Sure it's planned, but that doesn't mean it doesn't cost anything to create. If you really think that all these map packs/game modes/vehicles/weapons are something that they would be releasing for free 'normally' (or it's all 'ready now' and they're just staggering it) and some evil account simply said "Why not sell it?", I think that's naive.
I don't think it exactly happened like that, and it's a bit silly to even think that. What I do think happened, however, was either they had extra staff not being utilized halfway through development, or had planned this from the start and this was just another objective for the team to finish around release date. What it ended up causing was confusion and people paying extra for not having B2K.
They can produce extra content because "we" as players have agreed to subsidize it.
The same reason they keep making CoD games, right? I'm not sure where you are getting at on this point. That nice, people want it. People want more Sims expansions, so they keep making them. You forget to mention the diminishing sales once users get tired of this trend. This isn't even counting the fact that just because someone else supports it doesn't mean its successful. Three people out of the 40 people on my steam/origin friends list have bought the premium edition for BF3. More than 15 own bf3 "limited edition". Most of the 15 I mention pre-ordered bf3. All three BF3 premium players bought it on sale for 20$. That shows to me that either they didn't like the base game, or weren't willing to pay more for "ULTRA PREMIUM XP MODE".
I liked it plenty. Just because you are not fine with it, and "gamers" are still hung up on it doesn't mean it wasn't a good experience or value for many "other gamers".
Any game is a good value if you base it on hours spent playing. this game however is the first battlefield game where I felt I never got what I paid for. To each his own, though.
So the map packs... have too much content and thus you feel left out without them? Or maybe the 1942 expansions sucked, I have no idea. But if you feel left out it stands to reason that it's something you want... and isn't that what the whole point is?
I didn't feel left out because the best content was in the base game, and the expansions were just that. With the way they did premium, you'd be silly not to buy premium. Premium benefits overflow into the base game, too. That never happened in 1942 and it's expansion packs. They also came out at a MUCH slower pace, tons of new stuff and at a higher MSRP. for example, one expansion in 1942 (secret weapons) gave us jet packs. Nothing existed in-game like it. They also added in completely different flying vehicles and other goodies. I think one DLC for BF3 had a new game mode, and that so far has been the only thing that sounds interesting to me. That mode was the reason the three people on my friends list bought premium.
This, of course, varies person to person. I have played each of the DLC extensively with the exception of CQ. But that still means Premium was a better value for me. However it's up to you to make that determination; it's part of the reason that the packs are broken up and can be purchased individually.
At the same time, the vanilla game still has plenty of players and servers available. Hell Metro 24/7 is probably the most common server type there is. I played vanilla for a long time, probably until around Armored Shield. It's still a great game, there's just less of it.
Yea, metro is another good reason why BF3 basic edition is poo. Professional gamers told DICE during beta that metro needed improvement / was trash, and they never did listen. It needed way more movement options by the escalators. I also understand that each pack has its own value for each person, but once again, I'm not supporting that type of DLC scheme. If you want me to buy DLC, do something that isn't a month-long project for 5 map editors and oh hey lets throw in some new gun animations and a tank reskin with new sounds.
Facebook
Twitter