Why Does Activision Get A Pass For Micro-Transactions While EA Gets Roasted

It has been no secret that EA Star Wars Battlefront II has had its share of issues and detractors. The biggest of which is the use of Micro-transactions as a main component of the game. However they are not the only new release to have them and in a new Opinion Piece; Skewed and Reviewed looks at why EA was given so much grief while another major publisher got a pass.

The story is too old to be commented.
Brash1387d ago

Been asking that for a while

Garethvk1387d ago

I was in HQ today and noticed it.

Eonjay1387d ago

It worth going after Activation and Microsoft for these very same practices. EAs was targeted more heavily because it tried to use Star Wars to do it which is like among the top 5 properties of all time. Its owner Disney is the most valuable trademark in the country. People aren't willing to fight for COD. People are willing to fight for Star Wars.

Emily_1386d ago

I’m making over $15k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life.

This is where i started>>>

AspiringProGenji1387d ago

EA closed Visceral Games + All the P2W BS + all the damage controls. I see they have got all the attention while Activision is enjoying the distraction Also you know Most people don't like EA. They have earned the bad reputation

_-EDMIX-_1387d ago (Edited 1387d ago )

Activision is never close down a gaming Studio?

And I would also argue that Activision has just as bad as a reputation all I'm actually seeing from this as a lot of this hate is based on bias and personal emotion and less of it is actually based on what's actually being done.

If the people campaigning against microtransactions actually want their voice to be taken seriously they can't simply just cherry-pick a popular company to hate they actually need to openly be doing this against any company that's doing microtransactions.

I mean consider what you're saying applies to many companies.

You need to also consider that if the majority of your anger is coming from an emotional place and not something really objective regarding microtransactions like for example if you're talking about that EA close down a studio, you're going to find people are going to actually take your message less serious you'll simply come off as a person that actually hates Electronic Arts than actually really cares about microtransactions.

So how do we know that your anger is not simply based on not liking Electronic Arts?

So do you not see how easily somebody could ignore such a stupid campaign when they hate train is simply based on not liking a company vs the action?

Someone somebody says why is microtransactions bad? Your response can't be "oh Electronic Arts closed down the studio I liked"


"They evil"

This type of hard Edge approach is actually going to have a complete opposite effect if anything a great example would be the presidential election with Donald Trump. We understand he's regarded as an evil person but actually blaming the entire Republican Party and then even attacking the people that vote for him is not actually going to convince anyone to change their minds in fact that has a complete opposite effect your rhetoric simply starts to sound like you never were going to like this individual in the first place thus they don't care.

I mean put it this way would you be able to take my opinion seriously regarding any publisher if I've made it clear I 100% hate every last thing the Publishers ever done?

So I believe people's anger needs to be towards the action of what's being done in less about trying to slander the company because that's actually going to have an opposite effect than anyone believing or caring about such a campaign.

I mean would you take a Nintendo review from a website seriously called "I-HateEverythingNintendo .com"?

AspiringProGenji1387d ago (Edited 1387d ago )

I dunno about Activision closing down studios, but I am talking about recent events. EA closed Visceral Studios, then this P2W controversy follows, plus all the damage control ''Sense of pride and accomplishment,'' ''Arm chair developers.'' Etc...

Also EA has served as the catalyst for consumers to finally start pushing back MTs. This doesn't mean Activision or any company is getting a pass. Actually, every publisher/dev must be hating EA for this controversy. Companies now know they can't put P2W BS and get away with it. This is a message to every company. EA getting the most hate is because they caused it

All this controversy and hate EA is getting is warranted, regardless of liking or hating the company

Seraphim1387d ago

I certainly can't recall Activision closing down a popular or known developer. Not to mention they don't have the teams that EA does between Sports, Racing, and other genres. It's possible they have but Visceral was well regarded, known and loved for their work on Dead Space. And EAs excuse for closure was insulting to gamers.

And to add to EAs MT grief. Their sports titles are atrocious but because certain gamers don't play sports games this goes unnoticed. The sports fan base eats this pay to win stuff up w/o raising a brow.

Activision has their share of shat moments but not nearly like EA. Nor do they have the abundance of releases like EA. It seems Activision, while doing MTs doesn't take it to the extent EA is pushing it. though perhaps I'm wrong in that regard.

morganfell1387d ago

Why does HALO 5 get a pass for gambling based loot boxes called Req Packs in a Pay to Win Multiplayer Scenario get a pass. They have been doing this for over 2 years and no one has said a thing.

_-EDMIX-_1387d ago (Edited 1387d ago )

@Aspir-except you could easily look up that Activision has closed down several Studios all Publishers go through something like this at a game studio is not making them money.

I'm sorry but that's not an idea that's exclusive to Electronic Arts Sony Microsoft Activision and multiple Publishers have closed down Studios over the years.

