$50 for Battlefield 3 online play

The only thing that bothers me about it is the server que priority. I think that's a bit of bullshit , we should all have the same chance at getting in , it shouldn't be delegated to those that have paid for premium service. Even Failvision didn't push that "feature" ...

And yea I realize you can always find another server but while its a mild advantage I think its an advantage that shouldn't even be there to begin with.
 
m3ta1head said:
What you've described is literally exactly what they are doing. All separate, the 5 expansion packs (which you WILL be able to purchase individually, at your discretion) will be $15 each. If you were to purchase each of the expansion packs individually, it would cost $75 total.

The premium service gives you all that content, PLUS a great deal more (including a new knife, weapons, weapon/soldier camo, assignments, dogtags, and server queue priority). All of that for $50, $25 less than it would cost to purchase all the expansions individually. For those that can afford to pre purchase all the expansions, the premium service is an excellent option and it will save them money in the long run. For those that prefer to buy the expansions on an individual basis, that option is available too, so you can wait for reviews or whatever before deciding to purchase. The system rewards those that are willing to take a gamble and throw down money on unreleased content, and it also allows for players to purchase individual DLC at their own pace without screwing them with exorbitantly high prices.

For those complaining about the price, let me refresh your memory. Battlefield 2 came out during the summer of 2005 for $50. The first expansion pack, Special Forces, was released in November 2005 for $20. The next two booster packs, Euro Force and Armored Fury, were released March and June 2006, respectively for $10 each. That brings the total cost of all of BF2s DLC to $40. Also bear in mind that Special Forces was a standalone product, making it completely fragmented from BF2 Vanilla.

The premium pack promises to offer MUCH more content than the BF2 expansions did (20 maps, 20 weapons, 10+ vehicles, 4+ game modes, 30+ assignments, etc), and at a similar cost. That sounds like a win to me-I'll personally be upgrading to a premium account when I can afford to. My only qualms with the service are as follows: first, I already paid for Back to Karkand when I preordered the limited edition of BF3, which is a minor annoyance (although the preorder cost was only $42, so it's still hard to complain). Second, I am afraid that 5 separate map packs are going to fragment the BF3 community. It's going to be hard playing matches with friends, especially if they do not have all the content that you might. Finally, I am afraid that after the novelty dies down, most servers will revert back to Vanilla rotation (which is what seems to be happening after the B2K release). Only time will tell how things go.
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more. I don't see why so many people get worked up. The cost is not unreasonable, even without all the added stuff. I'm sure there is a good number of people who don't give a shit about BF3's SP, they bought it for multiplayer. When you did so, you plunked down (presumably) $60 for a multiplayer game with 9 maps. If you preordered and got B2K for free, then we'll say you paid $60 for 13 maps. Here, you are being offered an additional 20+ maps (well say 16 if you have B2K) for $50, and somehow that's too much money? By the time all of the expansions drop, you would have well more than doubled the amount of content in the multiplayer portion of the game. Especially considering each expansion also comes with new weapons and vehicles, and all the other goodies included in the premium pack.

No doubt about it, I'm getting this and not thinking twice about it. I wish EA had come up with this idea before I purchased B2K, but it's a solid deal either way.
 
Thinking about it more, I really think that while the price is fair, the question becomes one of value, in terms of, what portion of the new features and content are actually important/wanted, and of course different people will have different answers for that question.

Speaking for myself, I don't care about assignments. I don't care about other game modes. I don't care about camouflage and other more or less cosmetic enhancements.

I'm surely in the minority here, but I don't care about new weapons, either, and honestly feel that there are already too many weapons in the game for the devs to keep up with.

New vehicles might be interesting, but again, how much will this affect balancing efforts by the devs ? It might be "cool" to add some new vehicles, but I can't say that I've ever really have felt that the game needed them, and as with weapons, I worry a little about what new glitches/exploits/balancing issues they will introduce. I guess we'll see.

