• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Batllefield 2042 Pricing revealed

R6Rider

Member
Jan 22, 2020
3,512
5,700
485
USA
Fuck 70 dollars for any game.

It's BF. Give it 2 months (less if it's a BFV shitshow which was half price on launch week LOL) and it'll be down to 40-50 dollars.


So any shitty grindy game should be payed for by the hour? Would you pay 100 for Destiny or Diablo? It's not like this is even hundreds of hours of new experiences like some kind of godly xpac. It's the same 8 maps, over and over.

Piss poor reasoning.
No I'm saying for me the hours I'll get out of it is well worth 70 bucks. Pretty basic logic.
 

ZehDon

Member
Jun 13, 2013
4,444
8,045
815
Australia
Ouch - that Sony pricing. No one's paying AUD$125.00 for no SP, 7 maps, massive focus on paid content, and with MTX. Especially when you can wait two months after it's inevitably terrible launch and pick it up for cheap.

Bomba incoming.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Guilhermegrg

BabyYoda

Member
Sep 9, 2020
426
563
295
If you people pay those prices (anything above $60 really, which is already too much imho), then you are mugs and deserve $80 next gen and $90 the gen after that et al...if you pre-order, then God help you, because I can't"
Yeah how dare people spend 70 bucks on hundreds of hours of entertainment.
It's there prerogative, they forfeit the right to ever complain about the prices of games though, especially ones that are monetised up the wazoo!
 

jaysius

Member
Oct 3, 2019
2,830
3,715
465
golf golfing GIF by DraftKings


A swing and a miss.

Way to kill all the fucking excitement and momentum before gameplay is even shown.

Fuck this business model, I thought this bullshit had died.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Guilhermegrg

Moonjt9

Member
Oct 2, 2019
480
1,274
360
70 US dollars for a multiplayer only game? They can kiss my ass. Will wait for the inevitable deep sale or ps plus free offering.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Guilhermegrg

fatmarco

Member
Aug 3, 2020
342
507
320
So just to clarify, if you have Gamepass you're basically just having to wait a year for it to drop from 70 dollars to essentially nothing?
 

supernova8

Member
Jun 2, 2020
2,468
3,511
430
Did they say it isn't launching into Game Pass? Or are you just assuming this because they didn't say it would?

Well on the website it has the prices listed for all platforms (including Xbox). I guess there is a slim chance that it would come to Game Pass on top of that, but I highly doubt it would come to Game Pass straight away. Why would they bother?

Besides, look at their other titles. None of their other titles came to Game Pass immediately until very later on (ie when sales dropped off). I'd say it's a pretty safe assumption.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MiguelItUp

packy34

Member
Dec 12, 2014
1,869
431
485
No it actually proves you haven't played a BF game on the PC.
In a long time.
Punk Buster doesn't stand a chance against the hacks on PC BF games.

I will enjoy versions(double dipping) that will load day one and not have cheating.
Do you really think DICE is going to keep using punkbuster in 2021

If not, this post is dumb and meaningless
 
Jul 30, 2020
79
160
230
WTF - *IF* I were to buy it at launch (I won't because it'll be buggy as hell like all other previous BF releases) - I'd buy it on PC anyway - but hell - charging $10 more because it's on "next-gen" XSX/PS5? Seriously?

Are they going to nerf the PC version so it won't match next-gen consoles?
There is a thing called licensing for developing on consoles. If $10 kills your wallet.....
 

Kenpachii

Member
Mar 23, 2018
9,477
11,781
815
I agree with him tho, i prefer to have console auto aimbot cheaters removed from PC servers also. I rather have a bunch of bots in my team then controller players with cheat mechanics to keep the servers clean, those bots are probably more useful anyway.
 
Last edited:

Yselacrey00

Banned
Nov 20, 2018
1,358
1,655
520
$70 on next gen just as expected... but will we see the same amount of vitriol and negative articles like we do now towards certain major company when eventually every publisher jumps on board?
Thank Sony for that. They put the example, now everyone will follow suit and MS will have to because otherwise their games will look like cheap.
 
