Tagged: Battlefield 3′s Premium Service Confirmed

By Jim Rossignol on May 31st, 2012 at 8:00 pm.


EA have confirmed that Battlefield 3 is to get a “Premium” service, apparently allowing people who purchase it early and immediate access to future DLC, as well as a greater range of items and customisation options. BFBlog appears to have the details, although this is unconfirmed by EA, who say the details are to be announced on June 4th. The “leaked” details include the price: $50 as a one-time fee. For that you’ll reportedly get all the existing and future DLCs, as well as: 20 maps (in total, presumably?), 20 new weapons, 10+ new vehicles, 4 new game modes, 30+ assignments, unique in-game knife, dog tags, and camos, unique weapon camos, and a bunch of other stuff.

Hmm. I can see why this might sell, but personally I ran out of patience with BF3 within a few weeks of launch. Perhaps I’ll head back after the summer, but it just didn’t hook me.

, , .

147 Comments »

  1. Ertard says:

    Does it include regular patching and some sort of communication with the community? No?

    The wait for Planetside 2 continues then.

  2. Alexander Norris says:

    That is a pretty ludicrous price for paid map packs. If the maps had been free and the pack expansion-priced instead of costing more than the base game, I’d probably have gotten it.

    • Premium User Badge

      Smashbox says:

      Ludicrous doesn’t even begin to describe it. EA’s ideal customer would pay for the “Limited Edition” which includes day 1 DLC for somewhere around $80 – a pre order made up to SIX MONTHS before release (nice bit of interest collected on that money) – and then pay an additional $50 for continued support. That’s $130 dollars, btw, or more than TWO BRAND NEW RETAIL GAMES. Also equivalent to more than THREE retail games from a couple of years ago.

      Insane, stupid, cynical. Some people will do all this, mostly out of love for DICE or Battlefield. Sad.

      • Premium User Badge

        wengart says:

        The limited edition was the same price as the actual game and was more or less the preorder bonus.

    • deadly.by.design says:

      Selling maps is evil, as it divides the community.

      Sell hats instead.

      • akeso says:

        This right here.
        Although both EA and Valve are both reaching for your wallet, Valve structure actually BUILDS community (I have met plenty of people through trading) whereas EA’s breaks up community.

        This, more than anything, is why Origin isn’t seeing any real growth in user base.

      • LionsPhil says:

        This is why the smart devs/publishers work out how to sell maps in such a way that people might actually be able to play with their friends on them. See TF2′s map-stamps, or Sanctum/upcoming Frozen Synapse expansion’s only-the-host-needs-the-map (and I’m pretty sure Sanctum is nowhere near the first, but names aren’t coming to mind).

        • max_1111 says:

          Magicka is like this too.
          I nearly crapped my pants (with joy) when i found out that my friends who don’t have Vietnam or The Stars are Left can still play along with me as long as i host the game.

      • GSGregory says:

        Its not even jut the maps but weapons and what not. Its f2p p2w meets retail….. aka the shittiest combination ever that makes me glad I never touched bf3.

    • johndoe says:

      Well I have loved all the battlefield games, especially this one. Ive been busy playing other games and got a bit bored of BF3+B2K to play much recently. But I was waiting and looking forward to the new DLC coming out. So this was a pretty much a definate buy for me too till I heard this…

      The Premium service includes: Two weeks early access to DLC

      I might be wrong but… The DLC is finished and ready for release when its complete/finished right? So no-one can get it ‘early’ anyway, only when its done? So how does the premium service get it two weeks early?

      Are they getting a free beta test of it, or are we getting a ‘two week delay’ punishment for not paying them for elite/premium? If there was no such thing as premium would I have got it two weeks early too?

      • Commisar says:

        what it means is that you get it early. It is finished at LEAST a week before the PS3 gets it, as the PS3 gets it one week before the 360 and PC do. So don’t worry.

  3. deadly.by.design says:

    Everything else feels expensive and slow since I started playing Tribes: Ascend.

    • diamondmx says:

      I would say “Except the progression”, but BF3′s progression is actually just as slow.

      • Malk_Content says:

        Well it is faster but without choice. If it was like tribes I could have fun playing assault until I had the unlock points to make Engineer fun (exactly what I did with Tribes ala Soldier/Pathfinder and Technician.)

  4. SquareWheel says:

    So, for the price of a full game, you get what is normally included in a full game?

    • Silvermarch says:

      Uh, no. These are more than just map packs. Its miniature expansion packs.

      • akeso says:

        I wasn’t aware new weapons, vehicles, and maps counted as an expansion these days.

        Makes what skyrim is doing sound like a whole new friggin game in comparison.

        • Brun says:

          For a competitive, multiplayer FPS, what else could you put in ANY potential expansion besides maps, vehicles, and weapons? That’s pretty much all the game is! Did you even think about that comment before you wrote it?

          • Aedrill says:

            You could also put, I don’t know, a completely new singleplayer campaign, or new game modes, new environment to fight in, like under water, or space, or pink unicorn world, or whatever… Is it really that insignificant to you? Just because this game is focused on multiplayer doesn’t mean it has to boring and repetitive.

          • nakke says:

            >Just because this game is focused on multiplayer doesn’t mean it has to boring and repetitive.

