Skip to main content

3 ways EA could save Star Wars Battlefront II

It's no secret by now that Star Wars Battlefront II was heavily damaged by its microtransaction fiasco. Selling only 882,000 units in its opening month, the game missed the projected 1,720,000 sales estimate by a large margin. Though the game has managed to gain some traction in the last few weeks (possibly due to the hype surrounding Star Wars with the launch of the new film, The Last Jedi) things still aren't looking great for the galaxy far, far away.

Battlefront II likely won't fully recover from the backlash it received, but the developers might be able to mend the wound somewhat by implementing changes. Here are three things that would improve Battlefront II and bring it some positive attention.

Read: Star Wars Battlefront II review

See on Microsoft Store

Ditch microtransactions permanently

Electronic Arts (EA) took a step in the right direction before Battlefront II's launch to remove the microtransactions from the game entirely. However, this came with a catch: they planned to reintroduce them at a later date once they were tuned.

This has ultimately led many to believe that EA was simply waiting for the anger surrounding Battlefront II to die down before trying to sneak in the microtransaction system again. I think it's fully possible that they plan to genuinely try and improve it. Regardless, just keeping them gone would please many gamers and show them that EA is listening. Of course, permanent tweaks will need to be made to the loot boxes and in-game credit earning rates to compensate for the absence of the micropayments. But that's worth the effort if it means salvaging the game's long-term future.

Add era preference

One of the major selling points of Battlefront II was the return to all the Star Wars eras being available to play in. This was a feature present in the original Battlefront games, but noticeably lacking in EA's reboot of the series in 2015. Unlike the old games, though, there is currently no way to choose which era you want to play in on Battlefront II's multiplayer. If you're in the mood to blast battle droids as a clone trooper, you'll have to either hope that you get lucky enough to be placed in a prequel era match or play against bots in an offline session.

By adding a system in which you can tell the matchmaker which era you'd like to participate in, you could reliably play matches in your favorite timeline of the Star Wars universe. This would be a beneficial change for everyone, as it would make everything feel less random and make playing against other players in your preferred era a simple process. The only downside to this would be some longer queue times, but I don't think anyone would mind waiting a bit longer to reap the benefits of a customizable experience.

Implement cosmetic customization

After Reddit users mined the files of a PC copy of Battlefront II to see if they could find anything, they discovered that, at one point, the game had some form of personal customization for every soldier, from clones to rebels. Each option altered an aspect of the soldier you chose to play as. For the clones, it was paint schemes; for rebel soldiers, it was their skin color, facial hair, and gender.

EA should truly add these into the full game because, quite frankly, Battlefront II is completely devoid of cosmetic customization. There is no way to personalize your troopers aside from the gameplay-altering Star Cards, which are tied to the random number generator-driven loot boxes. Speaking of those, I think it would be a terrible idea to put these skins into those boxes, as it makes the player have to hope that they'll get the one they want from the "slot machine". Instead, EA should make them directly purchasable by credits earned through gameplay.

Your thoughts

What do you think of these suggestions? Do you think that they would help bring Battlefront II to a more healthy state? Let us know what you think in the comments.

See on Microsoft Store

Brendan Lowry is a Windows Central writer and Oakland University graduate with a burning passion for video games, of which he's been an avid fan since childhood. You'll find him doing reviews, editorials, and general coverage on everything Xbox and PC. Follow him on Twitter.