  • Triggered
Reactions: S0ULZB0URNE

Pull n Pray

Member
Mar 12, 2021
289
331
265
Well on the website it has the prices listed for all platforms (including Xbox). I guess there is a slim chance that it would come to Game Pass on top of that, but I highly doubt it would come to Game Pass straight away. Why would they bother?

Besides, look at their other titles. None of their other titles came to Game Pass immediately until very later on (ie when sales dropped off). I'd say it's a pretty safe assumption.
They still list the prices for games that launch into Game Pass. Yes, EA games usually come to Game Pass 6 months later anyways. But they recently made an exception with Knockout City, which launched into Game Pass. Maybe they will do the same with BF2042 to try to take some of COD's market share.

The Battlefield rumor got started because an insider said that there would be a AAA third party first person shooter that comes to Game Pass day in date this fall. But he never said which one, and people are just guessing he means Battlefield.
 

Rocco Schiavone

I am terrified of Microsoft and am always concerned about them.
Sep 5, 2020
1,004
2,984
520
Battlefield 2042 is available now for pre-order and is set to launch on retail and digital storefronts on October 22 for $59.99 on Xbox® One, PlayStation®4, and PC, and $69.99 on Xbox® Series X and S and PlayStation®5. EA Play members get a 10-hour trial starting Oct 15, 2021. EA Play members and players who pre-order will receive early access to the Open Beta**. Players who pre-order have three different editions to choose from, including the Battlefield 2042 Gold Edition for $89.99 on PC and $99.99 on console, or the Battlefield 2042 Ultimate Edition for $109.99 on PC or $119.99 on console

GamePass collaboration
Klobrille. Looks incredible. Jesus this isn't even ingame footage.🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️
 
Last edited:

lh032

I cry about Xbox and hate PlayStation.
Mar 8, 2021
1,901
4,188
470
The extra 10 dollars on consoles is "anti cheater tax", less cheater on consoles.
 

TheAssist

Member
Jul 17, 2013
958
1,177
715
So what I am getting from a lot of people here:

- EA should "learn" that f2p predatory lootbox mech...I mean surprise mechanics are the only way to go these days because battle royal games exist
- Battlefield should totally have a single player campaign, because thats the only way to justify full price. No way a multiplayer only game should charge full price ever. Because that has never happened. Never, ever, ever.
- 7 maps the size of a battle royal map is not enough. Even though BR games usually ship with only one
-3 games modes is somehow not in enough in a BF game. Though it seems fine in all their other games


Please let Battlefield do its Battlefield thing. Its bad enough that they focus so much on cosmetics, because people rather spend 10 bucks on 2 new hats and a pair of shoes for their virtual character, than actual new content like maps and modes, that take much more work. But buying maps that the team took months to create is somehow a rip of, but buying stupid looking cosmetics is cool. Only makes the game look ridiculous but whatever right...

Most Battlefields have shipped with a single digit number of maps. And those which did not had usually some very shitty maps along with them.
3 game modes is fine, as long as they are all good. BF doesnt need new modes for the sake of having new modes. Its core gameplay is usually strong enough to carry it.

Having a "battle pass" or whatever is fine as long as it comes with substantial content. I personally was fine with buying new maps as long as the maps are good. Because I think spending money on content that a lot of people worked hard on is a decent thing to do. Because I also want to get paid for my work. People expect too much free things these days. Nothing after the initial release should ever be charged for, but also prices need to stay the same for decades. This is just a very entitled way of looking at it. Everything becomes more expensive over time. So do games. But of course publishers "listen" and then come up with different monetization methods. This is why lootboxes exist. This is why so many game are plagued with cosmetics that ruin any kind of aesthetic. This is what you wanted. People should be happy that EA now gives all the actual content away for free and only want to charge for cosmetics. But still, people are bitching and moaning about it. Nothing is ever right.
You are literally saying this game should have

- more maps and modes
- have a single player mode
- be 60 bucks (in the USA, before taxes)
- get more content over time, without extra payments

And that all at the same time. Ignoring inflation, ignoring higher production cost, ignoring harder competition. Ignoring the fact that some of these claims are just completely random (like having a SP campaign in a Battlefield. This has never worked out and still people want it, just because. Just like people wanted multiplayer modes in SP games just because and publishers tried to shoe horn in stupid unnecessary MP modes in games that didnt need it).

