Up For Debate - Are you a fan of Battle Passes?

Written by Jon Sutton on Sat, Oct 19, 2019 4:34 PM
System Requirements Optimum 1080p PC Build Low vs Ultra Screenshots GPU Performance Chart CPU List That Meet System Requirements GPU List That Meet System Requirements

It’s been a while now since the warfare raging amongst AAA publishers switch from trying to take all your money to trying to take all your time. They still want the former, of course, but they’ve gradually figured out that the more of your time they can steal, the greater the eventual flow of money. It’s a perpetual spiral upward as well. If you play something a lot, you’re more inclined to spend money. And, the more time you spend playing a game, the more your friends will see you playing it (and potentially play it themselves), and the more active you keep the player base. It’s a win/win for publishers whom rather than charging a small proportion of the player base for a new map, can instead milk a little cash from everyone instead. 

The current means of weaponising your time is the Battle Pass. Pioneered, to a degree, by Valve and DOTA 2, the Battle Pass has now become the norm. Battle Passes can be found in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, Red Dead Redemption 2, Rocket League, Fortnite, PUBG, Apex Legends and Destiny 2. These are all pretty much the biggest games in the world right now, and they’re all treading a similar path. It’s everywhere you look and it’s the sort of delicious marketing genius which is so typical of Valve. 

You see, the Battle Pass is an insidious system, one which very capably extracts money from those who otherwise wouldn’t even think of paying ten bucks for a new cloak. It breaks down the barriers we have built up to defend ourselves against in-game purchases. Rather than pay for one item, or a randomised box, here is an entire torrent of items and all you need to do is keep playing the games you like. 

Only, once you’ve dropped that cash, you’re in. You’re in because you need to get to the end of the Battle Pass in order to get your money’s worth. You’re in because you need to complete those daily challenges. You’re in because this Battle Pass is great so why not drop five bucks on that new weapon skin? You’re in because you don’t want to miss out on exclusive content. And you’re in because if you and all your mates have a Battle Pass each, you will unlock the content quicker.

The trouble is, as with all these things, is we only have so much time. Money isn’t even factoring in at this point. You could buy eight battle passes for £60 and never have to play another game ever again, but it’s the time commitment to see these through which sees reality bites. Battlefield V invites players back most weeks to unlock a new weapon. Miss it and it’s gone. Red Dead Online is adding epic bounty hunts which are available for one week only. Fortnite’s best cosmetics are tucked away at level 100 of any given Battle Pass. Meanwhile, time ticks down. You’ve got 64 days to complete Fortnite’s Battle Pass. You’ve got 13 days to complete Fortnite’s Battle Pass. Before you know it, you’re not playing because you want to, you’re playing a game because you feel you need to or you’ll miss out on the best gear.

Battle Passes are the new norm but they’re ultimately as divisive as any other form of in-game purchases before it. I both love them and hate them. A battle pass can keep me hooked on a game or it can put me off playing a game entirely. They’re weird like that, but they ultimately feel problematic. FOMO is a powerful thing and with more games and more Battle Passes, it only adds to the pressure.

What are your thoughts on Battle Passes then, do you think they’re a great move for the industry or a terrible waste of time? Do you ever feel obliged to play a game just to level up a Battle Pass? Would you prefer we went back to paid map packs? Let us know what you think of them below!

Do you like Battle Passes?

How many Battle Passes do you regularly purchase?

If post launch content needs to be funded which would you prefer?

Login or Register to join the debate

Rep
33
Offline
08:55 Oct-22-2019

The problem with Battlepasses, is that they lock content away. Don't have time to dedicate to getting to that level 50 mark? Well tough, you can no longer ever get that content that you paid for. At least Ghost Recon Breakpoint doesn't charge, but for those that do, this is even worse. It doesn't have a place in AAA titles.

0
Rep
386
Offline
admin approved badge
14:52 Oct-22-2019

As long as they lock only visual content behind, they are still crap, but they are the least crap thing we have so far in terms of micro-transactions.


And micro-transactions, DLCs, loot boxes don't have a place in AAA titles that cost 90-120$ base price, for AAA titles that cost the outdated 60$ standard for most AAA games they are needed, hell many AAA games without them failed in the past 5 years.


of course CoD doesn't need it for example, but the games that sell a butt ton and make a butt ton of money will always get a butt ton of money, sadly and the excess will not go for better games, but for the executives and share holders/owners.

