EA statement on Battlefield franchise

Comments

  • MAJWolfcookies
    564 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    alienstout wrote: »
    alienstout wrote: »
    fragnstein wrote: »
    The highlight of the call was this:

    And second, you'll start to see in the next few months glimpses of the Star Wars game and I think you'll be blown away by what you see. We've played 20 plus minutes of it last week and it is exceptional in terms of its like level of polish depth and what living inside of the Star Wars world is a Jedi and I think people will be blown away by


    Blake jorgenson can tell after 20 min of game play the level of polish

    I thought Disney was taking their Star Wars IP away from EA?

    It won't be long till they terminate. EA = joke

    Damn, looks like it's not: https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2019-02-06-disney-praises-good-relationship-with-ea-around-star-wars-games

    Damn. Whatever. Retaining it by default not by performance. EA is so good at this. Good job shill.
  • warslag
    1395 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    The salt in this thread is better than even that I've been getting in my MAA games!

    Prediction: 5 years from now, EA will still exist as a successful company, Battlefield as a moderately successful shooter (albiet not on the very top level ala CoD) and players on reddit/official forum will still be crying that their personal problems aren't anally catered to by a massive multinational

    That's true in a lot of ways. But in 5 years the people who are moaning might be the upcoming next-gen gamers who will in turn be abandoned for the next big thing.

    In reality, 5 years from now gaming will look quite different, with a lot more people involved of all ages. More companies and more games to cater to greater numbers of players. Which will make it possible to develop good quality games for most tastes.
  • mrtwotimes
    728 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    These threads and messages are no different than any of the other Battlefield games.
  • xeNizKing
    349 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited February 6
    warslag wrote: »
    xeNizKing wrote: »
    I must admit 7 Million is more than what I was expecting. It may be noted somewhere but they said units sold. They count sales as sales to retailers not to end customers. So without knowing the direct digital sales. That number could be and I stress COULD BE misleading unless they confirmed that the number was sales to end players not. Sales to stores. But as I said I fully admit I’m a little surprised. I was expecting around 5 million. It most likely would have been if not for the permanent reduction in sales price. We may get more player numbers at some point. They also have no excuse to hold back population numbers from battlefield tracker.

    Too be honest, sales vs actual revenue needs to be taken into account here.

    For instance many of us here preordered or we payed full price but we are only a small fraction of the community, A lot of people waited and brought it on sale at an insanely cheap price in november/december.

    So while only losing 1 million in sales vs 7 million actual sales doesn't seem bad on the surface, we'd need to know how many of those sales were bought cheap and not at full price because then even if it is infact 7 million with no "odd" data then that means that;

    7 million sales at full price = $420,000,000 (standard edition)
    7 Million sales at full price and cheap (assuming its half the player base like many suspect then it will probably be somewhere in the figure of): $290,000,000

    As I recall the dirt cheap sales some places were doing were almost 70% off. That all said looking at it this way, it was a dismal performance and I seriously cannot see how a battleroyale mode could of changed any of that. Hell these guess work numbers dont even factor in the people who haven't actually bought the game and are using origin access instead.

    We need actual revenue numbers for the specific product here.

    But whether BFV was bought whilst on sale or not, the sales figures are still incorporated into the report.

    It's not like they would be pretending to have sold all the copies at full-price. I think that would actually be against the law. Just suggesting it, though, seems a bit silly. If that was what you were suggesting.

    "Suggesting" is somewhat at the core of it but not from me.

    What I am saying is a majority of people wont know jack about sales, revenue and marketing in general.

    On the surface 7 million sales with 1 million less on the surface isn't that bad at all even to the average person considering the actual price of the game at full price. So when they tell the media "7 million" its obviously not in depth and very suggestive that they still made a lot of money regardless which isn't necessarily true. Which is why I am wondering just how many were brought on sale because as I said, 7 million at full price would be $420 million if discount sales are considered then 7 million sales doesn't translate into $420 million which not everyone will realise (immediately anyway) - This is why I want to know the actual figures per discount + full price so we can really see just how badly its actually done rather than making guess work figures like I have. If not all of them with at full price then 7 million sales monetarily will feel like 5 million especially if its close to half of the players buying at heavily discounted prices.

