Apparently, according to founded reports, we will not be seeing another BF game for another two years. That's three years between titles. Some are cheering, in that one, they may have more time to work on the next title. Or two, more content for BF V. Here's the thing, if we put our fandom aside. As to the first point, weren't we told this as the rationale for a two year cycle? How did that work out?
Could a case maybe be made that some of the best BF games were actually on a one year cycle (BC 1, BC2, BF 3 and 4), nonetheless two? Now it's three, and my view is i could almost guarantee, the same issues and problems after a three year cycle. After all, DICE has Battlefront to work on as well that splits the studio, on an in fact more profitable title. BF 1 was a two year, and nothing special there. And of course..BFV was on a two year cycle. Dumpster fire there.
As for the second point, we've heard a year of hype about this pacific front. In the end, we got two maps, a third in yet another couple of months. How much content at this rate could we actually get? 6 maps in two years?
Finally, given this is the most unpopular title of the franchise by far, and given many may not like BF V, is this the title they really want t milk for three years? And in that time, for many who skipped the title, is EA willing to maybe permanently lose all those players, who will likely be moving onto other franchises?
My feeling is maybe unlike many, no, this is not the right move at all. All they seem to be doing is kicking the can, so they have more time to work on their more profitable title, Battlefront 3, leaving us with the same messes only this time, after three years instead of just two. Could a better case be made, that instead of DICE working on two big titles, maybe relieving DICE from their duties at BF, and have them work full time on Battlefront, and maybe bring Battlefield to Criterion, or even partner with Respawn?
Lets just be frank, BF4, Battlefront, Battlefront 2, and now BFV have not done well, or at least had huge problems from the onset. To me, it''s blatantly obvious DICE cannot handle it, and are biting off more than they could chew.
Three years is a long time to go without a BF game, particularly when a case really can't be made it would make it any better, which wasn't even EA's contention in their statement, but the fact Apex is now their "primary shooter", and want to focus there. Thanks for listening and any thoughts appreciated.