New Live-Action Star Wars Battlefront II Trailer from PlayStation

EA responds to Star Wars Battlefront II lootbox controversy, becomes most downvoted response of all time on Reddit

EA response to Star Wars Battlefront II controversy becomes the most downvoted in Reddit history

The Star Wars Battlefront II release date of November 17 is fast approaching. The post explained that the intent was to "provide players with a sense of pride and accomplishment for unlocking different heroes".

Death threats over game features came into vogue during the early days of the GamerGate controversy.

PCGamer.com has a good recap about the entire Reddit feed on the game, but in short, users detail that they're either forced to pay more for iconic characters like Darth Vader and Luke Skywalker - after already purchasing the game - or to play a hefty number of hours in order to unlock them for free. During my time with the game, few things were more deflating than going on a hot streak and earning enough points to play as Luke Skywalker, only to realize he's not part of my collection yet. Players can choose from an array of land and air vehicles and master their own hero's journey, with customizable character progression across heroes, villains, troopers and starfighters.

For the unfamiliar, Star Wars Battlefront II (and its predecessor) is an online shooter set in the Star Wars universe. Probably not. With a franchise like Star Wars and the legacy of this gaming series, the complaints of core players are likely to be harder to hear over the mass market audience that's buying the game this holiday season. The heroes, similar to the locked weapons for Troopers, are sidegrades instead of upgrades (Darth Vader should be on similar power level as Darth Maul, etc).

It's a shame that this progression fiasco is dominating the Battlefront 2 conversation right now, because there's a ton to love about the actual game. So gamers earn 25.04 credits per Galactic assault match on average.

By comparison, the second most downvoted comment on the platform now stands at a negative of 24,333 downvotes - more than 10 times less than EA's post. Heroes are purchased with points, and you can get more points by paying money.

Thus, EA choosing to lock those characters has been received poorly - especially given the perception that the lock is a means of encouraging players to buy in-game items.

Essentially, "When and how is it okay to handle charging players money in games?" Many video game publishers would argue that most players don't have the time to put the hours into a game that are required to unlock bonus characters. This is an understandably controversial move, coming after Battlefront I made all heroes immediately playable and micro-transactions were offered in the game.

"You can not ever attain a sense of pride and accomplishment from that, because most sane people will give up long before this", they added.

Do you think EA's response is worthy of the most downvoted comment?

Green Beret Killed After Discovering SEALs' Alleged Money Scheme
India Joins 'Quadrilateral' With Australia, Japan and US to Limit China's Intrusion