            Which is why they are putting out new maps, guns etc. Derp?

  5. misterT0AST says:

    The “and” at line 2 should be an “an”, I think. Delete that D, and then get rid of this comment, we’ll pretend like it’s never happened.

    • methodology says:

      i read it as they get early and immediate access to dlc’s not that they need to purchase it early to get immediate access.

  6. Brun says:

    It’s worth pointing out that $50 is likely the same as or cheaper than what you would pay for all of the DLCs bought individually (assuming $15 price point for each).

    • Phinor says:

      It’s probably much cheaper to buy the DLCs individually because you can source pretty great deals for those. I paid 8 euros for the Close Quarters pack. 8 euros times four is 32€, the premium pack is 50€. The incentive in this deal is that you are not being demoted to a second tier player and you pay quite a bit extra for that.

      • Hug_dealer says:

        to bad you actually get 5 packs instead of 4, along with some other nice perks.

        • shaydeeadi says:

          One of those packs is Back to Karkand though, which practically every day one or pre-order got included.

          • Hug_dealer says:

            not everyone has already purchased Battlefield 3. The game is still on shelves selling,

    • Commisar says:

      good point, but RPS HATES EA SO MUCH, they can’t realize this fact.

  7. Phinor says:

    Couple of things I hate about this but mostly it’s the fact that they are now punishing people who buy their “regular” DLC by delaying it another two weeks (in addition to the one week delay PS3 already causes). In addition to that, they are moving regular DLC buyers to second tier gamers by giving premium pack buyers priority over server queues. What a nice way to handle your customers.

    Now the easy answer would be to buy this premium package but the value doesn’t meet the price. You can get the same four pieces of DLC for much cheaper by hunting proper deals and while we don’t know it yet, I’m pretty sure EA won’t be offering any deals on this premium package.

    Mandatory whine: DICE should concentrate on fixing the game (for example the UPNP support they broke six months ago) instead of adding way too much new content for their game. By too much I mean there comes a point when the player base can no longer supply enough players for 40+ maps and ten different game modes at the same time.

    • Meusli says:

      Yeah, the server priority nonsense needs to be dropped or it will be a PR disaster for them. Not that they will as they never listen.

    • SkittleDiddler says:

      The queue-jump offer is what finally drove me to finally put EA on my boycott list. Selling early access to map packs and DLC content is one thing, but allowing players to jump ahead in queue lines just because they’re paying extra is just plain elitist.

      This sucks. I really enjoy BF3, and I was looking forward to the final two expansions. Not any more.

      • cube911 says:

        Exactly! As a read what is included with the premium pack, i just felt sick. This is wrong in so many ways. I love the game, but they’re not getting anything from me anymore.

    • perruci says:

      The limited edition was the same price as the actual game and was more or less the preorder bonus.
      Agen Sbobet

  8. Premium User Badge

    Smashbox says:

    I bought the game at full price and I will not EVER give them another cent for it. This kind of practice INFURIATES me. How can anyone not see it for what it is: a cynical milking of their loyal customer base.

    • Hmm-Hmm. says:

      Yeah.. this sort of practice is just unacceptable. Well, it should be. Now all we have to do is convince the fans.

      • Sparkasaurusmex says:

        Here’s a BF3 fan who won’t buy it. Only one of the announced DLCs interest me anyway.

      • max_1111 says:

        This always makes me wonder just how far Publishers/Developers can (or will?) push their consumer base before it finally snaps…
        Will there ever be such a breaking point?
        If so, i’m ever so curious as to what would do it.

        • DodgyG33za says:

          Dunno, but if the D3 debacle is anything to go by, pretty damn far.

          EA almost lost me with the Origin Beta thingie (why the fuck you can justify releasing a game on a beta downloader I have no idea) which still gives me the shits as it loses my region/favs every time it updates. If this is there model then I am off elsewhere.

          Bring back local hosting and mods – happy to lose the stats (or accept that they may not be comparable to other peoples). Oh, and playing against bots too.

  9. Fazer says:

    It’s funny to see this in comparison to Humble Indie Bundle, where you can get many games and soundtracks for a penny.

  10. Stevostin says:

    Either it’s <$25 and on Steam, either it's never for me.

    • Terragot says:

      This. I’m not tight I’m just on a very low income with very high bills. I genuinely am poor EA, and gaming CAN be cheaper than hitting the bottle, but those lines EA, those lines are becoming blurred…

    • Commisar says:

      BF3 is $30 on Gamersgate RIGHT NOW.

  11. Koozer says:

    I miss Battlefield :(

  12. Armageddon says:

    This series is dead to me

  13. downgrade says:

    I was hoping Battlefield could have stayed the smart(er) alternative to CoD with their ubermonetization and general disrespect for their customers. Guess I was wrong.

    They can stick all their future Battlestuffs where my wallet don’t shine.

    edit: they could have at least announced all this stuff before release (like activision). I would have known to stay away from it from the get go.

    • Snuffy the Evil says:

      “You don’t beat Call of Duty by being Call of Duty. You beat Call of Duty by making a better game”.

      • downgrade says:

        The Game is definitely better. That is not the issue I have with this.

