It has been months since EA’s Battlefront 2 released and it’s still being bashed about the countless microtransactions. It is only right to since they made the microtransactions an integral feature rather than an add-on. On the other hand, there is Call of Duty World War 2, which also uses microtransactions.
Although Call of Duty World War 2 wasn’t very well received by critics, it was cherished by players who were tired of the franchise’s repetitiveness. The game gives you 100 COD points as Payroll and players can earn more through various actions in game. However, players may also buy more COD points using real currency and I noted that 200 points could be purchased for $1.99. So why isn’t it criticized as Battlefront 2 was?
The bold and brief answer to this question are the results of these very microtransactions. While they were superficial and cosmetic in Call of Duty World War 2, they were necessary and integral in Battlefront 2. I’m not denying the fact that players who purchase in-game stuff with real currency have a benefit over those who don’t in Call of Duty World War 2, it is comprehensible by skill and time one invests in it. The Battlefront 2 is clearly pay-to-win. Even its single player campaign is pay to win.
Since the end of micro-transactions does not seem likely in near future, it would be for the common good if publishers derive an example and inspiration from Call of Duty World War 2 rather than EA’s Battlefront 2.
Register with us for the best in gaming, and join us for video game discussions on our forums.
