This has been suggested multiple times already and the main drawback is always the problem with matchmaking if you’re gonna segregate the paying from the non-paying. This system is better for non-BR games where you don’t need 60 players. Respawn can implement this in Arenas but almost no one plays that mode already and this system will worsen that mode’s MM.
"In my opinion the use of the "f2p" format is dated, it was a time when cheating was less prevalent and in todays time, its rampant and abused for all types of reasons. The only real way to reduce the cheating is to add a model where it cost you someting to play, so you have something to lose."
I respectfully disagree with this. Overwatch not going f2p and OW2 will be the death of that franchise since Blizzard doesn't want to move away from their tradition $60 multiplayer game and then expect you to pay more in the game. Try waiting for a single match for at least 10-15mins just to fill up a 12 player match, now try doing that in a BR for 60 players.
I get that you would like to at least make it harder for cheaters and smurfs to play, but I'm pretty sure there are other better ways. This is EA, I'm 1000% sure they already thought of milking more money from players.
It is a complete fallacy that paying for a game stops cheating.
Paying games have just as many cheaters.
it is the popularity of a game and ease of writing the cheat code versus anti-cheat code that determines how much people try to cheat.
I still argue differently. Fortnite and Overwatch (Blizzard's game is trash but their anti-cheat is good) are both immensely popular games but with less cheating because of the dedication both their companies do to shutting down cheaters. One is free to play and the other is pay to play. But cheating is rampant in plenty of either pay or freemium games. It's Apex that gets the attention, I'd argue, because it is probably the most popular game with the most cheating.
Not saying Respawn doesn't care, but I seriously doubt EA is bothering to spend the resources they need to fight cheating. Fighting cheating is a cost, so no company wants to do it. But if you start losing players in droves because of it, theres no cost like no income.
Apex gets away with it so far because it is still popular. I don't really think people are interested in quitting the game over cheaters.
@KelRiever@Cheese9Man
My response to several Replies: The idea of "seperating" servers for F2p and P2P is not an idea i put foward. The game will still be F2P the only "cost" "P2P" if you will, will be the use of legendary tokens(in game currency) to access the "ranked" mode per season, or an alternate route is to just purchase the battle pass (apex coils, real cash currency) which unlocks the "ranked" mode per season. So there is no seperation, the only difference is ranked mode is behind an entrance fee(paywall). Trios duos etc all still free inluding arenas.
Another arguement people put foward is "their wont be enough people to fill the 60 man slots, and long wait times if you charge for ranked mode" I completely dissagree, If we really think about the issue. How many people have put Apex Legends down because of the cheating? I truly believe if Respawn took a stance on cheating and attempted something new to curb ceating. A p2p ranked mode, 1000s to 10s of 1,000s would see that as Respawn is taking a stand and atleast attempting something new to help relieve the cheating problem. In the end the ammount of people playing ranked would still be the same. The ammount of non willing to pay participants of ranked mode would be offset by people coming back willing to pay to play ranked mode in hopes of cheating being detered.
Community Manager