      • CorruptBadger says:

        the thing is, the problem with call of duty isn’t the game, the core mechanics of it are simple so to provide easy feedback and enjoyment, the problem with call of duty is its monetization (i.e a gazillion map packs, an “elite” service that is expensive and useless and a community that is worse than that of LoL). Now EA have also decided they were dumb not to copy activision, they’re monetizing every franchise they have with an established fanbase, first the ME3 Prothean bull shit, then the battlefield weapon packs, now a crappy elite style servide for battlefield.

        A service that not only provides tips tricks and organisational help, but benefits you with queue priorities and exclusive content. Pfft, i feel dirty even buying the game now

  14. kaffis says:

    Yet more proof that EA hates gamers. ;)

    And they wonder why I don’t trust them enough to even make an Origin account, let alone prefer their digital distribution service over others.

  15. Groove says:

    I realise they’ve already sold most of the copies they’re going to sell, but this makes a hugely prohibitive barrier for new players. It must make economic sense or they wouldn’t be doing it, but…..I have a hard time imagining how it will work, especially in the long term.

    • DodgyG33za says:

      Would be very surprised if they didn’t package it with the game for newbies. The $50 will be aimed at those still playing with their “bird” that want to look as well as play !33+

  16. Snuffy the Evil says:

    This one-for-the-price-of-two deal isn’t really doing anything for me. I don’t think I’ll even bother to touch Battlefield 3 now.

  17. westyfield says:

    Haha, yeah, no.

  18. MonkeyShines says:

    Remember when Dice said that they would NEVER sell map packs?

  19. Artificial says:

    These sorts of schemes just mean I’ll never buy a Battlefield game ever again. I’m so glad I passed on BF3, I knew it would end up with DLC overload.

    • grundus says:

      Seems like it’s either got to be DLC overload or a new, full price game every year which is essentially a DLC except it removes old content as well. I’m personally far more in favour of regular DLC, the Call of Duty model is astonishingly arrogant. At the end of the day, though, it’s all completely optional anyway.

      • elmo.dudd says:

        I understand a lot of people don’t like CoD, but the sequels change more from the previous than the likes of Doom 2 did to Doom. There are strong preferences among the CoD community between MW1/2/3/BlackOps (I never hear anyone advocating for WaW) because of rather significant differences that don’t bullet point well, but are impactful. The handling of perks, player rewards, and inventory as a whole changes between the games. A lot of people look forward to Black Ops 2 because it would bring back the CoDPoints currency (earned in-game, no Real Money bs) which you could use to unlock attachments and camos at your discretion instead of the grinding for kills using particular equipment. People looked forward to MW3, and enjoyed it, because of the additions of the Support strike package (rewards help your team, point accumulation doesn’t reset on death), the Specialist strike package (you don’t earn UAVs, or Choppers or anything – just more perks – emphasis is on your personal gunplay), and the changing from killstreaks to pointstreaks (flag captures, taking out radar or choppers, taking out sentry guns all go to your next reward).

        In short, to each their own, but CoD installments change enough in multiplayer alone that people have strong preferences between them. I myself enjoy MW3 for competitive multiplayer, but if I just want some general military shooty action for a minute, I go for BlackOps because it has bots, so I can tell my wife with certainty “just 10 minutes” and unlock using CodPoints the exact config I want.

        • DrGonzo says:

          That’s a stupid example. Doom 2 to Doom 1. But then look at the differences between Doom 2, Quake 1, Quake 2, Quake 3 etc.

      • Malk_Content says:

        It isn’t really optional unless by that you mean “well you can just not play.” If you play and don’t pay this will have a severely negative impact on your gameplay experience. Even the most balanced of new weapons will make players who have them more powerful because more choice, more tailoring to your own play-style = more power. That and finding matches will be harder as servers will become split for those with and without the new maps/game modes.

        • grundus says:

          Well I meant you just have to weigh up the pros and cons and make your decision, like anything else there’s a certain value threshold which is entirely subjective. I will probably pay for this because I’m a sucker for Battlefield, but if it were for, I don’t know, Sniper Elite V2 I definitely wouldn’t… So it is optional, it just depends on the player. And also with BF3 there’s the fact that the packs are very different; there was the B2K expansion which was sort of a no-brainer because the maps were just so much better than the vanilla ones, but Close Quarters is aimed (so everyone says) at the Call of Duty crowd, and the next one is all armour-based; one pack is all indoor maps and the other has the largest map ever seen in a Battlefield game, apparently. They’re targeting very different audiences, so with DLC you can pick and choose, more than you can with Call of Duty because you just get the whole lot refreshed all in one go, except you also lose the old maps and weapons.

          Replying to the comment above this one:
          Call of Duty is more than just a re-skin, but not a lot more. Not enough to warrant charging full price, in my opinion, especially when you consider that all the maps from each game only have about a year to live, you might get one or two resurrected in a DLC but otherwise they’re forgotten about, and the maps are a huge part of the game. I might’ve played Black Ops for more than two weeks if I could’ve been playing for COD points on Vacant or Karachi, but as it is the maps were just so dull. I must admit that the minor improvements are quite interesting to read about, but that’s just it; they’re not a big enough change to warrant buying the game all over again for, particularly when there’s the risk that the maps will suck.

  20. Moraven says:

    Sounds similar to CoD Elite service, which sold millions.

  21. rusty5pork says:

    Back in the day, we called these “Expansion Packs.”

