SW Battlefront Devs talk free DLC, development path and missing ironsights

MWEB GameZone writes: "Two of the most pressing questions about Star Wars Battlefront is if there will be 'EA DLC schemes' in the works for the game and how the lack of ironsights will affect gameplay.

Thankfully, Star Wars Battlefront's Community Manager and its Design director have come to the rescue, answering community concerns."

The story is too old to be commented.
ZombieDreddZA1228d ago

Free DLC you say? Is this really EA?

Sillicur1228d ago

Maybe the company is turning around! Im sure there will be a lot of paid DLCs though. Do you think a pre-order bonus of 1 week head start is enough?

SonZeRo1228d ago

Who needs ironsights, just shoot from the hip, it works for stormtroopers :P. DLC's will be coming out your ears a few months after release and EA will be rolling in your money.

Sillicur1228d ago

Poor stormtroopers, those guys should really go for aiming classes. :)

Majin-vegeta1228d ago

"Who needs ironsights".

Apparently all the kids who's first consoles were PS3/360

plut0nash1228d ago

How much DLC free? IMO withthe price of console games shooting up so much all DLC that makes games complete needs to be free. Added stuff a year later we can pay for.

Sillicur1228d ago

yah, agreed, just the first DLC is confirmed to be free. However, i have a sinking feeling that there might be a "premium" DLC service like the Battlefield games :(

Pandamobile1228d ago

There will definitely be a premium DLC service. It's worked fine for Battlefield 3 and 4, so I don't doubt EA will do the same for Battlefront.

_-EDMIX-_1228d ago (Edited 1228d ago )

?No, no and no. More content can be free, but any more content should be expected at a extra cost, they don't work for free....


Do you not get that DLC is made for the sake of being sold? The budget for the DLC is based on knowing it will get sold, it was never going to exist if it wasn't going to be sold.

The evidence is really based on historically the amount of content games launch with, games get bigger each gen and have more content each release, not smaller...

ie GTAV bigger and longer then GTAIV...has dlc

Skyrim bigger then Oblivion, longer....has DLC

Mario Kart 8, most tracks and karts in its history...has dlc

Smash Bros, most stages and characters in its history...has dlc.

Those titles have always had progressive content, ie more content every release, even if it was a little more. have stayed the same price, its harder and longer to produce more complex content then lets say 10 years ago, yet...again, games have not moved up with inflation, they've stayed the same ie they are getting payed LESS while we are getting MORE content even at launch.

Soooo no, DLC is a choice, you don't need DLC to "makes games complete" that is a choice...its an EXTRA, its not the rest of the game...its merely more of it.

Do you deserve the sequel to a film for free because you bought the first one to have a "complete film"? I what point is it not known your buying the content for what they are providing and not what YOU want?

Could I not define the "Complete" version of a film with deleted scenes, all its sequels, bloopers, making of etc?

I'm sorry but there must be some limit to what folks are expecting with games. Games today offer a level of content just unheard of 15 years ago. I'd rather DLC be a choice for those that want it, vs them raise the price of games. Mind you, the price getting raised would make complete sense....we would STILL SEE DLC! Its an extra and even with the raising of the standard price, an extra is still an extra. Its not made to fill the gap, its made to make money, if that gap was filled.....they would still make it because there job is to make money.

Many legit need to fully get what DLC is, how the market works and how the industry has evolved over the years to fully get why DLC sorta needs to be here. "complete" is a subjective idea....I don't just think that BF4 is "complete" with 40 plus maps....even as a hardcore BF fan, that is just over kill, 40 maps or more really is for the devoted BF fan, not for the average gamer.

Games today don't need to be $60, they technically need to be MORE, so why would a developer make an absurd amount of maps to make a "complete" version for you all at a loss to them? They are already losing some money making it at $60 ie below market value due to inflation.

HanCilliers1228d ago

there must be some limit to what folks are expecting with games. Very true. but what do you suggest for that limit?

I like what CDPR has done with Witcher 3. 16 free DLC's and 2 paid expansions. EXPANSIONS

plut0nash1227d ago

How about Evolve? the Four extra hunters completed the game. That should've been free. Not everyone has teh same DLC policy.

CongoKyle1228d ago

April is over, pack it up boys.

kingeliran1228d ago

FREE DLC is the other HALF of the game they do not release on launch, and no iron sight for A FREAKING FPS is bullshit!!!

Skate-AK1228d ago

There is no physical iron sights on the gun. You can still aim down the gun like in Battlefield and COD.

_-EDMIX-_1228d ago

....I see your new to FPS gaming. Many FPS games don't have looking down iron sight.

Sigh....born in the COD era lol. Half Life, Left 4 Dead, CS, Halo, TF2, Day Of Defeat etc.

Even funnier....the Star Wars Battlefront games fired from the hip, they didn't have iron sight.

Your facts......get them straight.

Sillicur1228d ago

Exactly! Well said sir!

leogets1228d ago (Edited 1228d ago )

No.. iron sights are just a cosmetic thing. Many games dont have ads. Halo for 1 example. There is no need for iron sights it just slows down the player

Show all comments (25)
The story is too old to be commented.