Star Wars Battlefront 2’s update aims to fix progression


Keeping up with what the heck is going on with Star Wars Battlefront 2 is a tall order. The first-person shooter is now inextricably linked to the loot crate debate and the subsequent temporary removal of microtransactions, though the change did little to improve the game’s reputation. The developers are still trying though: ahead of tomorrow’s season of content themed around The Last Jedi, DICE has pushed out an update that tackles the game’s main bugbears, the economy and progression. The good news is that the focus seems to be on giving players more rewards, but the process is ongoing.

At the moment, three things have been tweaked. The payout at the end of a round has been increased. Credit rewards have been increased across the board, but particularly for players who performed extremely well, aiming their guns at the enemy rather than, say, the wall next to them, like most Stormtroopers. The Arcade mode credit cap has also been expanded by 1500 credits, so you can earn three times the amount of space dosh. Finally, you should find more crafting materials in your daily login crates, and that’s me just remembering that there’s a convoluted crafting system and gosh, what a nightmare. Down with rubbish crafting systems and other silly nonsense.

Anyway, on the surface this sure seems like a big improvement, and aside from the daily login crate, there’s no mention of loot crates or microtransactions, but this saga has been such a mess that I wouldn’t take anything at face value. This is also, according to EA and DICE, only the tip of the iceberg, and larger changes will be coming.

Onto tomorrow! The Last Jedi is a movie you’ll be able to devour with your hungry eyes soon, so Battlefront 2 is showing it some love with a season of new stuff. You’ll be able to play as Moses from Attack the Block and Jaime Lannister’s pal, as well as flitting around in new vehicles inspired by the latest trilogy.

Since DICE forgot to finish the story of Battlefront 2, you’ll also be able to jump back into the shoes of Iden Versio and spend some more time with the campaign in the new chapters. That’s not coming until the December 13, however.


  1. Paxeh says:

    So, about those lootcrates…

    • Pich says:

      After Disney broke EA’s knees right before launch, i doubt they’re gonna be in the game any time soon.

      • trashmyego says:

        Oh, they’re in the game. You just can’t buy them with real money anymore. They’re still the backbone of the ‘progression’ system.

  2. Meat Circus says:

    You can’t fix this game’s progression. It’s pay2win to its very core because it’s designed to be. Probably the best thing you can do is a wholesale removal of XP, of credits, of the lootbox system, and just give everybody a full set of upgraded star cards.

    EA won’t do that though, because they’re greedy, sociopathic, incompetent cunts who want to change *just enough* to be able to turn on the microtransactions again once the rage has died down.

    Do not let them get away with it.

    Fuck EA

    • Baines says:

      From news story reports of beta tester comments, EA’s next UFC game is even more pay-to-win than Battlefront 2. (Though some defenders have popped up to claim that UFC3 is actually more generous than UFC2.)

    • hjarg says:

      I’m not so sure it is p2w no more.
      Lootboxes make it gamble2win – you are not purchasing a chance, not an item.

      • Baines says:

        It is still considered pay2win in that someone who dumped a ton of money into the system is still going to end up with real advantages over regular players. Even if there is an element of chance, and an unlucky person could potentially just get garbage for his thousands of dollars.

        Besides, several of these games still offer some measure of reward even for mostly garbage, still giving a cash-friendly person a leg up over a regular player.

    • MajorLag says:

      They may be greedy sociopaths, but I’d be very weary of labeling them incompetent.

    • Anti-Skub says:

      As much as I hate loot crates and double dip payments, removing progression is just as bad for me. Unlocking stuff is an enjoyable part of the game for me, and one of the things that keeps me coming back.

      To me this would be like if people were complaining that cosmetic customisation costing real money, so they just remove customisation…that’s not better.

  3. crazyd says:

    Huh, yet another article from this site downplaying the impact of aggressively anti-consumer lootbox nonsense. I’m starting to expect it from you guys.

