- 79 Battlefield V - Announcements
- 25.7K Battlefield V - General Discussion
- 830 Battlefield V - Firestorm Discussion
- 4.6K Battlefield V - PC Community
- 1.8K Battlefield V - PlayStation Community
- 1.4K Battlefield V - Xbox Community
- 1.3K Battlefield V - Platoon Recruitment
- 35 Battlefield V - Bugs & Issues
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Comments
Well they said it was 1 million under because it didn't have battle royal. So now that's what they're hoping will make up the difference in March.
Right, and what's also not being said, is what's being said...here...
https://www.gamespot.com/articles/ea-has-difficult-quarter-stock-price-nosedives/1100-6464836/
In that, the rest of the story, is EA as a whole stocks took a major nosedive, primarily due to this game.
So, then you add the equation, on what EA may want DICE to do given these circumstances, to prevent more shareholders bailing out. So, from a business standpoint looking at these numbers, would you be encouraging DICE for new content for this game? As much as i'd want to see it, i think they'd have to crazy.
Look, we tried. We all have given our opinions, even ad nauseum on what could save our game, and make it better. DICE seems to think, Battle Royale was the answer, instead of a two hour linear target practice campaign. One would think that comment was demented and insane, not to mention, purely out of touch. In short, it's not looking good as far as new content.
EA did a product dump during the holidays, retailers got caught holding the bag and were forced to sell them at a 60% discount a mere six days after release because people weren't buying the game. They weren't buying the game with or without the discount.
EA didn't drop the price, retailers did because at that point they just wanted to break even.
The real point here is, while you say, "Single player is bad..." The unfortunate reality, is that the single player was their priority...
which they did poorly.
also, see my sig.
New Battlefield V, with focus on squad and teamwork...also on battle royale where you are solo.
What who where?
You know what is really sad and makes at least my head shake ?
How so much of the environment and gameplay of the Singleplayer was so much more interesting than its equivalent in Multiplayer!
The Tiger in " The Last Tiger " was just right in the feeling what a powerful vehicle you are using. With needing just one shot for a Staghound and not four like in Multiplayer.... ( and yes i know about balance in Multiplayer but right now its just ridiculous )
The North Africa aka SAS campaign had more interesting and diverse terrain than the multiplayer Hamada and Areodrome maps.
And why cant i see any maps with dense woods, Castles and interesting fortifications like in the Tirailleur campaign ?!
BFV is now like some Fast Food menu you get at a Saturday night after leaving the club/pub and before going home. All shiny on the pictures in the windows of the store but just sad looking when you see it on your table with your own eyes.
Well that's the point. That was just a flat out lie imo. That two hour campaign must've taken them a month to complete, out of a two year schedule.
It had nothing to do with the campaign, or Battle Royale nobody wanted but Level Cap and Jack Frags In fact, DICE would be very much helping themselves, to shut them off, and bar them from their premises lol.
It's all about shiny, easy-peasy gameplay, whacky skins and goofy carton-like childish themes. Get loads of kids addicted to your games, flog 'em loads of rubbish and do a runner. Then release another one and do it all again.
Battlefield doesn't fit into that. Not that EA aren't trying though.
Be it physical, or be it digital, each license sold is a unit. Anyhow after reading the earnings report, I'm impressed. The game is moving in the right direction, and as such, we may get more content in the future then I was expecting.
Last week, Dave Sirland tweeted that they were in really good shape as far as player counts go, and that Dice was going to do their best to go on a two patch per month cadence to squash as many bugs as possible because they feel that will pull in even more players.
Its not and i have to admit: i dont care any longer. Even more than that, i want them to fail. I am just sick to see how they screwed up almost everything with this game.
Its really insane. A Battlefield game with a WW2 scenario. That alone would be the biggest fundament for a game that should sell itself like sliced bread.
But instead they focused on every stupidity that is a red flag. While totally ignoring any point that made their previous game successful.
Right now i can only imagine that right from the start up to the release it happenend this way:
And this here is the presentation of the first Battlefield V trailer:
You mean assault royale, cause no one with a brain will use anything else.
to be fair, the tech sector in general has been on a nosedive, other studios were down as well. but albeit EA did manage to out nosedive even them all in comparison. the other part you mention leads me to think, if you have a title you think might flop, (think bf5 launch drama) why wouldnt you set yourself up to "push it" into a heavier competing release window, and then blame it on that. bonus points for pushing through fiscal year. so i imagine investors are like wtf, wait. so now the marketing train starts ...its misleading, all of it.
It's an entertaining theory but I think they really want to release BF bi-annually in time for Christmas similar to FIFA which is annual. BF to EA is like FIFA. It's their FIFA war game.
You are absolutely wrong about EA stock taking a major nose dive due to this game. EA stock took a major nose dive because they were heavily invested in Teck stock, which took a major nose dive. I work for a major corporation that also suffered the same fate as EA and we're in the glass fiber business. Speak the facts, I notice you tend to theory craft quite a bit. So do quite a few others around here.
there is no doubt thats their intent development wise, but the revenue isnt there to support it. i just think its bad taste to blame a clustered release window. i mean that was honestly best case scenario in retrospect. if this game launched as it did prior to the holiday, it would still have to be heavily discounted to attract the holiday money. so win for execs thinking they got it figured out, and lose for developers who will be advised by same execs who actually dont.
EA did take hits soley for the launch being pushed, obviously its not the sum of all its negative but very much a contributing factor. not their tech investments
I think what the said about "a competitive release over the holidays"- or whatever it was - meant that it didn't work this time but they may try something almost exactly the same again. Or even that Battlefield just doesn't sell well at Christmas in a b-annual release schedule.
They did also seem to say that they won't give up on trying to get more value out of BF in terms of managing it's lifespan etc.
BFV does still look messy though. But they may have been expecting that and that's why they chose the SP over BR so that BR doesn't suffer from being devalued by the Christmas thing that just happened.