Premium Pass content spread too far apart?

«13
ShintyShinto
33 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
edited April 3
We keep on getting these long, stale draughts of pure boredom after new content has been released and absorbed. They feel longer than usual. Why can't the gaps be shorter? We need more free maps, too. Are DICE even planning on rolling out more exciting free maps?

Come on, keep that hype-train steaming, baby!

Comments

  • jjsf24
    314 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    We keep on getting these long, stale draughts of pure boredom after new content has been released and absorbed. They feel longer than usual. Why can't the gaps be shorter? We need more free maps, too. Are DICE even planning on rolling out more exciting free maps?

    Come on, keep that hype-train steaming, baby!

    Play other games? Lol i didnt touch this game since december, came back for tsnp. Invest in lomg singleplayer games or survival! Helps me out!
  • MoonMansAK47
    9 postsMember, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    EA spread the DLC way too far apart, I do agree with that, 2 months would be an Ideal spacing for dlc.
  • ShintyShinto
    33 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    lol the DLC has been out a few weeks - and you already need another new free map? We got the game in October, we got a free map in December, and then got a full map pack in March.

    That's like a max of 3 months between DLC so far, or less.

    On paper it sounds perfectly fair. But the game has been getting stale very quickly these days – and a lack of new, exciting content has been on the forefront of many YouTubers' criticisms. It is also clear that when compared to BF4's DLC-spacing, BF1 has much larger gaps. That's what gave BF4 an edge, it kept on getting new content to satisfy the community.

    So here's BF1's Premium plan: 'They Shall Not Pass', March; then 'In the Name of the Tzar', in June; after that we have 'Turning Tides' in October; and finally 'Apocalypse', which is rumoured to be out in early 2018.

    And now look at BF4's DLC release dates: 'China Rising', December 2013; 'Second Assault', in February 2014; 'Naval Strike', March 2014; 'Dragon's Teeth', July 2014; and finally 'Final Stand', in November 2014.

    Evidently, BF4 had a lot more juice squeezed out of it in just a year since its November 2013 release date. On the other hand, BF1 is getting less expansion packs, that are spread out OVER the course of a year. Where the hell's the Fifth expansion pack? Are we getting one? Or has our so-far-one mediocre free map replaced the fifth DLC?

    We're already through the first quarter of 2017 and still we are lacking any free maps on the horizon. Hopefully we get some new information soon.

    Oh, and don't get me wrong, I love BF1. I'm really enjoying the WW1 setting and grittiness of the maps – especially those realeased through the 'They Shall Not Pass' DLC. Thus, I'm eager to get new ones sooner than what they have planned for us. I'll have to go through my first wave of exams and re-sits before I'll even be able to see the trailer for my most anticipated expansion pack, 'Apocalypse'!

    I think what they're doing is great, but how they're releasing it is eating away at my patience. And I'm a very patient person.
  • ShintyShinto
    33 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    jjsf24 wrote: »
    We keep on getting these long, stale draughts of pure boredom after new content has been released and absorbed. They feel longer than usual. Why can't the gaps be shorter? We need more free maps, too. Are DICE even planning on rolling out more exciting free maps?

    Come on, keep that hype-train steaming, baby!

    Play other games? Lol i didnt touch this game since december, came back for tsnp. Invest in lomg singleplayer games or survival! Helps me out!

    While that's definitely the best way to go around things, I don't really have any other games that I find incredibly interesting right now. I'm replaying AC4:BF right now, and will probably get Outlast 2, but then there's a massive draught until August, when the big games start to release.
  • ShintyShinto
    33 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    EA spread the DLC way too far apart, I do agree with that, 2 months would be an Ideal spacing for dlc.

    Agreed. Two months is enough time to fully digest the content we've been given, but not too much time so that we go hungry.
  • AresOtherworld
    14 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Shintyshinto you do understand that if your statement is correct that would mean battlefield 1's release has a maximum of 3 months in between and BF4 dlc has a maximum of four months in between right? I completely disagree but I also work a full time job so unfortunately I get very little time to play my video games. I understand if you play it every day, however Even if I did the same I would prefer they take as much time as possible making a dlc map pack. I've played half baked map packs, I'll give ya a hint they blow. Give devs as much time as they need. patience is a virtue my friend, these things take a very long time to create and polish. And even still a fully polished addition will still have bugs. Take that into consideration. I wouldnt complain about the time it takes, I would complain if it's not released at all. Also take into consideration that if they release a half baked thing early to satisfy demand they worked very very hard to make even that. So give em credit.
  • ShintyShinto
    33 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Shintyshinto you do understand that if your statement is correct that would mean battlefield 1's release has a maximum of 3 months in between and BF4 dlc has a maximum of four months in between right? I completely disagree but I also work a full time job so unfortunately I get very little time to play my video games. I understand if you play it every day, however Even if I did the same I would prefer they take as much time as possible making a dlc map pack. I've played half baked map packs, I'll give ya a hint they blow. Give devs as much time as they need. patience is a virtue my friend, these things take a very long time to create and polish. And even still a fully polished addition will still have bugs. Take that into consideration. I wouldnt complain about the time it takes, I would complain if it's not released at all. Also take into consideration that if they release a half baked thing early to satisfy demand they worked very very hard to make even that. So give em credit.

