Your thoughts on Battlefield 3 Premium?

[brunothepig]

So, I assume many of you haven't heard of Battlefield 3 Premium yet, since Escapist hasn't reported on it.
For those wondering, details are [a href=http://www.gamersunity.de/img/sys/2012-22/bfpremium.png]here[/a], but in broad terms you pay $50 to pre-order the four planned expansion packs, plus get Back To Karkand if you don't already have it, and get some extra swag. To me this is an awesome deal, I love Battlefield 3's multiplayer, I likely would have bought the DLCs anyway, and this way I get some cool stuff like a bonus knife.

For those wondering, you get no gameplay altering items, except possibly five weapons. By possibly I mean you do get five assignments, and the B2K assignments awarded weapons, but who knows if this is different. The rest of the stuff is extra camos and such, the ability to save up to five battle logs, for those games you just did really well and want to be able to relive, and a few other things. I thought it looks pretty good, a great deal for fans of the game, a clever business move, if DLC sales steadily drop after release, why not let people buy them now when you have a much larger audience, but it didn't place people who don't buy it at a disadvantage.

However, there is one controversial offering in the swag. Premium players get server priority. For me, a PC player, all this meant was I now had the option of jumping into a 64 player Metro if I wanted some chaos without waiting 10 minutes. Even here in Australia there are more than enough servers for me to choose from that server priority really doesn't change much. But this offering has enraged some people. Now, I don't know what it's like on the console side, and I can definitely understand getting pissed anyway thanks to BF3 already having online passes, but I was just wondering what Escapist users thought, and if any console players could shed some light on the server situation.

 

[Comando96]

I only agree with server priority when I am playing on Dedicated private servers and those whom control the priority factor are the guys who host the server or "donate" to the guys who host the server.
Because of these people... I get to play online for free while someone else puts up the cost of servers. However... By the sounds of it this power being given to people by EA is top down. Battlefield 3 has dedicated servers and I would assume people who donate already get a priority for some servers?

This would be encroaching on the rights of server owners and providers who get the right of priority on servers they fund. If this is the case I'd be pissed... like really pissed...

The degree of how pissed off I'd be would depend on exactly how the priority worked because in some case server priority kicks players off of servers if the server is full... If that's the case then... Fuck you EA. Whoever made that an option are all a bunch of cunts.

 

[brunothepig]

snip

That's quite a good point. I would hope that either priority is only on official servers (I would think it would have to be, but I'm not all that knowledgable on server hosting so I could be wrong) or at the very least priority would go first to those the server provider gives priority to. So server contributors, then Premium members, then regulars. However, I agree, I think ideally the Premium priority would only apply to official servers.

As for kicking players off to make room, another good point. With unofficial servers there isn't so many contributors that this could be a problem, but if Premium works like that non-Premium players could start to feel very downtrodden... Hopefully it simply jumps Premium players to the front of the queue, which I've seen servers do before for contributing players, but unfortunately the release isn't very specific.

 

[InsertEvilLaugh]

I've been against the DLC packs since the beginning, and I believe the direction they are going with Premium is a downwards one.

For one the weapons should not be limited to those who ave purchased the packs, they should be available to all, they offer a potential of giving one layer an edge over another and therefore should be accessible to all not just those who pay 15 dollars.

Secondly, we shouldn't even be paying for these packs. I understand many may call me entitled about this, but it's simple, they have caused a division within the community by making it so you must by these packs in order to play on the new maps. Karkand should have been free, it was the most popular map on BF2 and should have been a thank you gift to the fans. Instead it's EA following Activisions lead and forcing people to drop 15 dollars to get access to just four maps. This all on top of the weapons you can only acquire if you purchase the packs as well. Insult to injury...

The entire Premium service also just feels scary. For one, the number of people who have purchased it just means more and more money is flowing into EA's pockets and making them think, this is where the game industry should be heading. It shouldn't be going this way, the next logical step they'll think of is requiring all players to pay some form of monthly charge to even play the game.

The early access to the DLC is understandable, even though I do not agree with the DLC in the first place. But the extra things are just a bit insulting to the loyal fans who have followed this series since it's birth in 1942, followed it through the lush jungles of Vietnam, then through the Urban Jungles the Marines moved through in Battlefield 2. Now, they must shell out another 50 bucks to get the full experience of a game they have waited so very long for, or even more so if they purchase the packs separately. If they do not pay the 50 dollars, then they miss out on content, and Double XP weekends that used to be for all. Instead, we get this program, inspired by a money hungry company that has shown little respect to it's fanbase. The server priority is justifiably angering, and should not have been added, it just furthered peoples desire to hate this program.

It is not a matter of cost, it is a matter of principle, game altering content is behind a money barrier, and there's no sign of it coming down.

 

[AndrewF022]

While I don't necessarily like it, I don't really hate it either.

It's nothing new really, BF2 had its DLC pack 'Special forces' as well, which was paid DLC. So I kinda expected it to be the case this time around as well.

The other things though, like extra weapons, the bonus exp shit and the server priority (especially this), that's dodgy. The premium should purely be a way to pay for future DLC upfront in bulk, but have it be cheaper in the long run. Rather than a way of separating the player-base into two categories and playing favorites to one of them.

 

[TheSapphireKnight]

For a big BF fan like myself it is worth it, or if you are just trying to save money on content you plan to buy anyways.

I think the issue here is that they tried a little too hard to make it a good deal. Camo's whatever, early access is nothing new, bulk purchases at a discounted price seems like a standard thing to do. The part where they ran into trouble for most I imagine is with the que priority business.

I can't imagine most people having issues with the rest of it, just the paying for priority business that I think has caused a small controversy over what shouldn't be a huge controversy. Still of all the reasons people are buying premium I think that paying for server que priority is pretty low on the list.