Q&A: EA DICE on Battlefield: Bad Company

EA DICE on Bad Company's DLC backlash, in-game advertising, and why the game isn't coming to the PC.

Bad Company, EA's newest console Battlefield offering, takes the famed multiplayer PC game into single-player territory. With the game just weeks from release, GameSpot AU spoke to senior producer Karl-Magnus Troedsson about why the game has no PC port in the works, how the company dealt with the recent backlash about downloadable content, and much more.

GameSpot AU: We've heard no mention of a PC game in development. Why have you opted to skip the PC?

Karl Magnus Troedsson: Well, there are a couple of reasons. One of them is we don't want to do straight ports. If we do a console game, which is a true next-gen game we've been working on from the beginning, then it's just porting it over to PC, and we wouldn't feel happy about that. There are so many things that need to go into creating what we think is the perfect PC game. I mean, Battlefield was invented on the PC, so if we do a PC or a Battlefield game, it needs to be spot-on. The major goal of this game is to create a true next-gen game for the next-gen consoles.

GS AU: So do you think you will release a PC version further down the track, if you can find a way to bring it to its full vision?

KMT: It's not that we have forgotten about the PC players. We know that the franchise has a big heritage on PC and there will be other interesting things coming out there that aren't official at the moment.

Vehicles will play an important role in Bad Company.

GS AU: Can you run us through some of the playable vehicles in the game?

KMT: Absolutely. It's a Battlefield game, so it has a lot of different vehicles. First of all, we have them for land, air, and sea. So, for instance, with the boats, we have a light-patrol boat, and we also have more of a heavy cutter--a bigger boat with offensive skills. We have light-attack helicopters and heavy-attack helicopters. Then of course there is a wide variety of land vehicles, ranging from light jeeps, light tanks, to the main battle tanks--the heaviest enemy on the battlefield.

GS AU: Will you be offering PS3 Sixaxis support for any of the vehicles?

KMT: No, we have decided not to.

GS AU: What was the design choice behind that?

KMT: Well, we didn't really feel it added that much to the vehicle control. Vehicle control is a complex thing to nail on a handheld controller anyway. There are so many things you want to do. For instance, driving the tank, you want to rotate the turret, rotate the body, you want to fire the main gun, and deploy smoke. There are a lot of different controls. If you add Sixaxis to this, it just makes it more complex, which is not what we wanted to do. It's definitely something we will look at doing in the future--to see if we can continue to optimise the controller for future games. In this case, we thought that it wasn't the right focus for us.

GS AU: With the title nearing completion and almost ready to ship, are you any closer to confirming the time frame for the Conquest mode?

KMT: It's not been set. We're working on it right now, testing out the game mode and maps as they are. We don't have a set deadline, but I would expect it later in the [Northern] summer. The goal is to get it out as quickly as possible.

GS AU: Let's talk about some of the user backlash from the DLC. Five of the weapons are now available through promotions like signing up for the newsletter and ranking. Do you think that this disadvantages players who don't purchase the Collector’s Edition?

KMT: We can start from where all these weapons come from. They have all been balanced out by design. Battlefield has always been about the sandbox experience, which is a bit of a rock, paper, scissors experience. So, there's always something that can shoot out or shoot down a vehicle (which might be good against something else). The same goes for the individual weapons, when you compare them against each other. So for instance, if you have a shotgun with a higher rate of fire, it causes less damage or is less accurate. Another weapon might cause more damage, but has a reduced rate of fire. So, the easy answer is no, there is no silver-bullet weapon that you can find, that will break the game--or at least that's been our goal. So, the weapons that can be unlocked are more about [what] individuals might prefer [as] a weapon. For instance, if you unlock the M-60, that might have a different iron sight than the MG-36 LMG--individuals might prefer to use that weapon in the game, because it gives you a wider field or view, rather less of the gun in your face when you use it. It has a lot to do with individual gamer preferences, so they shouldn't unbalance the game in any way.

GS AU: You've said you want to keep it balanced and that you made the changes because of community feedback. Why not, then, make weapons single-player and unlock items to level the playing field when people go online?

KMT: I think this comes back to the fact that Battlefield is a multiplayer game from the beginning. We wanted to keep the unlocks and the persistence tied into the multiplayer achievements. So, that if you see somebody with a specific shotgun, you know that they've ranked up, you know that they've unlocked or spent those points on that weapon. If somebody has a wide variety of weapons, you know they're pretty skilled and they've unlocked a lot of different things.