    I’ll take this over microtransactions any day.

    • Tams80 says:

      Just look at Battlefield Play4Free. This is indeed preferable.

    • Vorphalack says:

      Back in the day , we would have called this an expansion pack divided by five to gouge a larger hole in the customers wallet. Funnily enough, that’s also what it is in the present day.

      Caving in and buying this because it is marginally less distasteful than micro-payments is just weak justification for compulsive purchasing.

  22. grundus says:

    Damn it. I like BF3 a lot, it’s the first game I’ve ever joined a clan to play and when we’re all online and in squads it’s almost the most fun I’ve had shooting things online; second only to Arma II (I haven’t tried Day Z yet though). I play BF3 several times a week, some weeks I play several rounds a night, so if this does add content you can’t get any other way I might have to pay for it. In my defence I don’t play any other online shooters (except for Arma II), I don’t buy many games any more (except for the odd indie bundle, really good sales, games I’ve been waiting for for ages (this year that has involved Sniper Elite V2 and will involve Borderlands 2, but that’s all) and racing sims) and if this is just a one-off payment ever and not a yearly thing like COD Elite I might give it a shot.

    • rockman29 says:

      In any case, I’m sure RPS will have a fantabulous PlanetSide 2 clan we can all be happy in :o)

  23. Euphoric says:

    If you haven’t bought, or don’t play the game – then why do you care?

    It’s NO different than the CoD Elite Service, even the same price – yet you guys think EA came up with this idea? You can blame Activision for ruining FPS games and slowly turning them into MMO cashcows. They set the precedence right after ruining CoD.

    • Brun says:

      Haven’t you been reading the Diablo threads? They care because they derive hollow fulfillment from belittling complete strangers for making the “wrong” decisions. It makes them feel smarter than someone else.

      • Vorphalack says:

        Or possibly people care because the decisions major publishers make influence the entire industry, and supporting anti-consumer business practices is detrimental to all gamers.

        Or possibly people care because, despite what you might want to believe, not all people are dicks, and some genuinely want to help other people make more informed purchase decisions.

        Or we could go with your theory that anyone with an opinion is a spiteful bastard, rolling around in a paddle pool full of schadenfreude and tears. But that’s horse shit, so pick one of the above.

      • Snakejuice says:

        I completely agree! The only reason to complain about someone making decisions that affect something you care about in a negative way, is to make yourself feel smarter than someone else, it just makes too much sense to not be so!

      • subedii says:

        Personally I care because it splits the playerbase, which is a bad thing at the best of times, and there are definitely other ways to monetise whilst still keeping the playerbase cohesive.

        That and the very idea of queue priority for premium, which is freaking terrible terrible TERRIBLE.

        But glad to see you’re taking after your own post and belittling other people in order to make yourself feel smarter.

  24. alundra says:

    EA? What’s EA?? Ah, the worst company in the world??

    I really feel sorry for the Wasteland 2 guys, tying their name to Origin and EA is going to hit them hard.

    • Dana says:

      The fuck are you talking about ? BF2 had shit ton of dlcs and expansions as well.

    • Runs With Foxes says:

      What are you on about? Wasteland 2 isn’t an Origin exclusive. They just said it might be sold there, along with many other places. Grow up.

  25. Dana says:

    Mortars don’t spew fire.

  26. Hug_dealer says:

    I hate to break it to all the haters.

    Battlefield 2 featured an expansion pack and 2 booster packs.

    The booster packs for BF2 are the same thing we are getting in battlefield 3. But the fact is that the booster packs we get now have more content than the ones we had before.

    These booster packs are nothing new. Anyone complaining now should shut up and sit in a corner. Booster packs were coming out 6 years ago for BF2. You cant start complaining now, esp when the booster packs now add more maps, guns, and other content than the old ones. We would have gladly bought more content when we were playing battlefield 2.

    Keep in mind that you get 5 booster packs for for $50. Sure most of us own the first. but look at it like this. 5 x $15= $75, 4 x $15 = $60. Any way you cut it, this is a discount, and you get even more content.

    No one hated when BF2 released its expansion pack special forces, or the booster packs, or when BF2142 released Northern whatscalled. Or when BF1942 released 2 expansion packs. All that split up the community back then, but no one complained. We welcomed additional content. Now its cool to hate. Yep, you were owned. I hope all you schmucks skipped every other battlefield game because of their dastardly plan to support their game with additional content at a good price.

    Also, this is nothing like COD elite. Cod elite is a monthy sub that lets you rent the additional content, cancel and you lose your access. BF Premium is all additional content coming out for the game at a reduced price if you are willing to preorder it. Thats a deal. There is no deal with COD elite.

    • Euphoric says:

      You’ve gone and done it now, you brought LOGIC into the equation. Keep an eye out for forehead bruises.

      BUT BF2 DIDN’T HAVE ORIGIN *whine*

    • BwenGun says:

      My thoughts exactly.

    • vasek45 says:

      THIS. You, mister, are awesome

    • Euphoric says:

      According to the CoD Elite FAQ, it is an annual $49.99 fee and they release monthly content. However, you do NOT lose the content if you let your membership expire.

      • Hug_dealer says:

        you are right. they have changed how it works since they originally announced it. I cant believe that its still not out for PC yet though.

