Anyone still having doubts about stupidity of a "Live Service"?

Comments

  • M_Rat13
    1505 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    When BFHL tanked did BF4 receive any further content and updates to keep fans engaged with Battlefield until BF1 released? 

    If V goes under before the years out it would be cool if they reinvested in BF1 and BF4.


    BF4 did receive some free content from DICE LA, although I don't know if it was down to Hardline's reception, or BF4's terrible launch. We got one BF2 map, Dragon Valley, though a lot of BF2 fans complained about the map being 'too different from the original' ... I quite liked it though. We also got a community map called Operation Outbreak; it was one of the few maps which featured RUS vs CN in terms of faction setups. It was a fun map, but it was a bit too chaotic for my tastes ... bonus points for guessing which of these two maps was more popular with the largely infantry-centric community we had at the time! XD

    We had a night map conversion project as well, featuring the following maps: Golmud, Shanghai and Zavod 311. I thought Night at Shanghai was brilliant, because it eliminated the two worst parts of the original map: the levolution, and the attack helicopter. Golmud at night was also brilliant. Zavod's Graveyard Shift was pretty decent, but it was clearly the weakest map of the lot. Unfortunately, they could only put one of these maps in due to PS3/XBOX 360 limitations, but inexplicably, they put the Graveyard Shift in as the only night map of the project ... bizarre decision right there.

    We had some free guns as well, but this is by far the worst 'free' offering that DICE LA gave us. They gave us a carbine and SMG that were very similar, had a high fire rate, and took up most of the screen ... nothing special. We also got an L86, which wasn't that different from the L85, except for the fact that it was an LMG rather than a rifle ... still, nothing special or useful. We got an interesting gun called the 'Mare's Leg' ... it was the only lever action gun in the game. It was fun in the CTE, before it got nerfed into oblivion. It's pretty useless now.

    The only free gun worth a damn was the AN-94, which was copy-pasted from BF3 ... it was also worse than the BF3 version, but still, it was a solid weapon.

    BF1 actually got some post-Premium content, such as the Shock Operations, the Burton LMR and the Thompson Annihilator, so I don't think DICE is going to do anything else with it.

    Oh yeah, I forgot about the free content for BF1, you know, the test bed for live service that actually worked lol. Funny how that worked but this didn't. Heck, I'll go further: We have games like Overwatch and Sea of thieves (soon COD too) proving live service works. Then, we have free to play games that also work like world of tank, armoured warfare, and, IMO, navyfield 2 (possible personal bias). It's not that free content can't work, even Dice proved this before BFV, it's that Dice chooses to male it terrible, so we are tricked into paying for premium again. Well I'm not falling for your trap Dice, you hear me! I'm not stupid!
  • RABID_4TUNA
    76 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    M_Rat13 said:
    When BFHL tanked did BF4 receive any further content and updates to keep fans engaged with Battlefield until BF1 released? 

    If V goes under before the years out it would be cool if they reinvested in BF1 and BF4.


    BF4 did receive some free content from DICE LA, although I don't know if it was down to Hardline's reception, or BF4's terrible launch. We got one BF2 map, Dragon Valley, though a lot of BF2 fans complained about the map being 'too different from the original' ... I quite liked it though. We also got a community map called Operation Outbreak; it was one of the few maps which featured RUS vs CN in terms of faction setups. It was a fun map, but it was a bit too chaotic for my tastes ... bonus points for guessing which of these two maps was more popular with the largely infantry-centric community we had at the time! XD

    We had a night map conversion project as well, featuring the following maps: Golmud, Shanghai and Zavod 311. I thought Night at Shanghai was brilliant, because it eliminated the two worst parts of the original map: the levolution, and the attack helicopter. Golmud at night was also brilliant. Zavod's Graveyard Shift was pretty decent, but it was clearly the weakest map of the lot. Unfortunately, they could only put one of these maps in due to PS3/XBOX 360 limitations, but inexplicably, they put the Graveyard Shift in as the only night map of the project ... bizarre decision right there.

    We had some free guns as well, but this is by far the worst 'free' offering that DICE LA gave us. They gave us a carbine and SMG that were very similar, had a high fire rate, and took up most of the screen ... nothing special. We also got an L86, which wasn't that different from the L85, except for the fact that it was an LMG rather than a rifle ... still, nothing special or useful. We got an interesting gun called the 'Mare's Leg' ... it was the only lever action gun in the game. It was fun in the CTE, before it got nerfed into oblivion. It's pretty useless now.

