EA: Battlefield, Medal of Honor Serve Different Audiences

[The Wooster]

EA: Battlefield, Medal of Honor Serve Different Audiences

Battlefield and Medal of Honor have a lot in common, except fans.

In Battlefield 3 you play a grizzled US soldier bravely battling the forces of terrorism, assault rifle in hand. In the most recent Medal of Honor game, you play as an extra-grizzled US soldier bravely battling the forces of terrorism, assault rifle in hand. It's easy to imagine that there's some degree of overlap between the two games' audiences, but according to EA Labels president, Frank Gibeau, only 50% of Medal of Honor fans end up dipping their toes into the Battlefield pool. That's a good thing, apparently.

"We are very careful that Battlefield and Medal of Honor stay differentiated," he said. "There is an inefficiency to having two different brands coming out alternating like that; there is some upside. You don't have the annualized, sequel fatigue. With Medal of Honor we tried to embrace that the game is real. The multiplayer is different than Battlefield. We're trying to use a sequencing strategy to keep it as fresh and different as possible."

According to EA's market research, the Medal of Honor crowd are looking for "more authentic" gameplay and storylines.

Despite its claims to the contrary, EA hasn't been shy about trying to cross pollinate the two fanbases. Medal of Honor's multiplayer was developed by Dice, the same studio responsible for the Battlefield series, and the upcoming Medal of Honor: Warfighter comes with a beta invite for Battlefield 4.

Source: Game Informer via Attack of the Fanboy [http://attackofthefanboy.com/news/ea-differentiate-medal-honor-warfighter-battlefield-3/]

Permalink

 

[FogHornG36]

exept fans, as in BF3 has fans, and medal of honor has none

 

[kajinking]

I'm not entirely familar with Medal of Honor but to me it seems like EA's attempt to make it's own COD while BF3 is...well...the newest Battlefield. Personally I'll stick to BF3 even after warfighter comes out since I'm the type of person who enjoys setting up a defensive line with an LMG and providing suppressing fire rather than running around dual shotguns waiting for a killstreak.

 

[Sneezeguard]

You may say they serve different audiences but to the average person I doubt they see the distinctions between the audience each game is aiming for.

"According to EA's market research, the Medal of Honor crowd are looking for "more authentic" gameplay and storylines."

how does this differentiate Medal of honor from battlefield 3 when a year ago CEO John Riccitiello said this about battlefield 3 in comparision to the modern warfare series.

"I think our game is more authentic. It's definitely going to do a lot of things better. Lighting's better, physics is better, animations are better, particle effects are better, vehicles are better. I think there's a lot of things to like about our product and I think it's going to be a great battle."

Source (http://www.videogamer.com/news/ea_battlefield_3_more_authentic_than_modern_warfare_3.html)

or when DICE producer Patrick Bach said this about battlefield 3.

"We are not trying to create a simulator. But the feeling that what happens in the game is plausible and looks real and authentic is important to us. We have a story tell and want to carry that story across in a unique style and tone grounded in authenticity. Researching authenticity is extremely important for us and it?s impossible to make this stuff up without risking our desired style and tone,?

Source (http://www.industrygamers.com/news/battlefield-3-producer-talks-attention-to-detail/)

It seems both games are striving for authenticity so then what difference is there between the two games?

 

[octafish]

You know how you could differentiate them EA? Don't shoe horn in useless single player and horrible co-op into Battlefield. The single player was terrible, and a waste of resources, focus your efforts in the areas the game excels.

Make Medal of Honor, a Single player experience and maybe throw in some co-op. Don't waste resources on multi-player, make a good single player/co-op campaign of impressive length and quality. Sure it won't sell as much as COD (what would?) but if you build it they will come.

Me? I'm interested in seeing what can be done with Frostbite 2 outside of DICE so I'll have a look at MoH, but it doesn't interest me beyond that.

