EA have been too silent

@LordDarthRossi  the original SW: Battlefront II (2005) isn't owned by EA. That belongs to Disney now and belonged to LucasArts previously and was developed by Pandemic for them, before Pandemic was bought by EA, so EA can't do nothing about it. Only Disney can decide if they want to port it or remaster it and who will get that job.

As for porting the new one on the XBox 360, i don't think that can be done, as the old XBox 360 might not have the power to run it. The newer Frostbite versions are quite demanding in terms of hardware and XBox 360 is a 11 years old console.

@chinnyreckon  you might be right, though that thread is about a lot of things. 

As you can see in my answer, i've tried to cover as much as i could. 

EA got the right to develop new games, but the old games are retained for distribution by Disney. EA has no say in that and they can only do something about the games developed by themseleves (even the KOTOR 1, which was developed by Bioware, is published by Disney in collaboration with Aspyr, Aspyr handling the MAC and mobile releases of the series, as KOTOR was developed by Bioware for LucasArts and published by LucasArts)

So porting the old games is a no go for EA, unless Disney lets them do that. EA was allowed to continue to operate SWTOR, as Disney had no MMO on PC for SW. For how long that will still be possible, we will see. 

Porting an old game means having access to the original code, having people that are at least familiar with the code (ideal would be to have on the payroll people that worked with that very code), having the production documents and so on. It's a LOT of work. 

Gearbox remaster of Homeworld encountered a problem when they've discovered that the code for the Homeworld Cataclysm was lost. Beamdog met such a situation while trying to remaster Baldur's Gate 1 (some parts of the code where lost) and Icewind Dale 2 (hence, no Enhanced Edition for IWD2). Trouble with very old games is that sometimes companies lose things because a number of factors: lack of backups, poor storing conditions, lost production documents and so on. It might not be the case for the old SW Battlefront games, as Lucas was quite careful with certain things, but the people that were familiar with the code are long gone. 

But, there is a but...EA has its third chance next year (with the launch of the final movie of the new trilogy). If they can manage to bring more of the features wanted by the fans in the final game, then we might have a Battlefront that could surpass the SW: Battlefront 2 from 2005. 

There are quite a few nice things in SW: Battlefront 2 2017 and there are a few bad things, too. Not gonna mention the bad, as they were debated too many times. But there are some nice things done right. Plus, the game looks gorgeous. I don't know if the game can go from a 7 (my personal score) to a 8.5 and i actually doubt that they can save much at this point, but i do hope that the third one will learn from the 2015 and 2017 editions and will make the game that the fans want. EA has the resources to make a great game, the only thing they need is to assume some risks (something hard to do, as they are a public company and shareholders and investors are usually adverse to risk). If they can ignore for once what the people with the money want, they might actually be pleasantly surprised by their customers.

And yes, i would love a remaster of the SWBF 2005😉

Thanks for such a comprehensive reply @ivrognard. I know the devs wanted BF2 2017 to be an amazing experiance for players. I personally think it is a beutiful game and the simulation of being a character in the world or flying a space ship is fantastic. I am sorry for the devs that other aspects of the game out of their control skewed peoples apreciation of what they had done. Indeed without those elements i am sure people would be raving about how great it is.

@chinnyreckon  trouble with the public companies is that they have to answer to shareholders and investors for any profit loss. If some of those shareholders and investors are okay with certain amount of risk, most of them are not comfortable with the notion. So such a company has to play it as safe as they can and maximize the profit, most of the time the result being the public outrage and a lot of time the outrage is directed towards the people that had no say in how the final product will be. Devs have to stay into the budget, middle management has to keep the devs into the budget and the timeframe allocated for developing and the big guys have to answer to the shareholders and investors for any missteps. It's a vicious circle, in which the ones that are getting the flak are the devs and the mid management, the people that have the least power in the whole development process. 

The sad part in this, is the fact that the game actually gives that SW vibe. Something that i didn't see since the KOTOR series, the old Battlefront series and the old Dark Forces series. EA still has a lot of talents, but they really need to start using them properly. And they really need to start taking some risks. Baby steps. AAA development today has the budget of a Hollywood blockbuster movie, so they should deliver something mind blowing. And we are again at the risk part of the problem....And, yet, the americans said the famous "No pain, no gain". That was the principle on which the american economy was built, after all. Taking insane risks, hoping for the best. The big fortunes where built upon that. And there is also the famous "The customer is always right" (even when he isn't, but that is a different story). I am not saying that the gaming companies should always listen to the customers. But they should actually consider what most of them would like to see in their games. I rememberthe times when those companies were making market surveys really often, surveys with well-thought questions, that would help them to deliver hit games on the market. Sadly, this happens all too rare in our days. 

Ah, well...got carried again. Maybe because i love games too much. And SW (and science-fiction, in general).

Yep @ivrognard everyone knows its cos of the cooperate big wigs influence. However games like Uncharted are really really big and make stacks of cash cos people love them and want them. They end up selling more by reputation too. That is a single player, closed world and story based game, not the multiplayer, open world, microtransaction model that EA are instisting upon everywhere. Athough I suppose the latter is more of a sure thing financially when a new franchise is concerned. I so wanted Vicerals Star Wars game which was like Uncharted but in the Star Wars universe. It would have made stacks of profit but EA binned it. The Star Wars IP alone would have made it a sure thing. But not as much profit as a multiplayer, open world game within which you could then impliment microtransactions. So its is not just about investors fear of risk, its is also about investors wanting profits maximized.

@chinnyreckon  pretty much this. But i disagree on the fact that everyone is aware of how things are working. Some people, yes. Most of them, not so much. They do have a few ideas about it, but they don't see the whole picture. Kind of refreshing meeting someone that can look at the both sides of the problem. Most of the pressure is on devs and the middle management from both customers and upper management/investors/shareholders. Right now you have to have nerves of steel to work in a AAA gaming company (or any multinational corporation, by extension).

With the rise of the indie companies and the AA companies that are coming strong, occupying any niche market left empty by the AAA companies, the big players are even more pressured for results and profit. Somewhere, something might go terribly wrong. I hope that day will never come, though.

@ivrognard : "Kind of refreshing meeting someone that can look at the both sides of the problem."

I used to work in the games industry until arround 2004. So I know what deterimes what and how studios choose to develop projects, which includes a vast amount of preasure from publishers with whether they will fund them or not. And I also know how much devs take pride in their work and want people to enjoy it and dont care at all about profits. All of them do it for the love of the job and the game. I used to be one.