    The only free gun worth a damn was the AN-94, which was copy-pasted from BF3 ... it was also worse than the BF3 version, but still, it was a solid weapon.

    BF1 actually got some post-Premium content, such as the Shock Operations, the Burton LMR and the Thompson Annihilator, so I don't think DICE is going to do anything else with it.

    Oh yeah, I forgot about the free content for BF1, you know, the test bed for live service that actually worked lol. Funny how that worked but this didn't. Heck, I'll go further: We have games like Overwatch and Sea of thieves (soon COD too) proving live service works. Then, we have free to play games that also work like world of tank, armoured warfare, and, IMO, navyfield 2 (possible personal bias). It's not that free content can't work, even Dice proved this before BFV, it's that Dice chooses to male it terrible, so we are tricked into paying for premium again. Well I'm not falling for your trap Dice, you hear me! I'm not stupid!
    Well, then.

    Video gaming as a whole is screwed 🤣
  • RABID_4TUNA
    76 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited June 2019
    M_Rat13 wrote: »
    Ferdinand_J_Foch said:

    BFB-LeCharybdis said:
    When BFHL tanked did BF4 receive any further content and updates to keep fans engaged with Battlefield until BF1 released? 

    If V goes under before the years out it would be cool if they reinvested in BF1 and BF4.




    BF4 did receive some free content from DICE LA, although I don't know if it was down to Hardline's reception, or BF4's terrible launch. We got one BF2 map, Dragon Valley, though a lot of BF2 fans complained about the map being 'too different from the original' ... I quite liked it though. We also got a community map called Operation Outbreak; it was one of the few maps which featured RUS vs CN in terms of faction setups. It was a fun map, but it was a bit too chaotic for my tastes ... bonus points for guessing which of these two maps was more popular with the largely infantry-centric community we had at the time! XD

    We had a night map conversion project as well, featuring the following maps: Golmud, Shanghai and Zavod 311. I thought Night at Shanghai was brilliant, because it eliminated the two worst parts of the original map: the levolution, and the attack helicopter. Golmud at night was also brilliant. Zavod's Graveyard Shift was pretty decent, but it was clearly the weakest map of the lot. Unfortunately, they could only put one of these maps in due to PS3/XBOX 360 limitations, but inexplicably, they put the Graveyard Shift in as the only night map of the project ... bizarre decision right there.

    We had some free guns as well, but this is by far the worst 'free' offering that DICE LA gave us. They gave us a carbine and SMG that were very similar, had a high fire rate, and took up most of the screen ... nothing special. We also got an L86, which wasn't that different from the L85, except for the fact that it was an LMG rather than a rifle ... still, nothing special or useful. We got an interesting gun called the 'Mare's Leg' ... it was the only lever action gun in the game. It was fun in the CTE, before it got nerfed into oblivion. It's pretty useless now.

    The only free gun worth a damn was the AN-94, which was copy-pasted from BF3 ... it was also worse than the BF3 version, but still, it was a solid weapon.

    BF1 actually got some post-Premium content, such as the Shock Operations, the Burton LMR and the Thompson Annihilator, so I don't think DICE is going to do anything else with it.




    Oh yeah, I forgot about the free content for BF1, you know, the test bed for live service that actually worked lol. Funny how that worked but this didn't.

    Heck, I'll go further:
    We have games like Overwatch and Sea of thieves (soon COD too) proving live service works. Then, we have free to play games that also work like world of tank, armoured warfare, and, IMO, navyfield 2 (possible personal bias).

    It's not that free content can't work, even Dice proved this before BFV, it's that Dice chooses to male it terrible, so we are tricked into paying for premium again. Well I'm not falling for your trap Dice, you hear me! I'm not stupid!

    if you looked up EA's intent behind live service its clear they arent catering to players, but their development schedules. They even has a catch-phrase trademarked for it 🤣🤣. A little too cart before the horse for me but thats EA for you.

    There is also proposed U.S. legislation that aim to ban loot box and pay to win microtransactions. I imagine EA is wiggling a bit and could give insight as to why/what made them take a live service approach.
    If I remember correctly, the guys behind Titanfall have a drip-feeding live service to avoid crunch time for its employees.

