criterion-sm dice-lg ea-starwars-lg instagram lucasfilm-lg motive-lg twitch you-tube
Game Update
Forest of Endor

Free DLC Maps?

Prev13
GivenumDaBiznes
1044 posts Member
edited July 2016
In one of my previous threads @Tobikun mentioned that Titanfall 2 would be giving all its DLC maps free to the players; This would prevent splitting of the community from those who had DLC maps and those who didn't. At first I didn't think much of it since it was another game, but then I quickly realized Titanfall is an EA published game.

This being said, my question to you guys is: how would you feel about DICE/Motive going this route with their DLC in future SWBF titles? Do you think EA is testing this business model with Titanfall or do you think they will implement it across all their MP games moving forward? Would you be willing to pay for things separately (i.e. Weapons, Starcards, Heroes) if it meant getting all the DLC maps free?

I believe free DLC maps is the best solution for keeping the playerbase united and eliminating things like forced playlist when DLC maps drop. I would gladly pay for everything else "a la carte" style if it meant no more worrying about which friends had which maps and even worse DLC playlist dying out to newer DLCs or just everyone eventually migrating back to vanilla.

I even came up with a rough sketch on how it could be:

Weapons - $1-$2 each
(10-15 DLC weapons)
= $10-$30
Starcards - $1-$2 each
(5-10 DLC starcards)
= $5-$20
Heroes - $2-$3 each
(8-10 DLC heroes)
= $16-$30
Skins/Outfits - $1 each
(Practically limitless)

In return ALL maps and game modes free. If you add it up; (not including Skins/Outfits) you are looking at anywhere from $30 on the low end to $80 on the high end for DLC content. I feel this system would be a good trade off between keeping the playerbase united and keeping the bigwigs happy.

How would you guys feel about this system? Should we just continue with season passes or do you like the idea of buying content more individually (not including maps and modes)?

Replies

  • Gingie
    4317 posts Member
    In my opinion, I just think we should wait until they show how they'll try and make their money without selling the maps. After all, it's not free to make them, so they have to earn that money back somehow. Like I said, let's wait and see how it plays out, let's see if they can give us free maps without earning the money from micro transactions.
  • Themainman
    1980 posts Member
    I will pay for extra heroes and maps no doubt
  • Sb2432
    2605 posts Member
    edited July 2016
    They don't care about you or the player base, they only care about what's most profitable, titanfall was totally DOOMED and they felt releasing dlc maps for free was most profitable in hopes more people would buy the game and maybe make sales. They don't give a hoot about you or anyone, and will do what they think is best to boost sales. As of now, I don't see free dlc maps helping boost sales because from what I see on ps4, game is far from doomed
    Post edited by Hozilla on
  • Gingie
    4317 posts Member
    Sb2432 wrote: »
    They don't care about you or the player base, they only care about what's most profitable, titanfall was totally DOOMED and they felt releasing dlc maps for free was most profitable in hopes more people would buy the game and maybe make sales. They don't give a **** about you or anyone, and will do what they think is best to boost sales. As of now, I don't see free dlc maps helping boost sales because from what I see on ps4, game is far from doomed

    1. He's talking about the next Battlefront, not this one, and 2. Your post is tasteless, too much salt.
  • Sb2432
    2605 posts Member
    Gingie wrote: »
    Sb2432 wrote: »
    They don't care about you or the player base, they only care about what's most profitable, titanfall was totally DOOMED and they felt releasing dlc maps for free was most profitable in hopes more people would buy the game and maybe make sales. They don't give a **** about you or anyone, and will do what they think is best to boost sales. As of now, I don't see free dlc maps helping boost sales because from what I see on ps4, game is far from doomed

    1. He's talking about the next Battlefront, not this one, and 2. Your post is tasteless, too much salt.

    Not salt, it's fact, big business do what's most profitable, go to college, read a book, watch a documentary, educate yourself, and you'll realize what kind of world you really live in.
  • FreeContentNowPls
    1306 posts Member
    edited July 2016
    I would rather have a season pass with a server browser instead of microtransactions plaguing the game. Giving 50 dollars and calling it a day with all future content instead of this charge small prices for everything which inevitably leads you to spending more than you would with a season pass.

    If you have a server browser with your game and give a good base game with plentiful expansions/support than your game will not die regardless of the playersplit given by paid maps/modes. I never see people from Battlefield or even Call of Duty complaining about playersplits stuff like this and they've had season passes for the longest. I guarantee you that the player bases on the last two COD's and Battlefield 4 probably surpass this game even with the season pass business that they do.

    I will never support offerings like this because then it makes it so easy for P2W content to pave the way and it turns a game into so much of a grind. I have yet to play a game which delivers content by micro-transactions that didn't either feel like a grind, turned into a P2W system or needed ridiculous playtimes to unlock something that people who pay for it get instant access. Free maps and modes are fun but at the cost of ruining everything else then I rather not have them at all. The last thing this franchise needs is to be riddled with microtransactions under the false pretense of "saving the playerbase"
    Post edited by Hozilla on
  • I think its a good idea in general. Killzone Shadow Fall also had all new multipayer maps free. The Season pass was for a brand new online coop mode, and other stuff like skins, etc.

    However, I don't think this is Battlefront's problem. It certainly wasn't an issue in Battlefield 4. They could make the current season pass model work for Battlefront 2 if they:

    1) Use a server browser so people can set up their own servers or use default ones from DICE like in BF4.

    2) Make every map a large map. For each large map released, use a cutout of that map for a small map. That way every DLC pack has 4 large maps, and 4 small maps that are cutouts of the large maps.

  • Sb2432 wrote: »
    Gingie wrote: »
    Sb2432 wrote: »
    They don't care about you or the player base, they only care about what's most profitable, titanfall was totally DOOMED and they felt releasing dlc maps for free was most profitable in hopes more people would buy the game and maybe make sales. They don't give a **** about you or anyone, and will do what they think is best to boost sales. As of now, I don't see free dlc maps helping boost sales because from what I see on ps4, game is far from doomed

    1. He's talking about the next Battlefront, not this one

    Not salt, it's fact, big business do what's most profitable, go to college, read a book, watch a documentary, educate yourself, and you'll realize what kind of world you really live in.

    Yea I was referring to future SWBF titles. I understand businesses have to make money, if you look at my model you will see they could still make a good profit (= or >$50 season passes) while still being able to provide the DLC maps for free.
  • GivenumDaBiznes
    1044 posts Member
    edited July 2016
    Nope **** this. I rather have a season pass with a server browser instead of microtransactions plaguing the game. Giving 50 dollars and calling it a day with all future content instead of this charge small prices for everything which inevitably leads you to spending more than you would with a season pass.