Look, I dont like EA just like the next guy. I want this game to be good, because I had great times with the older Battlefields. But I dont trust EA and DICE enough these days to deliver on their promises. But I also think that what they are offering so far is reasonable, when looking at the current market and consumer behavior.

Content wise its similar to older Battlefields, which is fine. They promise of further content free of charge, unless you want to dress like a clown. 70 bucks is reasonable in the year 2021. Thats my opinion, even if the game is multiplayer only (of course this only counts if the game is actually good, if its just decent, you might want to wait for a deal or not buy it at all).

I just want a good fucking Battlefield game again. Yes I pay 70 bucks for it. Just let me have some good old Battlefield moments again and dont get distracted by how to monetize the game EA.
 

VN1X

Member
Apr 21, 2016
2,669
4,506
820
golf golfing GIF by DraftKings


A swing and a miss.

Way to kill all the fucking excitement and momentum before gameplay is even shown.

Fuck this business model, I thought this bullshit had died.
Huh?

What business model is at play here that makes it bullshit? God forbid you have to buy a game these days. Maybe Ubisoft will have some nice F2P titles for ya soon though. :messenger_tears_of_joy:
 

IDKFA

Member
Jan 15, 2017
2,494
3,287
540
I guess GamePass does have it's limits. I was half expecting this to be GamePass Day 1.

It could and should have been. Microsoft bottled it. They could have easily have thrown billions of dollars at EA for this game to be on GP from day one, plus all of the season passes to be free to GP subscribers.

But no. They lost their nerve. Really disappointing because I thought this would be the game that started the trend of all AAA games coming to Gamepass day one.
 

DenchDeckard

Member
Feb 28, 2021
2,581
4,627
395
I don’t get why it’s not 60 on Xbox, there’s just one SKU on Xbox! What a load of shit.

I mean to be honest it’s a no brainier PC game anyway so good to see that EA know they can’t fuck with the pc crowd like that. Will grab on steam.
 

DenchDeckard

Member
Feb 28, 2021
2,581
4,627
395
It could and should have been. Microsoft bottled it. They could have easily have thrown billions of dollars at EA for this game to be on GP from day one, plus all of the season passes to be free to GP subscribers.

But no. They lost their nerve. Really disappointing because I thought this would be the game that started the trend of all AAA games coming to Gamepass day one.

I guess this is sarcasm lol ….

why didn’t ms just throw billions of dollars at every AAA game. I like it.

ahhh shit double post, sorry.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Guilhermegrg

cormack12

Gold Member
Mar 21, 2013
11,181
30,090
1,550
So what I am getting from a lot of people here:

- EA should "learn" that f2p predatory lootbox mech...I mean surprise mechanics are the only way to go these days because battle royal games exist
- Battlefield should totally have a single player campaign, because thats the only way to justify full price. No way a multiplayer only game should charge full price ever. Because that has never happened. Never, ever, ever.
- 7 maps the size of a battle royal map is not enough. Even though BR games usually ship with only one
-3 games modes is somehow not in enough in a BF game. Though it seems fine in all their other games


Please let Battlefield do its Battlefield thing. Its bad enough that they focus so much on cosmetics, because people rather spend 10 bucks on 2 new hats and a pair of shoes for their virtual character, than actual new content like maps and modes, that take much more work. But buying maps that the team took months to create is somehow a rip of, but buying stupid looking cosmetics is cool. Only makes the game look ridiculous but whatever right...

