Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: EA discusses why it didn’t stick to cosmetics for Battlefront II loot boxes

  1. #1

    Default EA discusses why it didn’t stick to cosmetics for Battlefront II loot boxes

    The controversy surrounding Star Wars Battlefront II has been going back and forth for a while but since switching off microtransactions, EA has been pretty quiet on the subject. Now, the publisher’s CFO, Blake Jorgensen has elaborated a bit more on EA’s decisions leading up to release, specifically addressing the subject of cosmetic loot boxes.

    At the Credit Suisse Technology, Media and Telecom Conference, Jorgensen started off by talking about the decision to switch off microtransactions: “We pulled off on the MTX, because the real issue the consumer had was they felt it was a pay-to-win mechanic. The reality is there are different types of players in games. Some people have more time than money, and some people have more money than time. You want to always balance those


    Jorgensen is right that gamers were very concerned about Battlefront II’s ‘pay to win’ nature. Meanwhile, cosmetic loot boxes likely would have been accepted without much hesitation. However, it seems that potential ‘violations’ of the Star Wars canon kept EA/DICE from going down that route:

    “The one thing we’re very focused on and they are extremely focused on is not violating the canon of Star Wars. It’s an amazing brand that’s been built over many, many years, and so if you did a bunch of cosmetic things, you might start to violate the canon, right? Darth Vader in white probably doesn’t make sense, versus in black. Not to mention you probably don’t want Darth Vader in pink. No offense to pink, but I don’t think that’s right in the canon.”

    Now, in the aftermath of Battlefront II’s release, EA is looking into things the company can do cosmetically instead: “There might be things that we can do cosmetically, and we’re working with Lucasfilm on that. But coming into it, it wasn’t as easy as if we were building a game around our own IP where it didn’t really matter. It matters in Star Wars, because Star Wars fans want realism. But Star Wars fans may also want to tailor things — a different colored lightsaber, things like that. So you might see some of that.”

    The main issue with the argument of violating the Star Wars canon is that Battlefront II already does this in its multiplayer. There are maps where you can have Darth Maul face off against Rey, or maps where Yoda can be on the same field as newer characters. With that in mind, having a white version of Darth Vader doesn’t seem like that much of a stretch, it would look potentially silly, but it would have been a lot better than trying to sell Star Cards.

    Source: Kitguru

  2. #2

    Default

    No EA, lightsaber colors have meanings. It's not just a damn cosmetic change, do your damn research.

    "Lightsaber crystals were used to indicate a Jedi's chosen class. Blue indicated a Jedi Guardian, a Jedi who used the Force on a more physical level. Green indicated a Jedi Consular, a Jedi who preferred to reflect on the mysteries of the Force and fight the dark side at its heart. Yellow indicated a Jedi Sentinel, a Jedi who honed his or her skills in a balance of combat and scholarly pursuits. Purple, yellow, and orange crystals were used by some Jedi until the fall of the Jedi Order, but they were exceedingly rare, and often passed down through generations. During the Galactic Civil War, the Galactic Empire banned trade and possession of all lightsaber crystals. The synthetic crystals, favored by users of the dark side for their offensive properties, were impregnated with the negative energies of their creators which gave to the crystals their red color; the majority of the Sith and Dark Jedi wielded crimson-bladed lightsabers, though colors similar in hue to red, such as orange and magenta, were not unheard of."

    So as "cosmetic" as it seems there is lore attached to it which should take into account the time frame in which the title plays off.

    Whatever EA, seeing that you don't care when can I get a M16A4 in Battlefield 1?

  3. #3

    Default

    Name:  hellovaderthumb.jpg
Views: 28
Size:  21.6 KB

    Still more acceptable than EA greed.

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by murfle View Post
    Name:  hellovaderthumb.jpg
Views: 28
Size:  21.6 KB

    Still more acceptable than EA greed.
    Name:  l3ol6.gif
Views: 22
Size:  1.26 MB

Similar Threads

  1. Loot boxes are considered gambling - Belgian Gaming Commission
    By Jamie McKane in forum Gaming News Articles
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 22-11-2017, 03:06 PM
  2. OpenCritic takes a stand against loot boxes
    By Jamie McKane in forum Gaming News Articles
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-10-2017, 10:10 AM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 14-09-2015, 08:11 AM
  4. Video game movies you didn’t know were in the works
    By Kevin in forum Gaming News Articles
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 21-01-2015, 10:17 AM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 25-06-2013, 04:26 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •