EA explains why loot boxes aren't limited to cosmetics

EA Loses $3 Billion in Stock Value after Battlefront 2 Debacle

Despite all of the controversy surrounding Star Wars Battlefront II, specifically the loot box fiasco, EA's CFO Blake Jorgensen has recently said that their latest title is one of the best games they've ever made. "We are trying to run the company with an ear to the consumer at all times, not only in the testing phase but when the game is up and running". We're trying to build games that last for years, not for months. "We think the time has come for the industry to collectively establish a set of standards for microtransaction implementation, both to fix damaged player perceptions and avoid the threat of regulation".

"A player's ability to succeed in the game is not dependent on purchasing [loot boxes]", it said in a statement. Fortunately, this is something that EA acknowledges as a possibility, with Jorgensen saying, "We certainly might be able to do that".

We don't know what goes on in the board rooms where these agreements are signed or what restrictions developer DICE was given, and whether those directives were handed down by EA or Disney. That's a fabulous partnership. Electronic Arts announced on November 16, a day before the "Star Wars Battlefront II" game's official launch day, it is temporarily turning off all in-game purchases for the game in response to the negative sentiment from gamers. "If you did a bunch of cosmetic things, you might start to violate the canon", explained Jorgensen. Players can choose which side in battles they want to play on, meaning they can unlock Sith and Jedi alike, such as Kylo Ren, Darth Vader, Rey or Yoda.

Just in case you've been hibernating in wampa cave for the past month, Star Wars Battlefront II has been sharply criticized for a system where character progression and weapons could only be acquired from loot boxes, which, originally, could be purchased with real money. But Star Wars fans might also want to tailor things, a different color lightsaber, things like that.

The best feeling in the world is that of Schadenfreude when you see a company like Electronic Arts suffering.

Yes, we're still talking about Star Wars: Battlefront II's lootboxes.

Some analysts came to the "ORLY" conclusion that the reason for the decline was the current Star Wars scandal.

"We have input and they take feedback from us across the whole spectrum". But our view is these are great opportunities for us to continue tune a game, to adjust things, and we pulled off on the MTX (microtransactions) because the real issue the consumer had was they felt it was a pay-to-win mechanic. The reality is there are different types of players in games. "You want to always balance those two". And with Electronic Arts shares still up 39 percent this year, there's a good chance that we haven't seen the end of loot crates.

EA thought players weren't smart enough to see through the money grab of Battlefront 2, and we have yet to see any evidence that the executives in charge of the company are willing to speak about the issue in anything close to honest terms. "But coming into it, it wasn't as easy as if we were building a game around our own IP where it didn't really matter", he added.

"We think the time has come for the industry to collectively establish a set of standards for [microtransaction] implementation, both to fix damaged player perceptions and avoid the threat of regulation", Cowen analyst Doug Creutz said, according to CNBC.

Latest News