Most Battlefields have shipped with a single digit number of maps. And those which did not had usually some very shitty maps along with them.
3 game modes is fine, as long as they are all good. BF doesnt need new modes for the sake of having new modes. Its core gameplay is usually strong enough to carry it.

Having a "battle pass" or whatever is fine as long as it comes with substantial content. I personally was fine with buying new maps as long as the maps are good. Because I think spending money on content that a lot of people worked hard on is a decent thing to do. Because I also want to get paid for my work. People expect too much free things these days. Nothing after the initial release should ever be charged for, but also prices need to stay the same for decades. This is just a very entitled way of looking at it. Everything becomes more expensive over time. So do games. But of course publishers "listen" and then come up with different monetization methods. This is why lootboxes exist. This is why so many game are plagued with cosmetics that ruin any kind of aesthetic. This is what you wanted. People should be happy that EA now gives all the actual content away for free and only want to charge for cosmetics. But still, people are bitching and moaning about it. Nothing is ever right.
You are literally saying this game should have

- more maps and modes
- have a single player mode
- be 60 bucks (in the USA, before taxes)
- get more content over time, without extra payments

And that all at the same time. Ignoring inflation, ignoring higher production cost, ignoring harder competition. Ignoring the fact that some of these claims are just completely random (like having a SP campaign in a Battlefield. This has never worked out and still people want it, just because. Just like people wanted multiplayer modes in SP games just because and publishers tried to shoe horn in stupid unnecessary MP modes in games that didnt need it).

Look, I dont like EA just like the next guy. I want this game to be good, because I had great times with the older Battlefields. But I dont trust EA and DICE enough these days to deliver on their promises. But I also think that what they are offering so far is reasonable, when looking at the current market and consumer behavior.

Content wise its similar to older Battlefields, which is fine. They promise of further content free of charge, unless you want to dress like a clown. 70 bucks is reasonable in the year 2021. Thats my opinion, even if the game is multiplayer only (of course this only counts if the game is actually good, if its just decent, you might want to wait for a deal or not buy it at all).

I just want a good fucking Battlefield game again. Yes I pay 70 bucks for it. Just let me have some good old Battlefield moments again and dont get distracted by how to monetize the game EA.
 

RPSleon

Member
Apr 3, 2015
408
525
620
Ive bought one £70 game so far for PS5. While it was a good game, i don't think theres anything they could have done to stop me feeling like it was an irresponsible purchace. Its too much even for the best games. Spending that on BF will not feel good to me, even if I loved it. It just doesnt sit right. The added costs on top that are "oPTioNaL" make it worse.

I didnt buy alot of games last gen because of the amount of bullshit publishers were pulling early on, and looks like Ill be doing that again.

:(
 
  • Like
Reactions: ZywyPL

Inviusx

Member
Jan 4, 2016
2,214
2,670
540
Like I said in the other thread, if they do cross play and cross parties at launch I'll dive in. I'm always down for a modern era Battlefield but my buddies are split across PS5 and Series X.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Alpha Male

supernova8

Member
Jun 2, 2020
2,468
3,511
430
They still list the prices for games that launch into Game Pass. Yes, EA games usually come to Game Pass 6 months later anyways. But they recently made an exception with Knockout City, which launched into Game Pass. Maybe they will do the same with BF2042 to try to take some of COD's market share.

The Battlefield rumor got started because an insider said that there would be a AAA third party first person shooter that comes to Game Pass day in date this fall. But he never said which one, and people are just guessing he means Battlefield.

I suppose there's not zero precedent for it but I doubt it would come day one or even day 30.

Unless Microsoft is paying them an absolute shit ton (they could well be).
 

Haggard

Member
Nov 25, 2020
938
1,743
470
It could and should have been. Microsoft bottled it. They could have easily have thrown billions of dollars at EA for this game to be on GP from day one, plus all of the season passes to be free to GP subscribers.

But no. They lost their nerve. Really disappointing because I thought this would be the game that started the trend of all AAA games coming to Gamepass day one.
Whoa what are you smoking?

