Nowadays, many games offer cosmetics through seasonal battle passes, which often attract more players due to the unique items they provide. Wouldn’t it be interesting if, in the future, Last Epoch also introduced a seasonal battle pass?
I believe that a system like this, focused solely on cosmetic rewards tied to each season’s theme, could help engage more players while also providing the game with a stable source of revenue—without affecting gameplay balance. What do you think?
If they implement a battle pass I’ll go my way since that’s a anti-customer method.
Limited time access to items you then need to spend time in-game on is basically the same as dailies. It provides nothing to do it that way instead of just offering a simple bundle… besides keeping the player inside because of FOMO.
If I see that crap in LE before the game is decently balanced and in a polished state at the earliest I’ll immediately leave and never return, including everyone I know with maybe 1-2 outliers at best.
I hate this response.
1.) it’s coming wether you like it or not
2.) you not preferring it doesn’t mean others don’t. While you may b!tch out and leave the game, you’ll just be replaced by others who it attracts.
3.) there are pro consumer ways to do passes. Look at Helldivers 2 or the finals. Their passes don’t go away. You can pick and choose which one you want to complete at ur own pace. This type of approach to passes I hope more games implement.
4.) you ever play path of exile? While their pass doesn’t take the approach of previous point (3), it doesn’t change gameplay or is shoved in ur face. It’s actually pretty hidden that you could play the whole game and not even think about it.
The end
I don’t think his issue is with having a battle pass. It’s wasting time working on one now when there’s still lots to be done in the game.
Which means I and everyone I know will leave if the developers like it or not 
Simple as that.
I prefer game design to not be predatory on the human psychology.
If you need a form of addiction inducing mechanism maybe the type of content isn’t designed for you. Video games are not meant to be a ‘fix’.
There doesn’t exist a single ‘pro-consumer’ methodology of it. It has never been done and is mutually exclusive to actual pro-consumer methods.
Your example of Helldivers 2 is actually a prime one to showcase how much people have been led into absolute dumb directions.
Timed deals? It’s a digital product, why do you need a times deal? I can understand timed events for holidays as an example… but even then give people the option to achieve those things off-holiday. Anything real-time tied is inherently anti-consumer. We don’t talk about a physical event here or a physical limited product. We don’t have unlimited resources in reality, but we do have more then enough storage space and bandwith to easily provide everyone the respective content hundreds of thousands of times over even. So no reason for a time-based limitation.
Not to speak that the monetization of the ‘passes’ are a pay-to-skip implementation, which is always bad. Play the game to unlock it, as supposed to be done, don’t offer people a option to skip your progression.
The only upside there is that it’s at least not ridiculous for those not paying to unlock things.
Yes, and I still say ‘it’s anti-consumer’. I can enjoy a product and still call out the downsides.
Like their lootboxes (the mystery boxes), their supporter packs which leave the store and the functional payments for stash tabs.
You think just bc something is called a “battle pass” or “mystery box” just automatically means it’s predatory?
You are an idiot if you believe that. You do know they have a shop with cosmetics that you can buy? A lot of people who would consider that predatory, but I’m sure you’re not included, huh? you just said you would leave the game if they were predatory. Yet you’re playing.
I think you are all talk, no bark. When they add a pass, you will continue playing (assuming you do like the game)
You bring up “psychological” and “FOMO”, the truth is YOU are the one in control of your own impulses. Everyone else included. You are in control of whether you buy something or not. You don’t need any cosmetics. The only reason why u should buy cosmetics or a pass is if u love the game you’re playing and want to see it continue. How is THAT predatory???
Are there weak minded people out there who can’t control their spending? Yeah. Don’t know why you are wasting time trying to stop idiots from being idiots. Those people will waste their money regardless. So here you are championing for people like that, and in doing so, kinda being a pain in the arse for a developer who would love to create a steady stream of income so they can provide future content for the players of their game.
Idk how old you are, but it’s not like the 90’s or early 2000’s. Those games were, you bought them, and what you got was what was in the box. These live service games now need to implement things like these to keep going.
No ill will towards you dude. Your frustration is targeting the wrong thing tho. It’s really the people who play and can’t control spending when you get to the bottom of it. And it’s not video games causing that, those people will impulsively spend money elsewhere (that’s the point).
I’m not bothered by it. If a game becomes bad bc of it. I’ll find another game. Easy as that.
But I hope you don’t blame developers.
I just wanna say that I only would consider you completely valid if/when they add a pass and their content started becoming lackluster. Bc then that would mean they aren’t using the money they make with the players in mind. Until then, really no reason to bring it up.
Long story short, if it doesn’t affect gameplay, then I’m here to tell you that you don’t need to buy the pass or any cosmetics. It’s your money, mind, control it. Stop worrying about others. You can’t control them. This is a live service game. It’s inevitable. Especially after Krafton purchase. Only purchase anything if you love the game and want to support.
