Sign this petition please.

[dg1995]

If you are disappointed in EA Star Wars games sign in this petition.It has near 19000 signs.

 

https://www.change.org/p/lucasfilm-revoke-ea-s-star-wars-license?recruiter=837721710&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink&utm_campaign=psf_combo_share_more.combo_new_control_progress_1dollarask111417

[Gorc]

I am disappointed but, for the most part, am not displeased. The only thing I really want them to do is dismiss micro-transactions. I'll sign nonetheless, maybe they can get a new company to work on their games that actually care about the games they release and the fans of the series.

[Circa]

When has an online petition like this ever actually made a difference? Don't get me wrong, I'm all for the concept of this. But the chances of Disney/Lucasfilm actually caring about 35,000 signatures are pretty slim. Maybe if the goal was a bit more impressive like 500,000. But 35,000 is going to be a very small fraction of the entire sales figure they are going to compare it to.

 

Also, the grammar in that petition is downright abysmal. If I were a Disney/Lucasfilm exec and tried reading that, I'd dismiss it after the second paragraph. Run-on sentences make him seem extremely unprofessional and the way he just rants on and on is tiring.

Edited November 27, 2017 by Circa

[dg1995]

Well from what I have heard, Batman Beyond Return Of the Joker uncut edition was released due to an online petition. And there was also the Petition of PC port of Dark Souls 1.

[Gorc]

And there was also the Petition of PC port of Dark Souls 1.

Which was horrid, in my opinion compared to the console version.

[dg1995]

Which was horrid, in my opinion compared to the console version.

The PC port was a success which was the main reason that Dark Souls 2 and 3 were ported to PC.(Which were awesome ports)

 

And now the success of Dark Souls franchise on PC is the main reason that Team Ninja ported NIOH to PC.

[Lancelot]

Personally, I'm not disappointed of Battlefront II at all. In fact, it simply surpassed my expectations and blew me away every now and then. While I thoroughly enjoyed the story mode, I also enjoy the multiplayer mode as well (and it takes a lot to get me playing online up to two hours straight). On top of that, it is such a huge improvement to the first Battlefront, and not as sadistic when it comes to heroes. In EA's first Battlefront, you had the heroes, but to get them was totally sadistic (e.g. if you wanted to fly the Millennium Falcon, you had to activate a token that was hovering a few feet above the ground, than you had to press some buttons, which was very difficult). Now, in EA's Battlefront II, you just have them, along with some extra vehicles and special troopers. But you have to collect points first (and credits to unlock the others), which is probably the best solution.

 

And regarding the micro transactions, there is a simple rule I have on this: If you don't want to spend real money on loot boxes, don't spend real money them. Nobody urges you.

You have the alternative to buy them with credits you collect in the game, which is at least a compromise. And there is another good thing: EA has listened to the critics and

shut down the micro transactions, at least temporary. Any other developer would have insisted on keeping them activated. Sometimes, it's better to give in and try to find a solution.

Like any other developer, EA still has the chance to redeem itself, and they already started to do so by adding things to the game that was missing in the first one. They still have many extra contents to release, like a The Last Jedi themed one next month, which will include new heroes, new maps and a new chapter for the story mode. This is something that keeps me excited.

[Boothand]

And regarding the micro transactions, there is a simple rule I have on this: If you don't want to spend real money on loot boxes, don't spend real money them. Nobody urges you.

 

The problem is when people do want to spend real money on them though. EA urges you to do it when you realize you are unfairly outmatched by people who paid. Unlocking via gameplay might appeal to someone, but there's a design decision that makes it problematic to simply say that you don't have to if you don't want. Which is true, but.. surely some responsibility must be on EA here.

[Circa]

The problem is when people do want to spend real money on them though. EA urges you to do it when you realize you are unfairly outmatched by people who paid. Unlocking via gameplay might appeal to someone, but there's a design decision that makes it problematic to simply say that you don't have to if you don't want. Which is true, but.. surely some responsibility must be on EA here.

Exactly. I definitely won't be spending money on any loot crates, but the people that do will always have an advantage because they can earn them quicker that way. I hope by disabling the microtransactions for now means they are moving to a cosmetic-only structure for the crates. That would solve the whole issue. If people want to spend money on customizing their characters and ships, by all means go for it.

[Delta-573]

100.000

[General Howard]

Personally, I SERIOUSLY want to see EA stripped of the Star Wars licence and preferably sooner, rather than later. But I do agree with @@Circa, on this. The grammar in this petition is so unprofessional, that it just doesn't sit well and kind of makes it come across like it's written (typed) by a pretty illiterate individual. I signed the petition, yes and would sign it a million times over, if I could. I have to admit though, that if Disney/Lucasfilm continue to keep partnering up with EA, then they are part of the problem and not the solution.

 

Unfortunately, long gone are the days when George was involved and LucasArts were at the helm of all Star Wars titles. Okay, not every game LucasArts published was a 10/10 game, but at least they actually cared about the consumer and put effort into their creations, unlike EA, who still haven't learnt that monetising games, is wrong.

[Teancum]

The best this might do is convince Lucasfilm/Disney not to use EA when the contract is up, but they're not going to renege on a deal short of it being in the original contract. Like if there were a clause in there that basically said EA had to have [x] customer rating/positive reviews/etc in order to hold up the contract, I could see that being a thing. Otherwise it'll just be a matter of waiting out the term of the deal, which I would guess is probably around 10 years or so considering how long it takes to make games.

[AshuraDX]

@@Teancum I work for a company that sells licensed band merchandise. License cotnracts in our case do have a set runtime after which they have to be renewed or run out. In our case these contracts can be terminated at any time by the licensor.

We have also lost licenses that we attained as sub-licenses from far larger companies due to the termination of their contracts by the original licensor.

 

Therefore I don't think that disney couldn't withdraw the license from EA at any given time, if they wanted to.

 

@@Circa let's not forget that a petition with about 128k signatures managed to bring Brian Griffin back to life in Family Guy.

[Teancum]

I'll say two more things -- 1) Front-page change.org campaigns that actually had an effect hover around 120k, which this is creeping close to, and 2) if nothing else, people are taking notice. What really needs to happen at this point is for the media to pick up the petition. People can always email tips@ emails (such as tips@kotaku.com). When I worked in lower-end media I did this all the time. In the end gaming companies seem to move when pressured by media more than consumers.

 

***EDIT***

Also, I'll happily eat my words if this works