A lion`s share of the revenue for AAA blockbuster titles is made in the first few weeks after release. You can´t expect MS to just give billions away to earn mere millions from their subscribers. They`re a business, not the welfare.....
 
Last edited:

Ozzie666

Member
Jun 27, 2020
659
630
295
I have to ask, for the people that love these games. Do you really care about a campaign or $70 price tag? Easy for everyone else to complain about stuff, but for the real fans, how do you feel?

It's a game I have no interest playing, so just curious.

I am just here for the chaos, for the how many micro transactions, levels, guns and pay to win drama.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Alpha Male

ZywyPL

Member
Nov 27, 2018
6,063
10,775
755
I have to ask, for the people that love these games. Do you really care about a campaign or $70 price tag? Easy for everyone else to complain about stuff, but for the real fans, how do you feel?

It's a game I have no interest playing, so just curious.

I am just here for the chaos, for the how many micro transactions, levels, guns and pay to win drama.

The lack of SP campaign itself isn't much of an issue itself, because honestly, other than BC 1&2 they never delivered anything decent (while in contrary CoD delivers a stellar blockbuster campaign year after year), but for 70€ and such a long development time and sole focus on the MP, what I'd expect, what I demand is shitloads of content - at least 14 maps out of the box, multiple game modes - conquest, rush, breakthrough TDM, BR, a vehicle-only mode, some escort type of mode where one tem has to defend a convoy while the other tries to steal it, maybe even some sort of variation of CTF adjusted for such amount of players, and all of those modes available in different player counts - 4v4, 8v8, 16v16, 32 vs 32, and the full 64vs64. This is where I'd see the 70€ fully justified, but what EA offers is unacceptable.
 

Kenpachii

Member
Mar 23, 2018
9,477
11,781
815
U all talking about dollars. this game will be 80 euro's on PS5, versus 60 on PC and with cdkeys probably 40 euro's. And people still defend sony rofl

Honestly, 3rd party games on PS5 are laughable expensive.
 
Last edited:

HoofHearted

Member
Oct 28, 2020
637
1,126
360
There is a thing called licensing for developing on consoles. If $10 kills your wallet.....
LMFAO… No… licensing is the cost of doing business… but if that’s the bullshit you want to tell yourself to justify what is essentially a console tax… go right ahead.

Lets put it this way - you want to buy a car.

The car costs $60. You can buy it direct or go to a dealership to buy the car. Dealerships start charging you $10 extra in “manufacturers licensing fees” to sell you the exact same car. Where do you buy the car from?

it’s not about the money - I can afford it. It’s about the fact that theres a focused shift and effort by some publishers in the console market to inflate the base price of games to a new base or “standard“ price.

The fact that there’s a difference in price between PC versus console is even more absurd. If you’re going to raise the price - then do it consistently. The issue is that EA knows that raising the price on PCs would cause a huge negative response in the market and impact their sales.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Guilhermegrg

IDKFA

Member
Jan 15, 2017
2,494
3,287
540
Whoa what are you smoking?

A lion`s share of the revenue for AAA blockbuster titles is made in the first few weeks after release. You can´t expect MS to just give billions away to earn mere millions from their subscribers. They`re a business, not the welfare.....

I'm not smoking anything.

Gamepass has changed my outlook gaming. I never want to purchase another console game again. Why pay £70 for one game when I can pay a monthly sub and have access to every game?

I know the cost of Gamepass would need to increase for there to be every AAA title on Gamepass form day 1, but I'd be willing to pay £70 a month for that service. Not only that, but I'm convinced this is a future that will happen sooner or later.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ZywyPL

Roman Empire

Member
May 8, 2020
587
532
310
Yeah, no way I'm buying this shit at launch and on consoles. Easy wait and see with how low I rate BF1 and BF V. The best part is that if I wait for a good 3 to 6 months, I can buy the game for around 1/3 or half the price.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Guilhermegrg