Diablo Immortal's Microtransaction Controversy Compared to Battlefront 2's Launch Controversy

gamerant.com:

Diablo Immortal has been mired in controversy since the initial reveal. It has flip-flopped from a bad reveal to good news and decent previews to an encouraging launch but a distressing failure, in terms of reception, as players reach Diablo Immortal’s endgame. Since its launch, it has been mired in even more controversy as players realized exactly how expensive and predatory these microtransactions were.

In fact, it brings to mind the launch of Star Wars Battlefront 2. Credit where’s credit due, as DICE and EA turned that ship around and Battlefront 2 would go on to become remembered as a great Star Wars game, but its launch was surrounded by controversy around its microtransactions. At the very least, DICE and EA responded early on, but Blizzard has been largely quiet. Still, looking at the two, it seems clear Diablo Immortal trumps one of the worst microtransaction debacles in recent history.

Maxroll Discontinuing Diablo Immortal Support

The easiest way to boil downBattlefront 2’s launch controversy is that it would take about $2000 to unlock all of its content. That is a huge chunk of the game locked behind microtransactions; to be fair, it could all be unlocked for free. However, it would take 4500 hours of gameplay, which amounts to about half a year, to do that. Requiring so much of players who bought a full-priced AAA game didn’t go well. Again, it’s worth highlighting that Battlefront 2 corrected course—now, it remains to be seen if Diablo Immortal does the same, given its huge initial launch.

While this was the height of microtransaction controversy in 2017, Diablo Immortal’s approach makes it look like child play. Its design is predatory and it encourages a quick, more gambling-like approach to getting good stats