    This doesn’t address the real issues of functional unlocks and numeric improvements, and it being inevitably made P2W again. This isn’t a “big improvement,” it’s just more confirmation that EA is not willing to make the actual big improvements this game needs.

    • Meat Circus says:

      I think you’re being a bit unfair:

      Anyway, on the surface this sure seems like a big improvement, and aside from the daily login crate, there’s no mention of loot crates or microtransactions, but this saga has been such a mess that I wouldn’t take anything at face value.

      and that’s me just remembering that there’s a convoluted crafting system and gosh, what a nightmare. Down with rubbish crafting systems and other silly nonsense

      I’d rather EA gets publicly raked over the coals, sure, but I wouldn’t take this as an endorsement.

      It *is* an improvement, even if only a small one. EA want to do the minimum amount to allow them to turn pay2win back on again.

      • crazyd says:

        If this was the first time I saw RPS downplay lootcrates impact, I’m sure I’d be more “fair”. This article isn’t all smiles and sunshine, but it’s remarkably positive for a tone deaf change that doesn’t actually address any of the real problems with the implementation. It’s a band aid at best.

        I generally really enjoy the articles RPS puts out, there’s only two things this site does that really bugs me. The consistently terrible VR coverage from people that hate VR as a concept is one, and their repeated attempts to normalize and justify lootcrates is the other.

        • dangermouse76 says:

          ” repeated attempts to normalize and justify lootcrates. ”

          Any proof of this ? Deliberately trying to normalise a behaviour in gaming ?

          I am not pro lootboxes like Battlefront uses them.

          But you just sound annoyed that RPS isnt angry in the way you think they should – angry like you for example. So you baselessly accuse them of shenanigans.

          You also seem to have missed where they have written how bad this implementation is. Or the podcast where all three comment how terrible lootboxes are in Battlefront.

          • crazyd says:

            I’m not accusing anyone of any shenanigans. I’m just expressing my disapproval at them for not fighting for customer rights, and instead basically pushing out press releases with no comments about how this does nothing about the real issue. If you want to see further justification and downplaying of lootboxes from these guys:

            link to

            And yes, there are loot boxes. But put down those pitchforks for now.

            There’s more if you feel like digging. They’ve certainly never made any stand against them, and urge people to accept them and not fight back, even when implemented in shitty ways.

          • Baines says:

            Across several RPS articles, it has felt like the site has downplayed concerns. I don’t know if it because the RPS staff are more favorable to loot boxes, or that they’ve been reporting stories without looking heavily into why people are angry, or that they’ve tried to not look like they were waving pitchforks, or whatever other reason there might be. (Also a factor is a concern raised by some that the games media in general isn’t particularly willing to take a hard stance. That while media is happy to run articles about the controversy and will even condemn loot boxes in general, they won’t dock a review score for it.)

            I remember Alice stating that she felt (Battlefront 2) loot boxes were not gambling, and went further by saying that she felt calling them gambling was hiding real gambling issues (without giving any example of what she felt was a real example.) That sounds like a pretty industry-defensive stance, right? Well, it does until you look back at the article and notice the generally forgotten bit that followed where Alice still called the loot boxes “rubbish and exploitative”. Hardly an actual defense of BF2 loot boxes, unless you only remember the highlight quote.

        • dangermouse76 says:

          Fair enough buddy. I dont see that myself but we won’t fall out over it.
          These lootboxes suck / it’s a bad trend in gaming, on that we agree.

        • soul4sale says:

          Agreed. This site has been remarkably quiet about this story, given the real business impact that it has had on EA and the (slow, tentative, halting) government action that has resulted. RPS is acting like a cowed advertising outlet, not a viable gaming news source. Then again, the general tone of the site has moved from clever irreverence to industry happy talk.

    • Anti-Skub says:

      You ever thought that maybe it just doesn’t bother them as much as it bothers you…rather than it being some conspiracy? Are they not entitled to their own opinion? Do you not realise this is a blog, not a newspaper?