GS AU: In a previous interview, DICE producer Jamie Keen mentioned that all of the five unlockables would just be a free download. Do you have an intended time frame for that?

KMT: We don't have a date for that. Some of the weapons will continue to be part of the promotion programs, because some of the promotions can continue to run--like signing up for the newsletter, for instance. The ones that cannot keep going, like the preorder promotions, they will most likely be given away for free, but we don't have a date for that.

GS AU: Does that undermine the Collector's Edition offering, then? If players know that at some point they'll get the bonus stuff for free?

KMT: The actual weapons that you have in the promotions campaign are not the same as the Gold Edition. The only way for a person that didn't buy the Gold Edition to get those weapons is for him to rank all the way up to rank 24. So, that will take people quite some time, but it's still achievable. People can unlock these things for free in the actual game. But, to answer your question, no, I don't think it undermines the Gold Edition.

GS AU: Keen also mentioned that the DLC weapons situation is a way of recuperating some of the high cost of development. Given the community backlash with this, will it affect the way you approach alternative revenue streams for future games?

KMT: We can put it this way: The microtransactions that we were looking at for this game were not something we would make a great ton of money off. I know there are a lot of people out there saying that EA's evil and only thinks about money, but that's not true. Well, not in this case, because we wouldn't make that much money from the microtransactions. However, it is true that we want to try and find different revenue streams because games cost a lot more to develop these days, but they don't cost a lot more in stores. We have a lot of problems with piracy and these kinds of things. Generally, the entire business is trying to find ways to get new revenue into the game development and game publishing.

GS AU: Have you considered supplementing the costs with in-game advertising?

KMT: Absolutely, there will be in-game advertising in the game.

GS AU: Can you give us some details on what's planned?

KMT: It's similar to what we have done before. As it is now, we don't have any advertising actually planned. We don't have any people doing ads for it. Right now, we're just using it for community messages, but we have the support in there if we want to. It's pretty much the same way it works in 2142. If we see a decline in interest for in-game advertising, it's most likely going to be used for community messages. We have the opportunity, if somebody wants to make a deal with us, of making in-game ads.

GS AU: So, the infrastructure's there, but the game itself won't ship with any in-game advertising?

KMT: No, unless someone calls us up and brings us a deal with something we find interesting. We say no to a lot of deals because we don't want to put something in there that could wreck the experience. We have the support in there; we can use it mostly for community messages. We'll have to see what happens in the future.

GS AU: Karl-Magnus Troedsson, thanks for your time.

71 Comments

  • toeyar

    Posted Jun 23, 2008 2:50 pm PT

    I have to agree even thou I have a console I don't do FPS on it because the idea of having to use the FREAKING HAND CONTROLLER as opposed to a pc and the lack of greater detail and control makes me ill. I would have to agree with H17OK1. EA isn't the company it once was and is losing the fan base that made them to begin with.

  • H17OK1

    Posted Jun 14, 2008 5:59 pm PT

    the idea of not having a pc version is just sucks, doesnt matter the excuse, even if the game launch months later, will lost the point AND the market for other games...

  • downloadthefile

    Posted Jun 13, 2008 7:47 pm PT

    I don't see where EA thought it was a good idea to cut out clan support...between the no full team chat and the tiny squads, I don't think that many people will be buying the game...which is unfortunate. I personally thought the gameplay was fun, but the kinks needed to be worked out. I just don't understand how EA and DICE completely overlooked a large portion of the gamers they are trying to steal away from COD4, and that is the clan members. Right now, the chat is the weakest portion but they are taking complaints on the forums. They have a whole portion of the forums stickied to complain about mic problems.

    I also think the entire premise of unlocking weapons outside of game is pretty low. It is essentially the same thing as buying gold with real money in a game like WoW. It gives an unfair advantage and regardless of how similar the weapons are, unless they perform exactly functionally the same to a "T" only with different skin, then it is different and unfair. In BF2 there are some sniper rifles I do poorly with and some I do incredibly with. Either way, people have their advantages in different weapons. If EA sold these weapons and said, OK, now you have the ability to unlock them if you buy the pack, then I would feel like that is just similar to an expansion pack, no harm done.