    If you have a server browser with your game and give a good base game with plentiful expansions/support than your game will not die regardless of the playersplit given by paid maps/modes. I never see people from Battlefield or even Call of Duty complaining about playersplits stuff like this and they've had season passes for the longest. I guarantee you that the player bases on the last two COD's and Battlefield 4 probably surpass this game even with the season pass business that they do.

    I will never support offerings like this because then it makes it so easy for P2W content to pave the way and it turns a game into so much of a grind. I have yet to play a game which delivers content by micro-transactions that didn't either feel like a grind, turned into a P2W system or needed ridiculous playtimes to unlock something that people who pay for it get instant access. Free maps and modes are fun but at the cost of ruining everything else then I rather not have them at all. The last thing this franchise needs is to be riddled with microtransactions under the false pretense of "saving the playerbase"

    Some may argue DLC in general is P2W. Just look at all the threads talking about nerfing EE4 and Disruption. Just because DLC is sold in "bulk" doesn't necessarily mean it will be more balanced and fair.

    ...I found this ironic and comical coming from "free content now please" xD but I respect your point of view and I know what your saying can happen.

    Oh and about COD, try playing DLC maps on COD games from 3-4 years ago.
  • Sb2432
    2605 posts Member
    Sb2432 wrote: »
    Gingie wrote: »
    Sb2432 wrote: »
    They don't care about you or the player base, they only care about what's most profitable, titanfall was totally DOOMED and they felt releasing dlc maps for free was most profitable in hopes more people would buy the game and maybe make sales. They don't give a **** about you or anyone, and will do what they think is best to boost sales. As of now, I don't see free dlc maps helping boost sales because from what I see on ps4, game is far from doomed

    1. He's talking about the next Battlefront, not this one

    Not salt, it's fact, big business do what's most profitable, go to college, read a book, watch a documentary, educate yourself, and you'll realize what kind of world you really live in.

    Yea I was referring to future SWBF titles. I understand businesses have to make money, if you look at my model you will see they could still make a good profit (= or >$50 season passes) while still being able to provide the DLC maps for free.

    Even so, what I said applies to future titles, they will do whatever they project to make the biggest dollar value. And if future game sells like this one did(pretty likely because most people aren't that bright and businesses like EA know this) they will sell you this game with a different skin. And from there, decide on what's the most profitable route they could decide for DLC.
  • I think its a good idea in general. Killzone Shadow Fall also had all new multipayer maps free. The Season pass was for a brand new online coop mode, and other stuff like skins, etc.

    However, I don't think this is Battlefront's problem. It certainly wasn't an issue in Battlefield 4. They could make the current season pass model work for Battlefront 2 if they:

    1) Use a server browser so people can set up their own servers or use default ones from DICE like in BF4.

    2) Make every map a large map. For each large map released, use a cutout of that map for a small map. That way every DLC pack has 4 large maps, and 4 small maps that are cutouts of the large maps.

    I feel this Battlefront is definitely being affected by this, there wouldn't be the need for forced playlist DLC otherwise.

  • Nope **** this. I rather have a season pass with a server browser instead of microtransactions plaguing the game. Giving 50 dollars and calling it a day with all future content instead of this charge small prices for everything which inevitably leads you to spending more than you would with a season pass.

    If you have a server browser with your game and give a good base game with plentiful expansions/support than your game will not die regardless of the playersplit given by paid maps/modes. I never see people from Battlefield or even Call of Duty complaining about playersplits stuff like this and they've had season passes for the longest. I guarantee you that the player bases on the last two COD's and Battlefield 4 probably surpass this game even with the season pass business that they do.

    I will never support offerings like this because then it makes it so easy for P2W content to pave the way and it turns a game into so much of a grind. I have yet to play a game which delivers content by micro-transactions that didn't either feel like a grind, turned into a P2W system or needed ridiculous playtimes to unlock something that people who pay for it get instant access. Free maps and modes are fun but at the cost of ruining everything else then I rather not have them at all. The last thing this franchise needs is to be riddled with microtransactions under the false pretense of "saving the playerbase"

    Some may argue DLC in general is P2W. Just look at all the threads talking about nerfing EE4 and Disruption. Just because DLC is sold in "bulk" doesn't necessarily mean it will be more balanced and fair.

    ...I found this ironic and comical coming from "free content now please" xD but I respect your point of view and I know what your saying can happen.

    Oh and about COD, try playing DLC maps on COD games from 3-4 years ago.

    Actually my name was made because I was very dissatisfied with the games lack of content even with the season pass hence why I support free content for this game alongside the paid DLC but that is besides the point.

    I actually play BO2 often and I own two out of the 4 packs (Revolution and Vengeance) and I have very little problem actually playing content from either DLC pack on multiplayer. I may have a wait time for a bit but it's nothing significant at all. Also if I really wanted to play then I could play with bots since COD actually offers bot support for all their maps/modes (this is a shot at you DICE). Granted Black Ops 2 is one of the most liked COD games and is a very popular game but it's exactly what I mean by a good game having an community/good player base 4 years after release despite offering a season pass. Not to mention how easy it would be for DLC users if the game actually had a server browser instead of doing match making.

    I guess you do have a point that DLC in general may seem like P2W for most but lets not act like balance issues are exclusive to the DLC content. Take a look at the forums and I guarantee that you will probably find at least one thread about any star card/weapon and how it's overpowered and needs to be nerfed.

    Either way I find it that it's even more apparent in games that offer microtransactions specifically for weapons and stuff that directly affects gameplay.
  • GivenumDaBiznes
    1044 posts Member
    edited July 2016
    Sb2432 wrote: »
    Sb2432 wrote: »
    Gingie wrote: »
    Sb2432 wrote: »
    They don't care about you or the player base, they only care about what's most profitable, titanfall was totally DOOMED and they felt releasing dlc maps for free was most profitable in hopes more people would buy the game and maybe make sales. They don't give a **** about you or anyone, and will do what they think is best to boost sales. As of now, I don't see free dlc maps helping boost sales because from what I see on ps4, game is far from doomed

    1. He's talking about the next Battlefront, not this one

    Not salt, it's fact, big business do what's most profitable, go to college, read a book, watch a documentary, educate yourself, and you'll realize what kind of world you really live in.

    Yea I was referring to future SWBF titles. I understand businesses have to make money, if you look at my model you will see they could still make a good profit (= or >$50 season passes) while still being able to provide the DLC maps for free.

    Even so, what I said applies to future titles, they will do whatever they project to make the biggest dollar value. And if future game sells like this one did(pretty likely because most people aren't that bright and businesses like EA know this) they will sell you this game with a different skin. And from there, decide on what's the most profitable route they could decide for DLC.

