Battlefield Dev Thinks Its Competition Is Getting Lazy

[MiracleOfSound]

Yeah, and it's already been spoiled elswhere. Several times.

Nice logic there... if someone else did it first then it's ok to do it again?

I've never seen it spoiled anywhere else.

 

[Alden Hou]

can we please get back on topic instead of talking about spoiler tags?

 

[beema]

Shit talking developers always wind up looking stupid. They better hope BF3 pays out.

I find it kind of funny that in a time when games think they need to have a multiplayer to compete that this franchise has decided it needs single player.

I'm 98% positive it will be a forgettable, under 8 hour campaign that nobody will even think about after the first week of release, just like every other modern combat shooter.

The multiplayer might just be so fantastic that doesn't matter though

 

[JourneyThroughHell]

True. But are you saying that DICE didn't try to be engaging? Wouldn't that mean they actively tried not to be engaging? I'm pretty sure it's one or the other.

Yes. I'm saying that the campaign was hastily slapped together and not really meant to be a huge part of the game. DICE did not put much effort into it, in my eyes, or at least, not into all of it.

Not sure if that's sarcasm.

It is.

MW2 did at least do something original with its ending. True.

But what would you suggest BC2 do that would be better? And you've got to remember, DICE wants to make money just as much as the next guy. They needed some sort of sequel hook.

They can at least not steal their main twist from the game they're trying to make fun of.

 

[se7ensenses]

I've always enjoyed the BF series more more than COD.

 

[Z4N5H1N]

Zzzzz. Nothing's lazier than shitting out sequels to your cash cow franchise, and DICE is no less guilty of that than Treyarch or Infinity Ward. Make another Mirror's Edge and we'll talk, DICE; in the mean time, I'll be playing Brink instead of your shiny new "CoD-killer."

 

[JUMBO PALACE]

If anything is going to upset COD, it'll be Battlefield 3. Looking forward to this fall.

 

[Wolfram23]

Well I hope he pulls through with his claims. I'll most definitely be getting BF3, although of course mostly it'll be so I can use a tank in MP but if the SP campaign is any good you bet I'll play through it.

 

[Blightning]

I like the part where he implies DICE is not lazy. Sure, they redevelop their engine all the time, but they never seem to want to fix frustrating things in multiplayer gameplay. Remember podsurfing in BF2142, and how there was no way to stop it but vigilant admins? Or how the best way to destroy objectives in BC2 is anything but actually arming the explosives yourself? Or how C4 Jeeping still works even though it frustrates half the fanbase?

 

[The Random One]

a strong single player campaign is never an unwelcome addition to a game.

Speak for yourself.

 

[Ajna]

True. But are you saying that DICE didn't try to be engaging? Wouldn't that mean they actively tried not to be engaging? I'm pretty sure it's one or the other.

Yes. I'm saying that the campaign was hastily slapped together and not really meant to be a huge part of the game. DICE did not put much effort into it, in my eyes, or at least, not into all of it.

I can't see how I can phrase what I said differently, and I can't see how I can change your mind, so I'll abandon this line of thought completely.

Not sure if that's sarcasm.

It is.

Okay, thanks.

MW2 did at least do something original with its ending. True.

But what would you suggest BC2 do that would be better? And you've got to remember, DICE wants to make money just as much as the next guy. They needed some sort of sequel hook.

They can at least not steal their main twist from the game they're trying to make fun of.
I thought the main twist in MW2 was that an American was the person pulling the strings in the first place?

 

[JourneyThroughHell]

Spoiler

I thought the main twist in MW2 was that an American was the person pulling the strings in the first place?

Alright, one of the main twists. Or at least shocker moments.

 

[Jumplion]

Developers have to occasionally take a leap and try something new, says DICE's general manager.

The question is; will you?

I forsee many a people claiming that it's yet another modern warfare FPS with explosions, craziness, and over the top action. And from what I've see (admittedly very little) it does seem to be yet another modern warfare FPS with explosions, craziness, and over the top action.

Prove me wrong, DICE.

Prove me wrong...

Of course, I loved the Bad Company games, and if they're anything like that then I think I'm in for a treat.

