Pachter: Battlefield 3 Won't Beat Call of Duty

 Pages 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

Pachter: Battlefield 3 Won't Beat Call of Duty

image

Outspoken analyst Michael Pachter thinks that there's no way EA will top its rival's COD juggernaut.

Call of Duty is very, very popular. Unfortunately for EA, COD is the property of its chief rival, Activision - and EA has been throwing everything including the proverbial kitchen sink to try to dislodge Call of Duty as the shooter king of the hill.

Medal of Honor failed to do that, and EA's next salvo is CryTek's Crysis 2, which hits shelves this week. If Crysis 2 doesn't dethrone Call of Duty, EA's third attempt will be DICE's Battlefield 3 - and DICE's Karl-Magnus Troedsson made it abundantly clear that the studio was setting its sights on its competition.

Unfortunately, when asked whether COD or Battlefield would come out on top, ubiquitous games analyst Michael Pachter looked into his crystal ball and determined that Battlefield 3 doesn't have a prayer of unseating Call of Duty.

"There is no prayer that Battlefield 3 will top the next Call of Duty, silly question," Pachter said in his IndustryGamers column. "EA is trying to gain share incrementally, and I'm sure that if it is a great game, Battlefield 3 will sell 25 - 35% more copies than the last version. It would have to sell around 300% more than the last version to topple Call of Duty."

Still, that's good news for EA, isn't it? Even if it doesn't knock off COD entirely, it's still slowly cutting into Activision's lead, right? Well, maybe not so much:

"The question you didn't ask is whether Battlefield 3 will take share," clarified Pachter. "[Based] upon the growing installed base of COD multiplayer players, it's possible that BOTH games will see higher sales in 2011, so I wonder whether EA will actually 'take' share."

In other words, Battlefield 3 might sell more copies than the last one, but so will Call of Duty - so DICE and EA might not be closing the gap at all.

(Via Destructoid)

Permalink

I'll still buy Battlefield 3, and won't be buying the next CoD. So I guess EA has my vote.

I don't know...putting Battlefield 3 up against a franchise like Call of Duty is pretty DICEy...

OH! I did it again!

image

I think once the media train gets properly rolling on this one, we could really start to see some interest in B3 from the COD crowd. I think they need to get started soon though; I get the feeling that if Activision announce MW3 at E3 and we haven't seen got much media push on B3 pritor to that, then people will only be interested in the next COD.

Wow. Lots of threes and acronyms.

Well, no duh?

I thought this was pretty obvious. A large portion of the CoD fanbase only buys CoD.

Disclaimer: Obviously I don't mean everyone who plays CoD, but I've seen so many people that only play it.

Whoever wins, we lose.

We either get a COD game with Crysis like fidelity or a COD game set in a slightly advanced age of weaponry.

Both will play the same, both will feel the same, and both will be getting yearly releases for not reason, and then we'll miss the days Madden was 'recycled'.

Well, It probably won't top COD's sales and it might not even top the absurdly high review scores (high 80's and 90's? should be high 70s low 80's, except for big red one and COD4), but it will undoubtedly will be a vastly superior game (just like the last 4 battlefield games were, even heroes).

AceAngel:
We either get a COD game with Crysis like fidelity or a COD game set in a slightly advanced age of weaponry.

Both will play the same, both will feel the same, and both will be getting yearly releases for not reason, and then we'll miss the days Madden was 'recycled'.

HA! Great joke. I severely hope you're kidding. Not about the Crysis part but the Battlefield part. You have OBVIOUSLY never played a battlefield game for more than 30 seconds if you somehow think they play anywhere near the same, or will get yearly releases. Battlefield games will not be produced yearly because you would had to add a second studio, and no one would be able to capture that distinct Battlefield "feel" as well as DICE.

I think Battlefield 3 will be awesome, but there are way too many Xbox Cod fanboys.

Pachter: The analyst that is always right by saying things everyone already knows.

At least he is honest. If this has a real campaign, I might give it a shot, but I've never been a huge fan of the Battlefield series. Call of Duty, well... World at War was the last I bought, and after renting MW2 and hearing about BLops, looks like World at War was the last I'm buying...

BF3 won't beat Call of Duty sales-wise, because people buy CoD for the name. Battlfield 3 will undoubtedly be the better game, however.

Even Bad Company 2 is infinitely better than any CoD game.

MationMac:
I think Battlefield 3 will be awesome, but there are way too many Xbox Cod fanboys.

Bingo. I'll be predicting that Battlefield 3 PC will in the long term outsell Modern Warfare 3 PC. Bad Company 2 is (according to Xfire) getting longer play times than either Black Ops or Modern Warfare 2, so it's not unheard of.

