EA Games Boss: We Won't Quit Until Battlefield Is Number One

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

EA Games Boss: We Won't Quit Until Battlefield Is Number One

Patrick Soderlund

EA Games chief Patrick Soderlund says he's not going to give up until he's number one.

Back in the spring of 2011 when John Riccitiello still had a job, he did his best to build up the rivalry between Battlefield and Call of Duty as a true clash of the titans. "[Battlefield 3] is designed to take [Call of Duty] down," he said. "If you're looking for a battle of the titans, a Red Sox versus Yankees, if you're trying to understand if it's Microsoft versus Google and what the tip-off point is for this holiday season - this is it."

And Battlefield 3 did pretty well for itself but Call of Duty is still the big dog, and while we don't have Riccitiello to kick around anymore, Soderlund is picking up his war-of-the-words torch. "Competition is good. It brings the best out of people. If there was only Battlefield or only Call of Duty, then the development teams might have been a little bit more content. We don't look at them necessarily and mimic what they do," he told MCV. "But we think about them."

"Maybe they weren't thinking about us much when we made Battlefield 3, but I can tell you, they are thinking about us now. They need too," he continued. "We made a dent in the FPS market and we took share from them. And I am not going to give up until I'm number one and I am going to make sure I'm number one."

Soderlund said he believes EA has "the right team, the right product and the right strategy" to reach the top, but added that there's no plan or pressure to turn Battlefield into an annual franchise like Call of Duty. "We have other games now. We have Titanfall, which we didn't have when we had Medal of Honor," he said. "To me it is about a balanced portfolio."

Battlefield 4 is scheduled to come out on October 29 for the Xbox 360, PlayStation 3 and PC, on November 15 for the PlayStation 4 and November 22 for the Xbox One.

Source: MCV

Permalink

Good luck mate. But neither you're nor Kotick are seeing a penny out of me.

As much as I like the Battlefeld series, if they're not going to stop until they're 'number one', they won't be stopping for quite a long time. It's not really about the games themselves any more, it's about what you know, what you're used to. You're not going to get many CoD fans with a new Battlefield game, and I don't even see why you'd want to.

Well, it's a big pile of number 2 right now, so I guess you're close.

Who knows, it could happen.

My War Shooter Obsessive friends are talking about Battlefield 4 much more than CoD Ghosts.

It was number 1 once, now it's number 4. Jesus, these guys don't know they're making Battlefield 4...

Normally this kind of rivalry will bring out the best of both parties and make sure they both strife to improve their games to the best possible level in order to outshine the other.

However, this is EA and Activision, so I guess it'll just be more of the same with just sharper graphics, more grinding for unlocks and once in a while a new dog.

lacktheknack:
Who knows, it could happen.

My War Shooter Obsessive friends are talking about Battlefield 4 much more than CoD Ghosts.

I haven't heard a peep about Battlefield 4 from my friends, by contrast.

It could still happen, though. I wonder which would happen first: #1 status or EA running out of cash to throw at it.

They need to dial it back on the DLC and microtransactions if they want to compete with COD

So you want to be number one? Well here's an idea: stop doing things to your video games that seems to piss off a reasonable amount of the video game community!

Eh, you may take a while there then DICE-man. Which saddens me, because it means that you will keep on trying with this instead of doing something with Mirror's Edge.

What worries me is that they consider all these shooters as a 'balanced portfolio'.

I hardly doubt they will do it this year either... i can imagine a lot of pissed off battlefield fans wont be investing in battlefield 4 (myself included) after the lies that where marketed to us during battlefield 3's development "true successor to battlefield 2 " utter bullshit. Not to mention the horrible patching system having to revolve around the consoles, the utterly horrific map design based around clusterfucks and bottle necks with no consideration towards 64 players. Then the so called community manager who only posted pics of his bloody cat and did nothing what so ever but teased and lied to try and keep fans from causing shit storms such as the one over the blue tint " too colourful™ "

To be fair to the guy's point, most of the FPS players on my friends list are still playing BF3 rather than BLOPs 2. I'd say that proves (at least as far as my situation is concerned) that his "we made a dent in CoD" statement has a bit of validity to it.