    ...unlike a certain company.
  • parkingbrake
    3202 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    DJTN1 said:
    Prep768 wrote: »
    Hawxxeye said:
    imho the problem is not that it is live service, the problem is that it is a very bad live service.


    This deserves more recognition than the OP

    Expecting a decent 'live service' should not be naive, nor stupid 

    Completely disagree, that’s exactly what it is, a scam. All EA needs to do is convince you that NEXT time, it will be better!

    Because that’s all it takes, the delusion that next time it will be better. It won’t... but many will again convince themselves that NEXT NEXT time, surely, it will be better!


    It's the hype train. I've seen a lot of people get caught up in it, myself included. They release all these cool looking trailers and have these events where they tell everyone how much they love and listen to the community. Then on release day we experience the same bugs they fixed in the previous title. Now they're giving us less content too and charging more, disguising it with cosmetics micro transactions. It's mind blowing.

    In all honesty I can't blame them though. They've played us for so long and we keep buying their broken products. Its our own fault. What is it that makes us fall for it every time?

    I see all these people on the forums complaining and rightly so, but I know, I'll see them on here again after the next release.

    The cycle continues...
    You nailed it, they'll keep on doing this so long as we're foolish enough to buy their games.  That BFV has issues that were fixed in previous games is astonishing, but it does.  There is no reason to think BF6 won't share the same failed business model as BFV, and there is no way Live Service isn't a failure in EA's hands.  So why think DICE will be able to do a polished release next time if they're on the same rushed timetable and have the same strangled budget as BFV?
  • JPhysics
    804 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    There is an increasing number of titles/franchises switching over to the live service model, it is a popular trend picking up momentum by developers for two main reasons in my opinion. 
    -
    Before I address those,  I listened to an interview the other day by Todd Howard from Bethesda games who was talking about the Fallout76 and their live service approach, which I could imagine echoed the outlook of other studios too.  He mentioned how the studio felt disconnected from their player base reflecting upon Skyrim/Fallout 4 games, which continue to be played in high numbers for such a long time after their release without any touch point with the community
    ... I guess it was convenient to not acknowledge the DLC packs and mod system at the time.
    This is where live service lure developers, because they can introduce subtle micro transactions in various ways giving them an ongoing steady flow of revenue without any commitment to major content. 
    The second reason is that it is a free card to release unfinished games with the promise that they will be fixed and optimised further down the line, but it order for that to work the studio has to be committed to the game and the community ..... that is where I think Dice will fail to successfully deliver a live service. 
    On top of that, whilst I perfectly accept games are released with bugs .... I do not expect to pay £59.99 for a AAA game for it to feel unfinished or riddled with bugs,  I see the existing poor QA process in place a reflection upon those commitments I previously just mention.
    A live service model can work as proven in other games, but I think it will only expose weaknesses in Dice studio's current state.
  • RABID_4TUNA
    76 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    JPhysics said:
    There is an increasing number of titles/franchises switching over to the live service model, it is a popular trend picking up momentum by developers for two main reasons in my opinion. 
    -
    Before I address those,  I listened to an interview the other day by Todd Howard from Bethesda games who was talking about the Fallout76 and their live service approach, which I could imagine echoed the outlook of other studios too.  He mentioned how the studio felt disconnected from their player base reflecting upon Skyrim/Fallout 4 games, which continue to be played in high numbers for such a long time after their release without any touch point with the community
    ... I guess it was convenient to not acknowledge the DLC packs and mod system at the time.
    This is where live service lure developers, because they can introduce subtle micro transactions in various ways giving them an ongoing steady flow of revenue without any commitment to major content. 
    The second reason is that it is a free card to release unfinished games with the promise that they will be fixed and optimised further down the line, but it order for that to work the studio has to be committed to the game and the community ..... that is where I think Dice will fail to successfully deliver a live service. 
    On top of that, whilst I perfectly accept games are released with bugs .... I do not expect to pay £59.99 for a AAA game for it to feel unfinished or riddled with bugs,  I see the existing poor QA process in place a reflection upon those commitments I previously just mention.
    A live service model can work as proven in other games, but I think it will only expose weaknesses in Dice studio's current state.