Outspoken? The guy won't shut his mouth.
And honestly, Battlefield not beating CoD in sales? Whoever thought it would must be delirious.

Pretty sure I put more hours into Battlefield 2 alone than I did in the entire Call of Duty series.

So personally, hell yes I am excited for BF3 and pretty sure it will take CoD off my radar for a quite some time.

if battlefield 3 is anywhere near crysis 2-level fun times, it'll do fine. rather than beat activision's shitassery w/ the call of doody series, i'd consider it preferable ea keeps making quality games that do more for people who don't care all that much about nazi zombies or michael bay-influenced shooting galleries. games like crysis or bad company 2 i'd totally play five years from now, whereas the cod series i tend to sell (rent nowadays) after about a week of i-can-get-roughly-the-same-thing-playing-counter-strike.

Another thing is, even though Battlefield is an amazing franchise(I'd take it over CoD any day, but we'll get to why), they do have slightly different demographics. There is surely some overlap, perhaps most with Battlefield fans also playing CoD, than there is CoD fans playing Battlefield. That's because Battlefield is a larger scale warfare kind of game, where there are a sense of tactic and teamwork involved. CoD is the arena shooter of the "realistic" shooter era. The Halo of contemporary warfare, if you will. CoD caters to primarily lone wolves, even if they play in teams, I'd dare say that most are only after their personal gain through personal victory. It stats and run and gun, and that demographic is easier to expand, because of the lower treshold for mastery at a certain level. In my opinion, those that favor Battlefield over CoD, myself included, are looking for a richer shooting experience, and an experience that require a different mindset, that if not harder per se, requires a certain amount of patience, if you will.

It's been discussed time and time again, Shamus Young did a column on it a while back if I'm not wrong(someone did, but I'm not 100% it was him), that the genre tags we use are to general to actual convey what content the game has, and what demographic it caters to. Even though CoD and BF share core mechanics, they play very differently mechanically, and the style of play and the mindset used are(mostly) quite different.

Almost every messageboard/forum I go to, a lot of people pledge their allegiance to Bad Company 2/Battlefield 3 as opposed to COD whenever such an argument arises, citing superior graphics/gameplay/realism/weapons/story etc, but everyone and their mum seems to end up getting right back behind COD and buying a copy whenever the annual installment comes out, abandoning BC2 (the 360 Squad Rush servers are becoming increasingly deserted).

I liken it to guerrilla fighters rallying people up to overthrow an evil dictator. The people show their support at demonstrations and rallies, but when the moment of truth comes, they all cower back into their comfort zones and pledge their allegiance once more to the Treyarch Worker's Party.

The more I think about it, the more it pisses me off. Why can't people be open to change, try something NEW every year? Do we still all wanna be playing the exact same old scripted thing on an obsolete relic engine when Call of Duty: Modern Ops at War 6 comes out?

Well, Battlefield 3 is a very different game from CoD. CoD is more close to Counterstrike; close-quarters, individualist combat that doesn't rely on team-based activities but benefits from them. Battlefield is the complete opposite of that.

However, Battlefield 3 is the reason that I won't be buying the next CoD. I don't have time and money to play two new multiplayer shooters at the same time.

Delusibeta:

MationMac:
I think Battlefield 3 will be awesome, but there are way too many Xbox Cod fanboys.

Bingo. I'll be predicting that Battlefield 3 PC will in the long term outsell Modern Warfare 3 PC. Bad Company 2 is (according to Xfire) getting longer play times than either Black Ops or Modern Warfare 2, so it's not unheard of.

This could be true for Battlefield since most of the CoD series feel like time killers just until the next similar release to come out the next year. They're turning into bloody sports franchises for hells sakes.

I hope the next COD goes the way of Guitar Hero just so Activision notices it needs some new IPs, they're even trying to make a sequel out of Prototype for gods sake!

Activision i am disapoint

And yeah i guess COD will end up beating Battlefield... I can't describe how irritated i am by this so i'll just leave this here

image

And again, Pachter with "Shit everyone in the gaming community already knew."

That's like saying "Rift wont sell as much as WoW" or "Braid will not sell as much as bejewled." Of course it wont. That does not mean that Battlefield 3 will be a bad game, it will be a great game. Nor does that mean EA will be a bad company to invest in.

This is news? The only thing that's going to beat Call of Duty is Call of Duty itself, when it finally burns itself out and people are sick of it. Just ask Guitar Hero, which is dead, and Rock Band, which is on life support but really should just gets its plugged pulled because it's really painful to see it keep lying in that hospital bed day in and day out without getting any peace. Just let Call of Duty keep pushing out a new game every year and it'll eventually be its own ruin. Yes, it will take longer than those two music games I mentioned because Duty doesn't require expensive controller bundles to play and because they rotate devs so each game gets about 2 years of time in the oven before being served so people don't get undercooked messes, but just give it enough time and it will destroy itself regardless.