        • elmo.dudd says:

          Don’t forget that Elite is the metrics/trends/tactics service, and Elite Premium is the pay form that immediately unlocks maps on availability, and lets you in early. It is silly they don’t have it rolled out to PC yet though. A friend of mine has made good use of Elite’s heatmaps to track the places he is the most vulnerable at and has adopted his play style for the better.

    • defunkt says:

      Yep, this. Gamers are losing… perspective.

    • shaydeeadi says:

      A bit after the fact, but about 2-3 years ago, they made all the BF2 expansions included in a patch for free and now they are all played in one list by everybody since they realized they split everyone up. Now they are doing it again, but this time I doubt they will bring it all back together. What a shame.

    • Premium User Badge

      piratmonkey says:

      Thank you for saying this so I didn’t have to.

    • Snuffy the Evil says:

      On the other hand, the booster packs for 2 and 2142 were eventually released for free, every title (save 2142) received copious amounts of free content and every previous expansion pack added interesting and diverse content to the base game. What do the Battlefield 3 boosters add to the experience that makes them worth the $50 price tag? Road to Rome added a new front and a plethora of new units. Secret Weapons gave us everything from bigger tanks to jetpacks. Special Forces added toys like grappling hooks and crossbows which completely changed the dynamics of any given map.

      What have we been promised with the Battlefield 3 boosters besides “more indoor-focused maps” and “bigger maps”? Are the 20+ new guns noticeably different from the however many that are already in the base game? What does Assault Rifle 1 do that Assault Rifle 2 can’t, and how does that keep the core game from stagnating?

      The Battlefield 2/2142 booster packs were guilty of this. The added content was too little for too much. There was plenty of backlash and the sales were low enough to justify them being released for free later down the line. These booster packs did split the community apart and one of the big reasons I moved on from Battlefield 2 is because I didn’t want to pay $20 for content I didn’t really want just so I could play the game without worrying about getting kicked.

      • Hug_dealer says:

        Really. Battlefield 2 received copious amounts of free content? You mean 3 maps…………………….. 3 maps is copious?????????????????????

        what do the battlefield 3 boosters add?

        20 maps
        20 new weapons
        10+ new vehicles
        4 new game modes

        Lets do some math Special forces added 8 maps. Euroforce added 3 maps, Armored fury added 3 maps. All of those added new guns, and vehicles also. All for the price of $50. Battlefield 3 boosters for $50 provide superior content value.

        If you honestly cant tell me the difference between the Famas and the 416, or the f2000. Then you are clearly a fool. Each of those weapons excels at something different, and need to be used differently. So adding more weapons with other variables also also for more weapons and playstyles.

        There was no backlash about the booster packs. They were popular, and people wanted more. I have no idea where you got your information from, it seems like you just think your opinion was that of the majority. The expansions we given for 3 years after their release. Well after when it could have earned them potentially large amounts of sales. Just like widescreen support.

        At this point, we have no idea what all the expansions will be adding. We do know that they kicked up the destruction a notch for close quarters, because the vehicles arent eating up bandwidth. We also know that there is a new game type. We also know that the map pack afterward is focused on vehicles and large maps, and will offer new vehicle types to play with and unlock. The final 2, we have no idea yet. Only time will tell, we could vary well end up with a 2143 expansion, they have teased it.

  27. TwwIX says:

    The spirit of this franchise died after BF2142 as far as i am concerned.

  28. vasek45 says:

    Why everyone is so angry? The only bad thing is queue priority for Premium. Like we didn’t buy 4-5 map packs with Euro Forces and Armored Fury 6 years ago. Yes, Special Forces was bigger (and incredibly awesome, I still miss it nowadays), but (i’m sorry if I’m wrong) it was also not tagged as 15$ release.
    I’m definitely buying the premium as I’m sure i’m gonna play BF3 for next year and it’s cheaper than buying one at a time.
    And i’d like to point out that this model is better than CoD’s one because we’re paying 60+50 and not 60+DLC+DLC+60+DLC+DLC for 2 years of play.
    By the way, most of you are surely not MMO players, because, well, I’m paying every month for 6 consecutive years as WoW player.

    • Euphoric says:

      Consecutive monthly PLUS $49.99 for every expansion, and with MoP this year thats 4 total.

      And I thought I read somewhere about Activision eluding to a monthly sub structure for CoD at some point. Like I said, they can be blamed for skewing FPS pricing. EA will just get nerdraged on for following…like every other game dev will do at some point.

    • Shortwave says:

      MP DLC like this splits up communities and makes it harder for friends to play together.

      • Hug_dealer says:

        no. It doesnt. You can always play the regular maps with your friends.

        Expansions have been coming out for Multiplayer games for many years. I truly hope you were complaining about bf1942 releasing an expansion.

      • vasek45 says:

        aaand Hug is right again. Friends usually buy expansions and DLC’s together and then they’re playing it together. So nothing splits them up. And if you don’t need it-don’t buy it and stop whining every time new content is announced.
        And to be honest I’ve never seen people complaining about boosters for BF2 or BF2142. Core community was happy for more content while those who didn’t need it played “vanilla” maps. And everyone was satisfied.
        And to be honest I don’t remember people complaining about having more than one expansion pack in past. Nobody said crazy things like “EVERYTHING SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE BASE GAME OMG EXPANSION AGAIN I HATE THIS STUDIO AND I WON’T BUY ITS GAMES ANYMORE”. On the contrary, people were really glad to see more content for their favourite game.

