criterion-sm dice-lg ea-starwars-lg instagram lucasfilm-lg motive-lg twitch you-tube
Clone Commando Community Transmission
September Community Calendar

Season Pass Debate

Do you guys want to have a paid season pass? I really don't and got suckered into getting it for the first game when it seemed to have content that should have already been in the game. So I guess my biggest question is, what do the devs have to put in the game, and subsequently in the season pass to have getting the season pass be worth it and not a rip off.

If this is handled poorly, it could significantly hamper the publics opinion of the game.
giphy.gif

Replies

  • No, I don't want a season pass......I want a complete game at release!

    OK, so now that the laughable part is out of the way......let's talk real. The most important part is not splitting the player base like they did with the first version. Split player base meant lower player count lobbies and the dreaded playlists.

    I will buy a Season Pass if there is a good amount of new content offered to justify the price. But if they are going to have maps behind a paywall, they will kill their game before it's released. No one is going to go back to that failed model.
  • No, I don't want a season pass......I want a complete game at release!

    OK, so now that the laughable part is out of the way......let's talk real. The most important part is not splitting the player base like they did with the first version. Split player base meant lower player count lobbies and the dreaded playlists.

    I will buy a Season Pass if there is a good amount of new content offered to justify the price. But if they are going to have maps behind a paywall, they will kill their game before it's released. No one is going to go back to that failed model.

    So you're suggesting a season pass that only offers new weapons, customization options and heroes? (Since it can't offer new maps or game modes) They'll have to be offered for a smaller price, because that won't sell as well

    I really hope they update the game for free (Maybe an added mode and map or two post release)
    giphy.gif
  • Blazur
    4468 posts Member
    edited April 2017
    I'm quite burned out with the crippling effect paid map packs has on a games longevity and matchmaking. If the next one has another season pass in the same fashion I'll probably skip it out of principle. I already know none of my friends will get the game if it follows the same trend and that I won't be able to win them over.

    People are plenty apprehensive about the next Battlefront. If they don't at least shake this up they can assume the same problems as before.
    The greatest teacher, failure is.
  • Blazur wrote: »
    I'm quite burned out with the crippling effect paid map packs has on a games longevity and matchmaking. If the next one has another season pass in the same fashion I'll probably skip it out of principle. I already know none of my friends will get the game if it follows the same trend and that I won't be able to win them over.

    People are already plenty apprehensive about the next game. If they don't at least shake this up they can assume the same problems as before.

    Exactly the reason I wanted to open this discussion, I want this game to not close in on itself, and a comprehensive season pass could do that, after the last game, I doubt over 60% of the players will buy it
    giphy.gif
  • Massman98 wrote: »
    No, I don't want a season pass......I want a complete game at release!

    OK, so now that the laughable part is out of the way......let's talk real. The most important part is not splitting the player base like they did with the first version. Split player base meant lower player count lobbies and the dreaded playlists.

    I will buy a Season Pass if there is a good amount of new content offered to justify the price. But if they are going to have maps behind a paywall, they will kill their game before it's released. No one is going to go back to that failed model.

    So you're suggesting a season pass that only offers new weapons, customization options and heroes? (Since it can't offer new maps or game modes) They'll have to be offered for a smaller price, because that won't sell as well

    I really hope they update the game for free (Maybe an added mode and map or two post release)

    Yeah, pretty much. I guess something akin to what Rainbow Six Siege did: new operators and stuff, but everybody got to play the maps. We just can't split everyone up again. It's probably the only deal breaker for me.
  • I think new maps and game modes should be free, but DLC for customisation and weapons, etc. This is so everyone can still play the new content.
  • Massman98 wrote: »
    No, I don't want a season pass......I want a complete game at release!

    OK, so now that the laughable part is out of the way......let's talk real. The most important part is not splitting the player base like they did with the first version. Split player base meant lower player count lobbies and the dreaded playlists.

    I will buy a Season Pass if there is a good amount of new content offered to justify the price. But if they are going to have maps behind a paywall, they will kill their game before it's released. No one is going to go back to that failed model.

