Do you have the numbers to back this statement up?
Let me just go ahead and stop you here, because I always see this kind of nonsense sentiment on Gaming Side.
Just because you and others play the game religiously and will shell out money for season passes without question, does NOT mean you get to have a monopoly on public opinion or constructive criticism. Because regardless if you're a fan of Battlefield or not, regardless if you're a fan of the genre in general, the concept of "value" is pretty universal across all genres. And for a game that isn't even out yet that is already attempting to splinter its userbase before it even has one, the value of this product is very poor right off the bat. As anyone who just wants to play the vanilla game and not spend $110 is gonna be left out of a significant amount of content unless they purchase the pass, or buy the DLC a la carte.
This is the same logic that Xbone fanboys used when defending the Xbone's initial policies, saying things like "NONE OF YOU GUYS ARE BUYING THE XBOX ONE ANYWAYS SO WHY ARE YOU COMPLAINING???" Trying to quiet the dissent of others just because, unlike you apparently, they don't shell out money for things without questioning the value first, or considering the past habits of the people making the game, is silly at best, absolutely petty at worst.
I think what SG-17 is getting at is that people who complain about Premium without ever actually paying for it and understanding all the content it contains, probably don't have an accurate perspective on its value (if value is the crux of this conversation).
On paper, "$50 for a season pass of DLC" sounds...not encouraging, yes. Again,
Your general complaints about splintering the community aren't new--they've existed since expansion packs contain exclusive maps (which has been happening for over a decade now), particularly with Battlefield. That's not a concern that's exclusive to Premium.
Your assertion that people who buy Premium are just "shelling out money with no question" is insulting. I personally put faith in DICE with BF3 when I bought Premium, as it had been untested...and it turned out to be great. 20 maps, 20+ weapons, 10+ vehicles, a few new game modes, plus all the extra crap (xp events, camos, battlepacks, etc.). That's $50 for an amount of content that rivals the vanilla game itself.
I think it is actually the only season pass I've bought (well, I got Titanfall's when it was on sale) for any series, because, generally, I KNOW what I'm getting. So please don't assume that Premium customers have not questioned or tried to determine the "value" of this. The value of it is likely a reason why customers still buy it.
Of course I'm hostile to the idea of season passes. I wasn't born yesterday; I actually remember a time when games had content, and any further content release actually added to the package. Today, though? Companies like EA, Activision & Capcom are taking content that was already made for final retail release and locking it away to be sold later, even when that content already exists on the disc. Who in their right mind would want to pay the $20-50 it costs to pay for content that was stripped out? Especially from companies who aren't even guaranteed to have the damn game working out the box if reputation is considered?
Imagine buying a movie on DVD only to find out that some scenes were stripped out of the theatre version just so they can sell a collector's edition before the vanilla DVD even hit shelves. Or even worse, imagine the company that made the movie creating a season pass for their film, drip-feeding the content that was stripped from the final version over the course of a set amount of time. EVEN WORSE, imagine the DVD didn't work as advertised. It seems absurd with movies, right?
The above scenario is what we're dealing with in the gaming industry.
So yeah... I'm pretty adverse to the concept of season passes.
The problem here is that you're equating a Season Pass=withholding launch content. When evidence of this is available, then I think it's a valid concern, and I get that you don't have any trust in the games industry, but assuming that every Season Pass contains withheld content is not the most balanced way of looking at these things.
As I've said before, Expansion Packs, in the past, were NOT always free. Historically, for Battlefield, they absolutely weren't. I'd be willing to bet that comparing the cost of BF2's expansion pack + booster packs is close, if not equal, to the cost and content of Premium.