    You're right but their "projections" are often made, in part, by consumers (us the community) feedback and trends. If we voiced to them (in large numbers) our feelings and ideas then they might hear us and decide to change their practices. Thats why I made this thread, I wanted to gauge the community's opinion on the matter and see if there were more like minded players out there.
  • Themainman
    1980 posts Member
    Ea and Dice? free? In the same sentence?! Ha!
  • 80 dollars for full dlc compared to 50? No thanks. Horrible idea
  • Nope **** this. I rather have a season pass with a server browser instead of microtransactions plaguing the game. Giving 50 dollars and calling it a day with all future content instead of this charge small prices for everything which inevitably leads you to spending more than you would with a season pass.

    If you have a server browser with your game and give a good base game with plentiful expansions/support than your game will not die regardless of the playersplit given by paid maps/modes. I never see people from Battlefield or even Call of Duty complaining about playersplits stuff like this and they've had season passes for the longest. I guarantee you that the player bases on the last two COD's and Battlefield 4 probably surpass this game even with the season pass business that they do.

    I will never support offerings like this because then it makes it so easy for P2W content to pave the way and it turns a game into so much of a grind. I have yet to play a game which delivers content by micro-transactions that didn't either feel like a grind, turned into a P2W system or needed ridiculous playtimes to unlock something that people who pay for it get instant access. Free maps and modes are fun but at the cost of ruining everything else then I rather not have them at all. The last thing this franchise needs is to be riddled with microtransactions under the false pretense of "saving the playerbase"

    Some may argue DLC in general is P2W. Just look at all the threads talking about nerfing EE4 and Disruption. Just because DLC is sold in "bulk" doesn't necessarily mean it will be more balanced and fair.

    ...I found this ironic and comical coming from "free content now please" xD but I respect your point of view and I know what your saying can happen.

    Oh and about COD, try playing DLC maps on COD games from 3-4 years ago.

    Actually my name was made because I was very dissatisfied with the games lack of content even with the season pass hence why I support free content for this game alongside the paid DLC but that is besides the point.

    I actually play BO2 often and I own two out of the 4 packs (Revolution and Vengeance) and I have very little problem actually playing content from either DLC pack on multiplayer. I may have a wait time for a bit but it's nothing significant at all. Also if I really wanted to play then I could play with bots since COD actually offers bot support for all their maps/modes (this is a shot at you DICE). Granted Black Ops 2 is one of the most liked COD games and is a very popular game but it's exactly what I mean by a good game having an community/good player base 4 years after release despite offering a season pass. Not to mention how easy it would be for DLC users if the game actually had a server browser instead of doing match making.

    I guess you do have a point that DLC in general may seem like P2W for most but lets not act like balance issues are exclusive to the DLC content. Take a look at the forums and I guarantee that you will probably find at least one thread about any star card/weapon and how it's overpowered and needs to be nerfed.

    Either way I find it that it's even more apparent in games that offer microtransactions specifically for weapons and stuff that directly affects gameplay.

    Haha I see and fair enough.

    True but like you said, BO2 is one of their most (if not the most) popular title in the series and I bet its only on certain modes. It is only worse on anything MW3 and back (probably Ghost too); fact is DLC maps don't stay populated on games long because the people who buy season passes and DLCs are most likely the same people who buy the next game as soon as it comes out. This leaves DLC maps in games pretty much dead and complete wastelands just a few years after the game comes out.
  • GivenumDaBiznes
    1044 posts Member
    edited July 2016
    Themainman wrote: »
    Ea and Dice? free? In the same sentence?! Ha!

    EA has already shown they would try it with Titanfall...Then again I don't know if that was EAs call or Respawns.
  • Staind716 wrote: »
    80 dollars for full dlc compared to 50? No thanks. Horrible idea

    80 is on the high end and it would all be sold separately, meaning you could pick and choose. You wouldn't have to worry about blindly buying a season pass mixed with things you want and don't want. So if you are a long range styled player you could buy all the snipers/assault rifles and forego the smgs/shotguns. It would be more personalized DLC in a sense, you wouldn't be forced to buy things you'd never use.
  • Gingie
    4317 posts Member
    Themainman wrote: »
    Ea and Dice? free? In the same sentence?! Ha!

    EA has already shown they would try it with Titanfall...Then again I don't know if that was EAs call or Respawns.

    Either way, it shows a company like EA is looking for ways to both earn back the money they spent on resources making the maps, and provide those maps for free.
  • Gingie wrote: »
    Themainman wrote: »
    Ea and Dice? free? In the same sentence?! Ha!

    EA has already shown they would try it with Titanfall...Then again I don't know if that was EAs call or Respawns.

    Either way, it shows a company like EA is looking for ways to both earn back the money they spent on resources making the maps, and provide those maps for free.

    They are a business, they need to make money no matter how you slice it. Im just proposing a way where they can make their money without sacrificing the playerbase and splitting the community.
  • Gingie
    4317 posts Member
    Gingie wrote: »
    Themainman wrote: »
    Ea and Dice? free? In the same sentence?! Ha!

    EA has already shown they would try it with Titanfall...Then again I don't know if that was EAs call or Respawns.

    Either way, it shows a company like EA is looking for ways to both earn back the money they spent on resources making the maps, and provide those maps for free.

    They are a business, they need to make money no matter how you slice it. Im just proposing a way where they can make their money without sacrificing the playerbase and splitting the community.

    Yeah I get that, I was just saying, whether it's Respawn's call or EA's, EA is now willing to open up to a solution.
  • GivenumDaBiznes
    1044 posts Member
    edited July 2016
    Gingie wrote: »
    Gingie wrote: »
    Themainman wrote: »
    Ea and Dice? free? In the same sentence?! Ha!

    EA has already shown they would try it with Titanfall...Then again I don't know if that was EAs call or Respawns.

    Either way, it shows a company like EA is looking for ways to both earn back the money they spent on resources making the maps, and provide those maps for free.

    They are a business, they need to make money no matter how you slice it. Im just proposing a way where they can make their money without sacrificing the playerbase and splitting the community.

    Yeah I get that, I was just saying, whether it's Respawn's call or EA's, EA is now willing to open up to a solution.

    Oh gotcha yea. I am just tired of buying DLC maps that have an expiration date on them just a few years after they drop (sometimes months depending on player reception and game popularity). Everyone generally always goes back to vanilla maps because thats always the biggest "pool" leaving DLC maps to rot and go unplayed after the hype dies.
  • Tyjames
    807 posts Member
    Gingie wrote: »
    Themainman wrote: »
    Ea and Dice? free? In the same sentence?! Ha!

    EA has already shown they would try it with Titanfall...Then again I don't know if that was EAs call or Respawns.