    It is unfortunate EA is my least favorite game company. BF2 is actually my favorite FPS and I would love to see that experience translated to an Xbox360 some time. I have not seen more than five replies by EA employees in forums where hundreds of posts are made in the form of complaints about lacking features. It is unfortunate that BF Bad Company seems like such a good oppurtunity, otherwise I would just say, "OK I'm not gonna buy it".

  • Cookie2-0

    Posted Jun 12, 2008 3:52 am PT

    Ypsteven Just played the demo its a very good game. I dont think they will take that long to bring it to the PC they would be pretty crazy to miss out the fan base. Yeh I am sure the people at EA are just drooling to see their game ready for download on every pirate site in town

  • MetalMan300

    Posted Jun 10, 2008 11:22 am PT

    Probably wouldnt download too many guns, but the gameplay itself was pretty good. Ill definately get this at launch. Oh and the controls are pretty easy to learn.

  • Turtlefark

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 7:18 pm PT

    The controls for this game are pretty bad.

  • AfrosRockMan

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 6:23 pm PT

    "It's similar to what we have done before. As it is now, we don't have any advertising actually planned. We don't have any people doing ads for it. Right now, we're just using it for community messages, but we have the support in there if we want to. It's pretty much the same way it works in 2142."

    Sure, after all everyone knows that Coca-Cola will still be around after war, economy collapse and an ice age!

    Anyone excited for Sears & Roebuck ads?

  • shenron43

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 1:44 pm PT

    Demo is great, looking forward for release.

  • TheoleDominion1

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 9:21 am PT

    Most DLC's that are ovepriced but still sell well, have a die-hard fan-base(Halo,Gears,Oblivion..etc). They are already KNOW that most casual gamers won't purchase them. It's for their fans.

  • ZcF495

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 7:40 am PT

    I played the demo...it was pretty sweet. The destructibility is really cool. The weapon and vehicle choices are pretty awesome too. I'm definitely getting this game. And can some tell me why everyone is freakin' arguing about all this crap about it being, "not next gen" and "over priced DLC". Everyone just needs to calm the heck down!!!

  • The_Praetor

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 7:17 am PT

    To fecalmatter...

    the demo on the 360 is amazing. I blow open a wall, watch it crumble, and hear the dust settling, as you expect a real wall would. I don't know what they're giving you on the PS3.

    Personally, I find the demo itself at least 3 times as realistic-looking as COD4.

  • ascalon94

    Posted Jun 8, 2008 10:38 am PT

    I agree with Ztoky

  • fecalmatter

    Posted Jun 8, 2008 12:30 am PT

    I'm really glad this isn't coming to pc, it just simply isn't worthy of the battlefield name.. it's a console game meant for consoles, I have a ps3 and played the demo really wanting to like it.. and found it a very mediocre FPS. wow destructable buildings that aren't even really that destructable... i'm not very happy with the graphics either explosions look cheap... not to mention you have to listen to idiots on the mic with feedback going crazy... i really hope it does well though so DICE can take the profit from it and make BF3 for PC the way it's meant to be.

  • Ztoky

    Posted Jun 7, 2008 1:42 pm PT

    Bloody hell I've seen so many angry comments about this game and I don't really understand why. It's either about the "stupid" findallfive that I just think is a fun touch. The other thing is that people complaining about it's not a next-gen game anymore, I mean wtf? Why get mad over this you high tempered children.

  • unknown-racer

    Posted Jun 7, 2008 11:43 am PT

    This game is the best FPS play the demo and love it Way Way Better them CoD4

  • DoHi

    Posted Jun 6, 2008 8:29 pm PT

    Why do idiot spindoctors insist on saying "next Gen"? I own a PS3 and it feels pretty current gen to me.
    Good to see I'm not the only person that bothers.
    Game looks pretty sweet though.

  • MrNib

    Posted Jun 6, 2008 4:50 pm PT

    Bad Company is merely a test game testing out DICE's new engine to see if it can preform well and be scalable for BF3, so if Bad Company turns out to be a great game, BF3 can only be better.

  • rtssam

    Posted Jun 6, 2008 1:23 pm PT

    sigh thats a let down because i don't have xbox live and i'm not sure if i will get it now if its focused in online

  • dark_xaero

    Posted Jun 6, 2008 11:10 am PT

    The reason why its not coming to PC is because BF3 is in development for PC.