  • Ferdinand_J_Foch
    3417 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    I think the post-Premium content that BF4 and BF1 got wasn't quite a 'live service', at least in a modern sense. Those content drops were extras that were given out as a part of community goodwill, or as an effort to repent for past mistakes, rather than scheduled content that is a part of the game's active life cycle. We were quite lucky to get them, to be honest. EA had already made a lot of money from BF4/1, so it wasn't that hard for them to give content away for free after Premium was wrapped up, but even then, we had limitations.

    BFV's live service is very different. This is being done when EA still has an incentive to make as much money as possible. The live service is also supposed to entice players into purchasing cosmetic microtransactions, and in the future, XP boosts. As we can all tell, people haven't been enticed very much, have they?

    I've had issues with pretty much every live service out there. Overwatch is too dependent on lootboxes, even though they're just cosmetics and they aren't the worst implementation ever. RS6 has lootbox-only cosmetics and R6 Credit-only cosmetics, despite having multiple bloody season passes. Titanfall 2 barely had any additional content, never mind additional content that was actually new ... and pardon my ignorance, but are people still playing Sea of Thieves? Really? That game had practically no depth when it launched ... its hard to imagine that its changed all that much in the past few months.

    There is another game that I play nowadays called Forza Horizon 4. I've actually talked about some of the qualms I've had with this game in the past few months, so I won't bring all of the older stuff again. Its got paid DLC, but it too has a live service. In this case, it makes the least sense, because the game has literally no microstransactions ... literally none. Thus, they're push towards forcing more people to play the online multiplayer modes is absurd. There was a car that they recently added for free ... the Apollo Intensa Emozione. Here it is:



    Quite an exotic looking car, isn't it? It's also got the performance to match it's looks: it pulls up to 3 Gs in corners, which is the most any car in the game can do. Its about the grippiest car out of the entire car selection, and it's got a good top speed too, which a lot of grip-centric cars don't have. How do you unlock this, you might ask?

    An online co-op race with five random troglodytes teammates. But that's not all ... you have to drive top-end hypercars ... cars that have too much power, and cannot be controlled by your typical FH4 driver, unless it is heavily tuned. You also have to drive at night, whilst it's raining, with no track barriers, and traffic cars. Oh, and you have to compete against a six driver AI team on the highest difficulty in the game: Unbeatable. The tracks you have to drive on aren't nice either: two events are in twisty and dark forests, and the final race is in Edinburgh, a tight and complicated city where traffic is at it's worst.

    You have essentially got the most difficult race possible here ... and I haven't even gone over the effects of lag. The event consists of three races, so you can't just win one and be done with it. Frankly, if you're not driving an AWD-swapped hypercar with moderate power levels and a focus on lightness rather than 'SPEED AND POWER!', then you're going to lose. 

    So, what do people bring to this event? Untuned Ferraris, Lamborghinis, Bugattis and Koenigseggs ... just about the worst cars possible. Hardly anyone brings tuned and track-focused cars, like the Noble M600 or Porsche 918, so you get lobbies filled with people who can't handle 1000+ horsepower in an uncontrollable mess, in the wet. There's also loads of people who constantly ram their own teammates off the track ... online racing games are plagued with these sorts of people, so it's especially idiotic to have us depend on these sorts of imbeciles.

    The best part is that because it's a team-focused race ... you coming in first place often means nothing. You can come in first place constantly, but if your teammates finish at the bottom of the pack, you lose the race anyways. I'm extremely lucky ... I only had to do this event once in order to win it. I've been scouring the FH4 forums and subreddit, and it's filled with people who say they've tried this event countless times for days without any success.

    In that sense, FH4 is somewhat similar to BFV when it comes to a live service. Both of them feature silly challenges to unlock content and silly decisions on the part of the devs. However, at least FH4 has hundreds of cars, plenty of paid and substantial content, an immensely enjoyable driving experience and a great simulation of driving around Britain. I enjoy the game so much that I can tolerate it's recent live service stupidities.

    I can't do that with BFV. I can't even play BFV right now without this insane stuttering.
  • RABID_4TUNA
    76 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I think the post-Premium content that BF4 and BF1 got wasn't quite a 'live service', at least in a modern sense. Those content drops were extras that were given out as a part of community goodwill, or as an effort to repent for past mistakes, rather than scheduled content that is a part of the game's active life cycle. We were quite lucky to get them, to be honest. EA had already made a lot of money from BF4/1, so it wasn't that hard for them to give content away for free after Premium was wrapped up, but even then, we had limitations.