    Either way, it shows a company like EA is looking for ways to both earn back the money they spent on resources making the maps, and provide those maps for free.

    They are a business, they need to make money no matter how you slice it. Im just proposing a way where they can make their money without sacrificing the playerbase and splitting the community.

    Except they've made their money. They are swimming in it actually. To move that many units was an amazing feat, at the expense of the consumer. Thus why we see the season pass faring badly.
  • Gingie
    4317 posts Member
    Gingie wrote: »
    Gingie wrote: »
    Themainman wrote: »
    Ea and Dice? free? In the same sentence?! Ha!

    EA has already shown they would try it with Titanfall...Then again I don't know if that was EAs call or Respawns.

    Either way, it shows a company like EA is looking for ways to both earn back the money they spent on resources making the maps, and provide those maps for free.

    They are a business, they need to make money no matter how you slice it. Im just proposing a way where they can make their money without sacrificing the playerbase and splitting the community.

    Yeah I get that, I was just saying, whether it's Respawn's call or EA's, EA is now willing to open up to a solution.

    Oh gotcha yea. I am just tired of buying DLC maps that have an expiration date on them just a few years after they drop (sometimes months depending on player reception and game popularity). Everyone generally always goes back to vanilla maps because thats always the biggest "pool" leaving DLC maps to rot and go unplayed after the hype dies.

    I've heard about Halo releasing maps for free in order to keep the playerbase from being split, but that's cause they're making loads of dough off the micro transactions. I would like to see new solutions made in order to release maps for free, but no way do I want that solution to be micro transactions.
  • Tyjames wrote: »
    Gingie wrote: »
    Themainman wrote: »
    Ea and Dice? free? In the same sentence?! Ha!

    EA has already shown they would try it with Titanfall...Then again I don't know if that was EAs call or Respawns.

    Either way, it shows a company like EA is looking for ways to both earn back the money they spent on resources making the maps, and provide those maps for free.

    They are a business, they need to make money no matter how you slice it. Im just proposing a way where they can make their money without sacrificing the playerbase and splitting the community.

    Except they've made their money. They are swimming in it actually. To move that many units was an amazing feat, at the expense of the consumer. Thus why we see the season pass faring badly.

    No ones arguing that James lol. We know buku money was made especially since they announced a sequel not even a year after the first. I am just suggesting alternatives to a season pass for the next game; one that doesn't split the playerbase and eliminates the need for forced playlist DLCs.
  • GivenumDaBiznes
    1044 posts Member
    edited July 2016
    Gingie wrote: »
    Gingie wrote: »
    Gingie wrote: »
    Themainman wrote: »
    Ea and Dice? free? In the same sentence?! Ha!

    EA has already shown they would try it with Titanfall...Then again I don't know if that was EAs call or Respawns.

    Either way, it shows a company like EA is looking for ways to both earn back the money they spent on resources making the maps, and provide those maps for free.

    They are a business, they need to make money no matter how you slice it. Im just proposing a way where they can make their money without sacrificing the playerbase and splitting the community.

    Yeah I get that, I was just saying, whether it's Respawn's call or EA's, EA is now willing to open up to a solution.

    Oh gotcha yea. I am just tired of buying DLC maps that have an expiration date on them just a few years after they drop (sometimes months depending on player reception and game popularity). Everyone generally always goes back to vanilla maps because thats always the biggest "pool" leaving DLC maps to rot and go unplayed after the hype dies.

    I've heard about Halo releasing maps for free in order to keep the playerbase from being split, but that's cause they're making loads of dough off the micro transactions. I would like to see new solutions made in order to release maps for free, but no way do I want that solution to be micro transactions.

    Yup Halo 5 did go the way of free DLC maps and I understand the hate towards micro transactions, but I am not talking about selling "mystery boxes" or whatever those Halo/COD packs are called. I am basically just splitting up the season pass into single items that can be bought separately and more personally...
    Do you have any new solutions that could be better? I am just spitballing here myself.
  • jason_kal
    1151 posts Member
    edited July 2016
    Given the bad word-of-mouth (because of the playlist), and the unhappy DLC owners (playlist, again), I'm hoping they'll do something different. I will never buy any DLC that forces me into a terrible playlist.
  • Nope **** this. I rather have a season pass with a server browser instead of microtransactions plaguing the game. Giving 50 dollars and calling it a day with all future content instead of this charge small prices for everything which inevitably leads you to spending more than you would with a season pass.

    If you have a server browser with your game and give a good base game with plentiful expansions/support than your game will not die regardless of the playersplit given by paid maps/modes. I never see people from Battlefield or even Call of Duty complaining about playersplits stuff like this and they've had season passes for the longest. I guarantee you that the player bases on the last two COD's and Battlefield 4 probably surpass this game even with the season pass business that they do.

    I will never support offerings like this because then it makes it so easy for P2W content to pave the way and it turns a game into so much of a grind. I have yet to play a game which delivers content by micro-transactions that didn't either feel like a grind, turned into a P2W system or needed ridiculous playtimes to unlock something that people who pay for it get instant access. Free maps and modes are fun but at the cost of ruining everything else then I rather not have them at all. The last thing this franchise needs is to be riddled with microtransactions under the false pretense of "saving the playerbase"

    Some may argue DLC in general is P2W. Just look at all the threads talking about nerfing EE4 and Disruption. Just because DLC is sold in "bulk" doesn't necessarily mean it will be more balanced and fair.

    ...I found this ironic and comical coming from "free content now please" xD but I respect your point of view and I know what your saying can happen.

    Oh and about COD, try playing DLC maps on COD games from 3-4 years ago.

    Actually my name was made because I was very dissatisfied with the games lack of content even with the season pass hence why I support free content for this game alongside the paid DLC but that is besides the point.

    I actually play BO2 often and I own two out of the 4 packs (Revolution and Vengeance) and I have very little problem actually playing content from either DLC pack on multiplayer. I may have a wait time for a bit but it's nothing significant at all. Also if I really wanted to play then I could play with bots since COD actually offers bot support for all their maps/modes (this is a shot at you DICE). Granted Black Ops 2 is one of the most liked COD games and is a very popular game but it's exactly what I mean by a good game having an community/good player base 4 years after release despite offering a season pass. Not to mention how easy it would be for DLC users if the game actually had a server browser instead of doing match making.

    I guess you do have a point that DLC in general may seem like P2W for most but lets not act like balance issues are exclusive to the DLC content. Take a look at the forums and I guarantee that you will probably find at least one thread about any star card/weapon and how it's overpowered and needs to be nerfed.

    Either way I find it that it's even more apparent in games that offer microtransactions specifically for weapons and stuff that directly affects gameplay.

    Haha I see and fair enough.