    So you're suggesting a season pass that only offers new weapons, customization options and heroes? (Since it can't offer new maps or game modes) They'll have to be offered for a smaller price, because that won't sell as well

    I really hope they update the game for free (Maybe an added mode and map or two post release)

    Yeah, pretty much. I guess something akin to what Rainbow Six Siege did: new operators and stuff, but everybody got to play the maps. We just can't split everyone up again. It's probably the only deal breaker for me.

    I think that is really the only option, given the blowback from the last season pass, and if they add new stuff thats cool, people will still buy it
    giphy.gif
  • Blazur
    4468 posts Member
    Massman98 wrote: »
    Exactly the reason I wanted to open this discussion, I want this game to not close in on itself, and a comprehensive season pass could do that, after the last game, I doubt over 60% of the players will buy it

    I get that games cost more to produce nowadays, especially with multiple studios involved. We've been fortunate that the price of games hasn't increase dramatically throughout the years. And while I appreciate a commitment to ongoing content throughout the coming year, I've got a pretty staunch belief that paid map packs in a shooter is not the best way to go about it, and it's rare for me to support that business model.
    The greatest teacher, failure is.
  • SG-17
    118 posts Member
    A season pass for Hero/Weapon/Gadget/Customization packs is fine as long as the maps are free for everyone.
    Visit The Star Wars: Battlefront Community for clans and tournaments on the PlayStation 4, Xbox One, and PC. Established 2007.
  • As we've all seen with BF1 and DICE's current SwBf, paid DLC only fragments the community in terms of player base. Ideally, there'd be no season pass at all, but I just can't see DICE/EA doing that. I find that a great compromise would be to release quarterly DLCs as they have done in the past, but keep the maps and modes free, only have weapons, star cards, heroes etc. behind the paywall. As such, it's likely that the cost of the season pass would drop (I'd guess from £40 to around £20/£25), this would;
    a) Not split the community
    b) Be easier on player's wallets
    c) and keep players returning for their free maps and modes even if they don';t have the season pass, thus having better and higher player counts.
    As I said earlier, in an ideal world there wouldn't be a season pass, just free content, but I believe that what I've just listed above is the best for everyone, as having no paid DLC at all is probably too ambitious for a Juggernaut franchise like SwBf.
    But... y tho?
  • Blazur wrote: »
    Massman98 wrote: »
    Exactly the reason I wanted to open this discussion, I want this game to not close in on itself, and a comprehensive season pass could do that, after the last game, I doubt over 60% of the players will buy it

    I get that games cost more to produce nowadays, especially with multiple studios involved. We've been fortunate that the price of games hasn't increase dramatically throughout the years. And while I appreciate a commitment to ongoing content throughout the coming year, I've got a pretty staunch belief that paid map packs in a shooter is not the best way to go about it, and it's rare for me to support that business model.
    SG-17 wrote: »
    A season pass for Hero/Weapon/Gadget/Customization packs is fine as long as the maps are free for everyone.

    Completely agree, it's just not good for data analysis of public opinion, longetivity, and player count if they divide the player base
    giphy.gif
  • Firety2812 wrote: »
    As we've all seen with BF1 and DICE's current SwBf, paid DLC only fragments the community in terms of player base. Ideally, there'd be no season pass at all, but I just can't see DICE/EA doing that. I find that a great compromise would be to release quarterly DLCs as they have done in the past, but keep the maps and modes free, only have weapons, star cards, heroes etc. behind the paywall. As such, it's likely that the cost of the season pass would drop (I'd guess from £40 to around £20/£25), this would;
    a) Not split the community
    b) Be easier on player's wallets
    c) and keep players returning for their free maps and modes even if they don';t have the season pass, thus having better and higher player counts.
    As I said earlier, in an ideal world there wouldn't be a season pass, just free content, but I believe that what I've just listed above is the best for everyone, as having no paid DLC at all is probably too ambitious for a Juggernaut franchise like SwBf.