"We're going to keep taking derivatives of CoD4.x until we replace it!"
Well, to be fair, that's also what Activision has been doing for the last 5 years.

Get rid of Origin and I'll give BF4 a try.

For starters, maybe try to spruce up the visual variety in the game. BF3's visuals were absolutely stellar in execution, but they were kinda bland in style. Maybe, just maybe, you should consider doing something a tad more artistic. If nothing else, it'll help distinguish BF from CoD, so people who otherwise would've only bought the latest CoD will buy the next BF game also, instead of just your competition.

P.S. Thanks

Sigh. I'm sick of this. I don't want any first person shooters to be "number one".

I'm sick of hearing about first person shooters and I'm sick of this being a thing. This has been so infectious that some people actually thought a Mega Man first person shooter might be a good idea. It is ruining franchises I actually care about.

All of my favourite video game franchises have withered with the trends. 2D platformers, fighting games, Japanese RPGs. All once popular video game genres are treated as old trends despite the fact that I still love them. When does this first-person-shooter trend go away?

I never wanted to play first person shooters back in the 90s, and I sure as heck haven't changed my mind now. First person shooters, oh first person shooters. Please just go away.

Andy Chalk:
Soderlund ... added that there's no plan or pressure to turn Battlefield into an annual franchise like Call of Duty.

Did he ACTUALLY say that, or is this just putting words in his mouth? In an entire paragraph of quotes, you specifically generalized that statement. I mean, their actions do imply that they like breathing room, but the jury is still out.

TiberiusEsuriens:

Andy Chalk:
Soderlund ... added that there's no plan or pressure to turn Battlefield into an annual franchise like Call of Duty.

Did he ACTUALLY say that, or is this just putting words in his mouth? In an entire paragraph of quotes, you specifically generalized that statement. I mean, their actions do imply that they like breathing room, but the jury is still out.

It was like that in the source link, too. It probably wasn't made up, but if it was, it was MCV's doing, not Andy Chalk's.

P.S. Thanks

TiberiusEsuriens:

Andy Chalk:
Soderlund ... added that there's no plan or pressure to turn Battlefield into an annual franchise like Call of Duty.

Did he ACTUALLY say that, or is this just putting words in his mouth? In an entire paragraph of quotes, you specifically generalized that statement. I mean, their actions do imply that they like breathing room, but the jury is still out.

The original article also doesn't directly quote this, but it continues it with a quote.

Unlike Call of Duty, Battlefield is not an annual franchise. And EA retired its other FPS franchise, Medal of Honor, last year. But Soderlund says there's no pressure to release a new Battlefield every year.

"We have other games now. We have Titanfall, which we didn't have when we had Medal of Honor. To me it is about a balanced portfolio."

Anyway, it's usually best to ignore the Escapist article and just head for the source if you're interested in a story.

Kwil:
Well, it's a big pile of number 2 right now, so I guess you're close.

actually it's Number 3 since Skyrim also sold more than BF3

You know what, I really don't fucking get this, you could sit and explain this until the end of time but I still don't fucking get it, there is nothing to gain from competing with CoD. At all. Nothing. Just fuck off EA.

llafnwod:

TiberiusEsuriens:

Andy Chalk:
Soderlund ... added that there's no plan or pressure to turn Battlefield into an annual franchise like Call of Duty.

Did he ACTUALLY say that, or is this just putting words in his mouth? In an entire paragraph of quotes, you specifically generalized that statement. I mean, their actions do imply that they like breathing room, but the jury is still out.

The original article also doesn't directly quote this, but it continues it with a quote.

Unlike Call of Duty, Battlefield is not an annual franchise. And EA retired its other FPS franchise, Medal of Honor, last year. But Soderlund says there's no pressure to release a new Battlefield every year.

"We have other games now. We have Titanfall, which we didn't have when we had Medal of Honor. To me it is about a balanced portfolio."