0
Rep
33
Offline
22:44 Oct-24-2019

If it's a paid battlepass, you should NEVER have that content locked. That battlepass should stay active permanently until you complete it. There's no excuse.

0
Rep
386
Offline
admin approved badge
06:19 Oct-25-2019

I agree, but that being said 60$ AAA games(that are NOT CoD or sell even less than half as much as CoD in their first 3 months) need some form of extra income, otherwise they should cost 90-120$ straight away, which is what is best for sure, but not everybody likes that idea.


And the "Free to Play" model should stay on phones. Charge us accordingly and give us everything.

0
Rep
105
Offline
21:16 Oct-21-2019

I prefer having non of this mechanics on games that already cost 60 bucks, probably for F2p and mobile games, but it is just a crime to make people play even if they dont want to and more because they have to, by offering a battle pass they are forcing you once you but that pass to play.Luckily i haven´t bought a single one, even in this mobil game called war robots wchich i have been playing for around 5 years, but i have spent something like 50-55 bucks on premium.

0
Rep
272
Offline
admin approved badge
09:43 Oct-21-2019

HUGE fan! I play precisely 0 games that have them and if people want to spend money on that stuff - I encourage it!

1
Rep
97
Offline
admin approved badge
05:39 Oct-22-2019

Wow that's great! Thanks for the info bro! Now i know how good they are! /s

0
Rep
272
Offline
admin approved badge
12:51 Oct-22-2019

#ItWasAJoke

0
Rep
97
Offline
admin approved badge
21:09 Oct-22-2019

I know it was. Notice the /s

0
Rep
30
Offline
11:38 Oct-20-2019

I'm fine with Battle Passes. As long as they contain cosmetic items only they don't affect gameplay, don't punish me if I don't want to pay and even give me skins/loot for just playing the game. The game will make more money allowing it to stay alive for longer and the people who wan't to pay will get exclusive items. Everybody wins.

1
Rep
30
Offline
11:40 Oct-20-2019

Paid map packs? HELL NO. They separate the community and lengthen the waiting time for everyone. To see anyone voting for them just blows my mind

0
Rep
7
Offline
09:44 Oct-20-2019

What are loot boxes? I think you meant "SurPriSe MeChAnIcs".

1
Rep
15
Offline
admin approved badge
02:43 Oct-20-2019

"Do you like battle passes?"


Where's the hell no option?

7
Rep
-1
Offline
02:14 Oct-20-2019

i only buy dota battlepass just because i love the game so much and that game already being part of my life about 11 years of my life spent to play that game

1
Rep
76
Offline
admin approved badge
01:04 Oct-20-2019

I never bought battle pass, likely never will, I am not against there being battle pass, especially for free to play games it feels like nice way to monetize them, it allows you to try game and decide if you want to commit. Provided they don't make BP pay to win, it is in a way optional subscription. It however bothers me more with AAA, which use BP and microtransaction store,...

2
Rep
76
Offline
admin approved badge
01:05 Oct-20-2019

... I understand that multiplayer has to be financed, but if you go for recurring payments, game should be cheaper and you shouldn't hit multiple free to play monetization methods in full priced games. Yes servers cost to run, but that is self imposed cost developers decided they want for themselves, when they killed dedicated servers. Plus Battle Front 2 did fine once lootboxes were stripped.

1
Rep
76
Offline
admin approved badge
01:07 Oct-20-2019

In fact, when progression was patched and it got sorted out, it did became better game and to think about it, EA did tell investors they had no loss because of it. Hence why I really don't like extra monetization on AAA games, because in reality, it is just their greed, it is not about paying cost of servers. It is just that with purchases only, they don't get all money.

1
Rep
31
Offline
00:28 Oct-20-2019

For F2P games? yeah that make sense.


For games that already have $60 paywall? Scummy. Less scummy than loot boxes but still scummy.

2
Rep
19
Offline
21:23 Oct-19-2019

I bought and still buy Dota 2 Battle Pass. If the game is free and I like to support it, Battle pass is the way to go I think. I don't support them in paid game in any form though or the one give competitive advantage even the slightest.

1
Rep
97
Offline
admin approved badge
21:17 Oct-19-2019

How about NONE OF THEM.