What disappoints me is the announcement of BF4. BF3 would be fine if they tweaked the netcode and added Squad VOIP. Without a six year wait between games (BFBC2 doesn't count), I doubt anyone will get excited about yet another Battlefield game, unless BF4 is a misnomer and the new game is actually BF2143.

 

[senordesol]

Yet again, EA tries and fails to convince us that the sky is pink.

 

[Doom972]

Battlefield is for those interested in competitive multiplayer in large maps that includes vehicular combat. Medal of Honor is for those interested in singleplayer and multiplayer in small maps with no vehicular combat.

Saying that they are the same is like saying Dragon Age: Origins and Dragon's Dogma are the same.

 

[Lunar Templar]

exept fans, as in BF3 has fans, and medal of honor has none

eeyup. i've seen that guys videos on youtube o.0 the shit you can do with a jet in that game o.o

 

[Neofishie]

The only consistent truth in any statement from EA is that nothing they say has any bearing on what they actually do. I can only wait for the Dead Space tie-in to complete the homogenization.

 

[thethird0611]

This is pretty true. Its the same between COD and Battlefield. It was interesting when BF3 came out, and my friends list split between people who love COD and people who love BF3.

 

[BBboy20]

Battlefield has always been about multiplayer. Medal of Honor has always been about single-player. Battlefield is about the common man with fellow common men against an army of other common men. Medal of Honor (mostly) has been about one dude with an vast set of amazing skills against the world.

Battlefield: Large-scale warfare with fellow human beings
Medal of Honor: Embarking on suicidal adventures that are worthy of the medal itself against AI bots.

You don't have the annualized, sequel fatigue.

No, you're just doing the same thing with different brands.

What disappoints me is the announcement of BF4. BF3 would be fine if they tweaked the netcode and added Squad VOIP. Without a six year wait between games (BFBC2 doesn't count), I doubt anyone will get excited about yet another Battlefield game, unless BF4 is a misnomer and the new game is actually BF2143.

Yes, Bad Company still counts because I'm still waiting for co-op where I can play as Marlowe, Sweetwater, Haggard, or Redford with my buddies...on a golf kart.

But yeah, I can't believe they have the gowl to even mention BF4 this soon and it's not even hard to just use other BF games. Jesus, they've been milking the franchise since the beginning with expansion packs and spin-offs (and been very successful at it)so why are they changing strategies now? Does EA not want to wow people with what BF4 can do and look like on next-gen hardware?

 

[Spitfire]

The only part of this article that was news to me was the fact that they're making Battlefield 4. It's nice to see that EA is not milking the Battlefield franchise - not at all.

 

[surg3n]

In Battlefield 3 you play a grizzled US soldier bravely battling the forces of terrorism, assault rifle in hand.

Except for 50% of the time, when your playing on the non-US team.

I think most people expect that MOH will have more in-depth single player, while BF is primarily a multiplayer game. Theres space in the market for both, but to be honest I'm a bit pissed that they're on about BF4 already - I mean, what about BF3 premium?, that's rolling out over about a year, do they expect people to buy BF4 just as soon as that finishes up!.

 

[Dandark]

In Battlefield 3 you play a grizzled US soldier bravely battling the forces of terrorism, assault rifle in hand.

Except for 50% of the time, when your playing on the non-US team.

I think most people expect that MOH will have more in-depth single player, while BF is primarily a multiplayer game. Theres space in the market for both, but to be honest I'm a bit pissed that they're on about BF4 already - I mean, what about BF3 premium?, that's rolling out over about a year, do they expect people to buy BF4 just as soon as that finishes up!.

Yes they do. They expect people to buy BF3 then buy premium then buy BF4 straight away followed by premium for that. They also expect people to buy any extra DLC for BF3 that isn't covered by premium, if there isn't already then there will be soon, this is EA after all.

 

[Jhooud]

Hrm, am I the only one who misses the Bad Company guys? That was a neat set of characters and a fun way to make the SP portion worth playing around with. C'est la guerre, I suppose.