I most certainly do care about features like server queuing, and would have liked to have seen a more widespread rejection of such things, but I know better than to expect anything like that nowadays.

So, that leaves maps.

So far we only have information on the first 2 of the remaining 4 DLC. I personally have no interest in Close Quarters, at all. To be clear, I am glad to see the variety and wider appeal that BF3 has brought, but I personally don't play BF for CQC. To those that do, more power to you, I certainly would be last to ever try and take that away from BF. It's just not for me.

Next up is Armored Kill, which certainly looks to be something more in line with what I want out of BF, and is so far the only DLC I am actually interested in.

The last 2 we know very little about. They could be large scale vehicle maps, or linear corridors. Or something completely different. In any case, it's just not possible to make a value judgement based on something we know so little about, and to be quite honest, I think that this might be where some of the drama is rooted, but who knows.

So from my perspective, and speaking only for myself, Premium really doesn't offer much that I actually know that I want, and does herald a feature that I am quite disappointed to see, and absolutely will not support. It may be that Aftermath and End Game become "must haves", but there is no way anyone can know that today, and no way anyone can assign a value to either.
 
cerwinvega said:
Thinking about it more, I really think that while the price is fair, the question becomes one of value, in terms of, what portion of the new features and content are actually important/wanted, and of course different people will have different answers for that question.
Click to expand...

It's always about value. The big arguments come in when people start to inject moralizing or political type stances about certain activities. (No DLC/DRM/EA/Ubisoft ever, no matter what, etc).
 
cerwinvega said:
Thinking about it more, I really think that while the price is fair, the question becomes one of value, in terms of, what portion of the new features and content are actually important/wanted, and of course different people will have different answers for that question.

Speaking for myself, I don't care about assignments. I don't care about other game modes. I don't care about camouflage and other more or less cosmetic enhancements.

I'm surely in the minority here, but I don't care about new weapons, either, and honestly feel that there are already too many weapons in the game for the devs to keep up with.

New vehicles might be interesting, but again, how much will this affect balancing efforts by the devs ? It might be "cool" to add some new vehicles, but I can't say that I've ever really have felt that the game needed them, and as with weapons, I worry a little about what new glitches/exploits/balancing issues they will introduce. I guess we'll see.

I most certainly do care about features like server queuing, and would have liked to have seen a more widespread rejection of such things, but I know better than to expect anything like that nowadays.

So, that leaves maps.

So far we only have information on the first 2 of the remaining 4 DLC. I personally have no interest in Close Quarters, at all. To be clear, I am glad to see the variety and wider appeal that BF3 has brought, but I personally don't play BF for CQC. To those that do, more power to you, I certainly would be last to ever try and take that away from BF. It's just not for me.

Next up is Armored Kill, which certainly looks to be something more in line with what I want out of BF, and is so far the only DLC I am actually interested in.

The last 2 we know very little about. They could be large scale vehicle maps, or linear corridors. Or something completely different. In any case, it's just not possible to make a value judgement based on something we know so little about, and to be quite honest, I think that this might be where some of the drama is rooted, but who knows.

So from my perspective, and speaking only for myself, Premium really doesn't offer much that I actually know that I want, and does herald a feature that I am quite disappointed to see, and absolutely will not support. It may be that Aftermath and End Game become "must haves", but there is no way anyone can know that today, and no way anyone can assign a value to either.
Click to expand...

And that is why they offer two ways of going about doing the DLC which a billion people have described in this thread. You only want one part of the DLC? Oh what do you know, they offer just that set of DLC for a fee when it comes out. Oh, you are interested in all the DLC that they have announced for future updates? Oh and would love to save money at the same time? Oh SNAP! They offer it for an upfront cost at a discount!


Can we please stop beating a dead horse here? They offer something for everyone. One full package or just single packages for people that only want certain DLC. Once you REALLLLYYYY take a look at it, it really is that simple of what I just typed.
 
