By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Ganoncrotch said:

1: Took me a few google searches to find out how that would be possible, Okay so going from the previous game where maps had an upfront cost they were released each 4 months in packs of 4 maps each, Battlefield V has a roadmap which adds 1 map per 5month cycle on average, conversely the games live services now pump out cosmetics and weapons at a far faster rate because those.... are of course sold for premium currency a la free to play model. If that modern warfare thing is yet to release and especially as it's a game from activision I would realllllly wait and see what comes of any offers of free dlc or free updates to their games because history should teach you not to trust them to not monetize the absolute shit outta games in every way they can.

2: Anthem was indeed a complete travesty from jump, with EA going on stage and shouting GET HYPED while gamers shouted back... "why bioware, why" but that games failing wasn't due to the loot boxes being present in it, the failing was because EA took a studio known for single player RPG glory and threw them a handful of scuffed ideas about what the game was to be, up until 9 months prior to launch the fact that you can or cannot fly freely in the game was still completely up in the air and came and left the table on a per management meeting basis, the game failed because there was a complete lack of communication within the 2 studios who were making it along with the management team relying on the fact that Bioware had previously finished off a product in shambles using "Bioware magic" rather than actually managing the project in a meaningful way, the games story was cut to ribbons to make a "finished product" which didn't in any way live up to the hype packages that EA were on stage multiple times pointing to and screaming for people to get hyped for.... but also the game had loot boxes so I guess that's why it failed huh? Because your logic isn't flawed in the slightest!

3: As for following game news for the last 2 years being a counter to the fact that EA's stock has fallen and a sword is over the head of lootboxes from a court point of view.... yes the Stock has gone down because people are getting out before that sword comes down and severs that monitization head, however regarding how popular lootbox's/gambling mechanics are in titles right now the last figures I can find directly for live services were from 2017 year end which was 1billion+ from services and less than 600m from game sales, which means for every 60dollar game sold they actually take in 100dollars worth of micro transactions and that figure Forbes was predicting would only increase at the time, again, stock prices are down now but also as I said there is a massive sword hanging over their heads about controls to be put in place on a billion dollars of revenue which you will see them fight tooth and nail for because they will have to make that somewhere and having gambling in games with a 3+ rating is by far the easiest way of doing that.

4: The games you mentioned all dropped around 3-4 years into the PS4 life cycle, by which stage massive amounts of work had been done already bringing a (horrific) Star Wars Battlefront as well as other titles laden with live services to the platform, having already mastered the game engines on the platform as well as the lesser work required for yearly sequels of said franchises then it's fairly easy to see why a company would of course bring a Fifa 20XX and Call of duty X Black Ops Y to the system, because half the work is done and yearly additions are rarely built from the ground up full games when it comes to titles in the same consoles lifecycle.

1: As said, it's weird to find myself defending games that I have no interest in, but you made it sound like Splatoon was the only shooter to add maps for free.

2: You're absolutely right that gamers dislike EA for various reasons but you can't ignore that the lootbox debacle and the anti-consumer monetization in general plays a major part in EA's downfall and 38% stock value decrease. I remember a Reddit-comment from EA about the monetization in SW Battlefront 2 being the most downvoted in history. Gamers no longer trust EA to release solid games without aggressive monetization.

3: With that said, you're right that EA still makes an awful lot of money on microtransactions. Especially across their sports titles. In FY2016, EA made $800 million in revenue on Ultimate Team (FIFA, NFL, NBA, etc.) alone and it seems like casual gamers buying not much other than yearly sports games don't really care about shitty pratices compared to the "rest of us". Here, you also have the reason why I think it's ridiculous to claim that publishers hold a grudge or have some kind of bias against Nintendo. They don't. If there's money to be made, 3rd party publishers will come.

4: With bold, you're practically agreeing with me that it's ridiculous to claim that a specific game not releasing on e.g. Switch is due to publishers being biased against Nintendo. If a publisher estimates that developing/porting a specific game won't lead to sales needed to make the game/port profitable, they won't do it.