    True but like you said, BO2 is one of their most (if not the most) popular title in the series and I bet its only on certain modes. It is only worse on anything MW3 and back (probably Ghost too); fact is DLC maps don't stay populated on games long because the people who buy season passes and DLCs are most likely the same people who buy the next game as soon as it comes out. This leaves DLC maps in games pretty much dead and complete wastelands just a few years after the game comes out.

    Fun Fact: MW3 is most likely more populated than Ghost but alas you are probably right that the playerbase for DLC is probably nonexistent at that point. However I still think that between a functional instant action being implemented and a server browser for online that the player base would be able to survive a season pass for years to come (assuming that the base game was actually complete and that we had a very substantial season pass/post launch plan)
  • jason_kal wrote: »
    Given the bad word-of-mouth (because of the playlist), and the unhappy DLC owners (playlist, again), I'm hoping they'll do something different. I will never buy any DLC that forces me into a terrible playlist.

    I'm hoping they try something new for their next Battlefront as well. Wasn't a fan of how they implemented DLC in this one.
  • Nope **** this. I rather have a season pass with a server browser instead of microtransactions plaguing the game. Giving 50 dollars and calling it a day with all future content instead of this charge small prices for everything which inevitably leads you to spending more than you would with a season pass.

    If you have a server browser with your game and give a good base game with plentiful expansions/support than your game will not die regardless of the playersplit given by paid maps/modes. I never see people from Battlefield or even Call of Duty complaining about playersplits stuff like this and they've had season passes for the longest. I guarantee you that the player bases on the last two COD's and Battlefield 4 probably surpass this game even with the season pass business that they do.

    I will never support offerings like this because then it makes it so easy for P2W content to pave the way and it turns a game into so much of a grind. I have yet to play a game which delivers content by micro-transactions that didn't either feel like a grind, turned into a P2W system or needed ridiculous playtimes to unlock something that people who pay for it get instant access. Free maps and modes are fun but at the cost of ruining everything else then I rather not have them at all. The last thing this franchise needs is to be riddled with microtransactions under the false pretense of "saving the playerbase"

    Some may argue DLC in general is P2W. Just look at all the threads talking about nerfing EE4 and Disruption. Just because DLC is sold in "bulk" doesn't necessarily mean it will be more balanced and fair.

    ...I found this ironic and comical coming from "free content now please" xD but I respect your point of view and I know what your saying can happen.

    Oh and about COD, try playing DLC maps on COD games from 3-4 years ago.

    Actually my name was made because I was very dissatisfied with the games lack of content even with the season pass hence why I support free content for this game alongside the paid DLC but that is besides the point.

    I actually play BO2 often and I own two out of the 4 packs (Revolution and Vengeance) and I have very little problem actually playing content from either DLC pack on multiplayer. I may have a wait time for a bit but it's nothing significant at all. Also if I really wanted to play then I could play with bots since COD actually offers bot support for all their maps/modes (this is a shot at you DICE). Granted Black Ops 2 is one of the most liked COD games and is a very popular game but it's exactly what I mean by a good game having an community/good player base 4 years after release despite offering a season pass. Not to mention how easy it would be for DLC users if the game actually had a server browser instead of doing match making.

    I guess you do have a point that DLC in general may seem like P2W for most but lets not act like balance issues are exclusive to the DLC content. Take a look at the forums and I guarantee that you will probably find at least one thread about any star card/weapon and how it's overpowered and needs to be nerfed.

    Either way I find it that it's even more apparent in games that offer microtransactions specifically for weapons and stuff that directly affects gameplay.

    Haha I see and fair enough.

    True but like you said, BO2 is one of their most (if not the most) popular title in the series and I bet its only on certain modes. It is only worse on anything MW3 and back (probably Ghost too); fact is DLC maps don't stay populated on games long because the people who buy season passes and DLCs are most likely the same people who buy the next game as soon as it comes out. This leaves DLC maps in games pretty much dead and complete wastelands just a few years after the game comes out.

    Fun Fact: MW3 is most likely more populated than Ghost but alas you are probably right that the playerbase for DLC is probably nonexistent at that point. However I still think that between a functional instant action being implemented and a server browser for online that the player base would be able to survive a season pass for years to come (assuming that the base game was actually complete and that we had a very substantial season pass/post launch plan)

    Bro I would not doubt that at all, if BO2 was the best in the series; Ghost was undoubtedly the worst, reception wise anyways. Lets not forget we are talking about COD (arguably one the most popular MP franchises out there) and it still suffers from DLC map degradation. Don't get me wrong, I am definitely all for instant action and server browser implementation but in the end I feel these systems would only slightly mitigate the main problem that the season pass and paid DLC maps inherently introduces.
  • Not gunna happened, I just realized that EA bought the rights to make star wars games and the probably spent a huge amount of money for it. Now they are just going to quickly spam out a whole load of unfinished games to try and get their money back. I'd say we wouldn't be able to see a good star wars game for a thew years, After Battlefield 1 and some other star wars games come out Ea shouldn't need to worry about money and we'll finnaly get a next gen experience battlefront game (clone wars)
  • Tyjames
    807 posts Member
    Tyjames wrote: »
    Gingie wrote: »
    Themainman wrote: »
    Ea and Dice? free? In the same sentence?! Ha!

    EA has already shown they would try it with Titanfall...Then again I don't know if that was EAs call or Respawns.

    Either way, it shows a company like EA is looking for ways to both earn back the money they spent on resources making the maps, and provide those maps for free.

    They are a business, they need to make money no matter how you slice it. Im just proposing a way where they can make their money without sacrificing the playerbase and splitting the community.

    Except they've made their money. They are swimming in it actually. To move that many units was an amazing feat, at the expense of the consumer. Thus why we see the season pass faring badly.

    No ones arguing that James lol. We know buku money was made especially since they announced a sequel not even a year after the first. I am just suggesting alternatives to a season pass for the next game; one that doesn't split the playerbase and eliminates the need for forced playlist DLCs.

    Maybe to clarify. Basically instead of finding ways or suggesting some other methods where EA can get money to add maps and so forth, those of us who have enough self control (it can be hard it's starwars after all) to not pre order the next starwars game and not get the season pass until it's considerably discounted.

    By buying season passes and dlc's we (the consumer) are providing incentive for this sham of a money grab. The game was lack luster when it came out, the executives admitted they rushed the game yet charged players more than the average of other games.

    If no one (which I know is probably impossible) bought the season pass, it would send a clear message. At least with battlefront 2, I hope the majority who bought the pass before they got any info will rethink their purchase and not do the same.