    Within three months they had released three expansion packs. So 12 maps, three game modes, new weapons – that's enough to satisfy me for a four month wait. You can't deny that we're going at a slower pace with BF1, and that there's actually less content too. The overall wait totals a few months higher than that of BF4's – yet we have four-less maps, less guns, and less game modes from Premium Pass.

    This was something the free map system was meant to fix, but we still haven't heard a drop of information from DICE on our next one yet.

    The reason we have forums is to voice our opinions. As the customer and consumer, I have every right to complain. I am the one who pays full price for the base game and Premium Pass. We are allowed to say what we want about something that we payed real money for. And that's how things improve, too. Without criticism, there is no motive to improve the game.

    I have given them credit where it's due. I have stated how much I love the game and its DLC. Forums like this exist for developers to get feedback and communicate with the players. It's constructive criticism.
  • ShintyShinto
    33 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    The problem isn't with the Devs it's with the customers. Too many of them want everything now and have little to no patience to wait. This all stems from the throwaway downloadable society we now live in. A world where the latest movies and music are available at the click of a mouse.
    Wait 3 months for new maps that's like a lifetime to some people.

    Things change. Technology is advancing and games are being pumped out faster than ever. The customers simply adapt to this change, and now fast development has almost became an expectation. It's certainly a desire, especially when the previous installments of the franchise released more DLC, faster. Thus, there's no reason they couldn't have done it with BF1. If you're gonna make us pay twice to get the complete game, atleast pump out the missing portions sooner.

    This is why the playerbase is dropping so quickly. If developers know we're becoming more 'impatient' these days, then they need to be prepared. Fail to prepare? Prepare to fail.
  • Loqtrall
    8383 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    lol the DLC has been out a few weeks - and you already need another new free map? We got the game in October, we got a free map in December, and then got a full map pack in March.

    That's like a max of 3 months between DLC so far, or less.

    On paper it sounds perfectly fair. But the game has been getting stale very quickly these days – and a lack of new, exciting content has been on the forefront of many YouTubers' criticisms. It is also clear that when compared to BF4's DLC-spacing, BF1 has much larger gaps. That's what gave BF4 an edge, it kept on getting new content to satisfy the community.

    So here's BF1's Premium plan: 'They Shall Not Pass', March; then 'In the Name of the Tzar', in June; after that we have 'Turning Tides' in October; and finally 'Apocalypse', which is rumoured to be out in early 2018.

    And now look at BF4's DLC release dates: 'China Rising', December 2013; 'Second Assault', in February 2014; 'Naval Strike', March 2014; 'Dragon's Teeth', July 2014; and finally 'Final Stand', in November 2014.

    Evidently, BF4 had a lot more juice squeezed out of it in just a year since its November 2013 release date. On the other hand, BF1 is getting less expansion packs, that are spread out OVER the course of a year. Where the hell's the Fifth expansion pack? Are we getting one? Or has our so-far-one mediocre free map replaced the fifth DLC?

    We're already through the first quarter of 2017 and still we are lacking any free maps on the horizon. Hopefully we get some new information soon.

    Oh, and don't get me wrong, I love BF1. I'm really enjoying the WW1 setting and grittiness of the maps – especially those realeased through the 'They Shall Not Pass' DLC. Thus, I'm eager to get new ones sooner than what they have planned for us. I'll have to go through my first wave of exams and re-sits before I'll even be able to see the trailer for my most anticipated expansion pack, 'Apocalypse'!

    I think what they're doing is great, but how they're releasing it is eating away at my patience. And I'm a very patient person.

    Yeah but let's take a look at BF4 without the map pack it got that was literally just remakes of past maps - Second Assault (they didn't have to MAKE those maps, they just modeled maps that already existed, so I'm not counting them as original "DLC" concepts they made SPECIFICALLY for BF4)

    That's BF4's release in October - we get China Rising near mid December. That's two months apart.

