EA says no microtransaction for the upcoming Star Wars Squadrons

[FakeSympathy]

The article

TL;DR
Yeah you'll get to experience things as pilots without any microtransactions on multiplayer

I don't know about this. I mean the idea sounds pretty damn good, and if this more in-dept than the start fighter mode in Battlefront II, it would gladly win me over. But this is EA we're talking about. Something about what they're saying sounds really fishy

 

[Hawki]

I'm actually willing to believe EA on this one. Like, they made Fallen Order, a singleplayer-only experience, and now they're making Squadrons, a fighter-only experience. This coming from a time where if you didn't go too far back, EA would have stated that singleplayer-only games don't sell, or you need microtransactions, or anything outside FPS is too niche. I think they've realized that there's a market for this.

Besides, Canto Bight is going to be doing plenty of microtransactions by itself.

 

[Elvis Starburst]

Wowee, no microtransactions? Oh man, I totally believe them. Like, for realsies guys, they reeeaaally mean it this time. EA is soooo sorry for being big meanie butts and now they're gonna be nice with one of their biggest money makers. Really and truly guys.
...
*Cough*

 

[SupahEwok]

Gonna be a gameplay stream on Thursday, which I’ll be tuning into. I have no faith in EA making either a new X-Wing/Tie Fighter or Rogue Squadron, but I’ll be paying attention regardless just in case the lead dev is an honest to god saint capable of miracles.

I have a very small hope that it’ll be more on the X-Wing side of things. Pretty much the defining feature of those games were managing power to shields, weapons, engines. There’s a shot early on in the trailer where the New Republic pilot declares “full power to engines!” or somesuch, and you see a blue bar max out while a red and a green bar recede. Absolute callback to those old space sims. But EA’s never going to try to release a full-out space sim for consoles, that’d be a nightmare for a control scheme.

My hope is that it’ll be Ace Combat in space. But my suspicion is that they’ll just spruce up the flying vehicle combat from Battlefront and throw it out there for people who want to cut out the shooter portions of those games. I suppose we’ll see on Thursday.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

Wowee, no microtransactions? Oh man, I totally believe them. Like, for realsies guys, they reeeaaally mean it this time. EA is soooo sorry for being big meanie butts and now they're gonna be nice with one of their biggest money makers. Really and truly guys.
...
*Cough*

It might be true, but if it is I'm going to assume that it was a directive that came down from Disney.

Disney was not happy with the negative press and fan reactions that Battlefront II got, and threatened to pull the Star Wars license from EA. I think EA is going to be spending years trying to get good will back for Star Wars.

Still not going to buy it though, I don't buy EA games.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

So what will they claim they're calling them now?

Mini DLC?

Tidbit buys?

Micro expansions?

 

[CriticalGaming]

to be fair, they didn't put microtransactions in the Fallen Order game. So though I'm skeptical, I believe them for now.

 

[meiam]

Honestly I'm more worried that the single player will be watered down to the point of being little more than MP against bots.

 

[FakeSympathy]

to be fair, they didn't put microtransactions in the Fallen Order game. So though I'm skeptical, I believe them for now.

Yes, they kept their words on that. But let's remember that was singleplayer only and SW Squadrons will have both the singleplayer and the multiplayer. We all know companies like to cash in on the latter. I guess we'll just have to wait to find out, but I'll remain skeptical

 

[CriticalGaming]

Yes, they kept their words on that. But let's remember that was singleplayer only and SW Squadrons will have both the singleplayer and the multiplayer. We all know companies like to cash in on the latter. I guess we'll just have to wait to find out, but I'll remain skeptical

meh, just expect season passes and shit like that. DLC and not technically MT's.

 

[Bedinsis]

I believe it when I see it.

 

[Nick Calandra]

I bet they'll end up having a Battle Pass or something, they gotta have something like that if they're gonna continue supporting the game overtime. I'd much prefer we keep cosmetic micros than have to pay for sectioned off multiplayer maps again.

 

[SilentPony]

Well what it says is "it will feature a dedicated single-player mode, and multiple multiplayer modes with no microtransactions." meaning the modes won't have any transactions. As in no during-gameplay buy-ups.
Certainly leaves open the door for outside of gameplay microtransactions.

