I agree BF4 RUSH was a major fail both vanilla and DLC maps, but BF3 RUSH was good (apart Close Quarters and Armored Kill DLCs) and BF3 had same problem with not many DLC maps RUSH servers
As i said making maps free would be best solution for players, but that would make Premium useless so i am sure EA (like most of gaming companies nowdays) wont lose on purpose the chance to monetize on it
EA has said there will be paid maps in BF1.
I’m just sick of hearing people complain about paid DLC being a bad thing when they have no evidence to suggest and/or support their reasoning. It really isn’t fair that some consumers think their should be free DLC right out of the gate. While it could be a good thing, people might get into the habit of expecting that from EVERY game from there on. It’s basically just them asking for self-gratification and developers that feed that…they will have to deal with a VERY selfish consumer base. I remember there was a big YouTuber (not gonna name him/her for Privacy reasons) that literally said that paid DLC always should be free… I mean, sure maybe some occasional free content like weapons and/or character models with skins, but full blown maps and possibly new game modes? Especially with huge games like Battlefield? It’s just seems absolutely absurd to me. People always complain about wanting more and more but when they finally get more, they just…demand even more. Not ask, not request, DEMAND. Games like Call of Duty are my best evidence for this argument. (If you have ever been on the official CoD forums you know exactly what I’m talking about). DLC is what keeps the Developers motivated to keep working and improving a game along with a helpful community. But…what happens if the helpful aspect of the community is gone? They can’t improve the game then because players just tell them their doing a terrible job with the game either with map design or weapon and class balance without telling them why. The developers then don’t see the information needed to improve that gaming experience. This is exactly what happened with BF4. The community was absolutely TERRIBLE for the first six months. They just complained about the “net-code” which took a ridiculous amount of time to patch up. But then for around 11-13 months after the net-code fix, the class balance was absolute GARBAGE. Yet most people weren’t complaining about that because most of the players were playing as the completely dominant class (Yes, I’m talking about the Godly Assault Rifles for the Medic in BF4). Now, imagine if things similar to these events happened in BF1…Yea I know, sorry for giving you guys/gals who played BF4 at launch day some Migraines from the memory of that horrid experience. It will completely destroy the community for good if either of these things happen to BF1. Not both, but just one of them. I personally hope the community won’t be unreasonable as it was at launch for BF4 and the game is launched smoothly or at least playable right from the start. I agree completely that DLC is what keeps a game alive, but consumers are just being greedy with it at this point from my perspective.
Battlefield should be a free2play game with microtransactions while the mappacks are released for free to every1.
Premium or dlc packs wouldn’t be so bad if the game wasn’t so full of microtransactions. If these war bonds currency unlock mechanic carries over to the retail game you know dice is going to make the unlock progression incredibly tedious and long. Unless of course you buy xx amount of virtual warbonds for real money. Kind of like the battlepacks and shortcut kits for bf4. But I would imagine even more annoying.
Not only this, but in Hardline, i hated how most of the DLC weapons require special eastereggs or i should say tasks to unlock them. And one (the syndicate machine gun which is also in BF1) required several players to unlock it. About 5 players is required for the tasks just to unlock a machine gun. Recently, the betrayal (final Hardline DLC) was just released for free for a limited time. BUT, sadly on the PS3, all the severs for the DLC maps are just boosting maps to get more money and unlock the weapon assignments. Only about 1 or 2 severs are actual rank matches. Every player wanted the exclusive easteregg shotgun which was the Mammoth Gun. I unlocked it, but it seems that these maps are just used for the DLC assignments. I’m not sure about current gen and PC if they have the same issues with the final DLC’s. But again, it’s just sad how all the severs with the DLC maps are just used for boosting and unlocking the weapons. I’m hoping that the DLC’s in BF1 will not require hard assignments that require more than 5 players just to unlock weapons. I don’t where you got your info that BF1 will have paid DLC maps, but it’s just a shame the most DLC maps are dead. i agree that all DLC maps should be free no matter what.