    Edit:
    While reading your main post, if dlc contained only extra modes/weapons/heros and left regular maps as a freebie then I might consider buying. But it would need to be reduced in cost. so 25$ for season pass, not this joke of 49.99 USD or worse 69.99 CAD.
  • Tewainui1 wrote: »
    Not gunna happened, I just realized that EA bought the rights to make star wars games and the probably spent a huge amount of money for it. Now they are just going to quickly spam out a whole load of unfinished games to try and get their money back. I'd say we wouldn't be able to see a good star wars game for a thew years, After Battlefield 1 and some other star wars games come out Ea shouldn't need to worry about money and we'll finnaly get a next gen experience battlefront game (clone wars)

    I still have high hopes for SWBF EA 2. The first one was rushed (understandably so, market/hype wise anyways) to coincide with the new movie. Now that they have the ground work done and a base to work upon, im sure they are going to have more time to focus on the game itself and just pack it with content...Pre DLC that is.
  • I know one thing for certain... I won't put a pre-order down for Battlefront 2. Now that I think about it, I might even wait until Black Friday this time around.
    PSN: N3GAT1VE_CR33P (Note: blank requests get deleted)
  • TheStalker88
    6084 posts Member
    edited July 2016
    Its the only way to go to not split community and force playlists which is the bane of Battlefront. They will implement this no doubt because they cant deal with increasing playlist heat. What they wont be able to deal with is severly lacking content they are releasing. No more free maps, one skin per dlc per faction, a couple of new maps, thats very lacking. And bugs and vague announcements. Unless they stop practising greedy cashgrabbing tactics Battlefront brand will be tarnished and doomed.
  • DO2L
    129 posts Member
    Its all about the money money mooonnneeey.
  • Tyjames wrote: »
    Tyjames wrote: »
    Gingie wrote: »
    Themainman wrote: »
    Ea and Dice? free? In the same sentence?! Ha!

    EA has already shown they would try it with Titanfall...Then again I don't know if that was EAs call or Respawns.

    Either way, it shows a company like EA is looking for ways to both earn back the money they spent on resources making the maps, and provide those maps for free.

    They are a business, they need to make money no matter how you slice it. Im just proposing a way where they can make their money without sacrificing the playerbase and splitting the community.

    Except they've made their money. They are swimming in it actually. To move that many units was an amazing feat, at the expense of the consumer. Thus why we see the season pass faring badly.

    No ones arguing that James lol. We know buku money was made especially since they announced a sequel not even a year after the first. I am just suggesting alternatives to a season pass for the next game; one that doesn't split the playerbase and eliminates the need for forced playlist DLCs.

    Maybe to clarify. Basically instead of finding ways or suggesting some other methods where EA can get money to add maps and so forth, those of us who have enough self control (it can be hard it's starwars after all) to not pre order the next starwars game and not get the season pass until it's considerably discounted.

    By buying season passes and dlc's we (the consumer) are providing incentive for this sham of a money grab. The game was lack luster when it came out, the executives admitted they rushed the game yet charged players more than the average of other games.

    If no one (which I know is probably impossible) bought the season pass, it would send a clear message. At least with battlefront 2, I hope the majority who bought the pass before they got any info will rethink their purchase and not do the same.

    Edit:
    While reading your main post, if dlc contained only extra modes/weapons/heros and left regular maps as a freebie then I might consider buying. But it would need to be reduced in cost. so 25$ for season pass, not this joke of 49.99 USD or worse 69.99 CAD.

    I never pre order (no reason to) and I never buy season passes (I dont like paying for something without knowing what that something is or will be) and this goes for all games I buy. I agree the consumer can speak loudest with their wallet but at the end of the day, the concept of "DLC" and season passes isn't going anywhere, at least not in the foreseeable future; so if its going to be, I rather it be in the best form it can. That form I believe would be to give out all DLC maps for free and only charge for weapons, heroes, cosmetics, ect. Lesser of two evils imo.
  • Tyjames
    807 posts Member
    Tyjames wrote: »
    Tyjames wrote: »
    Gingie wrote: »
    Themainman wrote: »
    Ea and Dice? free? In the same sentence?! Ha!

    EA has already shown they would try it with Titanfall...Then again I don't know if that was EAs call or Respawns.

    Either way, it shows a company like EA is looking for ways to both earn back the money they spent on resources making the maps, and provide those maps for free.

    They are a business, they need to make money no matter how you slice it. Im just proposing a way where they can make their money without sacrificing the playerbase and splitting the community.

    Except they've made their money. They are swimming in it actually. To move that many units was an amazing feat, at the expense of the consumer. Thus why we see the season pass faring badly.

    No ones arguing that James lol. We know buku money was made especially since they announced a sequel not even a year after the first. I am just suggesting alternatives to a season pass for the next game; one that doesn't split the playerbase and eliminates the need for forced playlist DLCs.

    Maybe to clarify. Basically instead of finding ways or suggesting some other methods where EA can get money to add maps and so forth, those of us who have enough self control (it can be hard it's starwars after all) to not pre order the next starwars game and not get the season pass until it's considerably discounted.

    By buying season passes and dlc's we (the consumer) are providing incentive for this sham of a money grab. The game was lack luster when it came out, the executives admitted they rushed the game yet charged players more than the average of other games.

    If no one (which I know is probably impossible) bought the season pass, it would send a clear message. At least with battlefront 2, I hope the majority who bought the pass before they got any info will rethink their purchase and not do the same.

    Edit:
    While reading your main post, if dlc contained only extra modes/weapons/heros and left regular maps as a freebie then I might consider buying. But it would need to be reduced in cost. so 25$ for season pass, not this joke of 49.99 USD or worse 69.99 CAD.

    I never pre order (no reason to) and I never buy season passes (I dont like paying for something without knowing what that something is or will be) and this goes for all games I buy. I agree the consumer can speak loudest with their wallet but at the end of the day, the concept of "DLC" and season passes isn't going anywhere, at least not in the foreseeable future; so if its going to be, I rather it be in the best form it can. That form I believe would be to give out all DLC maps for free and only charge for weapons, heroes, cosmetics, ect. Lesser of two evils imo.

    That I understand and also agree with "if there is to be dlc/season pass content" that it should not split the player base.