You end this convo with your response. I can’t stand typing crap like this out bc I just wanna game man. There are so many games I want to play. That’s my problem. I’m not buying all of them, don’t worry about me. Control
Wanna call it ‘season-pass’ then?
Provide me an example of a single ‘pass’ which provided solely upsides to the player without any limitation on real-time investment, it being phased out again if you didn’t finish it or the likes.
Because if they provide a battle-pass and for example make it so you have to do ‘xyz’ and in 3 years time that content is entirely reworked or removed as it’s becoming overly old and you haven’t done it yet… will you be able to finish it?
Doing such a pass ‘right’ is hard, and EHG is prone to do things related to their content sadly ‘not quite right’. So there’s no reason to trust something which 95% of companies use in a detrimental way for the customer in some way or another to do better then them.
Is it tied to real-time limitations? No?
Great!
Maybe first think properly before opening your mouth, if you do that in reality I wouldn’t be surprised if people just don’t interact with you.
Showcases you either:
a.) Have no clue what is predatory and what not despite my last post explicitly going into the aspects of it.
b.) Didn’t read properly what I wrote.
c.) Can’t understand at all what I wrote.
If you don’t understand the difference of a concept that limits your access to something you pay for unless you do a in-game task quick enough versus ‘I buy, I get, no hooks attached’ then I pity you. You’re prone to being ripped off.
Yes, you’re telling that to someone who has AuDHD here… sorry to say it… but my brain literally has no concept of ‘discipline’. If I don’t trick my brain through some ways to uphold basic daily necessities then I’m prone to land in the hospital.
So first off: Maybe don’t assume before you speak.
Secondly: If you got no clue about psychology at all and how the human brain works then maybe inform yourself first.
Thirdly: You should really take another look at how modern understanding of impulses has advanced to understand just how utterly jaundiced your view is by now. People thought so decades ago, it’s been overthrown nigh entirely.
Oh, that I can easily explain!
Looter-based Hack’N’Slash ARPGs which are set up in a progression system like Diablo especially focus on the aspect of loot collection. This is a form of collection mindset, if you don’t have any prevalence to enjoy this then the whole core progression system will at best be boring for you and at worst actively turn you off. Which means it’s very unlikely that you’ll engage with the product in the first place.
The exception is the power-fantasy aspect being so important to your enjoyment that it overcomes that, but even then there’s vastly better options on the market to adhere to your liking then this game, it’s literally the worst genre to pick compared to things like Vampire Survivors, advacent games to that or games like Dwarven Realms for example.
That means you already are likely to have a collectivist mindset in some form, which makes the count of people which have that mindset towards vanity based items in mind also respectively higher.
If there is no time-scarcity attached to it (hence any sort of ‘buy now or it’s gone’) then that’s fine, you’re not prone to have your impulses dictate it having to happen right now, disregarding circumstances besides that.
But if such a thing is there then there’s a subset of people - which are usually the ‘whales’ companies want to sustain them - that have a completionist mindset for those.
That means if you provide them with a limited-time phasing-out set up collectibles then you’ll acquire a short-term rise in engagement before it turns into a net-negative long-term. Which is bad for the company long-term already and also bad for those respective customers.
And then the more severe cases buy those timed exclusives disregarding their real situation to mild or large degrees. Be it using up their savings up to going into debt or in extreme severe cases not even buying food in favor of another acquisition in-game.
Just because you are not prone to it doesn’t mean there isn’t a respective responsibility of the side of the company to keep their customers protected and not directly harm them through their actions.
Oh, that’s simple! Because we life in a society and aren’t underdeveloped savages where ‘might makes right’.
Or would you also argue that we don’t need to help out people which are physically disabled by making buildings accessible for wheelchairs for example? Because it’s the exact same thing, one is simply a mental aspect while the physical one is easier visible.
If so then you’re a lost case anyway, so I recommend to take a step back and re-evaluate what exactly you’re giving off there.
Yes, gladly so! 
Thanks, I’ll keep championing for people which are at risk to have their life ruined through addiction which could be entirely avoided by not it based on real-money value by a significant margin!
I look over at OldSchool Runescape and I can see ‘no… they actually don’t’.
Your argument is moot since there’s examples out there which do it different and function.
You cannot fault an addict for being addicted. You can only fault the environment for not providing a surrounding which makes the addiction not happen.
Studies about that are conclusive nowadays. Look up the initial one where rats have been either isolated into a cage with drugged and non-drugged water access versus those which were given a social environment that functions + a healthy amount of options for enjoyment as rats need it. The usage case of the isolated one was nearly 100% while the usage case of the non-isolated ones was nearly 0%.
Those studies have been expanded after finding that out and led to the modern understanding of addiction and how the vast majority of it is based on external causes and not internal ones. High count of addiction is a sign of a environmental failure which hasn’t yet been remedied.
If you provide an environment which directly causes it then yes… it’s causing it.
Obviously picking a predatory methodology rather then a customer-friendly one is the fault of the developers. Who else? Higher powers?
It’s irrelevant of content quality.