The point I'm actually making is there is no reason to actually bring that up when talking about microtransactions cuz that actually makes your campaign sound like it's a personal Vendetta instead of focusing on the actual microtransactions

So if you have a website called I hate Electronic Arts. Com it makes it very difficult for anyone to take anything you say seriously about microtransactions because the idea is that you already hate Electronic Arts in the first place the say anything you're saying becomes instantly moot.

In order to get out of that you need to at least make what's your saying equal to other Publishers because the second you start going for an emotional Vendetta you're going to lose any chance at others taking you seriously.

I'm not even saying that they hate for the company is not warranted simply that you need to start focusing on the microtransactions as opposed to personally trying to attack the company. That doesn't really help your point as much as you might really think.

Because when I open up a website called I Hate Everything trust me someone's not really going to believe my real issues with Nintendo if I've already made it apparent that I Hate Everything the company does.

Make your hate about microtransactions and not simply exclusively Electronic Arts that's probably one of the biggest reasons why you're seeing Activision and Microsoft and even Ubisoft get a pass for doing similar things.

Please do not waste time trying to bring out that they closed down the studio because some of my favorite Publishers in gaming have closed down Studios that I've liked, this is business it's normal and it happens and it should have absolutely nothing to do with what we're talking about in terms of microtransactions.

If you keep making your issue emotional and personal you're going to lose any real chance that actually really getting people to look at this issue all you're going to successfully do is just have people pay attention to Electronic Arts that's not going to do jack to these other Publishers it's barely doing anything to EA.

I would argue that type of behavior is why Battlefront 2 is still selling huge numbers and it's barely effect Electronic Arts.

People are unable to see it as "microtransactions are bad and they are pay to win" they actually simply start seeing it as

"here's a person that hates Electronic Arts look at him bringing up everything he hates about Electronic Arts."

This concept has been proven psychologically time and time again that when you take this type of negative hard-edged approach what you actually do is reinforced the belief of the people who are even buying some of these companies games.

So they're not seeing it as I shouldn't buy Battlefront 2 because of microtransactions , they're actually seeing it as " here's another classic person that hates every single last thing about Electronic Arts"

ie they closed down the studio but let's disregard that multiple Publishers actually do this.

Bahamut1387d ago

Activision is pretty awful too though. They killed Tony Hawk's Pro Skater and Guitar Hero, to name a couple.

AspiringProGenji1387d ago (Edited 1387d ago )

No. This isn’t about closing studios. I added Visceral closure as another reason why EA is also getting more hate and all the attention in this controversy. That Plus All the P2W BS plus the dagame control is why EA is being hated more than other companies right now. Im talking about recent events

Activision is just as bad and like I said, they won’t get a pass. This is a message to all companies.

fenome1387d ago


So you're saying you have to not hate EA to be able to criticize them? Lol

Meh, I haven't been a fan of EA or Activision since last gen when they really started mainstreaming this crap. I guess you could say i hated them before it was cool, does that make me a hipster? Lol

EA has just outright started getting scummy about it though, I don't understand how you defend them so much. I honestly hope they don't just totally start gutting the games you like over the next 5+ years and I really mean that. I'll gladly eat crow if they actually start evolving their games instead of just turning them into ATMs with revolving doors. But hey, if that actually does happen it might just be because of us haters, who knows?

At this point I'm just curious as to when they're going to start charging a subscription on a game to game basis. I bet people would still find a way to defend that as well though, what can you do?

1387d ago
+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 1387d ago
Cyro1387d ago

Star Wars is a big IP so not really a big surprise it got a lot of attention.

Jinger1387d ago

So is CoD... it's just Star wars attracts more than just gamers.

Cyro1387d ago


...So basically what I said? Star Wars is huge, much bigger than CoD.

Kleptic1387d ago

IMO, eventually, one of the big publishers was going to get targeted for it. Start Wars helped the situation reach media that has a lot more to do with the world than just gaming that can't be ignored...

but sooner or later something like this was going to gather enough momentum and popular opinion. There's always been a vocal push back on gaming media about MT's...but there's also been a vocally happy group on the business finance side...turns out...investors love seeing reports of software companies selling 'nothing' twice, at ridiculous margins...and we still don't know how badly all this actually hurt sales...everything up to this point is still just projections. If it sold ok, it amounts to nothing....and that is how it always has happened before.

This was probably different because it was Disney that pulled the plug (and don't think for a second they didn't approve the ENTIRE progression model multiple times, they were just more worried about the feedback than EA was...they're used to it, and ride it out)...had it been a standard battlefield game, or something, they'd have carried on...took a hit with some reviews...and that'd be that.

-Foxtrot1387d ago

They do it's just EA make such a noise while doing their shitty practices that Activision use it to their advantage and slip into the shadows...they know unlike EA that there is a "time and a place" when doing their PR stuff while EA continues to dig themselves into a bigger hole.

