Media Star Wars BattleFront

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I played Red Dead Redemption for a ridiculous amount of hours but never finished the game. I don't have as much time to play video games now and still prefer single player to multiplayer. I don't have the time to commit to memorizing all the MP maps and secrets for these games. I just want to play a campaign for however long I want to play and not be bothered by *******s.
 
I have never and will never look to a video game to be moved by the story.

I just want to blow **** up and I don't care where I get that from, SP or MP.
 
I have never and will never look to a video game to be moved by the story.

I just want to blow **** up and I don't care where I get that from, SP or MP.

Yep sums up your movie views too? I don't care how good Banner acts, I want to see HULK smash.. ughh grrrr... :lol jk
 
I played Red Dead Redemption for a ridiculous amount of hours but never finished the game. I don't have as much time to play video games now and still prefer single player to multiplayer. I don't have the time to commit to memorizing all the MP maps and secrets for these games. I just want to play a campaign for however long I want to play and not be bothered by *******s.

Right, but when most people do that, the developer gets the feeling that they shouldn't put as much content into it, since that's wasted resources. The weird thing though, is that even though people don't play most of the content, they determine their purchase by it. So maybe EA could have sold more copies of Battlefront if they had a single player, but they still would probably have a very low number of people that would play the single player.
 
Does it really matter what the stats show ultimately? People make their opinion on the matter very clear. I actually don't mind SP. or MP only titles. But they have to offer more to that single aspect than games that offer both otherwise they just don't seem like good value to the customer base. The best game I played this year was a sweet little single player only game called Ori and the blind forest. I paid about £10 for it (and bought it again this week just for the few new additions to the definitive edition) And at that price it was superb. Like wise I love Titanfall, I held off and got it cheap mind and all of the DLC is now free so it is still a good purchase to this day.

This EA Battlefront however not only stripped away the single player elements, but the multiplayer was pitiful with barely any content and no real depth or longevity to it at all. And then of course we have the $50 season pass to boot.. Thanks EA. So it doesn't really matter if a game offers both options, it's just what it does with them.
 
Here's what gets back to EA:

-14 Million copies sold, which is more than they had hoped for
-Based on stats, you don't need single player to be successful

In fact, they could do the new game without singeplayer still and just do it as stuff from the new movies with the same type of gameplay and I bet that people would still buy it and it would be wildly successful. Because as much as people talk about what they want from a game, they'll still buy stuff no matter what.
 
More than that gets back, EA will be well aware that the PC version is already dead, and the consoles have dropped players very quickly. We found out this week they aren't too happy with the metacritic score also so they are aware. As bad a company as EA can be, they aren't stupid, they know they can't pull this kind of rubbish twice if they wish to see those kind of sales figures again.
 
I won't buy another one if it's the same as this Battlefront. No more preordering either. I'll just wait until enough reviews come in to convince me that I need to spend the money on it. These games cost too much to buy without enough information--especially considering it feels like we get the bare minimum so they can sell us a season pass for the rest of the content that should have been included in the first place.
 
Thing is....if the game is good...you can easily wait. No need for day one.

Look at where these are even coming from. For example the older BF's, people played them for YEARS cause they were just that good to play for that long. I played Command and Conquer Renegade for like 5-7 years...last few were on and off.

The problems comes with some companies dont even want their own games to last for years. If BF 8 lasted for years...then they have to wait that much longer to shovel 9 in your face.
 
They do want them to last though, if you aren't playing a game then you might resell it (in the case of console games) which means lost sales. If they can get people to continue playing then they lower the secondary market.
 
Been playing this a lot. And have gotten quite a lot better than i was at it when it first came out. I generally really don't like MP games, but this seems like just pick it up and play and have fun. I can play for just 20 min if i want and turn it off. Plus the setting is great and graphics are incredible.


Looking forward to the Bespin Expansion.
 
Been playing this a lot. And have gotten quite a lot better than i was at it when it first came out. I generally really don't like MP games, but this seems like just pick it up and play and have fun. I can play for just 20 min if i want and turn it off. Plus the setting is great and graphics are incredible.


Looking forward to the Bespin Expansion.


If you go into Fighter Squadron and see a dude named Spider with 32/0 that's my friend. :lol
 
Wtf, lol. I just saw the Battlefront ads.



Did they need to waste money on that?
 
Ad money...how else do you get more people to play?

I mean, not like they could invest that money into the actual product and make it better or anything.
 
There has never been a game I have tried and wanted to love more than this game. So much untapped potential.
 
Back
Top