EA Caught Up in Lootbox Controversy, Players Upset, Most Downvoted Comment Ever

In the past day, a regular 'ol 'shitstorm' has been a-brewing over at the Star Wars Battlefront subreddit. People have been voicing their complaints over BF2's lootboxes, and how they are supposed to have no place in a full, $60 game.

To clear things up, certain heroes and characters are locked in BF2, and you have to earn credits to unlock them. However, doing the math, a player would have to play for roughly 40 hours to reach the old amount of credits needed - which was 60,000 - to be able to play as a hero such as Darth Vader or Luke Skywalker.

After a post on reddit reached over 91,000 upvotes, EA chimed in. This led to them accruing over 505,000 downvotes and counting - the most amount of downvotes in the site's history. To understand why this lootbox issue is a problem, when no one complains about Overwatch's system, players need to understand that Star Cards are used to equip better, more powerful weapons and abilities in multiplayer. They can be achieved via lootboxes.

Lootboxes that alter gameplay of any kind have absolutely zero place in any sort of $60 Triple-A game. I could expect this from a free Eastern MMORPG, but absolutely not a game that was, gameplay wise, shaping up to be one of the best games of the holiday season.

EA has listened to the community, and has cut down on Hero credit costs massively, but this is not enough. Lootboxes still exist, and Star Cards still can be received from paid lootboxes. Remove Lootboxes altogether, and then maybe I - and everyone else boycotting this game - will think about purchasing it.

  • Feto

    The sad thing is that the game actually looks interesting. It's a shame went far to greedy with their game, probably the game is still gonna be a success, gonna sell lots of copies and make lots of cash (just like movies, even if they suck, if you put a MARVEL logo or something on the poster, there's still gonna be a shitload of people paying to watch it.)
    Modern gaming doesn't look good (AAA titles), it's going to a shady greedy place and I don't like it.

    • ivan_

      well said.

  • ivan_

    Forget Battlefront.

    Look at EA's line of...
    racing games: reskins, bad lag, unplayable glitches, year after year
    sports games: reskins every year - frostbite engine is pretty much cinematics-only
    hell look at what they've done to
    RPG games: mass effect.
    simulation games: Always online. Overpriced expansions (Sims 3 and 4 sold expansions for almost the same price as the base game, while offering nowhere near as much content. Most of this content was, unsurprisingly, recycled content from old games (equivalent to porting cross-platform, this is porting same-platform same franchise). Sure, you could say some stuff is iconic, but a lot of mechanics are the exact same just rehashed to look like stuff in the new game. Why should you pay $40-60 for mostly recycled content from old games?

    You can't spell steal without EA, I've been saying this for years, but no one listens and a part of me feels like everyone mad or disappointed or whatever negative emotion deserves it. I mean it's 2017, EA being one of the worst companies in the world is not news anymore. But I do have to admit I'm a bit mad myself, because where was "le reddit army" for every other game when players were shafted (much harder) in those? What makes Battlefront so special? The first game was a joke and trailers looked like they were advertising DLC/expansion, not a sequel.

  • Jeronimo Collares

    EA game sucks!