Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Blizzard savages Star Wars Battlefront 2 in series of StarCraft tweets
MadFrenchie
Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
https://www.polygon.com/2017/11/14/16652186/blizzard-savages-star-wars-battlefront-2-tweets
In light if the recent heated debates, thought it was worth sharing the Polygon article noticing some choice tweets by Blizzard referencing the criticism, it appears. Shots fired!
In light if the recent heated debates, thought it was worth sharing the Polygon article noticing some choice tweets by Blizzard referencing the criticism, it appears. Shots fired!
Comments
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Their marketing team are earning their pennies.
Jim Sterling for one.
But in all fairness...
Is there something Jim Sterling does NOT have an issue with?
The gameplay is markedly improved. I know once I finish the campaign I'll spend some time in the Arcade goofing around with custom games, 3 star as many of the challenges as possible, and then jump into multiplayer.
And with a solid post-launch release of free single player and multiplayer content... I know I'll be spending a good 100+ hours at least in the game over the next 6 months, which makes the $80 deluxe purchase a very good deal at less than a dollar per hour of entertainment.
If I get some xbox live rewards cards for my birthday and/or Christmas, will probably even buy some credit to get more lootboxes and get more skins/emotes and help progress a bit.
Who cares?
It's a shooter, the card ranks really only give you minor bonuses, your skill as a player will still outweigh any RPG disparity 10 to 1.
And the heroes? I've never liked the heroes gameplay... but with the dedicated 4vs4 heroes mode I may enjoy it? Don't know yet.
As for EA itself - I've quite enjoyed Battlefield 1, Titanfall 1/2, DA: Inquisition, and yes - even Mass Effect Andromeda.
I hope Anthem is a competent competitor/replacement for Destiny 2, as thus far I don't see/am not experiencing the same kick/rush/addiction on D2 as I did for Destiny 1.
I know that's what I'd prefer. That way you can choose 'not' to get the DLC and the game you bought is unaffected.
These aren't sidegrades. They're straight upgrades to key statistics on the competitive multiplayer side. Quite honestly, no self-respecting multiplayer developer should even give straight upgrades like that because it destroys the integrity of the multiplayer portion. For all the posting that Blizzard started the lootbox craze, they had the good sense not to hand out upgrades to players in a competitive multiplayer title.
But such is the progression. Publishers aren't looking at these monetizations through the lens of "how much does this improve the experience," but through a lens of "how much more will the players stand?"
It's just that his rants are part of his style very much like his suit.
It's what creates his popularity and entertainment value.
So using guy whose job it is to rant doesn't seem like the best choice to back up an argument.
They're not just putting extra stuff behind paywalls. They've taken the most iconic heroes of the franchise.
They've used the "free DLC" argument many times to justify why the game is so micro transaction heavy.
Bliz is giving away part of a 7 year old game with declining interest to bring in new customers who they hope will want to buy the 2 other DLC campaigns, the DLC announcer packs, and DLC commanders.
This is the opposite of a burn.
And the highest end cards you can only earn through gameplay, not buy.
So yes, it is (potentially) paying to get ahead, but it's not pay to win and it's not as big and drastic of an advantage as the sensationalist anti-EA everything crowd would have you believe.
The starfighter gameplay specifically is quite fast, 20% damage/resistance/mobility sounds like a lot on paper, but in actual gameplay it's NOT a huge advantage.
I can't remember the numbers off the top of my head... but (for example) if you have like 1,500 HP as a fighter, having 20% more gives you 1,800 HP - and say enemy shots each take of 250 HP that is a difference of 6 vs 7.2 shots to kill you...
Which in gameplay speed is maybe like an eight of a second difference??
I applaud that Blizzard has a game with which they can make these statements. But as Simsalabim points out there are loot boxes in CoD, which fall from the sky onto the beaches of Normandy and can be seen by other players. I presume this is to make them feel envious and want to buy them.
Over the years gaming companies have become about business and less about anything else. Less about how good the entertainment it, less about the artistry, the community, the creativity. Blizzard is not immune to that sadly, this is already where the gaming industry is and it is only going to get worse until regulation is brought in.
Not now. The name on the door is Activision Blizzard.
So, for example, when it comes to expansions launch used to be "when done". The last couple have released to a schedule given out to investors many months in advance. And it showed.