You seem to think that buying a map pack is the only way EA/DICE can make money after release… See what CS:GO, League of Legends, and, more recently, Overwatch does. They don’t need to charge for DLC with all the microtransactions.
lol, so are you suggesting that DICE over-inflate BF with meaningless and pointless cosmetic BS “content” and con people out of cash for them just so we can get maps for free? No thanks. I play CS:GO, LoL, and a *** ton of Overwatch, and the microtransactions in all of them are purely cosmetic and are purely stupid and pointless. I’d rather pay for DLC map packs instead of having hundreds of microtransaction skins and cosmetic items. It’s literally the one part of BO3’s content that I absolutely hate. Assets should be allocated elsewhere instead of focusing on using microtransactions to make money off of players using hollow, meaningless content.
You are absolutely stupid for suggesting that. There would be next to NOTHING in revenue for DICE if they did that. (By that I mean Revenue that would go towards making another QUALITY game or content). Not to mentition the fact that that would invite a massive overflow of players which would probably launch hundreds of individual servers that they would have to have upkeep on because of the fact that it would be a F2P. Shame on you.
Lol…no friggin way. I sincerely hope you’re being sarcastic.
Creating maps is far more difficult than creating other types of content.
I don’t see the problem. Unlike BF4, this time EVERYONE will be on next gen, the playerbase being split up will hardly be noticeable
You are also not obligated to purchase each DLC - be thankful they aren’t forcing some 100$ price tag down your throat like the new CoD Advanced Warfare
Proof? Seriously? OF COURSE dlc maps will cost money.
EA are making millions of $$$ from premium, season pass and DLC sales. Tons of people are paying money to pre-order the DLC before it’s even out.
How can anyone seriously think EA will hand out free DLC for a brand new game? They are a business looking to maximize profit and make their shareholders happy.
Titanfall 2 has free DLC maps as to not divide the community. That is also EA. Why aren’t they going the same route with Battlefield? Do they get off dividing player bases?
I would much rather have maps splitting the player base then have pointless cosmetic items. (CoD, Overwatch, Black Ops 3, Planetside 2, ETC) it just ruins games in my opinion since with those cases they not only charge for maps (exclude Planetside 2 from the map part) and what not but also the cosmetics. It is the Gamer’s equivalent to having cancer. Nobody wants it, nobody asked for it, and they just want it to stay the hell out of this franchise.
Don’t waste your breathe. These plebes don’t understand how any of it works and just want to blindly criticize a game simply for the Franchise’s PAST issues. While it needs to be stressed that the mistakes of the past 2 games cannot be repeated right at release, the community is just focusing on their own self-gratification and their inflated selfishness. I mean, this thread literally started with a guy complaining about something that has been part of the franchise since Battlefield VIETNAM…and their NOW just starting to complain? The playerbase is now feeling like because they have “supported” the Developers for SO long they need, not want, NEED a reward. That is what is going of some of the people’s minds and it’s actually worse than some of the things that EA have done…Pathetic, if I dare say. Just let them complain and leave only to come back like there were no problems, just like the BF4 community did.
More maps=Less players playing certain maps which=splitting the amount of players on certain maps you dimwitted fool. Who the hell told you that Titanfall 2 is having free DLC maps? There is not a single source on the internet that indicates that besides biased articles from B-rating critics that have no idea what makes a good game in any genre. Free DLC can be a good thing, but the way that the company (whoever it may be) has to proceed how they do it makes them have to be VERY cautious. If they do with BF1 what they are doing to BF4 and BFH it will completely destroy the trust bond (or what is left after these 2 games) they have with the community. I am refering to them giving out all of the DLC for free to the entire playerbase, which absolutely screwed over those who spent $50 for Premium on both games or the ones who spent $60 buying the maps over a period of time such as myself. Anotherwards, those who bought either BF4 and BFH with premium or just bought the DLC seperately, spent an extra $50/$60 for absolutely nothing. If they do that again you can expect a ton of hate to come from that decision if they do make it and a ton less money from there onwards.
He’s not being sarcastic. He’s just in the most blissful state of the human mind that is possible: Pure through and through stupidity.
Let’s just hope they don’t screw up the Operations game mode in this Battlefield like they did Rush in BF4. We can only hope the Dev teams for it will think carefully about the placement of objectives.
I take it those that want free map DLC are fully against Modding and Mapping tools?.?.