9 days 23 hours
Life is Feudal: Your Own
44 days 5 hours
Day of Defeat: Source
35 days 23 hours
Mass Effect 2
16 days 12 hours
I'm not trying to defend the decision to put statistical buffs behind micro-transactions. They made BF2 the literal definition of pay-to-win (the main reason I haven't considered buying the game).
The decision to drop loot box sales (and income) to repair the community backlash though? I'll give credit where it's due. This was the best scenario possible for gamers at the moment. This is the end of my complements for EA though, and the beginning of my skepticism.
If you read my original comment you'll notice I still think they'll put themselves first in the long run, but they won't be as blatant as they were on release.
The entire idea of loot boxes over DLC is a good way for them to earn more money. More people will start to invest if the first barrier is lower (1, 5, I assume 10 loot boxes are still cheaper than an average DLC these days). The lower the price and the greater the reward, the more likely people return and pay more. Addicted investors will keep buying the loot boxes till they have everything (far more income than DLCs) whilst those that previously didn't want to invest £40+ on Expansion Passes will now be tricked into spending more slowly through £2-£10 packages.
Statistically speaking its a flat-out win for EA. It would have been a win for customers too, if only they hadn't imbalanced the game to give payers a literal advantage. Give them skins, or let them unlock kit faster. But don't allow their rockets to shoot further, to come off cool-down faster, or deal more damage. By giving abilities 'levels' to progress through forces people who dont want to invest to either specify into 1 roll or to be at a disadvantage to others. The ideal way to remove satisfying competition from the game.
We can hope customer complaints continue to the point that they re-balance to remove the stronger P2W aspects, but odds are against it. Either they find a way to earn their money, or costs will be cut with DLCs being shortened/rushed out the doors.
It's a PR stunt to put out the fires. It's meant to make them look like the good guys.
"Microtransactions are easily startled. But they'll soon be back. And in greater numbers." - Obi-Loot KenoBox.
Best thing for gamers to do is to remember EA's original intent, hold firm, and not buy this game. And if you must buy it, wait until a sale and/or this quarter of EA's fiscal year is over.
EDIT: This isn't a dig at you. I agree with a lot of what you have said. Lootboxes could have been a great alternative source of income in exchange for free maps and other game content. They just went about it in the worst possible way. And a lot of gamers will see this announcement and think "hey, they listened to us! I can now buy this game". Forgive and forget. And then get angry because the same thing will happen with more games down the line because EA got away with it here.
Personally, I don't think the players were even considered when they made the move to temporarily disable crystal purchases. It was more of a last resort to extinguish the flames of this massive PR disaster and it was a happy accident for players that they were affected by it.
If memory serves me right, these guys came out with this concept when zombie games were on the rise. The market, at the time, was not over-saturated yet.
I remember seeing it on steam and being quite excited for it.
its called linking your steam account to uplay. I actually have all 3 accts stea origin and uplay linked through uplay
No, they didn't. It was initially only going to be on consoles but they decided to build a pc version after quite a few petitions, etc.
That makes more sense then. Still, yikes. What a mistake to make.
They're riding the train hype generated by the movie, resurrecting dead projects that have "star wars" anywhere in the description. And yes, it's Disney.
So ... I'm not very optimistic, although I guess this gives a glitter of hope that maybe they can put out a good Star Wars game that isn't aimed at the youngest audience.
Rome was my introduction to the series when I was a wee general growing into his armchair so I'll always have a soft spot for it. There are some things that no other Total War game has been able to replicate yet (the impact of a cavalry charge to name one).
But I honestly feel like Medieval 2 is my favorite. There's a wide variety of mods available that completely change the game.
The more modern titles started to streamline and strip features that I greatly enjoy whilst adding nothing interesting to me. With Shogun 2 the map started to feel smaller with the proximity of settlements to one another, in some cases you could just hop from one castle to the next each turn, but I let that go simply because Japan is a fairly small country. Overall, I still had fun with it.
Then came Rome II and despite desperate attempts to enjoy it, I cannot. The world they created with Rome II is vast as an ocean but only as deep as the most shallow puddle on a sidewalk. The campaign map is large but feels very cramped because the settlements are over-inflated in size and take up so much room and to top it off are given a huge aura of influence that the enemy can't cross, thus taking away even more space for armies to maneuver on. Speaking of armies, you are no restricted to only a handful. An arbitrary restriction for no other reason than.. well. Because the game says so. Casualties from battle don't matter anymore short of having a unit completely obliterated because they just regenerate the next turn. Even your General is simply replaced by the next nameless (ok, they have names but do you care?) face if he is killed in battle.
Sieges are almost non-existent because you're either assaulting the same little village over and over with the same generic garrison. By the time you finally find a walled settlement there's no one left aside from the weak garrison because the ai tends to run away from you and leave its cities undefended.
Then I just don't know what they did with battles. Either they sped up unit movement or their morale breaks much quicker, but in the older games a lot of the fun was from watching armies slug it out. Now they just blob up for a few seconds and then one side runs away. It happens so fast and so 'blobby' I can't even see the motion captured fighting unfold.
Unfortunately, I think it's another franchise I'm going to have to step away from. I don't know if it's because my interests as a gamer are shifting as I get older or if games are moving away from what I like.
See, I reckon Japan's relatively small size compared to the other TW maps is one of the reasons that Shogun 2 is the best. Everything is simply more focused.
"This is just the beginning - big plans for achievements and Origin Points are in the works, so stay tuned" EA 2+ years ago