    Then we get Naval Strike in March - an entire three months after China Rising.

    Then we get Dragon's Teeth in July - almost FOUR months after Naval Strike

    and then Final Stand in November, again, almost FOUR months after Dragon's Teeth.

    So the DLC being 3-4 months apart makes COMPLETE sense. Getting In The Name Of The Tzar in June would mean we're getting it 3 months after TSNP, a shorter span than the time between most of BF4's DLCs.

    And again - BF1 isn't getting "Less" map packs - BF4 just got a "map pack" full of maps remade from BF3 (which would not fit in with the theme of BF1). That wasn't a pack full of original maps, they were literal remakes of maps we'd already played before.

    Lastly about Second Assault - you said it came out in February, but that was early access for Premium players. It was actually released in March for all players, right alongside Naval Strike. It was publicly released on March 4, 2014.

    And when it comes to "free maps" - BF4 didn't start getting free maps until late 2015, well into the second year of it's existence. To expect news of free maps for BF1 "on the horizon" is a pipedream - it's only been out 6 months.

    While it's true we're through the first quarter of 2017 - BF1 has only existed since the last quarter of 2016. It's not like it's been out a year.
  • ShintyShinto
    33 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    edited April 9
    I would still pass it up as an expansion because it's adding things that weren't already in BF4. So I'm just gonna ignore that side of your argument, since you ignored an expansion pack to make your point seem valid. We also received 5 expansion packs in BF3.

    This is a discussion about Premium Pass. It's in the title. So all things talked about here are related to Premium Pass, including release dates.

    Battlefield 4 didn't need free maps because it had a huge blast of content in the first quarter of 2014. However, BF1 has not had such a blast. And it's free map system isn't like BF4's, mainly because it was implemented at launch. Thus, we get free maps earlier in the game's lifespan.

    The US got BF4 October 29th, and Europe got in on November 1st. I live in Europe, this release date applies to me. Besides, it was released in the last three days of October. That's practically November but oh well.

    Sorry if this response is half-@ssed, I'm busy right now.
  • Loqtrall
    8383 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    I would still pass it up as an expansion because it's adding things that weren't already in BF4. So I'm just gonna ignore that side of your argument, since you ignored an expansion pack to make your point seem valid. We also received 5 expansion packs in BF3.

    This is a discussion about Premium Pass. It's in the title. So all things talked about here are related to Premium Pass, including release dates.

    Battlefield 4 didn't need free maps because it had a huge blast of content in the first quarter of 2014. However, BF1 has not had such a blast. And it's free map system isn't like BF4's, mainly because it was implemented at launch. Thus, we get free maps earlier in the game's lifespan.

    The US got BF4 October 29th, and Europe got in on November 1st. I live in Europe, this release date applies to me. Besides, it was released in the last three days of October. That's practically November but oh well.

    Sorry if this response is half-@ssed, I'm busy right now.

    I wouldn't pass it as an expansion because you got 4 maps that you literally got in the game RIGHT before BF4 came out.

    It added maps to BF4 that people were still playing in BF3 when BF4 came out. That's not "new" content. It's content that's already existed in the BF franchise and was brought over from one game to BF4.

    That's like saying DICE implementing HC mode in BF1 after release when all it does is change infantry weapon damage and remove a HUD is "content".

    Secondly - when it comes to map packs, that's not "Premium Pass Content" - you get early access to publicly available content, but it's not content ONLY available to premium members, so trying to pass off "Premium Early Access" as the legitimate release date of a DLC is completely pointless. The "early access" for Second Assault was the longest time between early access and public release that has ever taken place in BF game. No other DLC did such a thing (probably because the other DLC didn't consist entirely of map remakes)

    The entire point of this post was about the duration of time between content releases. So far, we've gotten nearly identical or FASTER content releases than BF4. The time between release and Giant's Shadow was less than two months. The time between Giant's Shadow and TSNP was shorter than the time between most DLCs in BF4.

    If ITNOTT comes out in June, it will, again, be a shorter period of time between it and TSNP than there was between most BF4 DLCs.

    There were multiple BF4 DLCs that took four months to come to fruition after the initial release date of the previous DLC. So far that's a longer period of time between DLCs than we've seen in BF1 yet.

    And if you factor in Premium Early Access, which you seemingly want to do in this situation, you're waiting EVEN LESS time between DLC releases because you get two weeks early access to the content. Just think - if ITNOTT comes out before June 12-13 - premium members will get to play it IN MAY, only TWO months after TSNP.

