EA discusses why Battlefield is not annualized

@Joseph P. Johnson Or they think their fans are dumb enough to pay double in exchange for all DLCs without knowing in full detail what DLCs contain. So in fact they're paying for 2 games instead of the 1. It's the same BS just a different flavor.

EA needs to reboot the NHL series on next gen... just sayin'..randomly.

"You also want to be really careful that you don’t destroy the franchise along the way" This for Activation ,I am not a fan of shooting games but this is really well said from EA even if battle filed isn't that good as the previous one.

battlefield 3 = battlefield 4. so where is the

"Jorgensen said another issue to consider when annualizing a franchise is making sure every new entry in the series is perceived as substantially different than its predecessor." ???

Doesn't matter. After the BF4 fiasco there is no way I'm ever going back to a DICE title again. I swear it. They've got their last penny from me. I'll be going back to Valve and CS Go.

@Les Inaminute Haigh 1) You don't play a Battlefield game for the single player. 2) Those two consoles are now obsolete :P.

And because it takes 6 months before the game is playable. That would only leave them 6 months to make a sequel...

omg remove these fb comments from here!!! that's why FB exists: to keep these comments there.

I guarantee you if EA had a secondary company to work on Battlefield, they would have a game out every year as well. This is just marketing propaganda/gimmick.

Imo the game is bad enough. Rush the devs and it will be even worse.

Regurgitating the same game with a different paint job and bells and whistles is the SAME THING. EA lives on a different planet. Seriously. Up on their hill with nickle and dime tactics and greed. EA has helped single handedly destroy my enjoyment of gaming in the past 2 or 3 years.

launching 1 every 2 years is almost the same thing..

The 24 month cycle is clearly not enough time to get the game fully functional and out onto the shelves for the release date, as what I've seen from Battlefield 4 and Battlefield 3 is that it's basically the same, nothing has really changed, only the maps, controls and weapons. And there's a lot glitches and errors in the game, the most annoying one is the crashing in multiplayers and losing your saved progress in Campaign.

They need to rethink the 24 month cycle because 2 years clearly isn't enough for the marginally talented Dice to produce a working game.

I rather 3 year cycles with map and weapon DLCs in-between but that's just me. I think Battlefield 4 released a little too soon as is evident with its onerous problems and bugs since launch.

Game.. expansion.. similar game.. looks annual to me.

Ehh, every person with a decent head on their shoulder knows that CoD is a 2 year project as well? I don't see the big difference between BF3 and BF4 either, so my conclusion is that EA is full of shit. **** EA and Activision.

Can someone tell me what the big differences are between CoD and Battlefield?

"You want to be really careful that you don't destroy the franchise"

One might argue that it's too late.

God Bless them ....

Don't become dooty

I don't want to sound overly negative about it, because in the end it could be a great game to me, but honestly, with the reception it's getting, and just how it looks, it doesn't look much better than what you could do in a year to me when we look at Call of Duty. I mean, does Battlefield 4 really feel all that new compared to three? Plus, the campaign's not even supposed to be that good, which is something that should have been worked on since you have more than a year. I just feel like the jump from BF3 to BF4 is like, or little more than Black Ops 2 to Ghosts. I'd have to play them, so I could be wrong.

So it doesn't turn into the borefest COD has become? I'm glad the game isn't annual. It adds replay value.

EA, go fix my game please. UNDERSTAND?

"We don't want to annualize Battlefield... but lord help DICE if they need another month to iron out bugs! We gotta beat COD to release! Also, here's a DLC full of maps you've already played and payed for before! Netcode problems? What netcode problems?"

Forget you Jorgensen. Don't lie to us like you actually care about the people you employ or the games they make.

"EA discusses why they need your money"

The balance was great during the beta, then they went and nerfed everything so it isn't fast-paced or tactical anymore. I cancelled my preorder because it was going to turn into the same crapfest that was Camperfield 3.

Gamers will take anything that's handed to them today, even if it's broken and unplayable they will defend their favorite corporations until they die. Gamers are so damn pathetic and spineless, I would sell them the same game every 6 months, forget about waiting an entire year.

they want to release it every year, but theyre afraid of the backlash if they do.

This is EA basically saying "FU WE'RE BETTER" to Activision, but in reality, they have so many annualized franchises that they're actually worse than Activision. They inundate the market with Fifa every year and they rushed Battlefield 4 so much that you could just call it Battlefield 3.5. Screw EA man, they're ruining the games industry and when they fall, and they will, we just might get better games again, not recycles of last years crap.

It may as well be, its just as bad as COD milking now, rushing a release every 2 years that looks no different than the last, and then have overpriced map packs in between that splits up the community. Day one map packs, pffft.

They should stop releasing madden every year then

So battlefield is a 2 year project hmmm, newsflash SO IS CALL OF DUTY. Two developers working in two separate projects for 2 years each....

The other issue of course is DICE will have to do what EA wants and we already know EA wants an annual shooter to compete with Call of Duty. They Shelved Medal of Honor so who steps up?

No they are not the same. Battlefield is great. COD used to be a long time ago in a galaxy far f.... sorry but they aren't the same.

they're worried about destroying franchises? they just did it with SimCity...

...or they do it to combat used game sales. They stagger Battlefield expansions so that you HAVE to keep your copy to be able to play or else buy it again every 4 months or whatever the cadence is. If they blew their load all at once and released one huge game with no DLC, many gamers would play it constantly for 2 months and sell it, then Gamestop would reap the profits instead of EA. PC gamers should be given the option of having all the DLC at once--but maybe that would reveal their plan some see as anti-consumer when it is really pro-money/anti-Gamstop.

I haven't attempted to look, but I would bet that you have to use private servers once pirating Battlefield DLC, so perhaps that would help combat piracy on PC or at least not give the treasure map to the pirates all in one piece.