  • yimimoto

    Posted Jun 6, 2008 9:19 am PT

    Yeah, too bad so many developers have already said they had the maps ready they just weren't finished for release date, so they make them DLC then charge for them. I think that is ridiculous. I also think it is ridiculous they expect people to buy their maps way overpriced because people do. Like Halo. Ten dollars for three maps that aren't that good? So many people bought them too. Look at GRAW 2. You can get like eight maps for five dollars. With all the DLC and maps on disc there are over 50 maps. And I only paid like 10 bucks for the extra 30 something DLC maps that is the way it should be.

  • Ypsteven

    Posted Jun 6, 2008 7:20 am PT

    Just played the demo its a very good game. I dont think they will take that long to bring it to the PC they would be pretty crazy to miss out the fan base.

  • CageFury

    Posted Jun 5, 2008 10:05 pm PT

    "If it was however being developed on the PC, then that would be unfortunate".... Every game ever made was developed "on" (not "for") the PC. Piracy is the most rediculous argument for any online game. As of right now, you CANNOT play a pirated game online (with the excpetion of cracked/fake servers). Being that this is, for the most part, an online game, piracy is not an issue. That's the lamest excuse I've ever heard.

  • WizengamotX

    Posted Jun 5, 2008 8:35 pm PT

    Hey this isn't a bad deal, coming from someone who was expecting a PC based shooter and not a Xbox 360 based shooter. I'm glad they didn't try and port the game to the PC. If it was however being developed on the PC, then that would be unfortunate. I am still looking forward to the potential successor to the legendary console multiplayer games Halo series and Timesplitter 2.

  • DJ_54210

    Posted Jun 5, 2008 4:50 pm PT

    yea i mean c'mon "douche" my little sister could do better than you element1200.

  • Cajun_Catfish

    Posted Jun 5, 2008 4:21 pm PT

    Well I spose one of the reasons there isn't a PC port (yet, anyway) might be piracy. You can pirate X360's (chip), of course (not many people can do it by themselves), i'm not sure if you can pirate PS3's as of yet, but no doubt there will be some way one day, but you don't even need to chip a PC to play downloaded games. It's really easy to get free PC games as opposed to the console counterparts.

  • Cowboy-Bebop

    Posted Jun 5, 2008 2:16 pm PT

    element1200, what are you 10 or 11 years old? "Douche", really? My feelings are so hurt. You obviously have no idea how capitalism and the economy work. EA is trying to see how far they can push the envelope to make people pay more for games. Why dont we let them ship us a box for 60 and the charge us 10 for each level. Would that be perfect for you. That way your precious little game companies who are hurting so bad for money ,according to you, can make all the money they need off of idiots like you. Oh and Im sorry I didn't know it was so hard to make four maps for a game that they have to "bust their ass" to make for us cheap little gamers. Seems like us modders do it all the time without a big team working for us and modders don't get paid. Sorry I work for my money, not live off of mommy and daddy and I think its wrong for a game company to try and steamroll the customers. As I stated before, you don't see Activision and Ubisoft trying "new ways" to make more money. They are comfortable with new map downloads. Which I said I didn't like paying for but is now the norm. Why is that the norm? (Get a pen and write this down element1200) Because idiots like you blindly believe all the BS shoveled your way (our games are SO expensive to make now, we don't make truck loads of cash like we once did). And you blindly buy everything you can get your hands on. If nobody buys maps, guess what, its not the norm. Same with new guns or horse armor (I bet you brought 2 or 3 of that one didn't you?) or any other ridiculous in game item a company thinks they can make you pay for. One more time just for you, people play better with certain guns whether they are stronger or not, it is a preference that you shouldn't have to pay for in a game. If there hadn't been a huge backlash this too would become the norm. Sorry better luck next time for you and you little game company. Make a good game and you make your money. Anyone who says micro-transactions are great is truly an idiot. 'Nuff said.

    http://www.joystiq.com/2006/11/02/the-xbl-microtransaction-tracker/

  • jaredrichards3

    Posted Jun 5, 2008 9:06 am PT

    I love the battlefield concept, the whole rank, stats,medals and award system is great with fps's it keeps you playing and gives you a reason to play on. I have never got into any fps that does not have this type of system because it just feels pointless without all that stuff. I absolutely loved bf2 modern combat on the ps2 man I hope this game is an awesome extension of that game's concept and playability.

  • DisPimpin

    Posted Jun 5, 2008 7:31 am PT

    When the hell will people stop saying next gen? It's been almost 3 years now. Let it go.