    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  • Jrob122
    4638 posts Member
    The teaser trailer said that you can preorder for TLJ heros. This could be a hint that the DLC will just be heros and other cosmetic items
  • Jrob122 wrote: »
    The teaser trailer said that you can preorder for TLJ heros. This could be a hint that the DLC will just be heros and other cosmetic items

    That's a good point! maybe we're all set
    giphy.gif
  • Blazur
    4468 posts Member
    edited April 2017
    Jrob122 wrote: »
    The teaser trailer said that you can preorder for TLJ heros. This could be a hint that the DLC will just be heros and other cosmetic items

    A reassuring thought, although we could know as early as this weekend what their plans are when they start accepting pre-orders for the ultra deluxe sucker edition with early access to all future expansion packs.

    I hope they do right with this game so I can return to the same level of ***** excitement I had when we first saw that AT-AT foot on Hoth, instead of just being jaded about the game. And really that all hinges on the season pass and how they handle it.
    The greatest teacher, failure is.
  • Blazur wrote: »
    Jrob122 wrote: »
    The teaser trailer said that you can preorder for TLJ heros. This could be a hint that the DLC will just be heros and other cosmetic items

    A reassuring thought, although we could know as early as this weekend what their plans are when they start accepting pre-orders for the ultra deluxe sucker edition with early access to all future expansion packs.

    I hope they do right with this game so I can return to the same level of ***** excitement I had when we first saw that AT-AT foot on Hoth, instead of just being jaded about the game. And really that all hinges on the season pass and how they handle it.

    DUDE I remember that teaser, I completely feel you on anxiously awaiting details
    giphy.gif
  • I'm still split on purchasing the actual game after the barebones that was BF1 (if I do, it'll be second hand copy) ... so DLC/Season Pass is a huge 'no' for me. I didn't buy it last time and I won't buy this one.

    I understand why people will go for the Season Pass, but its a moral issue for me. Up until the last few years games were released complete. When DLC first arrived it was a little sprinkle on top of a complete game. But that's now changed and companies are using DLC as an excuse to squeeze more money from consumers. I'll never support that.

    Its ok if you have the money, but when I was in my teens I had to save hard just for the £40 needed for a new game ... I wouldn't have been able to afford another £40 to pay for the stuff that was missing from said game, and I assume there are still teens (and people less well off) who are in the same boat today.

    Its like the car industry suddenly charging extra for windows, roofs, seat covers and airbags. Sure the car works as a car without them, but no one will argue the car is complete with that stuff missing ... and that stuff has always been included to date, so why change it except to make more money from people. Its immoral.
  • Blazur
    4468 posts Member
    edited April 2017
    Massman98 wrote: »
    DUDE I remember that teaser, I completely feel you on anxiously awaiting details

    I can still feel the explosive excitement running through me when I think back to that teaser. The only other time in my life a video game trailer had that effect on me was when Tychus Findlay muttered "Hell, it's about time" and that glorious StarCraft logo faded into reality. It was pure dorky heaven.
    The greatest teacher, failure is.
  • I'm still split on purchasing the actual game after the barebones that was BF1 (if I do, it'll be second hand copy) ... so DLC/Season Pass is a huge 'no' for me. I didn't buy it last time and I won't buy this one.

    I understand why people will go for the Season Pass, but its a moral issue for me. Up until the last few years games were released complete. When DLC first arrived it was a little sprinkle on top of a complete game. But that's now changed and companies are using DLC as an excuse to squeeze more money from consumers. I'll never support that.

    Its ok if you have the money, but when I was in my teens I had to save hard just for the £40 needed for a new game ... I wouldn't have been able to afford another £40 to pay for the stuff that was missing from said game, and I assume there are still teens (and people less well off) who are in the same boat today.

    Its like the car industry suddenly charging extra for windows, roofs, seat covers and airbags. Sure the car works as a car without them, but no one will argue the car is complete with that stuff missing ... and that stuff has always been included to date, so why change it except to make more money from people. Its immoral.