0
Rep
49
Offline
21:10 Oct-19-2019

STILL BETTER THAN SURPRISE MECHANICS

1
Rep
49
Offline
21:08 Oct-19-2019

Only if it's free ! ahem! Fortnite Season 8!

1
Rep
49
Offline
21:09 Oct-19-2019

btw, my friend bought fortnite Season 11 bATTLE pASS without spending a dime. He just collected V-Bucks from last few seasons lol.

1
Rep
94
Offline
20:36 Oct-19-2019

For the last poll, I voted "map packs", assuming it's like every addition is a paid dlc like in payday 2. Then you can just choose whichever you want and not pay the full price of a battle pass. Ofc assuming that a battlepass would cost as much as all dlc content separate.

1
Rep
1
Offline
20:06 Oct-19-2019

I feel like if the game is free, you enjoy playing, and it offers no competitive edge over other players, a Battle Pass system is a great way to support the developers for a game you already enjoy. For a game that you have to pay premium price for, any type of microtransaction is ridiculous to say the least.

1
Rep
386
Offline
admin approved badge
20:38 Oct-19-2019

60$ is not premium, if anything since 2013-2014 it's too little for AAA games that don't sell 10 million+ copies in the first half year.

2
Rep
29
Offline
admin approved badge
19:11 Oct-19-2019

The question should be: "Are you a fan of games that have battle pass?"

1
Rep
49
Offline
23:56 Oct-19-2019

yesssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss! imagine every game had battle pass in 2 years, you wont be gamer anymore right?

0
Rep
80
Offline
admin approved badge
19:00 Oct-19-2019

i preffer that there is no locked stuff between people who buy battle passes and thos that dont with free battle pass, second thing is that i dont like battle/seasson passes bec it forces you to play so that you can reach some reward you want as there are games i really like but i want to play them 2-3h more or less and not to spend my whole day grinding points for battle pass

2
Rep
2
Offline
18:57 Oct-19-2019

FREE 100 V(IRGIN)BUCKS!!!!


Lets go!!!

1
Rep
17
Offline
admin approved badge
17:57 Oct-19-2019

Battle passes, season passes, lootboxes etc need to go back to mobile games where they belong. If i pay 60 bucks for a game, I should get a fully completed, fully fleshed out game with unlockable content in it as it used to be in the past. Where a skin could be obtained through getting 1000 headshots etc. Where a season pass wasn't needed to unlock a fighter. To think, this all started with horse armor for Oblivion....

1
Rep
21
Offline
18:03 Oct-19-2019

I still remember a sale years and years ago. It was literally "All Oblivion DLC 50% OFF! Horse Armor Double Priced!" ...... lol Granted it was April Fools.. But it was a legit sale for the week .

2
Rep
17
Offline
admin approved badge
18:06 Oct-19-2019

Haha! I mean, at least Oblivion was a finished game, and when you got Shivering Isles, it was a full other game for 30 bucks.

0
Rep
21
Offline
00:07 Oct-20-2019

Oh yea, 100%. Oblivion was finished (some bugs, sure; but still finished in terms of a complete, fulfilling story line with hours upon hours of side quests) and Shivering Isles was one of my favorite expansions to a game ever.

1
Rep
386
Offline
admin approved badge
18:27 Oct-19-2019

See I absolutely agree with that, but then the games should cost over 60$ for the ones that don't sell 10 million copies+ in the first 6 months.

2
Rep
17
Offline
admin approved badge
18:34 Oct-19-2019

I am fine with that. Lets think about it for a second. Games have gone up with inflation over time. Nintendo 64 games used to cost 30 bucks. Playstation 2 games costed 50 bucks. Then when we got to gen 7, we got to 60 bucks a game. It's been that way for over a decade. I would be fine with another uptick in price IF devs released fully finished games with no microtransactions.

1
Rep
386
Offline
admin approved badge
19:00 Oct-19-2019

Yup, you are the first to get it along with @Geldyr.
It's not only inflation, but also the cost to produce games in 2016 compared to 2006 had increased 5-10x times!


