Off-Kilter
Banned
Because if there's one thing the shooter market needs right now is annualized Battlefield. As much as I liked BC2, I would really prefer for Visceral to do it's own thing.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Speculation: Visceral developing Battlefield game for Fall 2014 (with evidence)
- Thread starter Nirolak
- Start date
Sleeplessnights
Banned
What are Criterion doing then? With that few people could they be just working on concept for a new game or are they done for a while?
Off-Kilter
Banned
Can't see how they would rotate Titanfall if they don't have the rights to anything but the first game.
UberTag
Member
It's going to be interesting to see how many shooters can be annualized into $110-120 mega-games (effectively a 3-4 month window before you get locked out of multiplayer due to mandatory DLC) at the expense of other genres and franchises before they burn out the audience. Clearly they haven't even come close to hitting the wall yet even with COD in a downturn.
Aren't they switching off with Ghost Games to release annual Need for Speed titles that look and play the same?
Yeah but what other publisher would they go to?
OldAsUrSock
Banned
DICE said that they can't do many games at once, but when they said that I thought it was strange that they have Battlefield, Mirror's Edge and Star Wars: Battlefront. I guess this makes sense now. RIP Battlefield
Rotation is corporate speak for line-up as opposed to annual rotation.
Nice detective work Niro.
Now can you do me a favor and find evidence if Sledgehammer Games or Treyarch are working on 2014's CoD?
Sledgehammer is definitely making a CoD game.
I haven't been able to nail that down for Treyarch, but they're still using Radiant so I would suspect they are.
Sledgehammer is doing the most hiring so I would guess they're next: https://twitter.com/SHGames
Off-Kilter
Banned
Dunno, but if the incident with EA signing the exclusivity deal with Microsoft is anything to go by, the relationship between EA and Respawn may have soured a bit.
Vince sounded surprised and almost a little saddened that the deal was inked.
Muffdraul
Member
I have to say, I can definitely understand the corporate suit logic of "OK, our bad for trying to make you turn your successful survival horror franchise into a mega-successful dudebro shooter. We realize it was a mistake. So instead, now we're making you do the next iteration of our established mega-successful dudebro shooter franchise."
The talent is still there, corporate exec interference was the real problem.
The talent is still there, corporate exec interference was the real problem.
I'm okay with the idea of a non-DICE dev working on a new BF release for 2014. I'm just as disgusted with everyone else at the shambles this BF4 launch has been, and at this point I have no interest in a BF5. I feel like DICE has lost control of this franchise. There's no vision. It's just more guns, more unlocks, more glitches, etc.
But the idea of a new studio working on a BF title, possibly BC3, gives me hope that we might see a new BF title that's given a little room to breathe and do something different. Maybe a smaller team won't have the same pressure that's put on DICE to deliver a COD-killer.
Probably just wishful thinking, but since I've lost faith in DICE this speculation gives me a small glimmer of hope for a quality BF title.
But the idea of a new studio working on a BF title, possibly BC3, gives me hope that we might see a new BF title that's given a little room to breathe and do something different. Maybe a smaller team won't have the same pressure that's put on DICE to deliver a COD-killer.
Probably just wishful thinking, but since I've lost faith in DICE this speculation gives me a small glimmer of hope for a quality BF title.
Duxxy3
Member
speculawyer
Member
So is EA going to adopt the ATVI strategy and have a couple dev teams tag-team their main shooter brand every other year such that there will be a new Battlefield every year?
Off-Kilter
Banned
What's the word, man?
Almost assuredly.
He obviously can't say, but given that neither him nor Ian denied this, and EA hasn't either, I'm feeling pretty good about my prediction.
Off-Kilter
Banned
Oh. Well I figured if he took the time to drop in like this, he'd have something to share. :/He obviously can't say, but given that neither him nor Ian denied this, and EA hasn't either, I'm feeling pretty good about my prediction.
We already got something!: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=92659072&postcount=89
Note how he alleviates the concern that they're only working on Battlefield and Star Wars by listing out three projects, but does not actually deny the whole Battlefield part.
Muffdraul
Member
Yes, and after Dead Space 2 came out I saw that there was no great loss. And I still get a kick out of Schofield's sour grapes tweets about it.
Duxxy3
Member
There was certainly a drop off from 1 to 2, but obviously nowhere as bad as 2 to 3. 3 might as well have been a completely different series.
Muffdraul
Member
I disagree, in my eyes there was absolutely no decline from 1 to 2. I've heard all of the arguments for why that's supposedly the case, but as far as I'm concerned it's all bullshit. Sorry.
I think most people expected that game to be TitanFall.
Remember when the general consensus was that Titanfall would go to other platforms eventually because EA wouldn't be able to use it to compete with COD if it was Microsoft exclusive?
EA isn't positioning Titanfall to be a COD killer. They're positioning it as a new IP.
SolidSnakeUS
Member
Well whatever it is, I hope they got some amazing people work on the new games, especially BF and Star Wars. They're lucky to get two major design heads both from 343 and Guerrilla games.
Looking back on it. It was really dumb for us to think that EA would position Titanfall, an IP they don't own, as their "Call of Duty." Why would they do that? They can't force it into a yearly franchise, they don't have control over the creators, it's just another game they're publishing and they managed get more money out of it by getting less people to play it.