    Driveclub did a great job with their dlc's /season pass. All tracks were free, while new cars and race contests were in form of a dlc.
  • Playlists are only present in Battlefront and this concept is the biggest fail of all online things to have ever been created. Only free dlc maps can rid the games of them and they will. Unless ea keeps pushing for paid maps for easy cash grabs. Tho if titanfall 2 is changing its tactics to releasing free dlc maps, there might still be hope for the next Battlefront.
  • jason_kal
    1151 posts Member
    Playlists are only present in Battlefront and this concept is the biggest fail of all online things to have ever been created. Only free dlc maps can rid the games of them
    DICE's DLC plan is a disaster. Look how many say they stop playing their DLC, and how many say they won't buy, and how many say they regret buying.
    Free maps would be 1 solution. If they won't do that, more playlists per DLC would help. Sabotage-only, WA-only (on Bespin + base game planets), same for FS, Blast, TP, Supremacy, etc. Then people that like the same thing, can find each other, and play together. This also would make the DLC feel integrated into the base game planets.
  • This. More playlists is a must for this dlc.
  • Sb2432 wrote: »
    Gingie wrote: »
    Sb2432 wrote: »
    They don't care about you or the player base, they only care about what's most profitable, titanfall was totally DOOMED and they felt releasing dlc maps for free was most profitable in hopes more people would buy the game and maybe make sales. They don't give a **** about you or anyone, and will do what they think is best to boost sales. As of now, I don't see free dlc maps helping boost sales because from what I see on ps4, game is far from doomed

    1. He's talking about the next Battlefront, not this one, and 2. Your post is tasteless, too much salt.

    Not salt, it's fact, big business do what's most profitable, go to college, read a book, watch a documentary, educate yourself, and you'll realize what kind of world you really live in.

    Here's a fact that applies to everything since you wanna go that route: If people don't like a product they purchase they will complain about it and demand it to be improved next time and if the demand is not met then they simply won't buy the product made by the company again until otherwise, and the company will eventually lose money. It's that simple, some people will give a company a second chance or so but if that trust is violated then you won't be seeing those people buying the product again including other customers that know next to nothing and have been told that the said company has a bad reputation for not listening to their customers and will ultimately drive more people away from it.

    Thus the business ultimately loses since no one wants to buy their products because they don't give good customer service, if you want to make money then you have to listen to your customers and especially your loyal customers who liked your products to begin with, they are your supporters who will help spread the word on how great your product is. Sure not everyone they talk to will like it when they try it but that's just how things go, it's also important to have a united community than a divided one since divided communities tend to have lots of infighting and separate demands for companies which can cause alot of stress for them and can hurt their business since they know that if they cater to one side than the other will be VERY disappointed and will leave them while also giving them a bad rep.

    Don't know where it all fell apart for EA in the past, I'm sure they were once a great company but I wouldn't be surprised if the reason why they started losing lots of loyal fans is because they stopped caring about them a long time ago. Our response to EA for doing this to us is this:
    hqdefault.jpg
  • Sb2432 wrote: »
    Gingie wrote: »
    Sb2432 wrote: »
    They don't care about you or the player base, they only care about what's most profitable, titanfall was totally DOOMED and they felt releasing dlc maps for free was most profitable in hopes more people would buy the game and maybe make sales. They don't give a **** about you or anyone, and will do what they think is best to boost sales. As of now, I don't see free dlc maps helping boost sales because from what I see on ps4, game is far from doomed

    1. He's talking about the next Battlefront, not this one, and 2. Your post is tasteless, too much salt.

    Not salt, it's fact, big business do what's most profitable, go to college, read a book, watch a documentary, educate yourself, and you'll realize what kind of world you really live in.

    Here's a fact that applies to everything since you wanna go that route: If people don't like a product they purchase they will complain about it and demand it to be improved next time and if the demand is not met then they simply won't buy the product made by the company again until otherwise, and the company will eventually lose money. It's that simple, some people will give a company a second chance or so but if that trust is violated then you won't be seeing those people buying the product again including other customers that know next to nothing and have been told that the said company has a bad reputation for not listening to their customers and will ultimately drive more people away from it.

    Thus the business ultimately loses since no one wants to buy their products because they don't give good customer service, if you want to make money then you have to listen to your customers and especially your loyal customers who liked your products to begin with, they are your supporters who will help spread the word on how great your product is. Sure not everyone they talk to will like it when they try it but that's just how things go, it's also important to have a united community than a divided one since divided communities tend to have lots of infighting and separate demands for companies which can cause alot of stress for them and can hurt their business since they know that if they cater to one side than the other will be VERY disappointed and will leave them while also giving them a bad rep.

    Don't know where it all fell apart for EA in the past, I'm sure they were once a great company but I wouldn't be surprised if the reason why they started losing lots of loyal fans is because they stopped caring about them a long time ago. Our response to EA for doing this to us is this:
    hqdefault.jpg

    Lol lets not kid ourselves now. Nothing has fallen apart for EA. Sure they may be regarded as a bad company but if things were really going bad for EA then they wouldn't be making as much money as they do now. They got exactly the numbers they expected to hit with Battlefront if not more and they have tons of avid followers for many other franchises they own. I doubt they really care that a few battlefront fans are disgruntled cause they don't like the game. They'd just try again or make another Star Wars game that you'd probably buy.
  • Playlists are only present in Battlefront and this concept is the biggest fail of all online things to have ever been created. Only free dlc maps can rid the games of them and they will. Unless ea keeps pushing for paid maps for easy cash grabs. Tho if titanfall 2 is changing its tactics to releasing free dlc maps, there might still be hope for the next Battlefront.

    Server browsers can do that job as well but everyone is on the free DLC maps hype and has seem to forget that majority of the issues when it comes to the games matchmaking/playlists would easily be solved with a server browser. Anyway I think that Battlefield 1's post launch plans will give us an indication of where DICE plans to go when it comes to post launch plans. If we get premium for BF 1 then it's probably a give n that Battlefront 2 will have an equivalent (that is if they are smart and actually give us a Battlefield type season pass instead of the lightweight content we got this time)

    Also COD does have playlists for their individual DLC packs but they also incorporate the DLC maps into matchmaking. It is generally good at first until the next COD game releases and the previous release pretty much dies with the only exception being the fan favorite COD games (BO, BO2, MW3).
  • jason_kal
    1151 posts Member
    edited July 2016
    Server browsers can do that job as well
    No, a server browser by itself solves nothing. It's just a different kind of interface for picking a server.
    If EVERY Bespin server continues to run the identical awful rotation of maps/modes we have now (& there's 0 indication we'll ever get customizable, rented server ability), all a server browser does is let you look at that list of identical, horribly-configured servers. And, in all likelihood, all servers start-up on-demand, so you could only browse the exact vanilla & DLC servers that people are already playing, right at that moment. You couldn't see vanilla Drop Zone, if no one were playing it at that moment.
    FIRST DICE needs to setup a greater variety of Bespin playlists/server types. Some offering the current playlist, some offering Sabotage-only, some offering WA-only (on Bespin + base game maps), same for FS, Blast, etc.
    Once that's done, it doesn't matter too much if you pick the server/playlist via a browser, or (since DICE seems dead-set on not giving us a browser), they update the in-game menu to give us access to all these varied playlists/servers.
  • Ctown
    859 posts Member
    Mos Eisley ftw!
  • Sb2432
    2605 posts Member
    Staind716 wrote: »
    80 dollars for full dlc compared to 50? No thanks. Horrible idea

    80 is on the high end and it would all be sold separately, meaning you could pick and choose. You wouldn't have to worry about blindly buying a season pass mixed with things you want and don't want. So if you are a long range styled player you could buy all the snipers/assault rifles and forego the smgs/shotguns. It would be more personalized DLC in a sense, you wouldn't be forced to buy things you'd never use.