        • Shortwave says:

          The BF2 addons actually had a ton of really good content though..
          Not just a few maps that they are already done and just deciding to trickle out at an insane price.
          Go ahead and compare what you used to get for one low price compared to BF3 now… It was actually game changing, adding new armies, tons of weapons 8 maps. BAM, all at once and I remember paying ten dollars for it not long after it was out.. So what? We wait months on end and get trickled 3-4 maps at a time with nothing else and pay as much as the original game in the end all over again? FOR MAPS that should of just been released for free ages ago to keep the game alive.. Or at least doubled their original map count for a small price… That’s called an addon. Not a shitty little DLC.

          Take a look at BC2 even. They created a whole new “mod” for the game.
          A whole different setting, new weapons, models, vehicles. BAM.
          Ten bucks it cost me. Again!

          So yea, when half of your friends are dumb enough to waste money on it.
          It breaks up the game a bit for people definitively.
          Be it BF3 does have the map selection filter, it’s still just rather sad to see them break them all up into so many different packs. That’s just not going to make it easy TBH. Unless you ALWAYS play on just the original maps. Even just because ONE person on your clan doesn’t have it..

          : /

          • Hug_dealer says:

            neither euroforce nor armored fury added 8 maps. Combined they didnt offer 8 maps.

            You are thinking of special forces that carried a $30 price tag.

            So armored fury and euroforce added new guns and vehicles and maps. The exact same that back to karkand did, new weapons, new vehicles, and new maps.(dont try to say they arent new, the destructed added to each of the maps has turned them into something more than any of the old versions, they couldnt do a simple port.)

          • vasek45 says:

            If Vietnam cost you 10$ it doesn’t mean it cost other people 10$ ;) I Payed more for it. And i’m living in russia, we have lower salaries than you guys.
            And yet again, neither EF or AF added 8 maps and lots of content. It was 15$ DLC on par with BF3 ones. You’re talking about 30$ Expansion Pack. And i’d like to point out AGAIN that noone complained about community being splitted and about price for NEW content. Only valve can release free content updates. Or the studios whose games are F2P/have subscription fee.
            Finally, AF and EF servers were a bit deserted compared to SF and Vanilla. People who wanted it-played it, those who didn’t-did not. Because vanilla and SF offered enough to satisfy most.
            And no clans played on AF and EF maps for god’s sake, they just didn’t suit it.
            By the way, BF3 and cybersport? With all these supression mechanics and destruction? Are you joking? It’s not even serious, espescially considering games like CS:GO and Tribes out there in FPS genres. So what you call a “clan” is basically a group of casual players who can simply buy DLC at one time IF they want to. Because, you know, noone forces them to.

  29. edwin1234567 says:

    wow

  30. Greg Wild says:

    I did enjoy the hell out of BF3. But I’m just not interested in this really.

    Especially with Planetside 2 on the horizon. If PS2 does what they claim it’s going to do, then I can see it blowing the COD/BF model out of the water. And then some.

  31. takfar says:

    Really, despite all the outrage I’m reading….

    All DLC included? I’d buy all DLC anyway, so I might as well get this. I love BF3. It’s the one multiplayer FPS I play – even if I haven’t had much time to play as of late.

    • Commisar says:

      well, most RPS readers are neckbeards who HATE EA SO MUCH because EA doesn’t give them free shit like their Lord Gaben does. Sometimes, this site disgusts me.

  32. best_jeppe says:

    BF3 was fun for a little while bit it never managed to reach the same level of entertainment as BF2 did for my part. Much of that I think is because of the “simplification” they did with BF3 and their own goal to appeal as many as possible on the mass market, which I find as a shame. I find games enjoyable when I can get better at it and must learn new stuff, to evolve my skills and so forth like BF2 did. Not having the training wheels all the time like in BF3.

    Regarding this premium service it is certainly not for me. I already own Back to Karkand and I have no interest whatsoever in the CQ-DLC which means that the 3 remaining DLCs I might buy…if I find them interesting and they get a good review from the community. 3 x 15 = 45 so for my part it would be a loss to buy Battlefield Premium, especially since the only DLC that has any kind of interest for me is Armored Kill.

    • Hug_dealer says:

      which is a good thing. Personally im not interested in CQ, but for $5 more, ill get everything, and all the guns and content from CQ.

      its great to have options like this. People can buy it all for a preorder discount, or pick and choose the ones they want, or none. Everyone gets what they want.

      • Commisar says:

        I know, but most RPS readers have a hatred for EA that is so stupid it blocks out their other senses.

  33. buzzmong says:

    Erugh. While I’ll freely admit I’m pretty much done with BF3 now after sinking over 150 hours into it (I certainly got my monies worth even if it was shy of the 200hrs spent on the much better BF2), I’m not too fond of the idea of Premium Service’s in general, especially not when maps and game modes are included.

    BK2 alone already split the game into Have’s and Have Nots, the same thing that happens when you release paid for maps into any online game, but this premium service is going to fracture it even more once the other DLC hits.

    Also, priority server access? That can piss right off.

