EA CEO Acknowledges Player "Trepidation" Over New Battlefield Game Due to BF2024 & BFV

EA's Andrew Wilson acknowledges the community "trepidation" on the new Battlefield game due to the last two entries not being able to deliver.

[-Foxtrot]

His remarks here are a little tone deaf aswell which adds to the reason why people are not willing to be sucked into the hype again. He acknowledges the poorer reception but still tries to lessen the damage done while failing to acknowledge their role in it. Lets not forget his recent Dragon Age The Veilguard comments which shows out of touch he actually is.

If this by chance fails both critically and sales wise then I hope he's booted out from the company.

[CrashMania]

Android Wilson is nothing more than a soulless corporate CEO, out of touch with their customer base.

[peppeaccardo]

Due to my horrible experience on the pre-order of that shitshow that has been bf 2042 at launch and its souldless gameplay afterward I feel compelled to tell the EA CEO that they will have my money only when the new game will be in the discount bin !!! Thieves !!!

[badboyz09]

Same this can be best game ever still not giving EA a dime.

[RaidenBlack]

**Due to sudden axing of BF:V and then shipping a hero shooter-esque 2042. ~ That's the trepidation.
If EA trusted and allowed DiCE to support and expand BF:V and make it the game it was planned to be, and then skip 2042 and then ship whatever you're planning now, a year or two earlier/ago, nobody would have any of this "trepidation".
You dont trust your own work. Why would players?
And I again give the example: Bethesda, even Bethesda didnt abandon their duck-taped FO76 and its still being supported. And BF:V was in a far, far better state. Actually it was 90% fixed before being abandoned.

[thorstein]

BF:V was great. It's biggest hurdle was that it followed BF1 which was better. I had V at launch and really enjoyed it.

The maps felt epic and worth playing.

It is fair to call out hate on both 1 and V, but then again, I sincerely doubt the shit stirrers played it.

2042 I played at launch. I reinstalled later and enjoy it but I don't think it ever really felt like a BF game.

[RaidenBlack]

"It's biggest hurdle was that it followed BF1 which was better."
Although true, it was not its biggest hurdle. That'd be the fanbase.
After the initial trailer was shown, aside from the "women in ww2 and prosthetic arm" discussion, the main pushback was, why not a modern BF. 'Why after WW1, the fanbase has to play WW2?' And this push back only grew. For easy referenece, you can just refer jackfrags' videos from that time period. BF bros didnt want to aim without ACOGs and scopes. Its only after 2042 that the sentiment changed but by that time it was too late. BF5 player count increase after 2042, meant nothing. 2042 was what EA was supporting then.
I was a huge fan of BF5's roadmap. All the actual WW2 theatres to be unveiled/added in each season in great attention to detail (cant fault Dice here). But gone, all of a sudden. Instead we got a hero shooter BF.

[peppeaccardo]

i share your experience 100%

[JEECE]

This comment is a perfect example of why devs are afraid to release a traditional style multiplayer game that isn't a live service. People say they hate live service games or "games as a service," but as soon as a game is treated more like a 2000s style traditional multiplayer game, gamers riot. BFV got a pretty long tail of new map releases etc. (about a year and a half). That's longer than most of the BF games people say they love got supported (really only BF4 got map packs longer past release). But people still insist it was abandoned early.

And ironically the people who whine about multiplayer games being "abandoned" because the devs stopped making seasons and skins are probably often the same ones who blast devs/pubs for saying they are planning a live service.

[RaidenBlack]

You mixed MP games as live-service with SP games as live-service, bub.
People hate when SP games are turned into GaaS model, not MP games into GaaS.
"devs are afraid to release a traditional style multiplayer game that isn't a live service" ~ coz that model doesn't work anymore and is inconvenient for the devs. If you look macroscopically, the earlier map pack/expansion pack/updates are what been replaced by steady stream of dev updates/patches via live-service model (plus, few extras due to convenience).
Releasing packs again or just abandoning live-service might sound great for a modern MP game but there will always be another rival game with steady updates that'll just suck the player count towards it.
Coming to, "BFV got a pretty long tail of new map releases etc." ~ this is basically novice comparison with BF4.
BF:V roadmap was aiming theatre by theatre approach reflecting the WW2 progression. Hence fans knew iconic stuffs like Ardennes, D-Day, Kursk, Stalingrad would come gradually (If you've got any idea of WW2). But with the BF3/4 fanbase complaining about the BF:V's non-modern WW2 theme and being dragged longer than they're comfortable (just like your analysis of the game being supported long enough), that EA/Dice decided to pull the plug by just adding Iwo Jima/Pacific. Or else the game would've spanned few more years with many more theatre additions, comfortably. No body said a current BF game HAS to match prior game's support length. If its good, let it continue. Hence, BF:V fans (not, you) insists it was abandoned early.
Hope this helps. And hope you're still enjoying the 'modern_ish' BF2042 that came right after.

[JEECE]

@RaidenBlack

I love how act like you are correcting me, then just admit I'm completely right about how devs are forced into making live service multiplayer games now because people would whine if they didn't. Appreciate you admitting you are one of those people though, I honestly expected you to try to claim you didn't want "live service," you just wanted "support." You at least admit what you want, which makes you more honest than most. But you are blind/deaf if you think people only say they don't want single player games to be live service. People whine about devs announcing live service multiplayer games all the time.

Much of your comment was also irrelevant. Not sure how you got the idea I played 2042. I guess you wanted to insult me and are just too clumsy to come up with a good/relevant one, so you made one up?

[jjb1981]

I wonder how many fools will pre-order the new Battlefield thinking EA changed their ways.

[peppeaccardo]

not me ... made the mistake to pre-order the 100 euros version of bf 2042 because of the F-ing epic trailer they showed. Bunch of liars and thieves ...

[JunonZanon]

Remember folks: you should NOT pre-order battlefiled games anymore.

[PapaBop]

Or any EA game, with the exception of the Jedi series.

[BlaqMagiq1]

Nah not after the buggy launch of Jedi Survivor. Even that is a wait and see.

[Yi-Long]

Only thing I want from a Battlefield game, is that it’s a Battlefield game. So, give me 10-12 medium-sized gorgeous fun maps, 2 teams of roughly 24-32 players each, and 5 or 6 flags to conquer. Some vehicles, 4 different classes. Done. That’s it.

I don’t want/need ridiculously big maps. I don’t need 100+ player teams, I don’t want bot-players, I don’t want perks, boosts, streaks, hero-characters, battle royale modes, whatever.

Just give us a cool Battlefield game.

[JEECE]

Sounds great. Unfortunately, that would be a niche game. Except for smaller audiences on PC, gamers now won't play games because they are fun. If they aren't "earning" something (guns, character skins, hats, gun skins, emotes, dances, perks, boosts, streaks, etc.), they'll say the have no reason to play anymore.

The RPG-ification of shooters in the late 2000s/early 2010s, coupled with kids growing up with grindy mobile games, rewired gamers' brains. Now the meta game (the progression system) is more important than the game itself. The live service focus is just a natural outgrowth of that development. After all, if people really only care about earning new things, even if you build a ton of things to grind for into the game, once they burn through that, they'll stop playing. So of course you have keep giving them new stuff to "earn."

I wish the world where your proposed game would be a hit still existed. But unfortunately it doesn't.

[thorstein]

Classes are back. Assault, Recon, Engineer, and Support (support has the medic symbol.)

[PapaBop]

EA desperate to have another cash cow it seems.

[isarai]

So you acknowledge trepidation, but won't bother to figure out the reason for that? 😒 I don't understand running a corporation and not researching your audience.

[blacktiger]

Independent fps is a better bet