Battlefield 3 confirmed

During financial presentation, EA COO John Pleasants reveals DICE is already hard at work on a new installment in the shooter franchise, due sometime during publisher's next fiscal year.

Though it helped put military multiplayer first-person shooters on the map, Electronic Arts' Battlefield franchise has seen itself outsold by the Call of Duty series in recent years. Granted, 2005's Battlefield 2 was a hit--selling more than 1 million units in the US, according to the NPD Group--as was its console spin-off, Battlefield 2: Modern Combat, which sold 1.2 million units domestically on the Xbox 360, Xbox, and PlayStation 2. However, 2007's Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare was the overall best-selling game of 2007 and has sold more than 8 million units domestically (according to NPD) and more than 15 million units worldwide (according to Activision).

Now, with the release of archrival Activision's Modern Warfare 2--developed by former EA employees at Infinity Ward--looming, EA is planning a comeback in the military shooter sector. Speaking at the William Blair & Company investor conference this week, EA COO John Pleasants revealed that, in addition to this year's sequel to the critically lauded, multiplatinum Battlefield: Bad Company, EA is planning a new installment in its core Battlefield franchise.

"We have a lot of IP in that [shooter] area, and we have not not noticed that Call of Duty has a significant share of that business," Pleasants told analysts during a question-and-answer session. "We are putting a real concentrated effort behind those titles. Battlefield happens to be one of them. ... I've had the luxury of looking at Battlefield 3 over at DICE over in Sweden. I was highly impressed by the way the people were working on that product. That's not for this fiscal year [ending March 31, 2010], but that is a product that is looking very good."

After saying that work on the download-only Battlefield 1943 (due in September) has been "going well," he said the Battlefield franchise is "strengthening and moving to a service model, and it has multiple titles within it which we can lever off of, so I am bullish on the Battlefield franchise, but it's not our only title which we are hoping to gain share with in the shooter category." He offered the forthcoming third-person shooter Army of Two: The 40th Day as another title that would court shooter fans.

377 Comments

  • Grif-yes

    Posted Nov 25, 2009 11:57 am PT

    @division_9

    I don't really think its the defining game, so much as since its the latest BF game DICE has made, its the latest "true" Battlefield game. And no, I'm not insulting BF3 at all, in fact, i really, really want BF3 as well. However, I find it disturbing that the fan basis is in this much turmoil right now. Which is actually one of the reasons I want BF3 to come out, or at least a spiritual successor of it, so that the BF fan base is whole again.

  • division_9

    Posted Nov 25, 2009 9:53 am PT

    @Grif-yes

    You know why the name "BF3" is so sought after?, Battlefield 2 for alot of guys including myself was the star of the series, and so naturally when we see what looks like a direct sequel WE KNOW ITS NONE OF THIS "BAD COMPANY" or "2142" stuff I don't want to play because to put it plainly for us BF2 was the perfect package, the commander, artillery, UAV, squad system, no vehicles, vehicles, large maps, large scale, fast paced, tactically friendly(by this I mean if I flank a squad it actually helps my team out ALOT), prone friendly, weapon variation, no lock on, front line based, map variation(close quater maps and woodlands etc). Basically it had just the right combination for me to enjoy it ALOT.

    For us BF2 was the game that defined the series and not all of us accept Bad Company or 1943, Bad Company might just be different because of the fact it is on a console and has a limited amount of buttons and so everyone naturally has lock on, but either way I didn't enjoy it and so I'm hoping "BF3" for the PC will bring back what was for me the good old days of BF2.

    For you guys who feel 2142 or Bad Company may be the defining game, good for you so don't turn BF3, the fist direct sequel in 5 ish years into another game like Bad Company that incorporates lock on and the rest of the stuff we generally don't like. Remember were part of the market to and we won't be happy if BF3 is giving up any single feature for a more Bad Company orientated feel.

  • IncipitOmega

    Posted Nov 17, 2009 7:15 am PT

    I hope it has prone. :-/ ffs.

  • John546

    Posted Nov 15, 2009 9:23 pm PT

    When is the next fiscal year?

  • kweeni

    Posted Oct 25, 2009 5:03 am PT

    wouldn't it be better to keep bad company on consoles and not on pc? i mean wouldn't bad company on pc and bf3 hinder each others sales in some way?

    but anyhow battlefield is awesome, one of my favorite franchise out there.

  • jedidonut

    Posted Sep 11, 2009 8:33 am PT

    I want BF1943.

  • ThePeacemaker83

    Posted Aug 28, 2009 12:54 am PT

    BF3 Will probably be purely multiplayer bigger maps more players per game and, hopefully lots of cool new multiplayer innovations>

  • TheKing243

    Posted Aug 21, 2009 1:54 pm PT

    i don't think BF3 will be released on any console. it should be released exclusively for PC.

