Quote Originally Posted by oskar View Post
People are invested in their franchise, if it's Football Manager, Battlefield, CS or whatever. It's easy to say "don't buy it then" from an outsider perspective, but if you really like a franchise, you'll probably still buy the next iteration.
Here's why the BF outrage is justified: They sell you a full priced game with a mobile game F2P scheme. In addition to locking away half the content behind a season pass AND being a yearly franchise.
Actual day-1 game mechanics and characters are locked behind a painfully slow grind and you have the option to buy faster progress with real money. This is something I can begrudgingly accept with F2P games because they somehow have to make money, but a full priced release with a full priced season pass in a yearly frenchise? This is truly unprecedented. In Rainbow Six Siege they did a similar thing, but the way they did is was to release a $15 version of the game that had painfully slow unlock progress and you could buy progress accelerators or individual characters once you realized your mistake, or you could just buy the full priced game and unlock pretty much everything within a month. It's very personal how much of this BS you are willing to take, but Battlefront2 got all of it and to no surprise to anyone, people are not happy.
On the downside: They will backtrack and after a huge amount of negative press there will be a truckload of "oh well, ok then" press and I can't imagine this game doing poorly. No Man's Sky made millions and that game is universally hated. Marketing is everything.
If people don't do that then it's their fault, not anyone elses. If a company takes the piss they lose customer loyalty & it's a bad long term decision, this probably won't be.

If making a decision makes you more money as a business why should you not be allowed to do that? F2P is still in very early stages so if developers are making poor decisions to exploit this then they will be damaged as a result.