  • element1200

    Posted Jun 5, 2008 6:36 am PT

    Cowboy-Bebop, you are a fool. The reason extra maps aren't shipped with games is because they DON'T EXIST when the games ship. Then the developers bust their ass making new maps, even though they might not shift as many units as the original game, just to provide new experiences and a change for online players. and I think its perfectly fine that DICE want to make guns DLC. As they say, they're not making as much money for games, and for those who WANT different (NOT better, DIFFERENT) guns (and therefore, more content) pay extra. It's basically the same as buying the "special edition" of a game that comes with extra models or some other bonus content, except instead of paying extra for special edition, you're downloading them at a very small cost. It's not a case of greed at all. douche.

  • vampyre1985

    Posted Jun 5, 2008 4:28 am PT

    I hate how everyone keeps calling it next gen!!! he must have mentioned it 20 times!!!!

  • shenron43

    Posted Jun 4, 2008 8:16 pm PT

    seems good to me.

  • Cowboy-Bebop

    Posted Jun 4, 2008 7:26 pm PT

    I can appreciate the fact that EA and DICE don't want to lose money on there game and I wouldn't wish any game company to lose money on there game if it's good. Ive seen way to many good games not get sequel's because the under performed. However, this whole gun download/unlock idea is exactly why I cancelled my preorder. I dont mind leveling up to get a gun. I own and play the heck out of COD4, but the fact that they are looking for new ways to get money off of downloads worries me alot. And what if I like the way a gun plays that I should have had from the start. Anyone who plays FPS's knows that play better with certain guns over others even if they are equal. Also, Karl I really don't like having smoke blown up my a$$ about new ways to make more money off your games. I don't hear Activision complaining about COD4. 10 million sold and what if only 3 million of those bought the maps. Wow 30 million more dollars for something that should be already in the game. I don't like buying maps, but everyone else seems to be OK with it in this money driven world so I know it will never go away. But when it comes to guns or vehicles or better camo and what not, I think its gone too far. Bottom line hear, make a great game (COD4) and you won't have to worry about how to rip of your customers. For that matter I haven't heard Ubisoft complain about their Rainbow Six games or the Ghost Recon games losing money either. Wow, really does seem like EA greed to me.

  • Rob_101

    Posted Jun 4, 2008 6:58 pm PT

    Just announce Battlefield 3 for PC already....

  • Merl57

    Posted Jun 4, 2008 6:02 pm PT

    crap more in game ads just what I didn't want

  • DamageIncM

    Posted Jun 4, 2008 3:51 pm PT

    Well, it's good to know they care about the quality for their games.
    Thus, not just porting a game from console to PC.
    Which indeed brings a lot of issues with it.

    There will be a great new Battlefield-game for PC within the next 2-3 years.
    Don't worry...

  • neonblueshadow

    Posted Jun 4, 2008 3:00 pm PT

    I rather them make a game for the PC with the money they make out of this, than a port, most ports are below average.

  • killzone_gamer

    Posted Jun 4, 2008 12:23 pm PT

    Just look at that Jeep!
    I have to run someone over with that little baby

  • coreyq

    Posted Jun 4, 2008 11:37 am PT

    Better watch out EA, ARMA dose have features like that(its a little bit more realistic to run out of bullets Sometime EA ), as a matter of fact ARMA 2 or Operation Flash Point 2 has those features, lots of Guns lot of Vics. If they could fix the online play right along with some gameplay tweaks then EA would have some more comp(no I take that back EA believes if it looks better than ours we will buy them lofl). R3DN1N3 EA tends to limit the amount of realism in games so people online can hover over a spawn point and mow down(AKA owning) people spawning. They say its for better online gameplay,makes the game fun, to much realism and no one will want to play. I have to admit if you have a good pilot in a chooper it is fun to just sit as gunner (lol BF2 rag doll physics are hilarious) waiting on unsupecting spawners.

  • R3DN1N3

    Posted Jun 4, 2008 10:12 am PT

    I like how u can have a 50 player battle here.
    That's 25 people on each side!!!!
    Hell yeah. This is what I was waiting for in consoles.
    ANywyas, I really hope helicopters have a limited number of ammunitions this time around.
    BF2's heicopters had infinite ammo which was REALLY annoying.
    Looking forward to the game.