And that stupid 60$ standard and exponentially increasing development costs are the main reason why we got microtransactions and DLCs in the first place, along with greed of course, but I doubt micro-transactions and DLCs would have been accepted if games costed 80-100$ in 2012


And the increase in cost can primarily be attributed to graphics and animations and everything visual as a whole. Nowadays from those 500+ people studios 5% are programmers and game designers and the rest are graphics artists, animation artists, motion capture, and everything visual as a whole.

3
Rep
17
Offline
admin approved badge
19:23 Oct-21-2019

Agreed. I feel that 80-90 is a fair price for a fully fleshed out game nowdays. That would be in line with the "super deluxe DLC versions" like "deluxe" and "collectors" that contain DLC that should be in the game to begin with. I paid 80 bucks for code vein and got a finished game with great content. I have no problem paying good price for a good game.

0
Rep
2
Offline
18:40 Oct-19-2019

I agree we deserve a finished product. However, $60 has been the norm for years, should we realistically expect to pay more considering how things have changed?

0
Rep
386
Offline
admin approved badge
19:47 Oct-19-2019

Absolutely agreed! We should pay more but for a finished product, not spliting the player base, no pay walls for certain content, everything is just unlockable through challenges!

3
Rep
-6
Offline
17:56 Oct-19-2019

EA we got rid of the loot boxes and microtransactions from our upcoming titles, but don't worry we got you covered as we'll implement battlepass system

0

Can They Run... |

| 60FPS, Medium, 720p
Athlon II X2 245 GeForce GTS 250 4GB
| 60FPS, High, 1080p
Ryzen 5 3500U 4-Core 2.1 GHz Radeon RX Vega 8 8GB
| 60FPS, High, 720p
Core i5-2400S 2.5GHz Radeon R5 340 (OEM) 4GB
| High, 720p
Core i5-2400S 2.5GHz Radeon R5 340 (OEM) 4GB
100% Yes [1 votes]
Ryzen 5 3500U 4-Core 2.1 GHz Radeon RX Vega 8 8GB
100% Yes [1 votes]
| 30FPS, Medium, 720p
Ryzen 5 3500U 4-Core 2.1 GHz Radeon RX Vega 8 10GB
| 30FPS, High, 1080p
Core i3-8100 4-Core 3.6GHz GeForce GTX 1060 3GB 16GB
100% Yes [4 votes]
| 60FPS, Ultra, 1080p
Ryzen 7 5800H 8-Core 3.2GHz GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile 32GB
100% Yes [5 votes]
| 60FPS, High, 1080p
Ryzen 7 5800H 8-Core 3.2GHz GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile 16GB
100% Yes [1 votes]
| 60FPS, High, 1080p
Core i7-4770K 4-Core 3.5GHz GeForce GTX 980 4GB 32GB
100% Yes [3 votes]
| 60FPS, High, 1080p
Ryzen 7 5800H 8-Core 3.2GHz GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile 16GB
100% Yes [2 votes]
| 60FPS, Ultra, 1080p
Core i5-10400F 6-Core 2.90GHz GeForce RTX 3060 Ti MSI Ventus 2X 8GB 16GB
100% Yes [6 votes]
| 60FPS, Medium, 1080p
Core i7-10700F 8-Core 2.9GHz GeForce GTX 970 Gigabyte G1 Gaming 4GB Edition 16GB
100% Yes [3 votes]
| 60FPS, High, 1080p
Core i5-11400F 6-Core 2.6GHz GeForce GTX 1650 Super 4GB 16GB
| 60FPS, High, 1080p
Core i7-3770 4-Core 3.4GHz GeForce GTX 1650 Super 4GB 16GB
0% No [1 votes]
| 60FPS, High, 1080p
Core i7-4770K 4-Core 3.5GHz GeForce GTX 980 4GB 32GB
100% Yes [2 votes]
| 60FPS, High, 1080p
Ryzen 7 5800H 8-Core 3.2GHz GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile 16GB
100% Yes [1 votes]
| 30FPS, Medium, 1080p
Xeon E3-1230 GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Gigabyte G1 Gaming 4GB 16GB
100% Yes [1 votes]
| 30FPS, Low, 1080p
Core i5-3470 3.2GHz GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Gigabyte G1 Gaming 4GB 12GB
66.6667% Yes [3 votes]
| 60FPS, Medium, 720p
Core i3-10100E 4-Core 3.20GHz GeForce GTX 750 Ti Asus OC 2GB Edition 16GB