    BFV's live service is very different. This is being done when EA still has an incentive to make as much money as possible. The live service is also supposed to entice players into purchasing cosmetic microtransactions, and in the future, XP boosts. As we can all tell, people haven't been enticed very much, have they?

    I've had issues with pretty much every live service out there. Overwatch is too dependent on lootboxes, even though they're just cosmetics and they aren't the worst implementation ever. RS6 has lootbox-only cosmetics and R6 Credit-only cosmetics, despite having multiple bloody season passes. Titanfall 2 barely had any additional content, never mind additional content that was actually new ... and pardon my ignorance, but are people still playing Sea of Thieves? Really? That game had practically no depth when it launched ... its hard to imagine that its changed all that much in the past few months.

    There is another game that I play nowadays called Forza Horizon 4. I've actually talked about some of the qualms I've had with this game in the past few months, so I won't bring all of the older stuff again. Its got paid DLC, but it too has a live service. In this case, it makes the least sense, because the game has literally no microstransactions ... literally none. Thus, they're push towards forcing more people to play the online multiplayer modes is absurd. There was a car that they recently added for free ... the Apollo Intensa Emozione. Here it is:



    Quite an exotic looking car, isn't it? It's also got the performance to match it's looks: it pulls up to 3 Gs in corners, which is the most any car in the game can do. Its about the grippiest car out of the entire car selection, and it's got a good top speed too, which a lot of grip-centric cars don't have. How do you unlock this, you might ask?

    An online co-op race with five random troglodytes teammates. But that's not all ... you have to drive top-end hypercars ... cars that have too much power, and cannot be controlled by your typical FH4 driver, unless it is heavily tuned. You also have to drive at night, whilst it's raining, with no track barriers, and traffic cars. Oh, and you have to compete against a six driver AI team on the highest difficulty in the game: Unbeatable. The tracks you have to drive on aren't nice either: two events are in twisty and dark forests, and the final race is in Edinburgh, a tight and complicated city where traffic is at it's worst.

    You have essentially got the most difficult race possible here ... and I haven't even gone over the effects of lag. The event consists of three races, so you can't just win one and be done with it. Frankly, if you're not driving an AWD-swapped hypercar with moderate power levels and a focus on lightness rather than 'SPEED AND POWER!', then you're going to lose. 

    So, what do people bring to this event? Untuned Ferraris, Lamborghinis, Bugattis and Koenigseggs ... just about the worst cars possible. Hardly anyone brings tuned and track-focused cars, like the Noble M600 or Porsche 918, so you get lobbies filled with people who can't handle 1000+ horsepower in an uncontrollable mess, in the wet. There's also loads of people who constantly ram their own teammates off the track ... online racing games are plagued with these sorts of people, so it's especially idiotic to have us depend on these sorts of imbeciles.

    The best part is that because it's a team-focused race ... you coming in first place often means nothing. You can come in first place constantly, but if your teammates finish at the bottom of the pack, you lose the race anyways. I'm extremely lucky ... I only had to do this event once in order to win it. I've been scouring the FH4 forums and subreddit, and it's filled with people who say they've tried this event countless times for days without any success.

    In that sense, FH4 is somewhat similar to BFV when it comes to a live service. Both of them feature silly challenges to unlock content and silly decisions on the part of the devs. However, at least FH4 has hundreds of cars, plenty of paid and substantial content, an immensely enjoyable driving experience and a great simulation of driving around Britain. I enjoy the game so much that I can tolerate it's recent live service stupidities.

    I can't do that with BFV. I can't even play BFV right now without this insane stuttering.
    Hrm.

    Seems the live service fiasco isn't new or unique to EA.



    (A-la Loot Box Update)

    Also....

    At least SOMEONE is aware of the stuttering

    "Something that we wasn't able to work into this update was a resolution to the Stuttering issues encountered by Players. I chatted with the teams about this last week, and our Engineers believe that they're making good progress on the problem. We'll have more updates about this the instant that we can provide them. For now we just wanted to ensure that you understood that we view this as a High Priority for us to fix, but will not be addressed as a part of Update #5." -PartWelsh
  • RABID_4TUNA
    76 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I guess it's safe to say live service as a whole isn't doing well, to say the least.


  • Ferdinand_J_Foch
    3417 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    I guess it's safe to say live service as a whole isn't doing well, to say the least.