    I honestly don't see the issue. Looking at the past BF4 DLC release dates and how far apart they were, which seems to be solely what you're comparing BF1's DLC releases to - BF1 is competing pretty well when it comes to lengths of time between releases.

    And again - when it comes to free DLC, we've gotten ONE map for free in BF1. Literally nothing else.

    The ONLY reason we got free DLC in BF4 is because an entirely different studio within DICE - DICE LA - took over the helm of BF4 within it's second year and started developing that content to keep BF4 going alongside Hardline (which was not supposed to be BF4's replacement). This was the case (that they had to keep BF4 going) because the length between the release of BF4 and BF1 is the LONGEST development process between two DICE BF games in the history of the franchise.

    Usually BF games are only near 2 years apart (literally, look up the release dates between them all). So if we're sticking to that formula, by the time Apocalypse is released in early 2018, we should already be getting hints at the NEXT BF game, and then full blown reveals in mid 2018.

    BF4 required more content because it went a longer period of time without a direct, DICE-made successor than ANY other game in the history of the franchise.

  • ShintyShinto
    33 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    HC mode was just that. A mode. It's not comparable to four maps, new guns and a new core game mode – regardless of whether they're remakes or not. So it's not like saying that, really.

    I'll say it again. This thread is about Premium Pass. Therefore, I'm using the Premium release dates for DLCs – which are nowadays the primary release date we get from DICE, and the only relevant one in social media.

    Though some light has been shed on the post today, through the announcement of 'Nivelle Nights', I still think the content is spread too thin. And the June release date of the Nivelle Nights map points towards Tzar releasing in the later months. As Jackfrags has said, this is a long time to keep fans waiting. Time gaps like this eat away at the playerbase.

    I think DICE should have their DLCs ready to be pumped out. 'Apocalypse' only exists as bloody concept art. TSNP releasing with a map missing apparently. Come on.

    Anyway, my views remain the same and I just can't be bothered with all this damn writing. Have fun in the Battlefield, soldier. Oh, my GT is ShintyShinto, if you ever wanna play.
  • GUNZ603
    101 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    lol the DLC has been out a few weeks - and you already need another new free map? We got the game in October, we got a free map in December, and then got a full map pack in March.

    That's like a max of 3 months between DLC so far, or less.

    Fact
  • DCFC79
    380 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    I dont feel the content is too far apart.
  • ShintyShinto
    33 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    edited June 17
    E3 pretty much confirmed my doubts. Sure, it's good that we're getting 2 new French maps and 6 maps with the Russian DLC, but this content has been spread out way too much.

    Playerbase is dropping and if these maps are gonna become serverless after a month then what's the point? It's already **** enough that you're including a full-price season pass, nevermind the droughts between releases!

    Honestly, I'm glad they're ditching this approach with Battlefront 2 – which launches later this year – and I'm pretty sure when it comes out, BF1 will be dead. And that's a shame, because we would still only be half way through the season pass! Very annoyed by the Russian DLC delay. It was already bad enough.
  • moosehunter1969
    520 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    edited June 17
    Stop with the BF1 is dead nonsense. If there are 50000 players at 10 pm on Wednesday night and 30000 players at 10am on Wednesday morning they aren't the same players. Yeah some may be but there's probably 75000 plus players in those two time periods alone. Spread this across the day, the week the month and there are hundreds of thousands regularly playing. All these people saying it's dead seem to assume it's the same people playing constantlly twenty four hours a day seven days a week which is utter nonsense.
  • ShintyShinto
    33 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    edited July 2
    Use http://bf1stats.com to see the stats.

    My first response got deleted, so TLDR:

    Game is dying quickly, that is a fact. Yes, all games die eventually, but Battlefield 1's lifespan is being seriously hindered by the lack of progression in the game, its primitive Premium Pass system and the strenuous gaps between DLC releases. Not to mention the fact that COD: WW2 and BF2 will be stealing a lot of the playerbase away later this year, while BF1 is still only half way through its DLC cycle.

    I'm not a hater. I really like the game and the DLC content (yes, I bought Premium Pass a while ago) but the release dates are soggy bread. Don't confuse me with the 'BF1 is dead' crowd, because it's far from dead.
  • moosehunter1969
    520 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    It's not dying, far from it. Peak player count around 1680000. That's just at that particular time. Throughout the day there are many many more unique players than that. If everyone of that 1680000 played 24hrs a day 7 days a week then the figures would be worrying but clearly people dont play every hour or even every day so how many unique players are there still playing? 1 million, 2 million, more? Probably.
    I personally don't mind the DLCs being spread apart, gives more time to play them a, like most (all) people don't play every minute of every hour of every day.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!