    Yep. hit it right on the nose with that one.
    Blazur wrote: »
    Massman98 wrote: »
    DUDE I remember that teaser, I completely feel you on anxiously awaiting details

    I can still feel the explosive excitement running through me when I think back to that teaser. The only other time in my life a video game trailer had that effect on me was when Tychus Findlay muttered "****, it's about time" and that glorious StarCraft logo faded into reality. It was pure dorky heaven.

    Same, I promised myself not to get all hyped up for this battlefront, since I became jaded after the last one, but I already feel myself slipping thinking about this game's possibilities
    giphy.gif
  • Blazur wrote: »
    I hope they do right with this game so I can return to the same level of ***** excitement I had when we first saw that AT-AT foot on Hoth, instead of just being jaded about the game. And really that all hinges on the season pass and how they handle it.

    ^This.

  • Really hoping for maps, weapons, and game modes to be free.
  • Maps being built into the DLC clearly didn't work. It decimated the player base 1 DLC at a time. If they add more non-map content (more heroes, more weapons, more skins, more emotes, more cards) to the DLC packages, they could remove the maps with little to no issues, and give us those for free. Win-Win.

    I absolutely won't be paying another $120 for the privilege of having to spend 20 minutes looking for a game, and/or not being able to play with my buddies because they have the maps 2 weeks ahead of me.
    I am one with the force. The force is with Steve.
  • Blazur
    4468 posts Member
    If it's the same crap at least we have the Respawn game to fall back on. Look at the next set of free content which is slated to come to Titanfall 2. They're also under the umbrella of EA.

    https://www.ea.com/games/titanfall/titanfall-2/news/frontier-news-network-13
    The greatest teacher, failure is.
  • Blazur wrote: »
    If it's the same **** at least we have the Respawn game to fall back on. Look at the next set of free content which is slated to come to Titanfall 2. They're also under the umbrella of EA.

    https://www.ea.com/games/titanfall/titanfall-2/news/frontier-news-network-13

    True but noone bought Titanfall, EA knows were buying every star wars game possible, so they'll screw us over on cost
    giphy.gif
  • Blazur
    4468 posts Member
    edited April 2017
    Massman98 wrote: »
    True but noone bought Titanfall, EA knows were buying every star wars game possible, so they'll screw us over on cost

    Respawn is working on an unannounced SW game. That's what I'm referring to, and everybody seems to respect them.
    The greatest teacher, failure is.
  • Blazur wrote: »
    Massman98 wrote: »
    True but noone bought Titanfall, EA knows were buying every star wars game possible, so they'll screw us over on cost

    Respawn is working on an unannounced SW game. That's what I'm referring to, and everybody seems to respect them.

    Yeah, my point was Titanfall needed to advertise free DLC, since star wars games will be hella popular, they'll be bought, so Im hesitant to think, even Respawn, will give out free DLC for a game they know everyone will buy
    giphy.gif
  • Bly
    3 posts Member
    I don't like season pass DLC, but if we were to have a season pass I would want it to be cosmetic and at most weapon based only. The reason for this is due to the fact that when you have gamemodes and maps locked behind paywall you are ensuring they will die within a month or so. Try finding a game on some of the DLC gamemodes or maps for Battlefield 4 or even Battlefield 1. It can be impossible. Not to mention Battlefront 1's DLC playerbase was almost dead even when it had more than 2k players. Now with even less they are pretty much dead. With cosmetics and weapons at least all players are in the same playgrounds and not sectioned off from each other. While still not a perfect model I would think this would be better than what they did before. At most I would like no DLC.
  • I don't buy blindly things. I need to know what's in it. Otherwise I don't see any chance to buy it. I am glad I didn't buy the small modes only buggy unfinished BF (2015) season pass. I only wasted money for one large Bespin map and played the rest for free.
    For General Ahsoka Tano!
    h3d5nuo8y0jq.png

  • I see the Season Pass as a reality of gaming. The free market will determine whether this practice remains. As for me, I'm going to spend the money. I spent the money the first time and feel like I got my money's worth, when measured in time spent playing. Others measure in amount of content received at the time, or perhaps value it less. That's up to the individual.

