EA Takes Battlefield: Heroes Full Pay-to-Play

[Evil Avatar]

http://evilavatar.com/images/thumbs/bf_heroes_logo.jpg

Slashdot.Games is reporting (http://games.slashdot.org/story/09/12/02/0554243/EA-Flip-Flops-On-Battlefield-Heroes-Pricing-Fans-Angry) that Electronic Arts has changed the pricing model of their free-to-play online shooter, Battlefield Heroes, making it necessary for players to sink real money into the game to remain competitive with other players.

"Ben Kuchera from Ars Technica is reporting that EA/DICE has substantially changed the game model of Battlefield: Heroes, increasing the cost of weapons in Valor Points (the in-game currency that you earn by playing) to levels that even hardcore players cannot afford (http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2009/12/ea-restructures-battlefied-heroes-pricing-fans-enraged.ars), and making them available in BattleFunds (the in-game currency that you buy with real money). Other consumables in the game, such as bandages to heal the players, suffered the same fate, turning the game into a subscription or pay-to-play model if players want to remain competitive. This goes against the creators' earlier stated objectives of not providing combat advantage to paying customers. Ben Cousins, from EA/DICE, argued, 'We also frankly wanted to make buying Battlefunds more appealing. We have wages to pay here in the Heroes team (http://www.battlefieldheroes.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=88636&pid=939699#pid939699) and in order to keep a team large enough to make new free content like maps and other game features we need to increase the amount of BF that people buy. Battlefield Heroes is a business at the end of the day and for a company like EA who recently laid off 16% of their workforce, we need to keep an eye on the accounts and make sure we are doing our bit for the company.' The official forums discussion thread is full of angry responses from upset users (http://www.battlefieldheroes.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=89646), who feel this change is a betrayal of the original stated objectives of the game."

No big shocker, it was obvious from the beginning that they would have to take the title fully pay-to-play.

[saulob]

Why obvious?

I never played, but is the game any good?

Anyone here play this game today?

[MasterEvilAce]

I played it a bit before the full release.. I don't find it fun. The gameplay is very minimal. The way they setup free play/micro transactions was BAD. Basically your equipment has time expiration.. so you keep playing to get points to buy better equipment or else you essentially end up with basic equipment. You could pay money for quick access to better guns, special items (usually customization stuff) that had less/no expiration (I don't remember)

I wanted it to be like a micro-battlefield 1942, but it really isn't. It's just very basic. And the way they integrated it.. it's a standalone game that you can only launch by going to the website.

Quake Live is a prime example of how they should have done it. Making this move will just destroy the player count, and ultimately lead to them shutting down

[Evil Avatar]

Why obvious?

How else are they going to make money? There is only so much money you can get out of people on a volunteer basis if most of what you are trying to get people to pay for they can buy using in-game money earned while playing.

It isn't really a viable business model and that is why all those US ports of Korean MMO's charge for items right from the beginning.

[WpnX]

BF: Heroes has always felt like Battlefield lite.

They should be thinking of ways to keep the game competitive at the free level, but make it inciting to purchase BattleFunds. Maybe buy a skin that looks like another popular EA character. Maybe buy vehicle skins, which changes your plane into something from Wing Commander. Charge for new levels.

This just feels like they've totally given up what they were trying to do, and now they just hope to hell someone wants to pay for their game.

[brandonjclark]

Yup, this will affect me none. I played the hell outta this game when it first launched, mainly because I was itching for some new BF, but it's a let down.

Going pay to play WILL kill this game.

*I agree with MasterEvilAce, the whole "renting" equipment thing sucks (ala Combat Arms).

[Demo_Boy]

I think this is no different than any other Free 2 Demo games you see online.
What's great about this model is the Free players are content for the paying players. Tasty fodder content.

Forcing RMT does not necessarily break the game either. It just changes the power level of the battlefield. Lots of players will be weaker now. In many ways it will simply force more coordination from the Free players.

Sure overall power of the players is going to go down, so it feels like a big ole nerf.

But it certainly raises the value of buying a bargain bin game like Enemy Territory Quake Wars PC for $10 which still has plenty of players online, solid mechanics and no ongoing charges.

[Demo_Boy]

The only games worth playing that are Truly free to Play are those on Kongregate.com

(or Armorgames, but their site navigation is weaker)

[rulyblue]

Will people pay small amounts of money for success and a good feeling while hobby gaming?


Yup.

Makes sense from the players and EA's perspective. Doesn't mean I or the upstanding chaps at EvAv do it, but I wouldn't blame you if you did it to get that edge over the next person.

[Demo_Boy]

I'm actually thinking of playing that game now.

See, I'm old. In the younger days I owned at QuakeWorld DM and Team Fortress.
But my reflexes have slowed. Nowadays, when I play ET:QW I get killed so ridiculously fast, I have to modify my playstyle to pretty much avoid players. But I still have fun.

So now with BF:Heroes, those uber players won't have the same equipment as me cause I have more money then them. I will PWN their weaksauce asses and take their fame away! Yeh! It's gonna feel just like the old days!

Now to get this game, I have to use the interwebs? Is there a disk?

[brandonjclark]

I
Now to get this game, I have to use the interwebs? Is there a disk?


Follow THIS (http://www.battlefieldheroes.com/frontpage/landingPage)link and click the oversized "PLAY 4 FREE" button.

[WpnX]

But my reflexes have slowed. Nowadays, when I play ET:QW I get killed so ridiculously fast, I have to modify my playstyle to pretty much avoid players. But I still have fun.


That might have something to do with the age of Quake Wars. It's far enough along in its life cycle where anyone still playing has been playing for months or years.

That being said, BF Heroes is much slower, sort of a hybrid of FPS and WoW (ability bar, slower movement speed, large maps). I think you'd enjoy it.

[CSargeP]

I played it when it first came out but it wasn't good enough to keep me for more than a week or two.

[Zurik]

I found this game very boring, and this isn't going to make it any better. I guess I just don't see the reason for paying anything for this when Steam is offering huge deals on Battlefield 2 and 2142 for super cheap.

[gzsfrk]

And with this move, EA just formalized the inevitable final server shutdown, moving up the timetable in the process.

[revelation]

Played it in beta, played a little at launch, wasn't impressed at all (outside of the art style which I quite liked).

Would I pay for it? Lord no.

[Steve_Erhardt]

I liked the idea and the art, but the game play felt very cardboard to me, but I didn't play very long.

I can see their point about making money so I won't even argue that, but... whoever it is over there that's counting on this game for their livelihood might better start making other arrangements.

[drakkarim]

tried it for a day when it was released, dumped it. too kiddy for me. guess enough people thought the same and now their pool of bit buyers is too small... they need to recoup some money quickly before they scrap the whole thing.