    But since BC2 is coming to pc there is a possibility that ea will release BF 3 for consoles too. I am going to buy both Bad Company 2 and BF 3 when released next year

  • -KU-

    Posted Aug 20, 2009 10:55 pm PT

    Bad company was a spin-off,
    I enjoyed BF2 for my ps2, the rank up system was great.
    But BF bad company plays like a third rate COD4
    While BF2 and possibly 3 you control the whole army so it's no biggy if you die, but try and stay alive.

    I'm wondering was there like a private to General thing in BF:BC?
    If not then thank God I didn't buy it.

  • Rickiej

    Posted Aug 18, 2009 11:05 am PT

    I don't get it? what is the difference between the badcompany games and the normal battlefield games? they both let you control vehicles they are set in the modern era, so what's different? I do know you can blow up buildings in badcompany, but they eventually want that to be implemented aswell in the normal battlefield series don't they?

  • SirCojocaru

    Posted Aug 18, 2009 10:50 am PT

    I'm just happy they announced BF3. So we know it will come.
    There is no better team, tactical, big map, cars ,tanks ,planes ,helicopters, boats, medics, sniper, and much more game like that so BF3 FTW.

  • Grif-yes

    Posted Aug 8, 2009 3:34 pm PT

    Ok this is sad... The Battlefield community has been split into two with the two being: 1. People who will not be picky and play the BF games they are given (BFBC, 1943, ect.). 2. The people who have been whining about all the new console battlefields, and will only buy a BF game if it is called BF 3.

    Its pathetic. Even if BF:BC 2 has 64 players, more hit damage, and other things BF2 had, there are still many who wont get it because its not called BF 3.

    I'm as excited about BF3 as the next guy because Ive been a fan since Vietnam came out. But I just think its pathetic that the BF community is split in half.

  • Grif-yes

    Posted Aug 8, 2009 3:33 pm PT

    Ok this is sad... The Battlefield community has been split into two with the two being: 1. People who will not be picky and play the BF games they are given (BFBC, 1943, ect.). 2. The people who have been whining about all the new console battlefields, and will only buy a BF game if it is called BF 3.

    Its pathetic. Even if BF:BC 2 has 64 players, more hit damage, and other things BF2 had, there are still many who wont get it because its not called BF 3.

    I'm as excited about BF3 as the next guy because Ive been a fan since Vietnam came out. But I just think its pathetic that the BF community is split in half.

  • kyilmaz

    Posted Aug 7, 2009 9:31 am PT

    If DICE/EA is listening... where have you been? BF2 and BF2142 were brilliant- hours of fun... COD4 and 5 are good/great but not the big environements on the PC...

    Why do you let Activision take over???? EA is a big company(the biggest??) Though I love COD 4,5 theres no helicopters...surely you can hire or have tons of programmers that could have been putting out more BF games. Ive played COD4-5 to death and BFBC is unplayable (shooting dynamics suck) Where have you been ???? we need you ... Ive overplayed COD4-5 , I p[lay 1943- pretty good- why cant you crank them out??/

  • mikegute

    Posted Jul 24, 2009 11:19 am PT

    This is bar none the best combat shooter out there! No room for newbies realistic graphics and game-play make this game the best! As for people taking to many bullets real soldiers wear armor so shooting some in the body may not be affective but shooting them in the head works one shot dead. newbies stick with COD. Real gamers try BF BC or BC2 squad up with GUTE360 and take real strategic approach to devastating a whole map!!!!

  • NakedSnakeSS2G

    Posted Jul 24, 2009 6:28 am PT

    please no console versions!

  • St0Ne4Ge

    Posted Jul 23, 2009 12:45 pm PT

    Bad company's major problem for me was that it took a whole magazine to kill somebody, and 2 shots from a sniper rifle to get a kill. when in close quarter combat having to reload after every kill is extremely annoying. the guns felt like airsoft guns because people could take 10 rounds or so and still keep running like they havent been touched.

  • St0Ne4Ge

    Posted Jul 23, 2009 12:42 pm PT

    i think EA and dice will screw this game hard and develop it with consoles firmly in mind. instead of being a true successor to BF2 and 1942 we will get a watered down console game to keep the masses happy.

  • shani_boy101

    Posted Jul 18, 2009 7:30 pm PT

    can't wait for BF3, hopefully they'll take it a step further with some epic 128, 64-on-64 player battles on a completely destructable battlefield. that'd be pretty freaking sweet.

advertisement
Also on

Games you may like…

Users who looked at content for this game also looked at these games.

See More Similar Games