    You want to call it 'incomplete' or what not, you're just arguing semantics. The fact is, the vanilla game you buy for $60 is what you're buying. It's as 'complete' as it's going to be. Maybe your idea of completion is with a campaign. Whatever. Other games were online only were played heavily. The DLC is an 'expansion', and whether or not you think it should have been released with the game at first is irrelevant.

    All that being said, I do agree that it divides the community. It makes matchmaking harder, and the longevity of the experience suffers. I hope they do get rid of the paid map expansions and reserve it for other customizations or access. So overall I think I agree with you, but I want the content, and if I have to pay for it, I'm paying for it.
  • I see the Season Pass as a reality of gaming. The free market will determine whether this practice remains. As for me, I'm going to spend the money. I spent the money the first time and feel like I got my money's worth, when measured in time spent playing. Others measure in amount of content received at the time, or perhaps value it less. That's up to the individual.

    You want to call it 'incomplete' or what not, you're just arguing semantics. The fact is, the vanilla game you buy for $60 is what you're buying. It's as 'complete' as it's going to be. Maybe your idea of completion is with a campaign. Whatever. Other games were online only were played heavily. The DLC is an 'expansion', and whether or not you think it should have been released with the game at first is irrelevant.

    All that being said, I do agree that it divides the community. It makes matchmaking harder, and the longevity of the experience suffers. I hope they do get rid of the paid map expansions and reserve it for other customizations or access. So overall I think I agree with you, but I want the content, and if I have to pay for it, I'm paying for it.

    That's fair, but I don't want to say I will buy it yet, I still kinda feel cheated in the first game (perhaps I expected too much). So i'm gonna wait to see what the DLC offers, and if I smell BullSh**, I wont buy it (which might include maps and modes being in the DLC)
    giphy.gif
  • Blazur
    4468 posts Member
    You want to call it 'incomplete' or what not, you're just arguing semantics. The fact is, the vanilla game you buy for $60 is what you're buying. It's as 'complete' as it's going to be. Maybe your idea of completion is with a campaign. Whatever. Other games were online only were played heavily. The DLC is an 'expansion', and whether or not you think it should have been released with the game at first is irrelevant.

    I've never been one to argue the base game was incomplete. For me, there was plenty of fun packed into the core game to make an impression. And I'd like to believe DICE when they claim nothing was cut from the game to save for future DLC.

    It's not even the price that bothers me, since I can value it based on how much entertainment it brings. What I take umbrage with is how crippling it is to the matchmaking and games longevity. With this business model each DLC adds more content but ironically devalues all of it by making it harder to find a game.

    And there's plenty of people who will simply refuse to buy the game if they do the same thing.
    The greatest teacher, failure is.
  • Blazur wrote: »
    You want to call it 'incomplete' or what not, you're just arguing semantics. The fact is, the vanilla game you buy for $60 is what you're buying. It's as 'complete' as it's going to be. Maybe your idea of completion is with a campaign. Whatever. Other games were online only were played heavily. The DLC is an 'expansion', and whether or not you think it should have been released with the game at first is irrelevant.

    I've never been one to argue the base game was incomplete. For me, there was plenty of fun packed into the core game to make an impression. And I'd like to believe DICE when they claim nothing was cut from the game to save for future DLC.

    It's not even the price that bothers me, since I can value it based on how much entertainment it brings. What I take umbrage with is how crippling it is to the matchmaking and games longevity. With this business model each DLC adds more content but ironically devalues all of it by making it harder to find a game.

    And there's plenty of people who will simply refuse to buy the game if they do the same thing.

    Seriously. Very Accurate^^. I know friends who will refuse to buy the game as a whole if it has the same DLC, but even if they succumb, they sure as H*** aren't buy the season pass, so why would I?
    giphy.gif
  • So what to add to justify a season pass: Maybe a block adding of new heroes/troops like prehaps DLC "Rebels" show. One for "Legends" (a mix of EU deemed Canon again). Reality is there will be a season pass so question is what dlc would justify us buying it.
  • Massman98
    299 posts Member
    edited April 2017
    So what to add to justify a season pass: Maybe a block adding of new heroes/troops like prehaps DLC "Rebels" show. One for "Legends" (a mix of EU deemed Canon again). Reality is there will be a season pass so question is what dlc would justify us buying it.