30 Comments
  • To late. Let the game die so other developers learn a lesson from this. If they make it out of this with the game being a success, they will think they can fix any slim ball things they do and will be encouraged to do it again.
  • Heavily disagree. No game should be treated like that. Always try and improve.
  • instead of giving up on a game we should be looking up for a improved version. after all game is made to be played.
  • It's a beautiful game but playing online is pretty awful. My son and I tried this game and we got killed every 10 seconds it was almost impossible to get invested in the game play. We both prefer story modes and progressive online play random arena battles are pretty tired.
  • Game sure is a beauty. Sorry you guys are getting killed quickly. The issue is the games matchmaking. I've been playing since day 1 so I can pretty much hang with any competitor but sometimes I'm thrown in matched with level 1s and that doesn't make any sense
  • Isn't getting killed every 10 seconds how you start playing every MP game well into its lifecycle? This may just be me, but it takes me a few weeks of playing casually to get to the point of where I feel that I can actually complete with the people that have been playing daily for months at a time.
  • It's a bit crushing though. That's why I liked Titanfall, there were AI to kill too at first. I'd no idea it was considered a bad game. I think the game is superb. I can only speak of the campaign and co-op firefight modes or whatever they're called in this game.
  • Part of the design is that matchmaking is subtly made to be hard for beginners, so they end up buying into the paid powerups.
  • Man I'm so glad to read this, I'm a serious gamer and middle aged and decent and I get killed every 10 seconds also and I try my best. I like the game but its just no fun like this. I prefer the story campaign too, id rather do star fighter battle online then on foot battles. Its no fun dying every minute in online battles.
  • They also need to make the high-end weapons sound more like blasters than sub-machine guns...
  • The sounds are taken directly from Skywalker Ranch sound effects, though, so...
  • As someone who plays this game daily, I'd say suggestion 3 is really what I'm pining for. I hate that my ginger officer looks identical to the next officer when I'm the one with teh leet skillz
  • Why don't you all get a life, oh, wait a minute, you likely can if you pay for it 😉
  • Only issue is that you cannot play with friends because you cannot spawn on a friend in your squad when you die, other than that I enjoy the game playing solo
  • Agreed. I miss that feature from the first game myself.
  • This game is dead. EA and their greed have killed it.  Disney will likely pull their license and give it to a less crappy publisher next time.  Let's hope it isn't another trash microtransaction gambling mess.
  • The Division is making a comeback 4 years later due to the developers fixing it up. I see no reason why Battlefront II can't do the same only months after launch.
  • Great point.
  • EA will charge you $4.99 per game or some ridiculous crap.  Don't put anything past them.  YOu are younger than me I am assuming and therefore overly optimistic.  Guess what?  EA cares about money.  That's it.  If they could make a Star Wars game starring Yoda crapping in a rice patty and people would pay for it, they wouldn't care.   This game is dead.  EA killed it.
  • I get many of you HATE the company EA. OK, fine but come on! The game is not dead. The single player is decent enough to be entertaining, it's a star wars game with enough feel to keep enough fans coming back. I speak for myself but still enjoy logging in daily if I can, get a loot crate play a few rounds online and always have other players to play against. It is far from a perfect game and EA in general does muck this up but DICE and other devs involved did a pretty good job on the game. It's the business side of EA that complicated a good thing and for that they deserve the negativity. But, BF2 is not dead, and I hope improvements can continue although I'm not holding my breath.
  • This comment is totally on point.
  • The single player is an embarassment.  Shoot this.  Move forward.  OH YES AND BECOME A REBEL FOR NO REASON and shoehorn your way into EVERY SINGLE HERO IN THE OT.  Amazing.  The single player looks nice and thats it.  If you like it, go swat at bugs with a green lightsaber for 40 minutes as that is true Star Wars, right?
  • ditch microtransactions in all kinds and types of games... on pc-, console-, and mobile-gaming! Microtransactions makes me carefull for the games I buy... I rather buy DLC (like Far Harbor and Nuka World for Fallout 4) to get more gameplay than ingame-purchases!
  • If people stop buying them, devs would stop making them. Apparently it makes them enough money to make it worthwhile. Personally as long as it doesn't ruin the game, it doesn't matter to me. I never buy them. I mean, I guess I do but with in-game currency. 
  • This. Exactly this. You can't say its not what the people want, when obviously it's the people buying them. I don't personally, but it must be enough that do to make it worth it for all these game companies to be incorporating them into their games. The sad part is that we used to laugh at Horse Armor, now people are spending even more spend money on the same type of thing!!!
  • Character customisation was blocked by Disney to protect the brand image - there wasn't any technical reason not to include it. It's a shame that this game broke the camel's back in terms of microtransactions and stuff because it's actually really good fun and the campaign is a perfectly decent Star Wars(TM) experience. It deserves more praise than it received.
  • You can't fight bad PR, remember Evolve? It's impossible to shake off. In this particular case, it serves them well. That said, the people who buys these games from EA and who in the end are accomplices to their awful practices, will buy the game without giving it second thoughts. Plus the license basically could sell a **** if it's a Star Wars product.
  • Do we want all games to be about grinding, though? I don't like the kind of gameplay this type of game brings.
  • In my opinion, if the grind is: Fair Fun Rewarding Than it's a healthy grind. Things like Destiny 2, though, are none of the three.
  • Just purchased this game for half price yesterday. Single player looks stunning in 4k HDR. Might try multi player next but no way will I be spending anymore money on this game.