      • ColonelFlanders says:

        Well if sleazy, predatory and greedy business practices are OK with them then I’m gonna go elsewhere. I’m sure they’ll wave goodbye with glee like they always do when someone says they’re going, but I’ll be sad, since I thought they had a little bit of something decent about them as a group.

      • Minsc_N_Boo says:

        It’s almost like they would be “preaching to the choir” anyway. Does anyone who reads this site think Lootboxes are a good idea for gaming?

    • ColonelFlanders says:

      I agree with this 100%.Frankly I’d find their whole attitude less offensive if their advocacy for other more social issues wasn’t so transparent. RPS as a whole have never been afraid to bring their personal politics into the foreground of what they’re reporting on, and with good reason; shitty things in the world need people in positions of influence to stand up and say “this is shitty”.

      If RPS see fit to call Tynan Sylvester a sexist and produce a whole editorial because of some background PLACEHOLDER code, but don’t have the integrity to shit on blatantly predatory, slimy, and harmful business practices, I gotta say I find that pretty gross. They can pick on the little guy when it’s an easy bandwagon, but they don’t want to make EA mad in case what? They don’t get their free codes? I just don’t get it.

      We are consumers RPS, both of the products you review and of this site. If you want to keep your readership you had better start standing up for us instead of being the corporate apologist. You’re quite happy to represent oppressed minorities, so why not make a stand against that thing which stands to harm us all?

      • Deano2099 says:

        Except where they suck, they do call it out.

        Here’s the thing you’re missing: RPS only does continued coverage of games they actually like and enjoy. If a microtransaction system completely ruins a game, they’ll say so in the review and then never cover that game again. Because it sucks.

        So yes, when they continually cover titles like AC Origins, Battlefront and Mordor, it’s because they’ve played them and aren’t that bothered by the loot crates. There are other games where they have been, told people not to buy, and that’s it.

        Reality is making games is getting more expensive and that either means games go up in price, games get smaller (or just split into two and released a year apart) or they find another income stream. The gambling element is problematic too for other reasons and probably deserves a deeper look.

        This game has now totally removed microtransactions so there’s absolutely no way it can be accused of anything bad from that angle. So it’s just if the progression system is any good without paying. And they’ve already said they think it’s alright.

        Do they want to avoid annoying EA? Have you even *heard* the latest podcast. It’s 50 minutes of talking about why they suck including a good 20 minutes of why Alec hates Battlefront, regardless of the progression system. I don’t think I’ve ever heard them be that down on anyone before.

        • ColonelFlanders says:

          “If a microtransaction system completely ruins a game, they’ll say so in the review and then never cover that game again. Because it sucks.”

          But microtransactions DO completely ruin the experience, at least with BF2 they do. They’ve tied the entire progression system to a loot box system.

          “Reality is making games is getting more expensive”

          Hmm. Yes and no. Yes, games are getting more expensive, but anyone can fuck off if they want to tell me that you need MTX, Season passes and bloody lootboxes in games in order to turn a profit. And if you do, you’re in the wrong fuckin business. What your lootboxes et al are actually paying for is publishers’ avarice, and the EPIC PR budget they needlessly pour into these games.

          “This game has now totally removed microtransactions so there’s absolutely no way it can be accused of anything bad from that angle”

          TEMPORARILY. I expect they’ll be back in the minute TLJ comes out and Disney give them the go ahead.

          “Do they want to avoid annoying EA? Have you even *heard* the latest podcast. It’s 50 minutes of talking about why they suck”

          I’m gonna have to say fair enough to that one. I’ve never listened to a single podcast in my life, I don’t really have space for them in my life.

  4. Freud says:

    The only way to to fix progression is to scrap it and start from the ground up.

    They’re not going to make it work in it’s current form, even if the players get a little more credit/crafting material. It’s a pay to win system and they are just waiting for the storm to calm down before turning on the microtransactions again.

  5. JarinArenos says:

    Why the heck is there even a limit on daily arcade points?

