Star Wars: Battlefront II 'Han Solo' Update Adds Insult to Injury

Star Wars: Battlefront II’s latest update, launching the ‘Han Solo’ season, offered more than new game modes and tweaks to the title’s multiplayer content. Alongside minor adjustments to Battlefront II’s online play, the recent update gave single-players something invaluable: proof that EA and its subsidiaries care so little about offline enthusiasts that the companies continue to neglect them with the occasional placating gesture.

The story is too old to be commented.
IamTylerDurden1178d ago (Edited 178d ago )

Enough is enough, this is another completely FREE season pass. It's free. EA screwed up originally, but to be so pompous as to aggressively criticise the free DLC it's nauseating. We get that the loot boxes were bs, but this free DLC is a good thing. And then you say EA needs to take lesson from CoD? CoD just ripped the sp campaign out of BO4 and that's who they should be more like in terms of sp content? I know you were referencing bots, but it's still jarring to hear.

Phantom2244178d ago (Edited 178d ago )

Okay, I think using an argument regarding campaigns isn't exactly comparable to the inclusion of bots to play all multiplayer modes offline. Also, I don't think this article is meant to indicate that CoD is perfect, but that's the closest type of game EA can try to emulate in terms of the way CoD allows people to play against bots outside of the campaigns. Activision absolutely has its flaws, but they're doing better for that niche single-player market than EA is when it comes to games that are clearly more focused on multiplayer than single-player. Also, you picked the worst CoD to try to compare this to, because that one's not even out and is the first CoD in a decade to not include a single-player campaign. While I see where you're coming from, your argument doesn't transfer directly based on what has already been done.

Also, by your logic, at least in my mind, if something is free it should automatically be considered awesome, but I can't agree with that. Just because something's free doesn't mean it has to be regarded as great. Sure, it's cool that it's free and they're not charging people even more than the money they already paid for the initial game, but that's a choice that the companies involved have made, and I don't think that justifies being lazy.

IamTylerDurden1178d ago (Edited 178d ago )

Then make your argument somewhere else. What does this free season pass have to do with bots? Were you honestly expecting a full inclusion of bots with this DLC? This is another free season pass, it's the Han Solo DLC, treat it as such instead of taking your issues with EA out on something fairly unrelated. Judge the DLC on its own merit and write about bots elsewhere. Even the title makes it sound as if EA did something absolutely abhorrent regarding this DLC. They put out another free season pass, that's it. I fail to see how it adds insult to injury? If you still hold a grudge with EA, that's fine, but this free season simply isn't something that should be demonized.

CoD BO4 is the newest CoD. News just broke about Treyarch removing the sp campaign. People are killing Activision for this right now. It's extremely relevant, so it's not like i just hand picked some old CoD game like you (or the writer) did in this very article as the example. It just sounds appalling when you say " EA/BF needs to be more like CoD in terms of sp" when CoD is getting lit the **** up for abandoning sp in the upcoming game.

Phantom - " Activision is doing better for that niche sp market than EA is when it comes to games that are more focused on mp than sp"

But what about the regular sp market? You praise Activision for supporting the "niche sp market" and denigrate EA, meanwhile Activision just fully removed the sp campaign from CoD and BF2 supports sp campaigns. It sounds ridiculous. It could've been worded much better, and the writer never should've praised Activision over in EA. They should've simply give Modern Warfare as an example of what they want from bots.

Phantom2244178d ago

The argument was made on a site that focuses on single-player gaming. Not sure where else you want them to make the argument they're trying to make. Also, this "free season pass" was hyped up on the game's forums for multiple things, and additions to the arcade was one of those pieces they hyped up and it simply didn't live up to the hype in the author's mind. It's an opinion piece, not objective news.

As far as judging the DLC on its own merit, sure, maybe the author could've done that, but based on the tone this sounds like it's more cake icing than the core of the meal. The guy was rough, I'll admit, but he has a right to be, just as you have the right to disagree with his opinion. Go for it. I fall somewhere in-between (though admittedly I agree with him more than you, but my argument is largely emotional).

As far as comparing EA to Activision, again, I think you and the author are on two separate pages. This is less about *becoming* like Activision and more about emulating things Activision has done before. I concur that taking out the single-player campaign in BO4 is an absolutely ridiculous decision, but Activision's track record with single-player content before this is less neglectful than EA's in recent history. Hell, even the original Battlefront reboot (oxymoron, I know) was pretty skewed away from single-player, which EA/DICE, admittedly, sought to correct, but they've done a pretty poor job overall. I give them credit for trying with the SP campaigns, but it's not enough to make it a repeat process so that those SP gamers who aren't just buying it for the Star Wars title to continue returning, and that's still a decent size market they could do better to satisfy, just like Ubisoft could probably do more to satisfy online gamers, because the Division didn't exactly do as well as they'd hoped. It did well, just not as well as it could have given Ubisoft's other titles.