  34. rockman29 says:

    I don’t really understand this. You don’t get the game for the $50 or do you? If you get the base game, that would be a great deal I think. But I’m assuming the uproar is you only get the DLC?

    I have never bought DLC for any game, and I’m pretty happy with my decision so far to be honest. I feel like DLC is just a quick way to get really horribly ripped off.

  35. Jabberslops says:

    There must still be enough people playing BF3 on Console to justify the development cost of new DLC and a COD Elite clone. With the PC “Community” shrinking every week, I doubt this or the expansion(s) will lure back the people who ditched the PC version long ago or bring in new players.

    My hatred of BF3 started when the Back to Karkand patch was released. The game became extremely laggy for me. Not only did I lose FPS, but hit reg became a joke. The hit reg is worse than any problems Bad Company 2 had. The latest patch actually made the hit reg and lag worse. DICE “fixed” what wasn’t broken because they most likely listened to the vocal minority as well as only balancing the game for Consoles. Look at how suppression works now for evidence.

    I read somewhere that DICE changed how the net code works on the PC version with the B2K patch; effectively giving the PC version the net code for Consoles(probably not true, only DICE knows) and is the reason for the all the new lag introduced.

    • Euphoric says:

      The PC “Community” is shrinking? Odd, servers I play on are just as packed as ever – including having to sit in queues. I think you’re thinking of that other EA/Bioware title…what was it…oh yes SWTOR (yack).
      Also, I nor anyone I game with on a regular basis have ever had issues with lag in the expack, with hit reg or the like. I’m assuming you’ve done all the remedial things like updated vid drivers, replaced your ATI card (snark), stopped trying to play at Ultra settings on 6 yr old hardware, and of course have ruled out ISP/net issues? …of course it might just be easier to burn crosses on EA’s lawn and flame Origin.

      • Enso says:

        From what I’ve observed the number of overall servers took a decent sized hit a while after launch and has been decreasing, but very slightly, since.

        Also the netcode is a joke. Being hit when you’re far round a corner and clearly haven’t been wallbanged (or it’s impossible). Not to mention weird things like shots being cancelled out when you die, although I kind of understand this applying to grenades to stop kamikaze’s, the numerous times vaulting fails to work, people exploiting clipping, and issues launching. The content is there but the core is rotten.

        After playing Bad Company 2 I don’t know why I bothered. Won’t ever again. With Battlefield, with DICE, or with EA.

        • Post-Internet Syndrome says:

          Grenades do not disappear when you die. They did when the game was released, but it was changed in a patch.

          The hit detection is a problem though. I beleive it’s client-side, so that’s why you get hit through walls.

          • Enso says:

            My mistake. I think there might be a slight disconnect between the animation and the launching of the grenade. You can be killed mid throw, in a position where the grenade would still have been thrown in real life but in the game it hasn’t been spawned yet so it seems off.

  36. tkioz says:

    So… what exactly do you get with the game… you know that you spend money on? Because it sure as hell looks like a double dip to me.

    • Hug_dealer says:

      9 maps will every game mode available on every map. over 55 guns to pick from.

      What they are selling are the booster packs like euroforce and armored fury that came out for battlefield 2 at a bulk discount if you buy them all together.

  37. Mayjori says:

    First, two words, “fuck EA”
    SOOOOO glad i didnt buy BF3, gives me more reason than just craptastic origin to not do so in the future.

    • Hug_dealer says:

      nononononono.

      Its FUCK DICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      They were releasing additional content for profit long before they were purchased by EA. DICE was milking us with 1942 for 2 expansions. Those bastards. Then EA bought them, and they continued to charge for additional content………………….DAMN THEM.

      Also, how dare they offer this additional content at a discount if you buy them in bulk. Thats not how you make more money is it.

  38. Premium User Badge

    piratmonkey says:

    I enjoy BF3. I want more content. They are selling more content for BF3. Where exactly am I losing in this equation?

  39. Enso says:

    Now you can feel even more ripped off with, yay, more content when the core game doesn’t perform to a good enough standard almost 8 months after release and a public “beta.”

  40. gwathdring says:

    It just sounds like a DLC bundle to me. I can understand why people don’t like DLC of this sort in a multiplayer game … but how is a company supposed to support servers for years to come without DLC or fees or something? At least with DLC it is optional. You don’t have to play with the DLC. I never bought any of the expansions to BF2 and I was perfectly content and always had plenty of servers to play on. I suppose you could point to past games that lived solely on their shelf price, but a lot l of the examples I can think of had fewer customers, smaller servers and cheaper development cycles.

    I certainly don’t appreciate the idea of customers getting the DLC content “early,” EA’s track record with server longevity, or the idea of paying $100+ for any one game regardless of the content provided. But those issues are a bit broader than this pack in particular. I ultimately passed on Battlefield 3 because my machine couldn’t run it. I probably won’t pick it up in the future because I played enough Battlefield to last me a lifetime between 1942 and 2, and I’m done with that style of multiplayer game until something more interesting comes along (since then I’ve gotten into Arma II and Frozen Synapse as my multiplayer games of choice). That said, I don’t think this development would have changed my mind either way had I been more on-the-fence about picking up BF3 with my next computer upgrade, nor further soured my relationship with EA had I already purchased the game.