TwistedAegis said:
It's always about value.
Click to expand...

Right, of course it is. I was just replying more the the "but look at all the stuff you get" posts, because none of us have any idea what we are, or are not, getting, or what any of it will be worth.

I do think that the drama revolves more around the idea that Premium is a blind purchase to a certain degree, and could be seen as an affirmation for EA/DiCE that they don't even have to tell us what we're buying, as long as it's "more". I don't know if I agree or disagree with that, but I can't deny that I at least see that as a possibility.

Having said that, the whole premium vs non-premium thing going on is pretty close to being the most retarded of gaming dramas I've seen in awhile.
 
Lames. said:
And that is why they offer two ways of going about doing the DLC which a billion people have described in this thread. You only want one part of the DLC? Oh what do you know, they offer just that set of DLC for a fee when it comes out. Oh, you are interested in all the DLC that they have announced for future updates? Oh and would love to save money at the same time? Oh SNAP! They offer it for an upfront cost at a discount!
Click to expand...

I am aware of all of that, but, thanks I guess. :confused:


Lames. said:
Can we please stop beating a dead horse here? They offer something for everyone. One full package or just single packages for people that only want certain DLC. Once you REALLLLYYYY take a look at it, it really is that simple of what I just typed.
Click to expand...

No, but what you can do, if you don't want to be a part of this discussion anymore, is not click this thread in the future. It really is that simple.
 
dkoag.png
 
m3ta1head said:
What you've described is literally exactly what they are doing. All separate, the 5 expansion packs (which you WILL be able to purchase individually, at your discretion) will be $15 each. If you were to purchase each of the expansion packs individually, it would cost $75 total.

The premium service gives you all that content, PLUS a great deal more (including a new knife, weapons, weapon/soldier camo, assignments, dogtags, and server queue priority). All of that for $50, $25 less than it would cost to purchase all the expansions individually. For those that can afford to pre purchase all the expansions, the premium service is an excellent option and it will save them money in the long run. For those that prefer to buy the expansions on an individual basis, that option is available too, so you can wait for reviews or whatever before deciding to purchase. The system rewards those that are willing to take a gamble and throw down money on unreleased content, and it also allows for players to purchase individual DLC at their own pace without screwing them with exorbitantly high prices.

For those complaining about the price, let me refresh your memory. Battlefield 2 came out during the summer of 2005 for $50. The first expansion pack, Special Forces, was released in November 2005 for $20. The next two booster packs, Euro Force and Armored Fury, were released March and June 2006, respectively for $10 each. That brings the total cost of all of BF2s DLC to $40. Also bear in mind that Special Forces was a standalone product, making it completely fragmented from BF2 Vanilla.

The premium pack promises to offer MUCH more content than the BF2 expansions did (20 maps, 20 weapons, 10+ vehicles, 4+ game modes, 30+ assignments, etc), and at a similar cost. That sounds like a win to me-I'll personally be upgrading to a premium account when I can afford to. My only qualms with the service are as follows: first, I already paid for Back to Karkand when I preordered the limited edition of BF3, which is a minor annoyance (although the preorder cost was only $42, so it's still hard to complain). Second, I am afraid that 5 separate map packs are going to fragment the BF3 community. It's going to be hard playing matches with friends, especially if they do not have all the content that you might. Finally, I am afraid that after the novelty dies down, most servers will revert back to Vanilla rotation (which is what seems to be happening after the B2K release). Only time will tell how things go.
Click to expand...

wow! A+
 
John1701 said:
So you feel that this company personally owes you something?
Click to expand...
Everyone but charities and family personally owes me something when I give them money. I know this. EA knows this.