  • Sokol4ever

    Posted Jun 4, 2008 10:11 am PT

    I love Battlefield, I have played all of them on PC and I'm a little disappointed that it won't come to PC this time around, at least for time being. However, owning one of the new consoles will do perfectly fine. It's seems like the game has been very well done.
    PC and consoles can co-exist together, it only takes proper gamer attitude. ^_^

  • skyline7284

    Posted Jun 4, 2008 9:57 am PT

    s_emi_xxxxx Can you really be more negative dude? if you don't liek it don't buy it... i don't have a 360 pr PS3 so i'll just be playing heroes and BF2 i guess *sigh*

  • coreyq

    Posted Jun 4, 2008 9:28 am PT

    I agree Coldfire T, BF2 pretty much did the trick. Really after looking at the gameplay footage of BFBC I would say its the same engine they just added Damage and Destruction to buildings.

  • chico129

    Posted Jun 4, 2008 9:09 am PT

    YoHandZeke, why are you complaining about the microtransactions? They don't exist anymore, they got rid of them... He said it AGAIN, in this interview right here.

  • corn999

    Posted Jun 4, 2008 8:59 am PT

    I'd like to ask a question.... Why can't you go prone in this game!!??? Mr. Karl Magnus Troedsson, why???

  • ColdfireTrilogy

    Posted Jun 4, 2008 8:57 am PT

    Ill wait to hear news for BF3 .... heck i would take a polished repacked version of BF2 with a better browser, friend support, using the Frostbite DX engine .... BF2 was and still is amazing, the few flaws are just annoyances. And they need to lessen the emphasis on global rankings ... that is what destroyed many maps in the game because people wanted points and large vehicle maps do not provide points ... BF1942 was fun because people focused on fun and generally large maps were still played a TON .... no one cared if the top player had 40 points .... they still won.

  • bendall01

    Posted Jun 4, 2008 8:49 am PT

    MGS4, GTA4, BF:BC, GT5 - I want them already!!!

  • fmobliv06

    Posted Jun 4, 2008 8:49 am PT

    can't wait for June 24. Bad Company looks excellent.

  • razgriz_101

    Posted Jun 4, 2008 8:05 am PT

    cant wait for BC,hopefully a new one for the computer soon fingers crossed

  • s_emi_xxxxx posted Jun 4, 2008 7:42 am PT (does not meet display criteria. login to show)

    s_emi_xxxxx

    Posted Jun 4, 2008 7:42 am PT (hide)

    Karl Magnus Troedsson: There are so many things that need to go into creating what we think is the perfect PC game. I mean, Battlefield was invented on the PC, so if we do a PC or a Battlefield game, it needs to be spot-on. The major goal of this game is to create a true next-gen game for the next-gen consoles.
    Ya Ya... that's why we're just getting Battlefield: Heroes this year. omg that thing is gonna pwn every other game. Accept it... You're just blinded DiCE, PC made you so famous.. & now you've become just like EPiC. Btw... It's current gen consoles.. not next gen anymore. & PC's the true next gen technology, keeps upgrading every year.... You're too confident of your success on consoles ? Don't think that just the nice "destuctibility" may give your game the title of "Best Shooter Ever" on consoles.. It'd still be something like... "Been there, Done That" thing. & It's pretty clear that why you didn't release for PC.. that's because the game doesn't really match up to the standards of what PC gamers are already experiencing... & Console gamers might jump & grab this game... as they don't have anything else or good to play atm. But We have.. so F U!

advertisement

Hot Stories

Newsmakers

Featured Stories

Submit News

Got tips? Send them in!

Related Game

Battlefield: Bad Company Boxshot
Battlefield: Bad Company

Game Stats

  • Rank:
    276 of 59,103
    (up by 34)
    X360 Rank:
    60 of 1,489
    Highest Rank:
    1 in 2008
    Tracking:
    6,536 Track It»
    Wishlists:
    3,659 Wish It»
  • Users Now Playing:
    1,854
  • Number of Players:

    1 Player, 24 Online

  • Top 5 User Tags:
    1. battlefield
    2. bad company
    3. battlefield: bad company
    4. fps
    5. ea
  • Teen Rating Description

    Titles rated T (Teen) have content that may be suitable for ages 13 and older. Titles in this category may contain violence, suggestive themes, crude humor, minimal blood, simulated gambling, and/or infrequent use of strong language. Learn more

Full Game Details »Close
Also on

Site Blogs