Battlefield Heroes Details Emerge

Some of the first details of the recently announced Battlefield Heroes have made their way out via the game's handy dandy developer blog. Senior...

87

Some of the first details of the recently

announced Battlefield Heroes have made their way out via the game's handy dandy developer blog. Senior producer Ben

Cousins shared some slides and info in the first update of note. We picked through the ramblings of Mr. Cousins for these new details:

  • Based on BF2142 Engine
  • Low system requirements
  • More RPG elements
  • Crazy unrealistic feel similar to BF1942
  • Quicker learning curve
  • Remain true to core BF elements

Announced just a couple of weeks ago, Battlefield Heroes is going to be a free PC-only

online game supported by in-game advertising and microtransactions. The details of

those microtransactions have not been fully detailed but one would assume that means you

can buy in-game items with really small amounts of money.

Steve Gibson is the cofounder of Shacknews.com. Originally known as sCary's Quakeholio back in 1996, Steve is now President of Gearbox Publishing after selling Shacknews to GameFly in 2009.

From The Chatty
  • reply
    February 4, 2008 6:53 PM

    "The details of those microtransactions have not been fully detailed but one would assume that means you can buy in-game items with really small amounts of money."

    No. Dear God, no.

    The absolute last thing I want to to pick up a game and be unable to compete with the others around me unless I pay $1.95 for the next best grenade.

    Worst idea ever.

    • reply
      February 4, 2008 6:56 PM

      I agree, just make me pay the 50 up front for everything...

      I hate all these micro-transactions for songs on guitar hero and rock band... ugh.

    • reply
      February 4, 2008 6:56 PM

      the game itself is going to be completely free

      • reply
        February 4, 2008 7:00 PM

        So?

        I'm sure that this is the worst case scenario, but it sums up my feelings on the whole thing.

        Let's say that I pay $5 for a better gun. Then two weeks later an EVEN BETTER ONE comes out. A couple weeks later, its a bigger grenade. By now, my original $5 purchase is worthless--it's only slightly better than starting the game and paying nothing.

        I'd rather pay the money up front.

      • reply
        February 4, 2008 7:00 PM

        yea, but kinda pointless if it would mean that to be able to compete - you'd *have* to spend money.
        Not sure if i'm jumping the gun here or what (as i still don't know enough about it), but agree with chilln - i'd rather pay a full amount once and not worry about things after that.

    • reply
      February 4, 2008 7:05 PM

      [deleted]

    • reply
      February 4, 2008 7:07 PM

      maybe its just different models, like spend 2$ for the pink hello kitty ak47.

      i doubt they would ad anything that would change the balance. but even if they do, it will be fun to pwn people who actually waste money on this crap with my free shit =)

      • reply
        February 4, 2008 7:14 PM

        If they can accomplish that (ie - not changing the balance with new stuff), then nps for me.
        Somehow tho.. i doubt that they'll settle with just that.
        Hope i am wrong!

      • reply
        February 4, 2008 7:25 PM

        [deleted]

      • reply
        February 4, 2008 7:26 PM

        Other elements I can imagine them charging for that would not reduce the enjoyment of the game for non-paying players.

        Minimal charges for :

        * decreased respawn time ( think premium servers on filshack)
        *character and username name distinctions (hello mercury lightning bolt)
        *ai announcer for paying players (Fuqstiq69 is DOMINATING)
        *reserved vehicle spawn spots (again, fileshack)
        *increased ammo capabilities (if balanced such a way where this only reduced resupplying)

        • reply
          February 4, 2008 7:38 PM

          To be honest, there is only a few places left (that works as good for non-paying users) as the fileshack.
          I'm not complaining thats for sure - just wanted to throw that in ^

    • reply
      February 4, 2008 7:21 PM

      Your idea is the worst idea ever because you made an example that fit the worst case scenario.

      After seeing some of the concept art in a post here last week, I assume most of the monetary transactions are going to relate to the look of your character. In one scan they had a fancier looking soldier and it said "Pimp your soldier" or something to that effect. I don't foresee them offering extreme advantages over purchasing items in the game because at the core of any game are rules and people like rules to at least have the appearance of being fair.

      Another likely guess is a health pack purchase. Other RMT RPG's have implemented this. For example, I would pay $2 for the ability to equip a second health pack. This only slightly diminishes your ability to kill me - maybe I needed the extra help in the first place.

