA don't give me money, and if I win with stuff I bought from lootboxes they don't give me further money again.

More importantly though, you can't make a Paddy Power account or put a bet on in the bookies until you are 18 (they don't ID very often in my memory though), while for this game it is 13.

Gambling addiction really isn't about making money though, it's about what it does to your brain chemistry in terms of dopamine rewards. EA and the likes understand this perfectly and uses many tricks to exploit that.

Penn

Penn wrote: »

Yet you support Battlefront 2. You don't play Overwatch because it normalises lootboxes even though the items are only cosmetic, yet you say you've played Battlefront 2 on PS4, XB1 and PC (so I'm presuming you own the game on at least on of those and perhaps played the others elsewhere), even though Battlefront 2 is one of the worst and most egregious implementations of lootboxes (hence the huge backlash).

As for Triple A often hitting a half a billion figure to make, that's not true.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_video_games_to_develop

Even though Destiny is often touted as costing half a billion, that's not strictly true, and much of that cost was based on a projected 10 year life-span of the game where they invested more than usual at the start. Obviously, the 10-year life of the game went out the window, but even then Destiny 2 wouldn't have cost nearly as much to make as development and marketing would be less as it's already off the same game engine, enemy design etc. Plus, even if we did take Destiny as costing $500m, it also had more than one seasons pass as well as microtransactions.

Didn't pay for the game on any format. Cleared the campaign on PS4, played a few hours of multiplayer on PC and had a play around on the Xbox one but did not pay a cent for the game. As I said, unlike so many others if I see a game using Loot Crates in a manner I dislike then I don't support them. Does not mean that I will not play the game but if the only way to play the game was by supporting the company then I would not play it.

Those figures are not exactly accurate or up to date. Battlefront 2 licensing fees, development cost and marketing were huge. The marketing campaign for Battlefront 2 is one of the biggest we have ever seen and cost hundreds of millions. I have it from good sources that Battlefront 2 and the latest Call of Duty all in cost just shy of 500 million.

M!Ck^ wrote: »

So somebody with a gambling addiction should be fine in picking this game up and ignoring the predatory progression system?
A bit of self control eh?
That's like telling an alcoholic to head to a wine tasting but make sure you don't drink the wine.

Comparing Mario Odyssey lol
You can't spend real world money that is all that should matter here.
You can spend it in Battlefront and the whole games mechanics are centered around it coaxing you to do so, like comparing apples to a biscuit.
Spending a grand and notifying you is part and parcel of Microsofts policy. Nothing at all got to do with EA. Until EA start to admit that it's gambling in their game then the can **** right off. But looks like regulation are going to take over and do it for them.

Legal Age of Gambling in the UK & Ireland is 18, the games age rating is wrong.
It's 21 in most states in the US.
Needs to be displayed on the box, as well as indications like gambling warnings from http://www.gambleaware.ie/ that you see on all gambling adds.

Ah so gambling is only dangerous to kids and vulnerable people if it uses real money. Having gambling mechanics in a game like Mario Odyssey is fine. Here I was thinking that people like you were up in arms to protect kids and the vulnerable and that a game like Mario Odyssey having a slot machine mini-game would normalise the idea of gambling but unless it's EA or uses real money gambling in games is perfectly acceptable. Good to know that it's ok for Nintendo to have gambling in games but not others.

M!Ck^ wrote: »

I was specifically talking about a Betfair account. An actual admitted gambling account.
But yea, I'd well imagine. That game is just as bad. But looks like it might also get nabbed now. Again, your average parent wouldn't have a clue until they realize there credit card bill is massive.
Fifa is a football game too. You would imagine no parent an issue picking up Fifa for them at Xmas or whatever.

If a parent allows their child unfettered access to a credit card on a gaming console then that is the parents fault. It is not EA or Activision or Warner Bros or anyone else responsibility. If a kid uses a parent's credit card to order 100 films on VOD, is that the fault of the company or the parents for not keeping a better eye on their card and money.

johnny_ultimate

kunst nugget wrote: »

And when you see the total cost of Witcher 3 for the quality of that game…

This is something of an outlier, it's important to emphasise, given it was made in Poland - which, given its lower cost of living, means they can operate on a different budget than a studio located in Tokyo, Vancouver etc... Even allowing for the fact they're an unusually capable & talented bunch at CD Projekt, sadly their model is not easily replicable elsewhere.

jcd5971

Deleted User wrote:

Those figures are not exactly accurate or up to date. Battlefront 2 licensing fees, development cost and marketing were huge. The marketing campaign for Battlefront 2 is one of the biggest we have ever seen and cost hundreds of millions. I have it from good sources that Battlefront 2 and the latest Call of Duty all in cost just shy of 500 million.

Do the voices in your head count as good sources?

K.O.Kiki

Deleted User wrote: »

Didn't pay for the game on any format. [...]

Can't tell if pirate or troll.

Penn

Deleted User wrote: »

Didn't pay for the game on any format. Cleared the campaign on PS4, played a few hours of multiplayer on PC and had a play around on the Xbox one but did not pay a cent for the game.

That's fair enough. As I said in my post, given that you'd said you'd played it on three different formats, I don't think it was unreasonable to assume you had bought the game on at least one of them.