EA's stockholders especially know this. They gave EA money, and they personally feel owed a return on investment, so EA is turning to the Battlefield players to make up for SWTOR's flop. And why not? FPS players have long been the kings of instant gratification and suckerhood. Activision has clearly established that people who play first person shooters are more than happy to be the milking cows whenever you need a quick buck.
 
cerwinvega said:
I am aware of all of that, but, thanks I guess. :confused:




No, but what you can do, if you don't want to be a part of this discussion anymore, is not click this thread in the future. It really is that simple.
Click to expand...


Was not ment to bash you. But it simply is not a discussion anymore, it is a bitch fest with the same complaints being said but in new wording.
 
Lames. said:
Was not ment to bash you. But it simply is not a discussion anymore, it is a bitch fest with the same complaints being said but in new wording.
Click to expand...

You may be right, but, my point still stands. If it devolves into a flamefest I'm sure the mods will handle it, otherwise, those that want to discuss this topic will, and those that don't can very easily avoid it entirely.
 
personally i would rather pay $50 as a one time fee for them to maintain this game then to spend $50 on BF4 which would be a NEW steaming pile of bugs, most of us agree that most sequels are not needed, that they could of tossed the stuff into the current game...

Would be interesting to see an FPS follow WoW style set up... new maps, new itemss, new gear. new buildings et cetera..
 
MrGuvernment said:
personally i would rather pay $50 as a one time fee for them to maintain this game then to spend $50 on BF4 which would be a NEW steaming pile of bugs, most of us agree that most sequels are not needed, that they could of tossed the stuff into the current game...
Click to expand...

I disagree. If you were referring to CoD, then maybe this would apply, but the Battlefield series so far hasn't been quite as stagnant and there have been fairly major changes between each release (though there are a lot of similarities between BC2 and BF3, but the graphics change alone was worth it IMO)

MrGuvernment said:
Would be interesting to see an FPS follow WoW style set up... new maps, new itemss, new gear. new buildings et cetera..
Click to expand...

The CoD Elite subscription thing already pretty much did this, and the BF3 Premium thing as well, except you are paying outright at the start for incremental DLC updates.
 
cerwinvega said:
I don't know. Today maybe not at all. Tomorrow ? Next week ? Next month ? Who knows.



To which you expose yourself willingly. You do realize you are complaining....about others complaining ?
Click to expand...

No kidding. Apparently having any sort of complaint is grounds to get bitched at around here. Not to say that all complaints are warranted, but neither are the useless whining about the complaints.
 
cerwinvega said:
Been trying to find more concrete info, all I am seeing so far, is that this is a server cvar, set by server owners.
Click to expand...

I really hope so , if its true then that will be crossing the line in a BIG way on EA's part. I mean not even Activision is doing that with COD Elite service..

I really wanna believe its not true and its some kind of bug or perhaps intentional setting by server admins. :(
 
WorldExclusive said:
After 4+ posts in a row of overreactions, the observation was accurate.
Click to expand...

If you can come up with a positive spin on premium-exclusive servers, regardless of what maps are in rotation, etc., I'm listening.

B2K servers didn't work this way, you only would get booted if the map changed to one you didn't have, not prevented from joining entirely, if vanilla maps were in play.

EDIT: Server owners can do as they please. They pay, they make the rules. I'm just having a hard time seeing how this could possibly benefit the community as a whole.
 
cerwinvega said:
I'm just having a hard time seeing how this could possibly benefit the community as a whole.
Click to expand...

It doesn't. It benefits EA exclusively, by encouraging more people to pay for "premium" access. I wouldn't put it past EA to be offering some kind of kick-back to server owners to encourage them to switch to premium.
 
I don't get it though. Can we buy the DLC on release date or is it buy the premium or fuck off?

I ask b/c the close quarters = I don't care but the armored kill I think I will get.
 
spaceman said:
I don't get it though. Can we buy the DLC on release date or is it buy the premium or fuck off?

I ask b/c the close quarters = I don't care but the armored kill I think I will get.
Click to expand...