81BX1387d ago (Edited 1387d ago )

Because gamers. All of a sudden it's a big deal but didn't say $h!t when bf4 season pass gave priority in matchmaking waiting. If you didn't see the baby steps, you can't cry at the end result

UltraNova1387d ago

Premium matchmaking is still a thing in Bf1...

rainslacker1387d ago

I think EA got more attention because of that reddit post which inflamed a lot of people to notice. In fact, I think EA has done more harm through trying to curb the complaints because they can't seem to say anything right...and in fact say the one thing that is likely to just piss people off more.

Activision tends to not address complaints very often, and just ignores them so the fuss about any complaint dies down after a week or so.

That's why most publishers are upset with EA right now. Not because they tried to institute some hideous monetization scheme, but because they handled it terribly.

UltraNova1387d ago (Edited 1387d ago )

Call me a cynic but this whole MT uproar will die down soon and EA will carry on as usual.

I'm wondering though, is BF 2 past 15-20million copies sold yet? (My local store is on their 7th BF 2 copy shipment, they dont even shelve them, they people who reserved it to come pick up their copy).

Yes I've lost all hope for humanity, in case you're wondering.

rainslacker1386d ago

It's quite possible. But I'd expect that to happen in a few days, and it's now going on a couple weeks. Maybe more gamers are feeling emboldened that it's seemingly going somewhere so they're keeping it going more.

I'm sure it'll die down eventually, but since lawmakers are looking at it, it may still end in our favor.

1387d ago
1387d ago
EatCrow1387d ago

I'm getting tired of seeing these kinds of weak arguments. Whose giving who a pass?? I know I'm not. MTs have always been a problem. MTs with pay to win is not as common. That's the major difference. And more and more ea games have the latter then any other game from any publisher.

Microsoft and Sony both do MTs they don't get a pass either. And Microsoft specifically was called out with the latest Forza game. Nobody is getting a pass.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 1386d ago
strayanalog1387d ago

Clearly I don't speak for the community, but I would imagine no one jumped on Activision because of the manner of how it was done in the given example of Call of Duty: WW2‎. Not to mention, EA has been considered the bad guy for so long I would imagine gamers relish in any hurt against them. I don't blame them, though, because EA deserves a lot of the backlash they get.‎
As for me, I sure didn't forget about Activision (or any developer) using microtransactions. I'd rather microtransactions be taking out of games completely, but that's my stance. I think they make our industry look bad and it's disrespectful to the community. I may have never purchased one in my life, and nor will I, but it's so aggravating that these things are still a problem. I love the gaming community, whether they agree with me on anything or not, but if we get riled on something we do need to see it through.‎

Garethvk1387d ago

Well said. EA has a bad reputation and COD are mainly cosmetic. Plus anytime you mess with Star Wars combined with a new movie coming you have trouble.

Summons751387d ago

COD is not mainly cosmetic, you can unlock high-level weapons from MTs.

Garethvk1387d ago (Edited 1387d ago )

Yes but better be maox level to use and many can be picked up and briefly used. Try before you buy.

DialgaMarine1387d ago (Edited 1387d ago )

@Summons No you can’t. All weapons, attachments, and killstreaks can only be unlocked through ranking up. The weapons you get out of loot boxes are merely pretty skins. They have no effect on the actual stats, with the exception of some giving you minor bonuses in Zombies, but that’s it. Actually play the game, and you’d know that.

lovethenoob1387d ago

@dialga what about the three previous call of duty games that included weapons in the supply drops ..
It just a matter of time before this new CoD does it ... It a billion dollar money maker ... You better believe it's coming

RegorL1387d ago

Did you see the "Meet the 19 years old who spent over $10,000 on microtransactions", CoD was one of the games...

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1387d ago
Rachel_Alucard1387d ago


Aside from the melee weapons the game is littered with actual guns you can't get anywhere else other then opening boxes. I've seen so many people using that akimbo nail gun you could snipe someone across the map with it, not to mention the MX Garand in BO3. Yes there's skins in the boxes but these are not skins. Only the melee weapons are technically skins.

DialgaMarine1386d ago

Once again, no it’s not. All the “weapons” you get out of supply drops are just skins that have no effect on the overall stats of the weapon itself.

Rachel_Alucard1386d ago


What are you talking about I own BO3 and 4RE and I have experienced this shit first hand. Explain this image then

There's camos for the guns but this is a gun you can't get any other way and there's a dozen and a half more.

1387d ago Replies(2)
quent1387d ago

Well its difficult to come together as a gaming community from all platforms and stand against sht like this on more then 2 fronts,mostly bc of tribalism, the bf 2 backlash was abit of a miracle in itself to be honest but I hope we can stand strong, stay vigilant and not let the "its old news get over it" argument settle in and fk everything like it always does with whatever the new killer ap the next hype cycle brings forth

That's exactly what the aaa publishers are banking on.