Anyway, it's usually best to ignore the Escapist article and just head for the source if you're interested in a story.

Haha, BURN.

Yeah, I'm at work so I forgot to check source. You know how wikipedia style link clinking can destroy an entire productive day :(

EstrogenicMuscle:
This has been so infectious that some people actually thought a Mega Man first person shooter might be a good idea. It is ruining franchises I actually care about.

Hey I don't know, Maverick Hunter was being made by a dev made up of people who worked on Metroid Prime. A lot of people thought that was a stupid idea too, but it turned out alright and it's generally considered one of the best of its generation. So maybe, just maybe, lightning could've struck twice.

Still, I would rather take a Mega Man-flavored Metroid Prime clone over no Mega Man at all, which is all we'll be getting from Capcom for now.

That's assuming they're still going to be around for long. Apparently they're in pretty bad financial shape.

OT: so EA is bent on chasing that COD-dollar, eh? Well, good luck.

I kinda admire his drive, albeit in a sad sort of way, to become the number one spunkgargleweewee game. But, to guys like me and Yahtzee, you and COD will always be #2.

image

Poop reference!

Ok, if he want's to do that, here's the challenge.

I don't even consider buying a BF game these days, it's a multiplayer game, it depends on the community, EA is churning these games out way too fast for me to consider investing in a BF game. When the next BF game comes out that's the community gone.

Fix that and we'll talk. Until then only the real die-hards will buy your game on a whim as soon as it comes out.

So he's basically challenging Activision to a spunkgargleweewee developing contest.

Just homogenize both your games to the point where the only thing that sets them apart is the title on the box. You know how you WOULD get more people playing? Battlefield 2245. Robot mech battles with foot soldiers on the ground. Jetpacks and laserguns.

You know actually putting fun shit in your game?

Nobody playing Call of Duty wants to play Battlefield and nobody playing Battlefield wants to play Call of Duty. Why? Because they already have a spunkgargleweewee game. They don't have time, interest or care for a second spunkgargleweewee game on their shelf.

I always thought that the new Medal of Honor games are EA's answer to CoD. The Battlefield games are very different. Battlefield 3 resembled CoD only in the single player campaign.

Well, you know, he wants his company's franchise to succeed. Can't get mad at him for that.

However, I get the feeling that if he had to toss up between "making the best game on the market" and "making the most money", he'd pick the latter. Which might be cynical of me, but there you go.

and the world collectively facepalms.

Well they won't be seeing a cent out of me as I don't play spunkgargleweewee games, I prefer FUN first person shooters like UT and Doom.

Good luck with that EA, the only way CoD will go to Number 2 or lower is when it finally burns itself out. Now go! Make your bland, grey/brown, 'realistic' wank and pointless shooter!

When you consider Call of Duty the pinnacle of what's good in the gaming market. You need to realise everyone with any taste wants you to be in a different market.

Mod tools, Scrap origin as a requirement, Dinosaurs (zombies are done to death)Cross platform Multiplayer.

I fopr one dont care for COD its got very stale and very quick Ive not cared for them since COD:WAW

"We have other games now. We have Titanfall....

This comment actually made me gleam. I have no intention of picking up an XBONE, yet M$ is alluding to the fact that Titanfall will be an XBONE exclusive. Now, they haven't come out and said "titanfall will only be available on the XBONE." Instead they've said "titanfall will be on the xbone." I suspect titanfall is a timed exclusive, and not a console exclusive. Since when does EA, the publishers of annual titles like Madden, as well as other multi platform games the likes of Mirror's Edge, Battlefield, Dead Space etc decide "you know what? I think we'd be best suited to release the hyped, debut game from our Respawn studio on not only a single console, but the console with the smallest market share."

No way! And this comment that EA "has Titanfall," made in the vein that it would be a game that allows them to compete with COD, only enforces for me that Titanfall will be released on the PS4, only after the XBONE. Because there's no way in hell they can hope to computer with COD by releasing a Triple - A title on a single console.

 Pages 1 2 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