I wonder how much this is going to affect the BF4 expansion time table, and Visceral's game in general.
Muffdraul
Member
And those are mutually exclusive... how?
They aren't mutually exclusive if you love putting all your eggs in one basket and potentially having it fail. As much hype as it's getting, it's still unproven and EA as already shown with Battlefield and Medal of Honor that they're more interested in positioning well known IPs against COD.
Also like I said right after: Why would EA try to make a IP they don't own from a company they don't have significant control over into their "COD Killer"?
Muffdraul
Member
I still don't get why a new IP can't also be a "COD killer". My question was rhetorical though, as I already know that there is no sensible answer to it. =P
SHADES
Member
As soon as the ranking system was announced I knew that this was the dawn of a yearly battlefield, 8 million to Col 100 when BF3 was 24.6m.
This is a bad move for Battlefield IMO & looking a premium all the DLC's are only supported/released until October 2014.
Damn you EA you can't even get a working title out the gate before pushing another one down our necks & yes I know its our choice to buy them or not but as a BF fan its IMO exploiting the decent base they've built upon. Such a shame as CoD may seem like a good business model now but will it still be in 5 years time? I don't think so.
This is a bad move for Battlefield IMO & looking a premium all the DLC's are only supported/released until October 2014.
Damn you EA you can't even get a working title out the gate before pushing another one down our necks & yes I know its our choice to buy them or not but as a BF fan its IMO exploiting the decent base they've built upon. Such a shame as CoD may seem like a good business model now but will it still be in 5 years time? I don't think so.
elementalsin
Member
Visceral already had amazing audio.... add this guy and wtfbbq man. I really wish they'd stick to creepy stuff
Samir Sedlar
Member
oh GOD, this is awful, the worst news one could ever hear, seriously what the fuck EA !!
So instead of -I don't know- letting Visceral create a new IP, or go back to the drawing board for Dead Space 4 that focuses more on Survival Horror, or try to make Dante's Purgatory that isn't a God of War clone, no no no, EA makes them another FPS ((like the market doesn't have enough of those)), and Battlefield non the less, Sigh.
Seriously I hate this shit.
So instead of -I don't know- letting Visceral create a new IP, or go back to the drawing board for Dead Space 4 that focuses more on Survival Horror, or try to make Dante's Purgatory that isn't a God of War clone, no no no, EA makes them another FPS ((like the market doesn't have enough of those)), and Battlefield non the less, Sigh.
Seriously I hate this shit.
Not happy with this potential news. For one thing, you're reducing Visceral to doing yet another Battlefield game. The next thing, is the annual release form for Battlefield. How about you do it the proper way and if you're going to release it, do it in 2015? Give DICE a break on BF, let them work on Battlefront and Mirror's Edge. They're being stretched too thin, is it any wonder BF 4's launch turned out exactly the way it did?
AHA-Lambda
Member
MW4 then?
dragonelite
Member
Microsoft?
But come on Ea i don't want an annualized BF franchise.
And especially not one that wasn't made by Dice.
Will not pre order unless people are telling its really good
So, I don't play CoD or Battlefield, but would it be hypocritical for BF fans to buy an annual release franchise after ditching CoD?
I was under the impression it would be Battlefield and Battlefront and Titanfall. Imagine if they released two of them every year (not 2 each, but 2 franchises in one year every year).
So Battlefield is annual, and then Titanfall and Battlefront are on rotation as the sci-fi shooters. Titanfall and Battlefront will take turns releasing early in the year while BF takes the end of year holiday spot.
Mother of god there is going to be a lot of milk.
I was under the impression it would be Battlefield and Battlefront and Titanfall. Imagine if they released two of them every year (not 2 each, but 2 franchises in one year every year).
So Battlefield is annual, and then Titanfall and Battlefront are on rotation as the sci-fi shooters. Titanfall and Battlefront will take turns releasing early in the year while BF takes the end of year holiday spot.
Mother of god there is going to be a lot of milk.
Broder Salsa
Banned
Oh God NO, not Visceral.
Who says BF fans ditched CoD? They are wildly different first person shooters, liking one and not the other does not necessarily have anything to do with how they threat their customers.
Who says BF fans ditched CoD? They are wildly different first person shooters, liking one and not the other does not necessarily have anything to do with how they threat their customers.
Tell that to the BF and CoD warriors who are fighting all the time.
dragonelite
Member
Why would it, if its good i will probably get it but i not sure if visceral can make a good multiplayer battlefield no one gives a fuck about an battlefield singleplayer the time taken for singleplayer in bf4 should be used to make training tutorials for vehicles like planes and heli after so many years im still scared to fly in one.
/Feels bad when taking off in a jet and 500m further crashing while someone good could take the jet and help in air control.
Broder Salsa
Banned
It's mostly just fanboys of one of the two talking shit about the other, then using shitty arguments to justify why they like one above the other... Kind of like with consoles. There is absolutely nothing hypocritical about still liking BF above CoD even if EA went down this route, they are very different games even if DICE has done further down the CoD way with their shitty campaigns and shitty game modes no one cares about, they are still quite different.
Similar threads
- Locked