The Finals' Battle Pass Highlights One Major Problem With Live-Service Gaming

screenrant.com:

is a big breakout hit, offering an FPS experience that isn't quite like anything else on the market, but its Battle Pass shows where the game comes up short in a way that exemplifies many players' frustrations with the industry. As a free-to-play title, it didn't take long for to attract a major audience with dynamic destructible environments and fast-paced gunplay. Retaining that popularity could be trickier, however, as the game is currently pushing up against the limits of what can be easily tolerated in some regards.

Any widespread criticism of has never particularly focused on its blood-pumping gameplay, which has gone over well with its target audience. Nonetheless, issues with the Battle Pass aren't the first thing that the game has come under fire over, with some earlier negative buzz focusing on the use of AI voice acting to cover the wide breadth of announcements made in its game show style. is a very modern product in ways both good and bad, and personal interest in the experience can depend on individual tolerance for the bad.

As is essentially the standard for modern live-service titles, uses a Battle Pass as a major mechanic for monetization, doling out rewards based on progress made through playtime. A free version of the Battle Pass spaces out a smaller number of rewards across levels, while paying for the upgraded experience unlocks more consistent momentum with a steady rate of one unlock for each tier. The big problem is just how long the Battle Pass takes, as seems to demand that anyone who wants to invest in the system should be willing to spend exorbitant amounts of time on the game to get their money's worth.

In general, earning enough XP to rank up each level in the Battle Pass averages out to