Battlefield Heroes Needs Some Backend Lovin'

[Andy Chalk]

Battlefield Heroes Needs Some Backend Lovin'

Battlefield Heroes [http://www.ea.com] has been closed down in order to allow the team to focus on "polishing the backend" - and yes, there will be jokes about polishing the backend.

Senior Producer James Salt said that the beta has been a "tremendous help" in balancing gameplay and eliminating bugs, but the studio now wants to concentrate its efforts on the unseen parts of the game. "You know the old saying about icebergs being 10% above water, and 90% below? Heroes is a little like that. There's the 10% game part you can see, and the hiding 90% is what we call the 'backend'," he wrote in a message [http://www.battlefield-heroes.com/news/closed-beta-update] on the Battlefield Heroes website. "The backend does a lot of things. From running the website's features and looking after the items you have, to collecting the results from each Heroes game and matchmaking players into games."

"We have received lots of great feedback from our beta testers," he continued. "So much so that we are now ready to enter our next phase. On Friday evening (6pm CET, noon EST) we will be closing down the current Closed Beta and moving our focus to polishing the backend." Salt added that he expects the beta to re-open early next year, so obviously EA's plans to have the game out in time for Christmas 2008 have gone out the window. Battlefield Heroes is now targeted for release in the first quarter of 2009.


Permalink

 

[Mr.Bubbles43]

Wasn't this game originally supposed to come out in summer 2008?

Also frankly they can fix all the backend they want, but that still isn't gonna make the game even marginally fun.

 

[HobbesMkii]

Wasn't this game originally supposed to come out in summer 2008?

Yes. Yes it was. I remember, because I found it very frustrating, even more so when they started doing their sporadic "Monitor our site constantly and you'll get a Beta-Key!" giveaways.

 

[DeadlyYellow]

Why the article title? Why must it be able to be taken so out of context?

 

[Digikid]

Stuffed full with DRM junk no doubt.

 

[HobbesMkii]

Stuffed full with DRM junk no doubt.

Errr.. I suppose so. You can't exactly buy the game, because its free. So pirating it is worthless. And, except for the client, all the data is stored online. I think the only thing you might want to steal is the special perks and clothing that you have to buy in order to get. I hear that doesn't work so well, though.

 

[cainx10a]

Stuffed full with DRM junk no doubt.

Errr.. I suppose so. You can't exactly buy the game, because its free. So pirating it is worthless. And, except for the client, all the data is stored online. I think the only thing you might want to steal is the special perks and clothing that you have to buy in order to get. I hear that doesn't work so well, though.

True enough. It's actually good to see EA sponsor free-to-play online games with paid items to bolster your game experience. Although in my experience of games, like Gunbound, and Exteel, paying for items usually mean, paying to create an avatar that can stomp on everyone else with ease.

 

[Andy Chalk]

I wonder if it'll be possible to set up servers that restrict players with paid content. That's the only way I'm going to be even remotely interested in this thing. Free is fantastic and kudos to EA for taking a shot at non-traditional revenue generation, but there are too many other team-based multiplayer options available, either free or so cheap they might as well be (looking at you, TF2) to make BF:H a compelling choice, especially if it's impossible to avoid the inevitable horrible gameplay imbalance that will result when the "I paids" meet the "cheapies."

 

[Jaccident]

the inevitable horrible gameplay imbalance that will result when the "I paids" meet the "cheapies."

I have some experience with micropayment based online games and the one most important thing I learned was that very few people pay for these games so they free-to-play players have to enjoy the experience enough to stay on and play thus creating the world and opponents to keep the pay-to-play players paying. It's a tough balance to strike!

 

[cleverlymadeup]

so they're trying to polish the backend to make it more accessible to ppl?

tho maybe ea has learned something and is making a more stable game for players instead of hearing how much of a pile of crap it is and saying it sux

 

[Phyroxis]

I wonder if it'll be possible to set up servers that restrict players with paid content. That's the only way I'm going to be even remotely interested in this thing. Free is fantastic and kudos to EA for taking a shot at non-traditional revenue generation, but there are too many other team-based multiplayer options available, either free or so cheap they might as well be (looking at you, TF2) to make BF:H a compelling choice, especially if it's impossible to avoid the inevitable horrible gameplay imbalance that will result when the "I paids" meet the "cheapies."

So far the only difference between payers and cheapers is that payers get cool looking shit that does nothing.. while cheapies get not so cool looking shit that still does nothing.

Weapons are all based on in game currency, same with abilities.

 

[Ranooth]

Damm was just starting to have fun with BF Heroes.