$50 for Battlefield 3 online play

"FUCK! People aren't paying to keep playing our MMO's! We better start charging them to play our FPS's to offset it!"
 
The title is a little misleading (of the article). It makes it sound like they will charge $50 a year to play the game online, which isn't what the rest of the article says (will get click click clicks though).

It is just $50 a year for wiping stats and some (probably) junky items.
 
The title is a little misleading (of the article). It makes it sound like they will charge $50 a year to play the game online, which isn't what the rest of the article says (will get click click clicks though).

It is just $50 a year for wiping stats and some (probably) junky items.

Priority in server queues as well.
 
Seems like a good deal to me for $50.

If you're buying the remaining 4 DLC's alone it'd be $60 and you get no bonuses.
 
I guess I could expect to see Elite players jumping ahead of me while waiting in queue.
 
Title is incredibly misleading. The $50 gets you all 5 expansion packs, probably some more bonus content, stat reset options and server queue priority.
 
Electronic Arts will charge $50 for 'Battlefield 3' online play
By Liana B. Baker

It's written by a girl lol.
 
Better get used to this or move on to another hobby.

It costs money to maintain these games and keep them updated. These people do not work for free nor are part of some charity that most here think they are. PC gamers seem to think these devs owe them something, shit costs money. Everyday indie devs who try to cater to cheap ass PC gamers go belly up, because the cash flow isn't there for the resources needed.

Battlefield 3 is easily worth $50/yr but according to some on here it should be sold at a loss and DICE/EA should kiss your ass for buying it.
 
I'm unsure of why this needs it's own thread. Extensive discussion of Call of Duty Elite... I mean Battlefield Premium... has already taken place in the BF3 thread.
 
Thought it wasn't per year, thought it was a one time fee of $50. Guess we'll know here in the next day or so.
 
Better get used to this or move on to another hobby.

It costs money to maintain these games and keep them updated. These people do not work for free nor are part of some charity that most here think they are. PC gamers seem to think these devs owe them something, shit costs money. Everyday indie devs who try to cater to cheap ass PC gamers go belly up, because the cash flow isn't there for the resources needed.

Battlefield 3 is easily worth $50/yr but according to some on here it should be sold at a loss and DICE/EA should kiss your ass for buying it.

Isn't all that maintenance shit supposed to be what online passes are for? Not to mention selling servers to players.
 
Better get used to this or move on to another hobby.

It costs money to maintain these games and keep them updated. These people do not work for free nor are part of some charity that most here think they are. PC gamers seem to think these devs owe them something, shit costs money. Everyday indie devs who try to cater to cheap ass PC gamers go belly up, because the cash flow isn't there for the resources needed.

Battlefield 3 is easily worth $50/yr but according to some on here it should be sold at a loss and DICE/EA should kiss your ass for buying it.

What? You are so horribly confused.
 
I'm not paying EA a single cent for BF3 online play Why the fuck should we have to pay for a fps. $60 not enough for you EA??????

I'll just go back to BF2 and make believe it's 2005 all over again
 
Priority in server queues as well.

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.

I'm not paying EA a single cent for BF3 online play Why the fuck should we have to pay for a fps. $60 not enough for you EA??????

I'll just go back to BF2 and make believe it's 2005 all over again

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".
 
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".

ye, topic title is severely misleading.

But, like i said, whatever, 50 bucks for a dlc that's going to turn out mediocre is prolly not worth my time anyways.

Everyone said B2K maps is going to "revolutionize" BF3, yet, the game still functioned the same and more and more just got let down.

Lots of Penny Savage galore going on in EA headquarters. DLC price is utterly retarded as well. $50 is the price of a whole new game. Why the price isn't around the 30 dollar mark is beyond me. I hate this company so much.
 
Better get used to this or move on to another hobby.

It costs money to maintain these games and keep them updated. These people do not work for free nor are part of some charity that most here think they are. PC gamers seem to think these devs owe them something, shit costs money. Everyday indie devs who try to cater to cheap ass PC gamers go belly up, because the cash flow isn't there for the resources needed.

Lol, what? So you're saying that they should charge a monthly fee for patches, now?

That's insane. The day they do that is the day I give up on new PC games entirely.
 
If it's $50/year they might only give you _access_ to the expansion packs rather than owning it. As with COD Elite, I'm sure you lose access without continued pay.
 
If it's $50/year they might only give you _access_ to the expansion packs rather than owning it. As with COD Elite, I'm sure you lose access without continued pay.

EDIT: Never mind.

I thought this was a one-time payment...$50/yr? Fuck that.
 
Lol, what? So you're saying that they should charge a monthly fee for patches, now?

That's insane. The day they do that is the day I give up on new PC games entirely.

Then quit now and save yourself the time. Maybe take up model trains or something.

It is evident that these companies can not sustain supporting these multiplayer games with a one time fee. If a game is going to be driven by a multiplayer community then it will start being F2P with micro transactions (HoN, LoL, Dota 2, Tribes), or some sort of pay to play (CoD Elite and BF3 Premium are the begining). This will lead to a separation of multiplayer and single player games (which in retrospect are severly over priced, no reason an interactive movie should be $60). The multiplayer games will have longer lifespan and this is a good thing. There is no need for Call Of Duty 14 or Battlefield 8, but keep the patches and content flowing for a fair price to generate revenue and profits.