    • Janichsan says:

      Because they don’t want you to grind enough currency to buy all the cool characters by being an anti-social single-player loner.

  6. Splyce says:

    At this rate, EA is going to stop making anything except sports games, cause the people that play FIFA and Madden don’t complain about the rampant microtransactions in those games, and lovingly spend lots and lots on card packs.

    • Richard_from_Winnipeg says:

      Actually EA faced quite a dust up last year with FIFA when it came out that the game would throttle higher ranked players down when facing lower ranked teams.

      This also took place in madden mobile last year when the top ranked player had a moderate team with one great player and when he got his team wide boost applied that lone player was unstoppable.

      I actually was one of the top 50 madden players in the world on Xbox 360 in 2011 but when they went to MUT I stopped playing competitively – well, and I decided to do other things with my time.

      MUT and FUT are really just P2W in the worst way now – now that they don’t throttle (not that I think throttling is good either – that to me seems like straight up stealing).

      This was the first article I could find on FUT: link to

      But there are many…

      (Although I do play Madden Mobile and never spend money – it can be a fun little diversion)

      • BillyBantam says:

        I only play FIFA Ultimate Team so cannot comment on any of the other EA sports games. It’s not a P2W system per se, it’s much worse than that.
        If you understand the systems at play it’s very easy to build a better team without ever spending a penny, because EA does a very good job of drawing your attention away from what really matters, in game stats. Ultimate Team is all about using the flashing lights, bells and whistles to entice you into buying packs to pursue the “Special” cards (icons, TOTW, Ones to Watch). I could show many examples where these marquee players are no better than some of the more undervalued players, but the strategy is to show these players as being special and worth pursuing. That’s the really scummy thing in all this, it’s at a point where it isn’t even pay to win anymore, it’s pay to get these vastly overrated players that may be no better than this guy who spent a few thousand coins he earn’t in game. Again it’s exploitation pure and simple, the players who aren’t as good think these players will instantly make them better, and spend $$$ pursuing them.

        • Pikarov says:

          Isn’t this a pretty faithful simulation of pro football team management IRL though ?

          I jest of course ^^

    • ChairmanYang says:

      That would be great! EA can exit the industry (sports excepted) and stop pushing the frontier for exploitative garbage in AAA games. It’d also be nice for the Star Wars license to go to a competent publisher.

  7. Crimsoneer says:

    I’m enjoying it. Not feeling any particular urge to spend money, and just pew-pewing. It’s not particularly great, but’s definitely the prettiest star wars

  8. Seyda Neen says:

    The whole thing is just looticrous.

  9. kuertee says:

    Here’s a pretty good overview of EA’s loot boxes. It details its history, how it differs from other publisher’s loot boxes, and it shows how ingrained the system is into EA’s view of games: link to

    (It’s good game journalistic work from the Skill Up team.)

  10. alert says:

    A multiplayer FPS doesn’t need an “economy” or a “progression system”.

    Collectivise the industry and run it for the benefit of the devs and gamers. It’s the only reasonable solution to this nonsense.

    • Reefpirate says:

      Yeah. Nationalize game dev. That’s the only ‘reasonable’ solution.

  11. p00rWhiteGuy says:

    Don’t buy EA games. Say no to Electronic Arts and their business model.

  12. PiiSmith says:

    If it would be a good game I might deal with this crate nonsense. As it is a bad game I will just pass it and not deal with it at all.

  13. 1manandhisdroid says:

    ..yeah, I’m one of those hypocrites that can’t stand loot boxes but I preordered it (yup, it gave me an early advantage) – but a month on – and the game has levelled off – everyone has the same cards at pretty much the same level – and it’s pretty much no different to the first… except without the much-loved droid run… and dropship thingummy one that was ace too… still great fun though… would never dream of spending a penny more…

  14. Ham Solo says:

    The nonexistent matchmaker still causes frustration and anger. people with 3 top notch cards matched against people without a single one. The logic holes and issues in the singleplayer also persist. And the terrible lootbox progression system is also still terrible.