 

[Silvanus]

It'll probably be a rebranding exercise, like when they said lootboxes weren't lootboxes, but "surprise mechanics".

So it won't contain "microtransactions", but it'll contain "mini-boosters" (which cost money) or something asinine like that.

 

[SilentPony]

It'll probably be a rebranding exercise, like when they said lootboxes weren't lootboxes, but "surprise mechanics".

So it won't contain "microtransactions", but it'll contain "mini-boosters" (which cost money) or something asinine like that.

Well its a war game, so 'Supply Caches' or "Requisition Crates"

 

[Dalisclock]

So what will they claim they're calling them now?

Mini DLC?

Tidbit buys?

Micro expansions?

Surprise Mechanics?

Oh, wait, that was loot-boxes.

Pleasure....er, Enjoyment enhancers?

Progress Accelerators?

Grind reducers?

 

[Bob_McMillan]

I think we all know that at some point, they will have at the very least some cosmetic DLC that will replace their idea of what microtransactions are.

I bet they'll end up having a Battle Pass or something, they gotta have something like that if they're gonna continue supporting the game overtime. I'd much prefer we keep cosmetic micros than have to pay for sectioned off multiplayer maps again.

You know, I used to believe that when I was an avid Battlefield player, but it seems like the "live service" approach BFV took completely killed the game. I'm no fan of paying $50 for more maps and weapons over the course of a few years, but at least in BF4 a) the amount of stuff we got more than doubled the multiplayer content , b) updates were regular and assured (and usually quality).

At least with the season pass model, patient people (or newcomers such as myself) can pick up the "complete" game later at 90+% off and enjoy a massive game that's still active years after launch.

Of course live services can be done right, Modern Warfare seems to be doing quite well, but I don't think they're feasible for all games.

 

[Nick Calandra]

I think we all know that at some point, they will have at the very least some cosmetic DLC that will replace their idea of what microtransactions are.



You know, I used to believe that when I was an avid Battlefield player, but it seems like the "live service" approach BFV took completely killed the game. I'm no fan of paying $50 for more maps and weapons over the course of a few years, but at least in BF4 a) the amount of stuff we got more than doubled the multiplayer content , b) updates were regular and assured (and usually quality).

At least with the season pass model, patient people (or newcomers such as myself) can pick up the "complete" game later at 90+% off and enjoy a massive game that's still active years after launch.

Of course live services can be done right, Modern Warfare seems to be doing quite well, but I don't think they're feasible for all games.

I don't think it was the live service that killed the game, I think it was the infrequent updates that killed the game. Content wasn't coming out fast enough and as we've seen with successes in the live service area like Destiny, Rainbow Six, Call of Duty, Fortnite, etc, the sweet spot seems to be a content update around every 2 - 3 months to keep people interested.

Not to mention they did the unknown theaters of war, and while interesting on paper, I don't think players were super excited about not having iconic locations in the game either.

Battlefield got a few expansions, but it took, what...almost a year to get the new maps out and then by the end of it we didn't even get to the other theaters of war they were planning to go to.

They're surely paying attention to Modern Warfare and Siege going forward to keep their playerbase over time and we already know they're going back to the modern era as well.

 

[Bob_McMillan]

I don't think it was the live service that killed the game, I think it was the infrequent updates that killed the game. Content wasn't coming out fast enough and as we've seen with successes in the live service area like Destiny, Rainbow Six, Call of Duty, Fortnite, etc, the sweet spot seems to be a content update around every 2 - 3 months to keep people interested.

Not to mention they did the unknown theaters of war, and while interesting on paper, I don't think players were super excited about not having iconic locations in the game either.

Battlefield got a few expansions, but it took, what...almost a year to get the new maps out and then by the end of it we didn't even get to the other theaters of war they were planning to go to.

They're surely paying attention to Modern Warfare and Siege going forward to keep their playerbase over time and we already know they're going back to the modern era as well.

Well that's what I was saying. With the live service, DICE didn't really have any obligations to pump out extra content. The season pass for BF4 explicitly tells you you're getting 5 expansions, and 5 expansions and some extras we got. With BFV, they released a few roadmaps that as far as I know they didn't stick to, because they weren't really required to.

But anyway, we're sure that they're going back to the modern era? When was that announced?