This makes good business sense, these companies are in business to maximize shareholder profits and make money. Their developers and employees are there to get paid and make a living. They are not there to give you games to play on your leet PC for free.
 
It is evident that these companies can not sustain supporting these multiplayer games with a one time fee.

BULLSHIT! What is evident is that they want to take every cent they can and people like you will believe every word they say.
 
BULLSHIT! What is evident is that they want to take every cent they can and people like you will believe every word they say.

Do you think money just grows on trees and never runs out. Do you realize how LITTLE $60 is for a multi-million dollar game. It is a good thing PC gamers are in charge of the gaming industry as it would be non-existent and bankrupt.
 
Do you think money just grows on trees and never runs out. Do you realize how LITTLE $60 is for a multi-million dollar game. It is a good thing PC gamers are in charge of the gaming industry as it would be non-existent and bankrupt.

Considering I've spent a lot of time on this forum talking about game budgets I'm well aware. However EA's entire defense of Online Passes is that they pay for servers. If EA can't pay for servers that isn't gamer's problem, it's EA's problem.
 
If EA can't pay for servers that isn't gamer's problem, it's EA's problem.

Ignorance at its finest. EA has to generate revenue to pay for servers so that is EA's problem, thus it has to charge for a service that the gamers have to pay to play... THATS CALLED BUSINESS. Generate the revenue or fold up shop... the market will dictate it. I for one enjoy playing and understand that you get what you pay for in this world.

PC gamers should start to understand that or just find new hobbies.
 
EA at e3 right now: we love you for buying our game, because we love you so much for that we want to sell you premium for another 50 bucks - yeah, it's our reward to you from us for buying it!! now give us more money.

:rolleyes:
 
Ignorance at its finest. EA has to generate revenue to pay for servers so that is EA's problem, thus it has to charge for a service that the gamers have to pay to play... THATS CALLED BUSINESS. Generate the revenue or fold up shop... the market will dictate it. I for one enjoy playing and understand that you get what you pay for in this world.

PC gamers should start to understand that or just find new hobbies.

If EA can't pay for servers (which I HIGHLY doubt) then perhaps they shouldn't make games that require them. EA didn't even use that bullshit excuse when talking about Premium at E3. People like you are the reason we have $20 map packs because you will believe all the bullshit coming from these companies.
 
quiet the misinformed thread.

its a one time fee, it includes all 5 DLC's($15 each)..which is what 99% of people will buy it for. It also includes 2 week early access to all DLC's, server que priority(dumb), and some dog tags, knife, camos and other useless junk.

If you dont buy premium, nothing changes from what BF is right now. Other then the que jumping... You can still buy any or all of the DLC's you want and not have to buy premium.
 
quiet the misinformed thread.

its a one time fee, it includes all 5 DLC's($15 each)..which is what 99% of people will buy it for. It also includes 2 week early access to all DLC's, server que priority(dumb), and some dog tags, knife, camos and other useless junk.

If you dont buy premium, nothing changes from what BF is right now. Other then the que jumping... You can still buy any or all of the DLC's you want and not have to buy premium.

For what they're offering it's not a horrible deal. $15-25 (depending if you already have the first DLC) savings. The only problem I see with something like this is it becoming popular and EA believing that means every one of their games should have a service like it.
 
its a one time fee, it includes all 5 DLC's($15 each)..which is what 99% of people will buy it for.

I didn't realize this either at first, but it's not really a "one time" fee, it's a pre-pay of a yearly subscription. So my questions become:

1) How much more content is going to be released to make a monthly/yearly fee worthwhile?

2) If you cancel, do you keep the DLC?
 
BULLSHIT! What is evident is that they want to take every cent they can and people like you will believe every word they say.

Plus, most dedicated servers these days (BF3 included) have to be paid for by the players. So how is this requiring EA to "maintain" servers? Other than maybe the matchmaking/routing servers, but that is minimal bandwidth compared to actual game server load.

If they don't want to pay for that shit then they shouldn't continue requiring you to use THEIR servers and THEIR bandwidth to play their games. Forcing players to pay a monthly fee for that is asinine.
 
Not to defend too much, but it's not like Battlefield 3 DLC has been churned out at a fast pace. The game came out October/Novemberish, and there's been 1 DLC pack. If they had 2-3 I could agree with you, but this DLC is what DLC should be. After the game has been out, months after the hype has died down, they produce more content. I think that's pretty fair.
 
I've said this before: Activision leads and EA follows. This is no different than a monthly sub just a one time fee. Next year, there will be another. If they had the fan base Call of Duty had, they would be charging you $100. Suckaaaas...
 
I wonder about the timing...some of the dlc is dropping after the next batch of shooters enter the market. Will BF3 still have a decent population at that point or will the masses have moved on to Warfighter...etc. If this had come out at BF3 launch it would be more interesting to me.
 
Proof please.

zERTk.png
 
Back
Top