Premium

[backtothefight64]

Come on, someone had to start a thread about it

I think I'm gonna hang on for now. It's worth doing if you intend to buy all the map packs.
But I'm not in any rush for CQC, I will checkout reviews, videos and SWF opinions first. Then there are the last two map packs we know nothing about ? Not sure I trust Dice enough to pay in advance.

So I shall have to queue like a second class citizen for now

Of course one night + a few too many beers could have me reaching for the credit card !

[pershainovitsh]

It was either Endgame or Aftermath where you play in an Apocalypse.Now -type of setting. But that's about it. Not much is known about them, as you said.

If you buy Premium, it means you buy Close Quarters, and if you don't want to support the gameplay featured in CQ, don't buy Premium. I won't buy either. The decision is yours.


A bit off-topic: have you noticed how many different names DICE has given to various levels of destruction in BF3?
BF3: Unrivaled destruction
BF3: Back to Karkand: Enhanced destruction (it really is)
BF3: Close Quarters: HD destruction (I don't know about HD, but the destruction should be more detailed this time around due to maps being smaller)
What about Armored Kill? Endgame? Aftermath? I'm betting they'll use "tactical destruction" at some point.

[Spartan0536]

I bought Premium yesterday, DICE has now gotten 100 USD from me between Premium and BF3 Limited Edition, however I get exclusive stuff and there is lots of it, as well as all DLC, I get the DLC for free effectively now. I just want all the guns as I am a gun nut.

Armored Kill is all about wide open all out warfare in vehicles, this includes a spawn-able AC-130 Spectre Gunship that the player gets to use the weapons on, I am betting this will be like Battlefield 1943 where a certain center flag once captured will provide one lucky player every say 5 minutes to "call in" the AC-130 and wreck havoc for probably 1 minute. On top of all that the mobile arty is the M270A1 MLRS for the US, and for RU its the BM-21 GRAD. The new US tank is also the Striker MGS (Mobile Gun System). Armored kill looks to be huge, I just hope they get it in their heads for in game VOIP.

[madviper101]

Hell yeah of course i'm going to buy Premium. Have so many games that I have purchased and hardly every played. However I think its good value as I am sure I will be spending many hours on all the games as with previous battlefield/bad company games.

I know I have diffrent views to others but want to give close quaters a go. If its rubbish I just wont play it. Am sure DICE will be doing some seroius stats on what maps people like.

When there is a small group of us playing e.g. on Monday evenings with the Jersey Boys I am certain there will be a demand for close quarters.

[swfwebmaster]

I will NOT be buying Close Quarters and will likely not purchase Premium. There is still a chance I may buy Armored Kill. (For each of us, just buying Armored Kill is likely the best course of action for the future of Battlefield.)

It is my belief:

- If you buy Close Quarters, you are encouraging Battlefield to become a game with Call of Duty type game play.

- If you buy into the Premium gimick, you are paving the way for the video game industry to move toward a monthly fee to play their games.

I encourage others to delay their purchase of Battlefield DLC until the package option facts and the maps offered become clearer. A delay of days or weeks will likely not cause the "must have" offer to evaporate. Think about the vote you want to cast and the message you want to send to EA/DICE. Be strong and resist the hype. There have many documented instances of DICE intentionally not telling their customers the truth about their product. Make an Informed Decision.

[pershainovitsh]

Jun 6, 2012 18:44:36 GMT 1 madviper101 said:

I know I have diffrent views to others but want to give close quaters a go. If its rubbish I just wont play it. Am sure DICE will be doing some seroius stats on what maps people like.

When there is a small group of us playing e.g. on Monday evenings with the Jersey Boys I am certain there will be a demand for close quarters.

Of course DICE will be checking the statistics, that's what they do: it's all about telemetry. Unfortunately telemetry doesn't tell everything. Like how Operation Metro has been the most played map, followed by Caspian Border, Op Firestorm and Back to Karkand maps. Why would such a bad map be so popular? Why is only one small map above all the "big" ones in the statistics? Because it's a map where you can legally stat pad. Playing there for ten minutes throwing grenades and using RPG's and GL's equals an hour on Caspian. I'm making these numbers up, but you get the idea.

But what interests DICE even more than stats, it's money. Even if only few ever plays the Close Quarters maps after buying the pack, they would still had sold a lot of copies and made a huge amount of money. And that's what matters.

But I do understand that Battlefield's maps are usually too big for a very small player count such as when playing with friends. I just wonder why didn't they do like in BF2? There was a 64 player, a 32 player and a 16 player variant of every map. Suited everyone's taste and every occasion.

Still, your decision will affect the future of the Battlefield games. I will boycott the Close Quarters pack and will get Armored Kill. I'll have to see what are Endgame and Aftermath like before judging them. Hopefully I'll buy the expansions for the PC. I'll try to get the new computer by the end of the summer.

[swfwebmaster]

DICE can see two measurable variables to take market share from Activision/Call of Duty:
- Revenue per game release (The competition's and theirs)
- Telemetry. DICE does not care what you like or why you are doing something. DICE only values the cold lifeless facts of your actions. Each map joined and played and each action are min-votes which will directly effect the future of Battlefield.

