This is the reason why Activision gets a pass for Micro-transaction in Call Of Duty while EA gets roasted for having them in Star Wars Battlefront 2

  • 30

EA introduced micro-transaction in Star Wars Battlefront 2 that allows player to purchase and equip star cards which can increase the amount of damage a player can unleash, thus change the balance of the game whereas in Call of Duty, the items you can buy are for the most part cosmetic or stylistic and do not tip the competitive balance too far. If you have to have it now, you can purchase it. You may not be able to use it until you get to a certain level and may find it does not really do much to alter and improve your gameplay. 

Replies • 21

Interstellar

EA is just stupid....

Honestly, why would someone agree to buy something (a game) and still have to buy some things giving a competitive advantage ?

Better play a F2P in this case, at least you don't pay 40$ to start with...


Interstellar

You should NEVER go pay2win. Its just bad business and will only bring bad rep to your company.


Interstellar

I just hope that EA will learn an important lesson here, but last time I saw EA saying they'll not give up micro-transactions... How longer are they willing to face the criticism?


Interstellar

Nobody can escape the microtransaction drama. Everyone is guilty and eventually the bubble will burst. The problem is here that publishers charge and extra $60 before you can even play the game. Microtransacitons is in top of that. You see F2P games can get away with microtransactions. Somehow they have to recover development costs, keeping servers alive.

The only good lootbox system is where you simply cannot buy them with real money. In-game currency is fine as long as you cannot buy that either. Simple playing the game gives you points, you get the lootbox and you open it. It's that simple. Oh and don't allow trading because then people will sell the digital items for real money and they avoid paying taxes.



SebDemiss said:

EA is just stupid....

Honestly, why would someone agree to buy something (a game) and still have to buy some things giving a competitive advantage ?

Better play a F2P in this case, at least you don't pay 40$ to start with...

Micro-transaction that doesn't effect gameplay is understandable. From player's perspective, since i play dota2 for a long time, i like the fact that i can still win a game just like the other guy who has all these cosmetics as they are just some effects in game other than some stat points to give the purchaser some sort of advantage. EA ,in this case, clearly got greedy and paying the price .



Interstellar

P2W is the root of the microtransaction controversy and it will go on until the Studios and developers will smarten up. :)


alienwarefanboi said:

P2W is the root of the microtransaction controversy and it will go on until the Studios and developers will smarten up. :)

How have they not smartened up yet? I've refused for years to play P2W for years.I think most people didn't know it was going to be P2W. I didn't, but I didn't purchase it. I can't even think of any P2W games that are popular. EA is just greedy.