    In regards to the "pretending" part. Doing saying one thing to consumers and another thing to investers isn't unheard especially concerning AAA companies. I am not suggesting they are "pretending" but I am saying they're being very suggestive with their response despite the negative aspect of the whole thing.
  • PoppaPappo
    235 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    xeNizKing wrote: »
    warslag wrote: »
    xeNizKing wrote: »
    I must admit 7 Million is more than what I was expecting. It may be noted somewhere but they said units sold. They count sales as sales to retailers not to end customers. So without knowing the direct digital sales. That number could be and I stress COULD BE misleading unless they confirmed that the number was sales to end players not. Sales to stores. But as I said I fully admit I’m a little surprised. I was expecting around 5 million. It most likely would have been if not for the permanent reduction in sales price. We may get more player numbers at some point. They also have no excuse to hold back population numbers from battlefield tracker.

    Too be honest, sales vs actual revenue needs to be taken into account here.

    For instance many of us here preordered or we payed full price but we are only a small fraction of the community, A lot of people waited and brought it on sale at an insanely cheap price in november/december.

    So while only losing 1 million in sales vs 7 million actual sales doesn't seem bad on the surface, we'd need to know how many of those sales were bought cheap and not at full price because then even if it is infact 7 million with no "odd" data then that means that;

    7 million sales at full price = $420,000,000 (standard edition)
    7 Million sales at full price and cheap (assuming its half the player base like many suspect then it will probably be somewhere in the figure of): $290,000,000

    As I recall the dirt cheap sales some places were doing were almost 70% off. That all said looking at it this way, it was a dismal performance and I seriously cannot see how a battleroyale mode could of changed any of that. Hell these guess work numbers dont even factor in the people who haven't actually bought the game and are using origin access instead.

    We need actual revenue numbers for the specific product here.

    But whether BFV was bought whilst on sale or not, the sales figures are still incorporated into the report.

    It's not like they would be pretending to have sold all the copies at full-price. I think that would actually be against the law. Just suggesting it, though, seems a bit silly. If that was what you were suggesting.

    "Suggesting" is somewhat at the core of it but not from me.

    What I am saying is a majority of people wont know jack about sales, revenue and marketing in general.

    On the surface 7 million sales with 1 million less on the surface isn't that bad at all even to the average person considering the actual price of the game at full price. So when they tell the media "7 million" its obviously not in depth and very suggestive that they still made a lot of money regardless which isn't necessarily true. Which is why I am wondering just how many were brought on sale because as I said, 7 million at full price would be $420 million if discount sales are considered then 7 million sales doesn't translate into $420 million which not everyone will realise (immediately anyway) - This is why I want to know the actual figures per discount + full price so we can really see just how badly its actually done rather than making guess work figures like I have. If not all of them with at full price then 7 million sales monetarily will feel like 5 million especially if its close to half of the players buying at heavily discounted prices.

    In regards to the "pretending" part. Doing saying one thing to consumers and another thing to investers isn't unheard especially concerning AAA companies. I am not suggesting they are "pretending" but I am saying they're being very suggestive with their response despite the negative aspect of the whole thing.


    Not necessarily. If taking about physical sales, then EA got the same amount either way, as they’re paid by the retailer beforehand. A game sitting on the shelf at Best Buy was already sold to the store by EA. The heavy sales and discounts will have impacted how much money retailers made much more so than EA.
  • fragnstein
    462 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited February 6
    fragnstein wrote: »
    The highlight of the call was this:

    And second, you'll start to see in the next few months glimpses of the Star Wars game and I think you'll be blown away by what you see. We've played 20 plus minutes of it last week and it is exceptional in terms of its like level of polish depth and what living inside of the Star Wars world is a Jedi and I think people will be blown away by


