@sk1lld wrote:I miss the DLC'S, what happened to paid expansions?
Yeah I was a fan of the old Premium Pass when we got 4 new maps / new weapons etc every 3 months.
Imho it really helped to keep the game fresh and was value for money.
@RayD_O1 wrote:
@sk1lld wrote:I miss the DLC'S, what happened to paid expansions?
Yeah I was a fan of the old Premium Pass when we got 4 new maps / new weapons etc every 3 months.
Imho it really helped to keep the game fresh and was value for money.
Same.
I don't know what the real solution is, we've learned over the years that locking maps behind a paywall is terrible for splitting the player base. But if 1 map/season is the best they can do with the 'live service' model then it's a failure as well. In all reality, have the maps be free/available to all, but additional weapons/unlocks can be in premium or skins or something. Although that may start feeling "P2W" so I don't know how that would play out either.
I agree with the OP, skins have an apex/fortnite/CoD kind of feel that I feel doesn't belong in Battlefield. JMHO.
@RanzigeRidder2 wrote:
@Anobixwe’ve had 2 BF games under the live service model. And in both cases it failed.
BFV was terminated premature despite the promise of a tides of war concept that would follow the complete World War 2, and then there was BF2042 which as you mentioned got drip fed content.
The issue is that the game needs some kind of monetization to pay off its development. The risk with premium or paid DLC is that indeed it splits the player base, and you run the risk that you don’t get delivered what you paid for. Fortunately with Battlefield the latter has never been the case, it has always been value for money, which is why I would choose premium without hesitation.
I wouldn't mind an option for Premium also, as I've purchased the 'Premium' pack I think in every BF that has offered one. But my fear, along with the dedicated servers wish that many/all of us have wished for to return, is when it comes down to it, a lot of dedicated servers in previous games just offer the 1st-published/free maps as their player counts drop off pretty hard if they have other maps in the rotation (if the game even lets players join if they have DLC maps in the rotation to begin with).
I realize we're comparing apples to potatoes here, but paywalling maps has gone the way of the dodo in essentially all of the mainstream shooters [mainly CoD/Halo, but I imagine others as well] and granted, they've also all pivoted to LiveService crap. Maybe the battlepasses and skin packs that Dice offered just didn't do well enough for them to fund more? Or they just pocketed the profits, didn't reinvest any of it, and did the bare minimum. As much as I hate some of the stupid skins in the game, if it means that people will buy them and that it actually aids in the development to allow for a wider selection of maps for everyone versus someone in your group saying "Oh, I didn't buy premium/that DLC" then they get dropped from the party.
And again, it's not something that myself or those in my regular group would likely run into (everyone is doing well enough that buying premium or whatever isn't an issue), but I can imagine it being a different situation for the overall masses. I wonder what the conversion rate of Base vs premium and at what price points they were purchased at in the previous games was.