      From a developer standpoint I think this is a brilliant fucking move on EA's part because too many free games are already eroding the playtime base. They know they can move in with high quality development (BF/DICE LOLZ I know) and they already have ad connections in place for their game browser.

      • reply
        February 4, 2008 8:12 PM

        [deleted]

      • reply
        February 5, 2008 12:19 AM

        In the announcement they said that they are going for the same model as in that FIFA game in Korea, where you can pay money to upgrade your players skills and abilities, thus giving you an advantage.

        • reply
          February 5, 2008 6:26 AM

          They will not be allowing players to buy better guns but instead buy certain abilities that improve their experience like being able to purchase a Rest XP system similar to WOW's.

    • reply
      February 4, 2008 8:13 PM

      You will be fine with this game then. It was either the Shackcast or PC Gamer Podcast that said that the micro transactions are just to customize your appearance.

    • reply
      February 4, 2008 8:17 PM

      i cant wait to own ppl without spending 1$ of my welfare check.

    • reply
      February 4, 2008 8:55 PM

      For what its worth, EA has been known to try crazy new crap and then ditch it if it doesn't work.

      Anyone remember Majestic?
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Majestic_%28video_game%29

      That was that MMO where it was less "play in front of your computer" and more "we call you and give you a clue and you figure it out". Crazy experiment like this one. Even better, since development was (in theory) cheaper and piracy was basically impossible.

      Died miserably. If this new Battlefield is a bad idea, it will die, too.

      • reply
        February 4, 2008 9:10 PM

        Motor City Online, Ultima Online 2 are two other big ones.

        WTF were they thinking canceling Ultima Online. Geezus did they blow it there. Here they were, one of the largest publishers out there with the largest MMO on the planet and instead of parlaying that success in the world of 3D, they bagged the whole thing while EQ stomped into their garden and took a dump.

        This is from 99 : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWumht6AuZo


        • reply
          February 5, 2008 4:52 AM

          Well they had the not-so-bad-at-the-time idea of not segmenting their market. Instead of upsetting what they had with UO, they just kept trucking (they also canceled Ultima X, which would have been an MMO). In the wake of WoW's success it seems like it would have been a good call but remember, just because an MMO has a superior (graphics-wise) sequel doesn't mean it will work - look at Asheron's Call 2, which got shut down, meanwhile the original is still going

    • reply
      February 4, 2008 9:23 PM

      Yup, this is EA's master play to turn the essentially single entry fee FPS model into the pay-to-play MMO model.

      In another story they detailed a pay-for-upgrade MMO in Korea as they're target for this game. Have fun paying $10-15 a month just to stay ahead of the curve. Want to drive that tank? Sure, you can buy the keys to the ignition for only $4.99! v_v

    • reply
      February 4, 2008 9:31 PM

      $1.95 per grenade would be more along the lines of EA thinking. Would make WoW gold farming look pathetic if you could farm ammo and sell it on the black market.

      • reply
        February 4, 2008 9:36 PM

        [deleted]

        • reply
          February 4, 2008 10:28 PM

          Per bullet, as well

          • reply
            February 5, 2008 1:06 AM

            It's not a game, it's an auction!

            Wish i could find that PA comic where the guy has the idea to charge per damage dealt.

    • reply
      February 4, 2008 10:59 PM

      I'd only complain about this is if the paid stuff gives a huge advantage. If it's just a slightly more accurate gun or slightly more powerful grenade i have no problem with it.

    • reply
      February 4, 2008 11:19 PM

      shawn on GFW talked briefly about it, he said that you could pay some money to increase how fast you rank up, and when you rank up you can unlock weapons etc. So you can play a lot, buy this stat boost and play a little, or play a lot and buy this stat boost. I suspect it isn't going to make people who play a lot get to the really really high ranks fast, but it will help those with low ranks get into the mix. So as far as paying for an advantage goes there could be worse things.

    • reply
      February 5, 2008 1:31 AM

      I hope people set up servers with no add-ons

    • reply
      February 5, 2008 3:19 AM

      When hearing "Microtransactions" for the first time, did anyone actually think 20-40cent/pennies/etc rather than $2-$10?

      The current "microtransactions" are more like minitransactions.

Hello, Meet Lola