Editorial: Why Overwatch succeeds where Battlefront failed

Why Overwatch succeeds where Battlefront failed

         I was a latecomer to the Overwatch Beta train, only joining in the last few days. I’ve come to learn that this was a huge mistake, as Overwatch is a complete blast to play. It’s everything I loved about Splatoon with what was great about PvZ: Garden Warfare 2 added in for good measure.

          I’ll save my praise and criticisms for when I actually get the full game and review it, but for now just know that it’s one of my favourite games of the year so far and I can’t wait to jump in and play some more.

          What I’m really here to talk about today is Star Wars Battlefront, and how the inevitable next installment of EA’s “reimagining” of the sci-fi shooter classic can learn from Blizzard’s first entry into the shooter genre.

          I don’t know about the rest of you, but when I got Battlefront last year, I was sorely disappointed. I played it about three times total, and until very recently I couldn’t quite put my finger on what exactly I didn’t like about the game. The graphics are undoubtedly one of the best on console, and the sound design places you right in the middle of the original Star Wars trilogy, but something in the gameplay was lacking.

          Eventually, after a while of thinking about the game, I realized it. The devs somehow made shooting down Stormtroopers or Rebel scum as boring as grinding in an RPG.

          In Battlefront, you’re placed into a massive team that can grow up to thirty to forty people, all of which look essentially identical and, aside from a slightly different weapon or special ability selection, play the same too. There’s nothing creative or interesting here. Aside from the six hero-class characters, all the pawn-class playable characters are the same.

          When looking at Overwatch, you can clearly see that each character is different in their own way. Don’t like how Winston plays? Give Tracer a shot. Don’t like her either? Reaper’s ready to play. So on and so forth, until you find the characters that suit you best. Overwatch encourages experimentation and creativity with how you play, unlike Battlefront’s cookie cutter foot soldiers everyone is stuck with.

          There’s also the big problem everyone had with Battlefront’s Fee-to-Pay model right out of the gate. Those who forked over a few extra dollars were given the best weapon in the game, allowing them to dominate their way up the ranks by mowing down low level players repeatedly with no problem. Add in the easy to camp spawn points, and you’ve got yourself a ticket to the top ranks of the generic foot soldiers, all because you were willing to shell out a bit more cash.

          Because Overwatch works more on different characters than different weapons, it doesn’t have this problem, bringing back up the boring characters argument. If you die to another player in Overwatch, you can only blame yourself, and vow to do better next time. If you die to another generic looking guy in Battlefront, more likely than not you’re facing off against someone who paid to win, rather than being simply better than the game at you. You can try to avoid that player again, but with how everyone looks the same, you’ll have a hard time trying to do that.

          That’s not even mentioning how obscenely broken it is to give players a weapon that one-shot kills low level players just because they forked over some cash. I know that Battlefront is an EA game, and EA is all about their money, money, money. But seriously, we can’t sit back and act like this is okay.

          I’ve always been fine with paying elements in games, so long as you can easily get the same items without using some of your hard earned cash. Looking at a game like Hearthstone, even if you pay, you can’t specifically choose which cards you want to buy. You have to go through the randomly generated packs like everyone else. In a way, paying is just accelerating the rate in which you can get the cool stuff.

          Overwatch works on the same principle. The only things that can be paid for are strictly cosmetic. Skins, spray paints, character poses, and so on. If you don’t care for these things, you can walk away completely happy with your $60 purchase, feeling fulfilled.

          If I remember correctly, Battlefront cost around $70 at release, with $20 added on for early access to the Battle of Jakku map, as well as the one-shot gun. That’s a $90 game, with even more microtransactions waiting inside!

          But I’m getting off topic. We’re here to talk about how the next Battlefront can learn from Overwatch.

          I understand that the two are extremely different games, Battlefront being more focused on spectacle than gameplay, and Overwatch having the presentation being the icing on an already delicious cake. But when making a game, the gameplay should always come first. No one will remember your game in 5 years if all you had going for you was graphics and sound design, no matter how good they are. They’ll remember the games that were the most fun to play. Overwatch knows this. PvZ Garden Warfare and Splatoon knew this. The original Battlefront games knew it too. This “new” Battlefront doesn’t know how to be an enjoyable shooter, instead focusing more on the feeling of being in a Star Wars movie.

          Well, if I really were in a Star Wars movie, I wouldn’t want it to be as shallow as Battlefront is. That’d probably mean I was trapped in the Prequel Trilogy.

          Seeing as Battlefront isn’t getting any elements from The Force Awakens, it’s inevitable we’ll see a sequel in that timeline soon enough. So I ask the developers this: next time, try harder than just impressing us with your flashy graphics. Look at shooters that did it right, and borrow from them. Good luck, and may the Force be with you.