    I’m not interested, but it doesn’t seem WRONG exactly.

  41. Etherealsteel says:

    Expansions to games are fine, but this is just BS. This is what happens when they don’t open up the game for modders who can make other maps and certain changes to the game. The majority of that Premium Service would be free in a modders hands. Who gives a sh.. about dog tags in a game? I’m glad now that I didn’t get this game. BF3 by itself is a good game, but on the back end with Origin and Battlelog it ruins it. I may get BF3 if it like ever gets to be $5, may pay $10 if it supports mods, but I have no huge interest in BF3.

  42. Theschiznits says:

    I was in a clan for BF2 and hoped to get back into it for BF3. Due to the retarded/random way the guns act as well as the overload of cheaters, ill probably never play it again, so no thanks DLC. It was a awesome franchise that is no longer worth the time.

  43. Smoky_the_Bear says:

    This seems like an OK deal to me other than 2 things.

    1) Queue priority is total, total BS. Why should people that dont want to buy all their content be bumped down the list for the maps they do own.

    2) People that didnt preorder and then also bought B2K are getting screwed here by paying twice for the same content, even if it works out cheaper for the remaining DLC’s, they had no way of knowing about this when they shelled out for B2K.

    • Hug_dealer says:

      #2 is wrong.

      Thats like claiming that because bf3 is on sale for $30 now, and i bought it at launch for $60. I am owed 30. No you arent. You have been enjoying it all this time, while other people have not.

  44. Synesthesia says:

    yeah, this wont divide the community.

    • Hug_dealer says:

      Guess what.

      BF1942 divided the so called community twice, then mods came along and divided the community even further. Then BFV came out and divided the battlefield community even further. Then bf2 came out and all the games before it became even further divided. Then 2 more boosters, and divided everything even further.

      Now the point im making is that it doesnt matter whether the new content comes as an entirely new game, or it comes as expansions and booster packs. It divides the community. People will always leave the old to play the new. But i dont see anyone crying about a new battlefield game coming out that will pull the community from the current game into the new one. Along with that statement i just made. The community for every battlefield is still alive, and you can still play them all. Also with that, the battlefield community is larger now, than ever before. So it can afford to split the player base and provide everyone with people to play with.

      • Hunchback says:

        That’s not the point.
        The problem with this elit… oops sorry, “premium” service is that they will release tons of stuff, most notably maps, that will be exclusive for people who are willing to pay the original game’s price yet again for a map-pack.
        “Dividing” with a new game is normal, it takes a lot of time and the differences between the games are usually big enough to make it worth it. Dividing over exclusive “premium” content is not ok.

        This is very sad, as BF3 is one of the best MP shooters out there for the moment (The best for me, but i won’t go as far as proclaiming it TEH BEST FOR EVERYONELOLO), and it will be ruined by money-hungry business plans.

        I am starting to hate EA Games as much as Activision. :S

        • Hug_dealer says:

          are you seriously saying that expansions packs are not welcome for any game????? They arent new to the battlefield series. Battlefield has always had booster packs and expansions.

          Suddenly battlefield 3 is not allowed to follow the footsteps of the rest of the battlefield series??? Let me guess, you dont think team deathmatch has any place in battlefield either?????????????

  45. Hunchback says:

    Oh god, why are they doing this?

  46. SanguineAngel says:

    Fantastic – another online game that wants to divide it’s community. As others have said – selling maps is crap. Ps I am not paying any more money. I actually love BF3 but I’m not buying it twice

  47. Xan says:

    Don’t know why people are hating on this. You actually save money by buying this premium pack instead of buying all expansions separately.

    There are 5 confirmed expansions for BF3, each is 15$, so that’s 15$x5 = 75$, you save 25$ by buying the premium pack or just 10$ if you already bought Back to Karkand, and you get some extra in-game items.

    Don’t get me wrong I’d rather have them fix stuff first, but this deal is better than anything CoD did.

    • Hunchback says:

      5 “expansions” for one game, what is this, WoW?
      That’s why we are hating – ’cause their “expansions” are generally map packs, couple of vehicules and a few guns.

      • Xan says:

        I understand that, but that’s how it is sadly. For those who wanted to buy all the extra stuff this is cheaper.

        Yes it sucks that they expect you to pay another 50$+ to get the “whole game” but sadly until EVERYONE stops buying ALL of the DLC content this won’t change.

        • Hug_dealer says:

          we got the entire game already. now we have the option to get additional content to add to our game. Just like Special forces, euroforce, and armored fury added to BF2, and RtR and Secret weapons did for BF1942.

  48. rocketman71 says:

    Still Origin. Still no public server files. Still no LAN. Still FUCK YOU EA and DICE.

    • Commisar says:

      YEAH, because YOU still have 56kbps Internet. Hey everyone, look at this POOR PERSON on RPS.

      • My2CENTS says:

        Why are you defending a company that basically have a dildo in your ass? The fact for the matter is that i can’t get regional servers, because the fucks don’t have a partner to provide servers near me and their excuse is pathetic.

        DICE i own every game you released, yet i paid nothing (not pirated, fully functional copies) – that’s how much i appreciate you as a developer.

  49. Big Daddy Dugger says:

    I feel bad for buying this game now, even though I got it half off.