    It's certainly possible to do it well, but at the moment, only a few companies have a live service without it being completely awful. A particularly popular example is Warframe, but that's a free to play game which features a lot of cosmetic microtransactions locked behind F2P style grinds.

    Overall, yes, this 'live service' thing isn't very good. After all, why would anyone expect a large trove of quality content for free? Almost nothing in life that is free is all that great.

    Every video game developer and publisher wants a profit ... it only makes sense that they focus on things that make them a profit, even if we as consumers don't like them. People don't like lootboxes, but these things earn massive amounts of revenues at very little costs. The only realistic way that we can stop this practice is to not buy into it.

    This logic can also be expanded onto a live service model. Game companies don't usually hand out content for free just because it's a nice thing to do ... they do it to incentivise microtransactions, or foster enough goodwill for people to buy the next game. EA probably believed that it could make more money through a live service funded using MTX, rather than the old season pass model. They didn't do all of this just to be nice ... they did it because they honestly believed that this would improve their financial status. If EA were told and convinced that they would lose out on money making opportunities with this live service, they wouldn't have done it, even if it had the potential to make their customers happy.

    Rainbow Six Siege is where this principle is extremely obvious. Ubisoft didn't make that 'Rainbow is Magic' event just because they wanted to have a jolly old time ... they did it to push those damned Event-only Alpha Packs which contained exclusive cosmetics. They could have charged for those cosmetics directly and still made a fair bit of money ... hell, they could have made those cosmetics free. However, they went down the Alpha Pack route. They did this because it would be better for Ubisoft if we spent up to $40 gambling for packs in order to get Unicorn Tachanka rather than buying Unicorn Tachanka directly for 'only' $10-15.
  • MarxistDictator
    5230 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Everywhere loot box games are sold where they are forced to reveal their odds and algorithms they tank sales like they should for peddling garbage and setting up cost parameters to gouge the people who are easily separated from money. Unfortunately this is not the case everywhere.
  • RABID_4TUNA
    76 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Everywhere loot box games are sold where they are forced to reveal their odds and algorithms they tank sales like they should for peddling garbage and setting up cost parameters to gouge the people who are easily separated from money. Unfortunately this is not the case everywhere.
    If DICE had revealed the odds of getting a super rare tank skin in BF1 from a standard battlepack, nobody in their right mind would have ever bought them.
    Black Ops 4's loot boxes are no better; they offer "Ultra" Signature Weapons that grant extra 25% XP per kill, and contain duplicates for items you may have already owned.






  • Sixclicks
    5075 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited June 2019
    Sixclicks wrote: »
    bran1986 said:
    The thing is at least with Fallout 76 there has been constant content released and a sizeable amount of content coming this fall.

    It's a shame the game had such a rocky start and is still pretty buggy. I've been watching my brother play it. I'll probably buy it too just to play with some friends, but only at a very cheap price.

    Their live service is definitely better than DICE's though.

    I saw it at Walmart for like $40 or $50 still earlier, I still think it's so stupid that there's no disc and it's a piece of cardboard shaped like a disc, I would buy it for $15 probably, maybe.

    My poor gf thought Anthem was actually good, I said no hun...stay the hell away from that game.
    I got Fallout 76 for $20 used today. My brother got his copy from the PSN store at $15 when it was on sale. It's back up to $60 on the PSN store though.

    I only got it because I have some friends and my brother playing it.
  • ninjapenquinuk
    2244 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited June 2019
    Personally i think EA/DICE are going about a 'live service' the wrong way.  In my mind a live service should be about keeping a game going for more than just one cycle, which in BF's case is usually 2 yrs. So instead of bringing out a brand new game every one or two years, you keep refining and adding new content to the current game.  In BFV case there is a shed load of content that can be added to keep the game going for ages. You would of course need to pay for the content with a mix of MTX and paid DLC , but you say to the 'community' you can either pay for extra content to the current game, which over time could become free to everyone (maybe a year or so after release, which if a game is going to be around for 4-5 years id say thats fair) or every 2 years pay £50-60 anyway for a new (buggy at launch) game. 
  • RABID_4TUNA
    76 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited June 2019
    Doublepost. Again.
    Post edited by RABID_4TUNA on
  • BrianLocal1
    583 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    We need a lot more maps and you should be able to get more with company coin, ie things should be much cheaper amounts of it.
Sign In or Register to comment.