    Yup. So far the repeated items are: weapons, gadgets (Gadgets. Not "Star Cards"), heroes, and customization options) and that works for me.

    EDIT: DOESN'T mean to sell main heroes in DLC, like Vader or well any of them iconic ones
    giphy.gif
  • Landeaux
    3467 posts Member
    If they make it where all the maps ship but you have to pay, say, $30 to unlock more heroes and villains, so be it. I rather than than a game deprived of maps and gamemodes unless you buy a $50 season pass
  • Blazur wrote: »
    You want to call it 'incomplete' or what not, you're just arguing semantics. The fact is, the vanilla game you buy for $60 is what you're buying. It's as 'complete' as it's going to be. Maybe your idea of completion is with a campaign. Whatever. Other games were online only were played heavily. The DLC is an 'expansion', and whether or not you think it should have been released with the game at first is irrelevant.

    I've never been one to argue the base game was incomplete. For me, there was plenty of fun packed into the core game to make an impression. And I'd like to believe DICE when they claim nothing was cut from the game to save for future DLC.

    It's not even the price that bothers me, since I can value it based on how much entertainment it brings. What I take umbrage with is how crippling it is to the matchmaking and games longevity. With this business model each DLC adds more content but ironically devalues all of it by making it harder to find a game.

    And there's plenty of people who will simply refuse to buy the game if they do the same thing.

    Agreed.
  • So what to add to justify a season pass: Maybe a block adding of new heroes/troops like prehaps DLC "Rebels" show. One for "Legends" (a mix of EU deemed Canon again). Reality is there will be a season pass so question is what dlc would justify us buying it.

    If they could make enough different hero/bounty hunter/semi heroes, they could release those as packs of 4 or 6, along with customizeable skins. If they sold them cheaper, like say - $6.99 or something. They could still make a killing, and give us all the cards, weapons, and maps for free. Weapons and cards would be in-game attainables through Jabba.

    I am one with the force. The force is with Steve.
  • Landeaux
    3467 posts Member
    Massman98 wrote: »
    Blazur wrote: »
    If it's the same **** at least we have the Respawn game to fall back on. Look at the next set of free content which is slated to come to Titanfall 2. They're also under the umbrella of EA.

    https://www.ea.com/games/titanfall/titanfall-2/news/frontier-news-network-13

    True but noone bought Titanfall, EA knows were buying every star wars game possible, so they'll screw us over on cost

    No one bought Titanfall because they had a terrible marketing plan. They released Titanfall around the same time they released Battlefield 1. It was set up for failure. I bought the game and it was improved from the first one; wasn't a bad game...just forced to compete against a superior game
  • I see the Season Pass as a reality of gaming. The free market will determine whether this practice remains. As for me, I'm going to spend the money. I spent the money the first time and feel like I got my money's worth, when measured in time spent playing. Others measure in amount of content received at the time, or perhaps value it less. That's up to the individual.

    You want to call it 'incomplete' or what not, you're just arguing semantics. The fact is, the vanilla game you buy for $60 is what you're buying. It's as 'complete' as it's going to be. Maybe your idea of completion is with a campaign. Whatever. Other games were online only were played heavily. The DLC is an 'expansion', and whether or not you think it should have been released with the game at first is irrelevant.

    All that being said, I do agree that it divides the community. It makes matchmaking harder, and the longevity of the experience suffers. I hope they do get rid of the paid map expansions and reserve it for other customizations or access. So overall I think I agree with you, but I want the content, and if I have to pay for it, I'm paying for it.

    I think for us older gamers we compare what was considered a complete game in previous generations to what is released now ... and for some modern games such as BF1 there is a definite reduction in the amount of content.

    EA are notorious for this. When franchises like Madden and NHL move on to a new console EA strip out previous content then drip feed it back in as the years go by.
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!