 

[Ajna]

-snip-

That's... Actually way better. You seriously should work for somebody as a storyboard writer, cuz... Really, I'd much rather play that than the actual BC2 campaign. Damn.

 

[DTWolfwood]

I guess EA's other game Medal of Honor doesn't count as competition...ROFL god i could not type that with a straight face XD

Still don't get the Medal of Honor hate around here. Despite what Extra Credits would have you believe, the game actually sold over 4 million copies on the consoles. Admittedly, it's PC sales figures suck at 300K worldwide but something that sells over 4 million copies isn't bad.

well how many of your friends still play it? I know none of mine are. XD

 

[thepyrethatburns]

I guess EA's other game Medal of Honor doesn't count as competition...ROFL god i could not type that with a straight face XD

Still don't get the Medal of Honor hate around here. Despite what Extra Credits would have you believe, the game actually sold over 4 million copies on the consoles. Admittedly, it's PC sales figures suck at 300K worldwide but something that sells over 4 million copies isn't bad.

well how many of your friends still play it? I know none of mine are. XD

That's not actually a good question. Most of my Xbox friends are people that I don't know who just friended me and I rarely refuse a friend request. Out of the people that I do personally know:

One hates competition and only really likes to do co-op if we're doing Live together.
One digs on anything COD and pretty much modern shooters in general (He thinks Battlefield is crap. I don't know if that says something or not.).
Two think that FPS games are for people whose brain stem stopped developing at age 8.

So asking me what my friends think isn't really a great yardstick. If I may offer a criticism, it's also a self-centered one. I don't play a whole lot online. Not counting Sunday Live sessions with my personal friends, I'm not too big on playing with Randoms because of situations like:

Last night, I decided to play L4D2's mutation "Follow the Liter". I was doing well in the game and working well as a team player. We were tied up but I got kicked in the last round. Y'know what my offense was?

I wouldn't join in the discussion of whether the jockey was gay and where he's sticking his "jockey" when he jumps on someone.

However, when I have wanted to play Medal of Honor multi (and I only got it last week after renting it from Gamefly), I have had no problem joining a game. Therefore, a lot of people must still like the multiplayer.

And, once again, 4.3 million copies sold. How many games sell less than that? How many fan favorite games sell less than that? Ultimately sales determine who your competition is.

 

[DTWolfwood]

I guess EA's other game Medal of Honor doesn't count as competition...ROFL god i could not type that with a straight face XD

Still don't get the Medal of Honor hate around here. Despite what Extra Credits would have you believe, the game actually sold over 4 million copies on the consoles. Admittedly, it's PC sales figures suck at 300K worldwide but something that sells over 4 million copies isn't bad.

well how many of your friends still play it? I know none of mine are. XD

That's not actually a good question. [b/] Most of my Xbox friends are people that I don't know who just friended me and I rarely refuse a friend request.[/b] Out of the people that I do personally know:

One hates competition and only really likes to do co-op if we're doing Live together.
One digs on anything COD and pretty much modern shooters in general (He thinks Battlefield is crap. I don't know if that says something or not.).
Two think that FPS games are for people whose brain stem stopped developing at age 8.

So asking me what my friends think isn't really a great yardstick. If I may offer a criticism, it's also a self-centered one. I don't play a whole lot online. Not counting Sunday Live sessions with my personal friends, I'm not too big on playing with Randoms because of situations like:

Last night, I decided to play L4D2's mutation "Follow the Liter". I was doing well in the game and working well as a team player. We were tied up but I got kicked in the last round. Y'know what my offense was?

I wouldn't join in the discussion of whether the jockey was gay and where he's sticking his "jockey" when he jumps on someone.

However, when I have wanted to play Medal of Honor multi (and I only got it last week after renting it from Gamefly), I have had no problem joining a game. Therefore, a lot of people must still like the multiplayer.

And, once again, 4.3 million copies sold. How many games sell less than that? How many fan favorite games sell less than that? Ultimately sales determine who your competition is.

Doesn't that answer the question even better? if strangers, i.e. a correlative to the masses, don't play the game anymore doesn't that tell you something?