I already answered this question the first time you brought it up.

m3ta1head said:
What you've described is literally exactly what they are doing. All separate, the 5 expansion packs (which you WILL be able to purchase individually, at your discretion) will be $15 each. If you were to purchase each of the expansion packs individually, it would cost $75 total.

The premium service gives you all that content, PLUS a great deal more (including a new knife, weapons, weapon/soldier camo, assignments, dogtags, and server queue priority). All of that for $50, $25 less than it would cost to purchase all the expansions individually. For those that can afford to pre purchase all the expansions, the premium service is an excellent option and it will save them money in the long run. For those that prefer to buy the expansions on an individual basis, that option is available too, so you can wait for reviews or whatever before deciding to purchase. The system rewards those that are willing to take a gamble and throw down money on unreleased content, and it also allows for players to purchase individual DLC at their own pace without screwing them with exorbitantly high prices.

For those complaining about the price, let me refresh your memory. Battlefield 2 came out during the summer of 2005 for $50. The first expansion pack, Special Forces, was released in November 2005 for $20. The next two booster packs, Euro Force and Armored Fury, were released March and June 2006, respectively for $10 each. That brings the total cost of all of BF2s DLC to $40. Also bear in mind that Special Forces was a standalone product, making it completely fragmented from BF2 Vanilla.

The premium pack promises to offer MUCH more content than the BF2 expansions did (20 maps, 20 weapons, 10+ vehicles, 4+ game modes, 30+ assignments, etc), and at a similar cost. That sounds like a win to me-I'll personally be upgrading to a premium account when I can afford to. My only qualms with the service are as follows: first, I already paid for Back to Karkand when I preordered the limited edition of BF3, which is a minor annoyance (although the preorder cost was only $42, so it's still hard to complain). Second, I am afraid that 5 separate map packs are going to fragment the BF3 community. It's going to be hard playing matches with friends, especially if they do not have all the content that you might. Finally, I am afraid that after the novelty dies down, most servers will revert back to Vanilla rotation (which is what seems to be happening after the B2K release). Only time will tell how things go.
Click to expand...
 
DeathPrincess said:
Seems kind of silly. Just search for servers with 1-5 free slots. I don't think i've ever been in a queue for more than a second before just refreshing and joining another server.



You don't have to pay to play online. It's just a very badly worded article. Online is still free, just you can pay $50 for some "extra features".
Click to expand...


yeah I was thinking the same thing. BF3 is the one game I have never had real trouble getting into a server. Given I only play hardcore rush 32 (3-4 popular NA servers) but its still never a problem. I would have paid $50 for all the older generation games that had no queue and the dweeb server admins would set it to show 34 slots but only 32 accessible so they are always open.
 
Ok then I didn't see it obviously. Tired as fuck from work and just ground down atm.

I agree with you btw. Seeing as I don't want to play close quarters and do like armored kill.
 
Wow, I can't believe I took the time to read most of this thread. My thoughts? I will probably buy this as I plan on getting all the expansion packs anyway. There is nothing to be worried about here. Reading some of these responses I can only think that some of you motherfluffers need Jesus and tinfoil hats and better jobs.

m3ta1head, thank you for one of the only posts worth reading in this thread.
 
XamediX said:
Wow, I can't believe I took the time to read most of this thread. My thoughts? I will probably buy this as I plan on getting all the expansion packs anyway. There is nothing to be worried about here. Reading some of these responses I can only think that some of you motherfluffers need Jesus and tinfoil hats and better jobs.

m3ta1head, thank you for one of the only posts worth reading in this thread.
Click to expand...

lol The only posts worth reading are the ones you agree with. Nice.
 
Master_of_Sparks said:
lol The only posts worth reading are the ones you agree with. Nice.
Click to expand...

Oh shut up and post another useless website screenshot, troll. :rolleyes: Many people have already commented on the quality of his post regardless of their stance on the issue. It was a well written viewpoint without the fail evident in the other posts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top