So, I'll adjust my previous statement at the very least. Activision, until recently with BO4, has been doing better than EA when it comes to games that are more focused on multiplayer than single-player. However, I will not concede the point fully.

Also, I may have somewhat misspoken or communicated my perspective poorly. It's not so much that Activision supports the niche single-player market. I think it's more that they give offline gamers more options in multiplayer-focused games. The author was harsh, I totally agree, but that's okay and I'm sure plenty of people agree with him, just like many others won't. Personally, I gave up on EA after Mass Effect: Andromeda, but that had nothing to do with multiplayer vs. single-player. I still hold that grudge, though ;)

I don't think there's going to be common ground on this one.

Hungryalpaca178d ago

They’re not delivering what was promised. Plain and simple. People like you are why games are in this state.

enviable27178d ago

I agree with you, the only reason why bf2 didnt have a season pass was because they were planning to fund dlc through optional microtransactions. Which they implemented horribly. What did people expect? EA to do a full season of content for free after people got the micro transactions removed? Lol get real. The video game industry is a business not a charity.

starsi360177d ago

People downvote you, even though what you say is 100% the truth.

EA is a business. They want to keep customers happy but they have to balance it with making money. In an ideal world they would keep adding tons of DLC for free and funding it out of their own pockets, but that’s not going to happen and neither would I expect it to.

Kicking off about loot boxes may end up coming back to haunt the gaming community as personally I’d much rather let some people pay for fancy cosmetics so I get lots of free DLC and season pass content. I do draw the line at performance enhancing loot boxes however... pay to win ruins games.

uth11177d ago (Edited 177d ago )


the extta content in this game has been disappointing for sure.

but i'm totally not surprised after the backlash killed the monetization plans.

i still don't understand why people thought the loot boxes were worse than the $50 season pass the previous game charged. that split the playerbase. this was completely optional

OB1Biker178d ago (Edited 178d ago )

I agree. Fair enough to complain but it's.... Free.
I stopped playing the game long ago but I don't get it.

emiyaxtousaka178d ago

I loved the campaign the way it is. Any other add-on for single-player enthusiasts FOR FREE is a gift

OffRoadKing177d ago

If you're looking for leniency you've come to the wrong place, around here its damned if they do and damned if they dont.

PapaBop177d ago (Edited 177d ago )

It's EA, what can I say, their greed brings out the pompous in me. They didn't just screw the game originally, even now the game still seems screwed up to me. New players are at an overwhelming disadvantage due to the progression system, getting matched up with players with fully upgraded cards. EA really doubled down on this stupid card progression system, only difference now is that players can't spend money to progress faster.

This isn't even a season pass. EA probably originally planned on doing a proper season pass worth of content but now that they can't nickel and dime the fanbase like they wanted, they've taken their ball and gone home. It is free after all so we really don't have a right to complain too much but I sure will just because of how EA talked up their content plans for Battlefront 2 and since TLJ stuff, their releases have been piss poor.

That's the bottom line here really, EA can no longer nickel and dime their fanbase so they've downgraded their plans for the game. They make stupid amounts of money from their other games with minimum amount of developer effort needed but God forbid, they get put in a position where they can't nickel and dime their customer for once.

iofhua177d ago (Edited 177d ago )

To be fair bots as a single player mode isn't a new thing. I played the hell out of Battlefield 1942 back in the day when I didn't have an internet connection. It had no campaign mode, just bots. I still had fun.

Yes we should rain fire down on EA for the loot box controversy, but I'm not going to hold the lack of a single player campaign against them if what they want to do is make a multiplayer game.

It's not the end of the world either! A recent article on N4G was suggesting that single player games are coming to and end - that's ridiculous. There will always be people making single player games. People making a multiplayer only game aren't doing it to spite you. Get over yourself.

uth11177d ago

yes it's free, but we're getting what we pay for

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 177d ago
Sciurus_vulgaris178d ago

Of course EA is going to ditch Battlefront 2, the game underperformed and the planned micro-transaction scheme failed. EA would rather have Dice (and the co-developers) focus on other games, with the main developer focusing on Battlefield V.

Show all comments (30)
The story is too old to be commented.