I have way more Steam friends than i do actual friends and off those 100+ ppl, about 15 of them bought MoH. Of those 15, 100% of them own BFBC2 or BLOPS. and guess what, none of them currently play MoH but still play the other 2 games listed. pretty telling to me.

edit: sorry i look at the big picture, not specific examples of instances where its wrong. I don't use exceptions to define the rules.

 

[thepyrethatburns]

That's not actually a good question. [b/] Most of my Xbox friends are people that I don't know who just friended me and I rarely refuse a friend request.[/b] Out of the people that I do personally know:

One hates competition and only really likes to do co-op if we're doing Live together.
One digs on anything COD and pretty much modern shooters in general (He thinks Battlefield is crap. I don't know if that says something or not.).
Two think that FPS games are for people whose brain stem stopped developing at age 8.

So asking me what my friends think isn't really a great yardstick. If I may offer a criticism, it's also a self-centered one. I don't play a whole lot online. Not counting Sunday Live sessions with my personal friends, I'm not too big on playing with Randoms because of situations like:

Last night, I decided to play L4D2's mutation "Follow the Liter". I was doing well in the game and working well as a team player. We were tied up but I got kicked in the last round. Y'know what my offense was?

I wouldn't join in the discussion of whether the jockey was gay and where he's sticking his "jockey" when he jumps on someone.

However, when I have wanted to play Medal of Honor multi (and I only got it last week after renting it from Gamefly), I have had no problem joining a game. Therefore, a lot of people must still like the multiplayer.

And, once again, 4.3 million copies sold. How many games sell less than that? How many fan favorite games sell less than that? Ultimately sales determine who your competition is.

Doesn't that answer the question even better? if strangers, i.e. a correlative to the masses, don't play the game anymore doesn't that tell you something?

I have way more Steam friends than i do actual friends and off those 100+ ppl, about 15 of them bought MoH. Of those 15, 100% of them own BFBC2 or BLOPS. and guess what, none of them currently play MoH but still play the other 2 games listed. pretty telling to me.

edit: sorry i look at the big picture, not specific examples of instances where its wrong. I don't use exceptions to define the rules.

You lost me. You asked how my friends feel about it and I told you. You then said if strangers, i.e. a correlative to the masses, don't play the game anymore doesn't that tell you something?

But I've already said that, whenever I have wanted to play a multiplayer game, I have had no problem joining a game. This shows me that enough strangers do like the game's multiplayer if I have no trouble jumping into a game.

Also:

edit: sorry i look at the big picture, not specific examples of instances where its wrong. I don't use exceptions to define the rules.

You're losing me. The big picture is that it sold well. The big picture is that there are still enough people playing the game on multiplayer that there is no problem with jumping in for a quick match. Thusly, I don't see why BF wouldn't see it as competition.

That's why I didn't think that the Friends question was a good one. Saying that 3/4 of my personal friends or your friends don't play it so therefore it is poor competition for Battlefield is more of an "exception" statement than a big picture statement. That's like me saying that the Metal Gear Solid series is crap and most of my friends agree with that statement. Therefore, based on these personal views, MGS is objectively crap.

 

[DTWolfwood]

Spoiler

That's not actually a good question. [b/] Most of my Xbox friends are people that I don't know who just friended me and I rarely refuse a friend request.[/b] Out of the people that I do personally know:

One hates competition and only really likes to do co-op if we're doing Live together.
One digs on anything COD and pretty much modern shooters in general (He thinks Battlefield is crap. I don't know if that says something or not.).
Two think that FPS games are for people whose brain stem stopped developing at age 8.

So asking me what my friends think isn't really a great yardstick. If I may offer a criticism, it's also a self-centered one. I don't play a whole lot online. Not counting Sunday Live sessions with my personal friends, I'm not too big on playing with Randoms because of situations like:

Last night, I decided to play L4D2's mutation "Follow the Liter". I was doing well in the game and working well as a team player. We were tied up but I got kicked in the last round. Y'know what my offense was?

I wouldn't join in the discussion of whether the jockey was gay and where he's sticking his "jockey" when he jumps on someone.

However, when I have wanted to play Medal of Honor multi (and I only got it last week after renting it from Gamefly), I have had no problem joining a game. Therefore, a lot of people must still like the multiplayer.