So I guess it's being proven . . .

*puts on sunglasses*

by science.

YEEEAAAAAH!

Sorry, couldn't resist. That said, I think Pachter is right. Despite the air of anti-COD, COD is still king. ;P

Its a shame because i recon most gamers agree that cod would have to have a MASSIVE shake up to beat battlefeild 3 in quality. Shame all the casuals will rush out and buy a game from an evil company :(

Patcher actually said something sensible and based in facts?

*Checks the skating conditions in Hell*

Probably not. Which is unfortunate, as Battlefield games are generally less shitty than CoD games in every aspect.

Battlefield 3 will destroy CoD.... on the PC.

Consoles, on the other hand, will belong to CoD until it chokes itself off, going the way of the dodo. For the most part, CoD has jumped the shark, and Battlefield just keeps looking better.

As far as FPS's go, CoD and Battlefield are fairly different types. CoD really is more of a fast-paced run'n'run, while Battlefield has it's huge maps with big teams and (preferably) some tactic.

Good, I'm glad it won't beat CoD. It's an entirely different game in the first place. Battlefield trying to beat CoD is like Toy Story 3 trying to beat the SAW movies at the Oscars. Same medium, different styles.

Wish people would get rid of the 'MUSTBEATCODIMUSTIMUSTIMUST!!1!' mindset and focus on making their game fantastic instead of trying to "de-throne" another game.

Hachura:
Almost every messageboard/forum I go to, a lot of people pledge their allegiance to Bad Company 2/Battlefield 3 as opposed to COD whenever such an argument arises, citing superior graphics/gameplay/realism/weapons/story etc, but everyone and their mum seems to end up getting right back behind COD and buying a copy whenever the annual installment comes out, abandoning BC2 (the 360 Squad Rush servers are becoming increasingly deserted).

I liken it to guerrilla fighters rallying people up to overthrow an evil dictator. The people show their support at demonstrations and rallies, but when the moment of truth comes, they all cower back into their comfort zones and pledge their allegiance once more to the Treyarch Worker's Party.

The more I think about it, the more it pisses me off. Why can't people be open to change, try something NEW every year? Do we still all wanna be playing the exact same old scripted thing on an obsolete relic engine when Call of Duty: Modern Ops at War 6 comes out?

i don't think it's fair to assume people who post on gaming messageboards represent gamers as a whole, let alone gamers that buy the call of duty games. it's a little like being surprised twilight books are so popular when most users on my favorite literary messageboards tend to talk bad about it in favor of other things that aren't as popular.

Battlefield it totally different try playing Battlefield NAM or Battlefield 2 then go to a cod
The maps are 3 to 4x bigger than cod, the weapons are usually not customizable, and Battlefield has everything from drivable tanks to jeeps to helicopter to fighter planes. There's more players there's more everything in Battlefield than in COD

Anyway id much rather buy Battlefield 3 than COD whatever the hell ,Battlefields usually last longer.

Xyphon:
Good, I'm glad it won't beat CoD. It's an entirely different game in the first place. Battlefield trying to beat CoD is like Toy Story 3 trying to beat the SAW movies at the Oscars. Same medium, different styles.

Wish people would get rid of the 'MUSTBEATCODIMUSTIMUSTIMUST!!1!' mindset and focus on making their game fantastic instead of trying to "de-throne" another game.

It's not like the CoD bubble isn't set to burst anyway. Black Ops had the greatest sales numbers on record; does anyone really think anyone aside from hardcore fans are going to put down serious cash for a sequel designed by committee? I think Modern Warfare 3 will start the Guitar Hero walk of shame to the poorhouse, to eventually be cast aside by Activision, and then picked up by EA or something.

These kinds of sales cannot sustain themselves. I think Black Ops hit critical mass.

image

Yeah, I dont really care.

As long as the game is good then its all fine. The only thing that I care is if I am going to like it.

AnythingOutstanding:
I don't know...putting Battlefield 3 up against a franchise like Call of Duty is pretty DICEy...

OH! I did it again!

image

It wasnt that good...

Well duh, CoD is obviously more accessible and thus will be favored by the majority over a game that requires team work and coordination.

Also, BF3 will probably sell more copies on the PC. It happened with BF:BC2.

http://www.neoseeker.com/news/13383-battlefield-bad-company-2-tops-sales-charts/
http://www.mygaming.co.za/news/news/5549-Battlefield-Bad-Company-sales-strong.html

 Pages 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here