    Only issue with that, is it
    Sb2432 wrote: »
    Gingie wrote: »
    Sb2432 wrote: »
    They don't care about you or the player base, they only care about what's most profitable, titanfall was totally DOOMED and they felt releasing dlc maps for free was most profitable in hopes more people would buy the game and maybe make sales. They don't give a **** about you or anyone, and will do what they think is best to boost sales. As of now, I don't see free dlc maps helping boost sales because from what I see on ps4, game is far from doomed

    1. He's talking about the next Battlefront, not this one, and 2. Your post is tasteless, too much salt.

    Not salt, it's fact, big business do what's most profitable, go to college, read a book, watch a documentary, educate yourself, and you'll realize what kind of world you really live in.

    Here's a fact that applies to everything since you wanna go that route: If people don't like a product they purchase they will complain about it and demand it to be improved next time and if the demand is not met then they simply won't buy the product made by the company again until otherwise, and the company will eventually lose money. It's that simple, some people will give a company a second chance or so but if that trust is violated then you won't be seeing those people buying the product again including other customers that know next to nothing and have been told that the said company has a bad reputation for not listening to their customers and will ultimately drive more people away from it.

    Thus the business ultimately loses since no one wants to buy their products because they don't give good customer service, if you want to make money then you have to listen to your customers and especially your loyal customers who liked your products to begin with, they are your supporters who will help spread the word on how great your product is. Sure not everyone they talk to will like it when they try it but that's just how things go, it's also important to have a united community than a divided one since divided communities tend to have lots of infighting and separate demands for companies which can cause alot of stress for them and can hurt their business since they know that if they cater to one side than the other will be VERY disappointed and will leave them while also giving them a bad rep.

    Don't know where it all fell apart for EA in the past, I'm sure they were once a great company but I wouldn't be surprised if the reason why they started losing lots of loyal fans is because they stopped caring about them a long time ago. Our response to EA for doing this to us is this:
    hqdefault.jpg

    If you want to believe companies work like that, you go ahead, think that, but I promise you, you guys will all buy their games just cause it's starwars, and there will be movie hype, propaganda everywhere promoting swbf2 just like this game had, I mean look at this community every time a DLC comes out? "Omg omg I'm so excited ahhhhhh" they get it, try it out, put it down a few minutes later and say it sucks lol that's exactly what'll happen with eabf2, people aren't smart, they all fall for propaganda and hype, kinda sad how stupid we are and how much big businesses actually exploit us and how smart/good they are at doing it lol
  • jason_kal
    1151 posts Member
    edited July 2016
    Sb2432 wrote: »
    I promise you, you guys will all buy their games just cause it's starwars
    I never buy anything without reading about it first. That's why I was fine pre-ordering SWBF (I didn't even pickup my pre-order until after reading reviews) and don't regret doing that. That's why I never pre-bought any SWBF DLC, and am glad there too. I will never buy any DLC that has a forced playlist. And I tell others to beware that too.
  • Sb2432 wrote: »
    Gingie wrote: »
    Sb2432 wrote: »
    They don't care about you or the player base, they only care about what's most profitable, titanfall was totally DOOMED and they felt releasing dlc maps for free was most profitable in hopes more people would buy the game and maybe make sales. They don't give a **** about you or anyone, and will do what they think is best to boost sales. As of now, I don't see free dlc maps helping boost sales because from what I see on ps4, game is far from doomed

    1. He's talking about the next Battlefront, not this one, and 2. Your post is tasteless, too much salt.

    Not salt, it's fact, big business do what's most profitable, go to college, read a book, watch a documentary, educate yourself, and you'll realize what kind of world you really live in.

    Here's a fact that applies to everything since you wanna go that route: If people don't like a product they purchase they will complain about it and demand it to be improved next time and if the demand is not met then they simply won't buy the product made by the company again until otherwise, and the company will eventually lose money. It's that simple, some people will give a company a second chance or so but if that trust is violated then you won't be seeing those people buying the product again including other customers that know next to nothing and have been told that the said company has a bad reputation for not listening to their customers and will ultimately drive more people away from it.

    Thus the business ultimately loses since no one wants to buy their products because they don't give good customer service, if you want to make money then you have to listen to your customers and especially your loyal customers who liked your products to begin with, they are your supporters who will help spread the word on how great your product is. Sure not everyone they talk to will like it when they try it but that's just how things go, it's also important to have a united community than a divided one since divided communities tend to have lots of infighting and separate demands for companies which can cause alot of stress for them and can hurt their business since they know that if they cater to one side than the other will be VERY disappointed and will leave them while also giving them a bad rep.

    Don't know where it all fell apart for EA in the past, I'm sure they were once a great company but I wouldn't be surprised if the reason why they started losing lots of loyal fans is because they stopped caring about them a long time ago. Our response to EA for doing this to us is this:
    hqdefault.jpg

    Lol lets not kid ourselves now. Nothing has fallen apart for EA. Sure they may be regarded as a bad company but if things were really going bad for EA then they wouldn't be making as much money as they do now. They got exactly the numbers they expected to hit with Battlefront if not more and they have tons of avid followers for many other franchises they own. I doubt they really care that a few battlefront fans are disgruntled cause they don't like the game. They'd just try again or make another Star Wars game that you'd probably buy.

    I never bought this game, got it as a gift (felt bad for the kid so I accepted it) but regardless EA is only surviving now because of certain franchises that have an enormous fanbase like Star Wars which is why this game sold alot but the reception numbers don't lie, alot of people were disappointed with this game on release not just because it was overpriced but also was missing loads of content for both sides. I certainly will not be buying the next one if it ends up like this again.
  • Sb2432
    2605 posts Member
    jason_kal wrote: »
    Sb2432 wrote: »
    I promise you, you guys will all buy their games just cause it's starwars
    I never buy anything without reading about it first. That's why I was fine pre-ordering SWBF (I didn't even pickup my pre-order until after reading reviews) and don't regret doing that. That's why I never pre-bought any SWBF DLC, and am glad there too. I will never buy any DLC that has a forced playlist. And I tell others to beware that too.

    Good for you! Way to have critical thinking skills! Hopefully you can maintain that thru the propaganda and hype
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!