Buy Close Quarters = vote for small maps with lots of action

Play Close Quarters = vote for small maps with lots of action

It is all or nothing. DICE will not cater to both audiences. There are not any LARGE maps in BF3. There are very few integrated TEAMPLAY tools in BF3. Tournaments, Leagues, Mod teams, Communities, and Clans are organized groups of fans that are being dismantled by EA/DICE in favor of the individual.

A vote for Close Quarters and Premium is a vote for the elimination of Large maps and teamplay tools; and a reduction in the strength of organized groups.

[mcguirk2]

Whether you are a fan of BF3 or not, what Scriv is saying is the truth. As with any product, bean counters will always move the product to where the money is. Close quarters combat is not what I enjoy, so I will likely pass on that DLC. I'll leave the armored kill decision for later. It seems to me that buying the premium package before the content is even unveiled is giving EA/DICE a big vote of approval for the path they've chosen so far.

[wobblyone]

OK, here goes ;D

I have bought Premium because I was going to get all the expansions anyway (inc. Close Quarters)

I'm playing BF3 full time so these expansions give me more options, and opportunity to play with buddies who are on these new maps.
Close Quarters may be more CoD than BF, but sometimes I WANT that type of gameplay. (Running and gunning with a shotgun can be FUN). I can choose whether to play it or not.
Hopefully 'Armored Kill' will bring larger maps. If not, they will be no smaller than the present selection. The problem is not the size, but number of players. 64 is way too many. It was exactly the same in BF2. Full servers were bedlam. I never joined a server with more than 40 players max in BF2. I do the same in BF3.

As for the future of BF. We lost the true Battlefield after BF2 (and we won't be getting it back). However, I am enjoying playing BF3 more than BF2. If I wasn't I would still be playing BF2.

If a shooter comes along that is better than BF3 I will be the first to bin it. But so far nothing comes close.
Red Orchestra......dissapointing......binned
Iron Front....binned
Tried ArmA2 to compare with Iron Front........binned.

PS:
I'm not upset by anyone's views or opinions of BF3 ;D
We all have different preferances ;D
These are just mine ;D ;D ;D

[backtothefight64]

Jun 6, 2012 17:34:53 GMT 1 Spartan0536 said:

I get the DLC for free effectively now.

Lol.........if some how you can forget you paid for it in the first place

[swfwebmaster]

I do want us all to get along and not get upset. I also want folks to understand what is happening and make educated decisions aoub the hobby I care about. DICE divided the opinions of this clan and DICE is dividing the whole Battlefield Community on purpose.

- They are going full-tilt after Call of Duty and will not even develop one map for the Battlefield map.
- DICE lied and said PC was the lead platform for the development of BF3. It is clear that PC is third in the level of importance.
- DICE will not even provide the standard feature of in-game in-squad VoIP
- DICE is intentionally banishing the Battlefield Veterans and embracing the COD fans

What will you do when DICE tells you the PC will be supported then actually stops making Battlefield for the PC platform?

[swfwebmaster]

[hakanp4185]

I Also like bf3 better than bf2. The issue with Voip and teamplay is a negative thing, but everything else is better. I often played infantry only in bf2 but the maps were to big. In bf3 you can choose to play small maps like Metro, Seine crossing if you like infantry only. If your in for tanks and airplanes you choose the bigger maps, like Caspian border and Op Firestorm. That is an improvement.

I bought premium and I am going to play all the maps

[pershainovitsh]

Hakan (Håkan?), in BF2 you could choose to play a small, a medium or a big version of any map. So if you wanted infantry gameplay, you could have it. If you wanted vehicle gameplay, you could have it as well. Some maps leaned more towards vehicle and some towards infantry gameplay.

But in BF3 most of the maps are small and only some are even moderately sized. What happened to maps like Highway Tampa or Dragon Valley? I mean maps that are actually big. DICE's excuse for this has been that the soldiers and vehicles are faster in BF3 than in BF2 so it feels like the maps are smaller. In practice they are smaller. So why didn't they make the maps a bit bigger to compensate for the faster moving speed? I don't know. Then there's spawning on all four squad members, which makes the maps feel even smaller because you can just hop in the middle of the action instead of driving there for a minute.

Anyway, everyone has a right for an opinion. You may like the maps, I don't. I don't think they are big enough.

We have saying in Finland: Don't buy a pig in a bag. This applies perfectly to Premium. You do not know what you are buying. We know everything about Close Quarters, only something about Armored Kill, the fact that Endgame is an Apocalypse.Now-style expansion and that's it. What will Aftermath even be about? You barely know anything you are going to get. I'd say it's wiser to wait and see what the expansions are even about, then some reviews, then some thoughts from friends and then decide whether to buy them or not.

I read somewhere that the price of Premium varies between countries. In the US it's 50 $. I remember that in Sweden it was 70 $, when turning SEK into US dollars. I don't know why is this. And I don't know what is the price of individual expansions in US or Sweden.

[backtothefight64]

$50=£32=€39

Maybe the extra £8 covers shipping.......to my ISP !

But we're used to paying more in the UK, I remember some years ago seeing a documentary about the car industry which referred to the UK as 'Treasure Island' because of the high mark up on prices