I really don't understand what's going on here after reading the article. How the hell can something like that influence price this much? I seriously doubt most gamers are using video cards for anything other than gaming. Are these companies trying to piss people off? 700 is already way too much and now they want more? Kiss my ass all day long.
@Evenglare: That's a really good point as well. How do you balance a game where certain gear is better, and obtaining that gear comes down to randomization. The answer: You don't, and they're full of S***. Everything they're saying right now is damage-control, it doesn't need to make sense, its all dmg control.
@mighty-lu-bu: It's only "good" news because it blew up in their faces and they have no choice but to make a statement on it.
They haven't said they are fixing anything, if you read their comments closely, all they're going to do is maybe let you choose an option that will change crate-loot slightly to fit a specific class or something.
They didn't say anywhere they were going to remove the crate system or make it cosmetics-only and so they're not really "fixing" anything.
@khanwashere: That will never work because competitors who offer good full-sized single-player game in addition to multiplayer elements will out-value them.
You either make a full packaged game or you focus on just the single player element (witcher/elder scrolls/fallout) or just on multiplayer (battlegrounds/mmo).
Cutting your game into pieces and selling it as individual components would look bad. Not going to get anywhere by doing that. The problem with battlefront is that they made a 4-5 hour crappy little campaign and tacked it onto this terrible multiplayer that revolves around microtransactions and time-gates. If they were smart they would have dropped the campaign entirely and just charged 30 bucks for the multiplayer (that's all its worth anyway).
Loot-crates should only EVER involve cosmetic items. It should never directly have an impact on actual gameplay. Time-gating stuff should never be a thing in a game you paid for.
This is how counter-strike gets away with it (though needing a "key" to open a crate you've earned in that game is still bull****). Even Diablo 3 ended up completely revamping its progression system because it was too player-unfriendly with the auction house scam (now gone) and its terrible drop-rates (now gone).
These lessons have already been learned in the industry (even in an RPG game like diablo 3 that revolved around grinding went too far with it and made critical adjustments based on player feedback). Why is EA trying to get away with it in 2017? I'm more upset about the level of idiocy behind the move than I am about anything else because whoever is making decisions like that has no place in the game industry.
That whole "I'm sorry, we hated it as well" comment makes no sense to me. If you people were even slightly remotely aware of how awful doing that crap is then what the hell is the excuse supposed to be? F****** moronic.
Since when is adding a mobile game model of free-2-play microtransaction and time-gates (gating) into a 60 dollar game considered normal? That isn't innovation, it's just dumb. The stupidity involved is mind boggling, but if EA want's to shoot their foot off, then please be my guest.
Loot-crates should only EVER involve cosmetic items. It should never directly have an impact on actual gameplay.
This is how counter-strike gets away with it. Even Diablo 3 ended up completely revamping its progression system because it was too player-unfriendly with the auction house scam (now gone) and its terrible drop-rates.
These lessons have already been learned in the industry (even in an RPG game like diablo 3 that revolved around grinding went too far). Why is EA trying to get away with it in 2017? I'm more upset about the level of idiocy behind the move than I am about anything else because whoever is making decisions like that has no place in the game industry. It's just absurd how completely out of touch they are.
Game was a technical disaster with worse animations and voice acting than most games have that are 10 years older that it. It plays like a dull boring singe player mmo. I mean if this guy seriously thinks the game didn't deserve every bit of criticism that it got than its no wonder why EA hasn't got a clue what they're doing when the big boss himself appears to not know what a good game looks like. They failed dragon age, battlefront, and mass effect. Whats it seriously gonna take to get the damned clue EA lmfao. Just wow.
Patches can only do so much, and this game needed another year in development before it should have been considered for release. The true crime here is how the brand itself became tarnished by how bad the game actually is. This is like some new trend nowadays. First it was Diablo 3, now andromeda.
I just hope the necessary lessons have been learned from these disasters. Seriously, it's time to stop. If you know you can't deliver a sequel that holds up to the games that came before it, then don't. Just wait and do a remaster (that's what blizzard is apparently doing with their older titles now), but at least they're aware of the fact that they can't make good games anymore lmao. Do a remaster, or a new brand. But seriously stop ruining great games with horrifyingly bad sequels.
Shelledfade1's comments