And, once again, 4.3 million copies sold. How many games sell less than that? How many fan favorite games sell less than that? Ultimately sales determine who your competition is.

Doesn't that answer the question even better? if strangers, i.e. a correlative to the masses, don't play the game anymore doesn't that tell you something?

I have way more Steam friends than i do actual friends and off those 100+ ppl, about 15 of them bought MoH. Of those 15, 100% of them own BFBC2 or BLOPS. and guess what, none of them currently play MoH but still play the other 2 games listed. pretty telling to me.

edit: sorry i look at the big picture, not specific examples of instances where its wrong. I don't use exceptions to define the rules.

You lost me. You asked how my friends feel about it and I told you. You then said if strangers, i.e. a correlative to the masses, don't play the game anymore doesn't that tell you something?

But I've already said that, whenever I have wanted to play a multiplayer game, I have had no problem joining a game. This shows me that enough strangers do like the game's multiplayer if I have no trouble jumping into a game.

Also:

edit: sorry i look at the big picture, not specific examples of instances where its wrong. I don't use exceptions to define the rules.

You're losing me. The big picture is that it sold well. The big picture is that there are still enough people playing the game on multiplayer that there is no problem with jumping in for a quick match. Thusly, I don't see why BF wouldn't see it as competition.

That's why I didn't think that the Friends question was a good one. Saying that 3/4 of my personal friends or your friends don't play it so therefore it is poor competition for Battlefield is more of an "exception" statement than a big picture statement. That's like me saying that the Metal Gear Solid series is crap and most of my friends agree with that statement. Therefore, based on these personal views, MGS is objectively crap.

disclaimer: Did not read text wall

Spoiler: rant

to get back to what i was saying prior to all this, MoH gets rifted on because it came out with a whole lot of hype. then abruptly died. (no news no DLC, smaller and smaller concurrent players) That is a sign of the generic. (looks like its gonna happen to Homefront too.) So
DICE has only 1 real competitor in the FPS space, does it not? the yearly copies of Call of Duty.

The game is new, relatively speaking. Its no longer even in the popular conscience. there will always be a few die-hards playing the game. thats a given. So unless EA kills the servers for the game YOU WILL ALWAYS FIND SOMEONE TO PLAY WITH ON THAT GAME (there are still populated servers for BF1942 doesn't mean its more popular than BFBC2) Plus not every gamer is gonna have the $$ to buy every shooter. and for those that can, the ones im concerned about, don't play MOH anymore.

plus WHY SO SERIOUS? just giving you a reason y MoH gets the hate sauce its a good punching bag since its new and is built around the same setting of "modern" shooters.

great if you still play the game. Most don't. Unless you're trying to argue most do, than you win.

p.s. at this point i want WWII back. fuck all these modern day shooters to hell I was most happy when i had an M1 Garand in my avatars hands.

 

[Squilookle]

It's funny that this guy is saying something about "laziness" when it comes to single-player campaign while being part of DICE.

You can say that again. DICE is just as lazy as the rest of them, and Battlefield games never even HAD a narrative campaign before Bad Company. Unless BF finally has it's singleplayer make use of wide open areas with combined operations of soldiers and vehicles (you know, where BF's strength has always been), then it's just going to be another craptastic corridor shooter like COD is.

They shouldn't see COD as their rival- they should see Flashpoint and Homefront as their rivals.

Didn't Battlefield: Modern Combat's campaign do just that? It's been a while since I played it, but I think so.

Also, though I understand what you mean with "rival", when it comes to money, COD is their main rival. Flashpoint/Homefront are really more "allies", because if they do well, that means there are more people playing "tactical" shooters, and thus more people they can interest. While COD has the main share, there's a huge group of people out there who may not (or, probably, do not) know that "tactical shooters" is an actual term.

Sorry, yeah, I forgot about Modern Combat- that did have a singleplayer. It was still awfully linear though. The shifting soldier mechanic as actually pretty novel though.

I use Homefront and Flashpoint as an ideal rival for battlefield because the gameplay of each holds the same advantages over everything else- they are each in the same league of gameplay. Hell if we were only talking money, then COD would be the main rival of every single video game ever made, and that's not what we're getting at.