    Blake jorgenson can tell after 20 min of game play the level of polish

    So what are you trying to say? That it takes a unemployed basement dweller 200 hours of grinding make an educated guess on whether a game is good or not? You people are a joke.
    That's a pretty defensive reaction. You work for EA quality assurance?
    I didn't say we there it's good or not, I'm referring to how well polished a game is. Bugs don't exactly all jump out at you in the first 20 minutes of playing
  • warslag
    1395 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    xeNizKing wrote: »
    warslag wrote: »
    xeNizKing wrote: »
    I must admit 7 Million is more than what I was expecting. It may be noted somewhere but they said units sold. They count sales as sales to retailers not to end customers. So without knowing the direct digital sales. That number could be and I stress COULD BE misleading unless they confirmed that the number was sales to end players not. Sales to stores. But as I said I fully admit I’m a little surprised. I was expecting around 5 million. It most likely would have been if not for the permanent reduction in sales price. We may get more player numbers at some point. They also have no excuse to hold back population numbers from battlefield tracker.

    Too be honest, sales vs actual revenue needs to be taken into account here.

    For instance many of us here preordered or we payed full price but we are only a small fraction of the community, A lot of people waited and brought it on sale at an insanely cheap price in november/december.

    So while only losing 1 million in sales vs 7 million actual sales doesn't seem bad on the surface, we'd need to know how many of those sales were bought cheap and not at full price because then even if it is infact 7 million with no "odd" data then that means that;

    7 million sales at full price = $420,000,000 (standard edition)
    7 Million sales at full price and cheap (assuming its half the player base like many suspect then it will probably be somewhere in the figure of): $290,000,000

    As I recall the dirt cheap sales some places were doing were almost 70% off. That all said looking at it this way, it was a dismal performance and I seriously cannot see how a battleroyale mode could of changed any of that. Hell these guess work numbers dont even factor in the people who haven't actually bought the game and are using origin access instead.

    We need actual revenue numbers for the specific product here.

    But whether BFV was bought whilst on sale or not, the sales figures are still incorporated into the report.

    It's not like they would be pretending to have sold all the copies at full-price. I think that would actually be against the law. Just suggesting it, though, seems a bit silly. If that was what you were suggesting.

    "Suggesting" is somewhat at the core of it but not from me.

    What I am saying is a majority of people wont know jack about sales, revenue and marketing in general.

    On the surface 7 million sales with 1 million less on the surface isn't that bad at all even to the average person considering the actual price of the game at full price. So when they tell the media "7 million" its obviously not in depth and very suggestive that they still made a lot of money regardless which isn't necessarily true. Which is why I am wondering just how many were brought on sale because as I said, 7 million at full price would be $420 million if discount sales are considered then 7 million sales doesn't translate into $420 million which not everyone will realise (immediately anyway) - This is why I want to know the actual figures per discount + full price so we can really see just how badly its actually done rather than making guess work figures like I have. If not all of them with at full price then 7 million sales monetarily will feel like 5 million especially if its close to half of the players buying at heavily discounted prices.

    In regards to the "pretending" part. Doing saying one thing to consumers and another thing to investers isn't unheard especially concerning AAA companies. I am not suggesting they are "pretending" but I am saying they're being very suggestive with their response despite the negative aspect of the whole thing.

    As far as I know it was a quarterly report to shareholders, which is a type of financial report. I believe they are subject to legal requirements. The accounting has to be spot-on. They don't need to be "suggestive" as the actual accounts are published to shareholders by law, anyway. Anyone investing at that level is going to know all this stuff. It would be very embarrassing to try and pull a fast one on a lot savvy investors over a piddling little video game. That's why they don't do it.
  • xBCxSEALxTEAMx6
    1432 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    The salt in this thread is better than even that I've been getting in my MAA games!

    Prediction: 5 years from now, EA will still exist as a successful company, Battlefield as a moderately successful shooter (albiet not on the very top level ala CoD) and players on reddit/official forum will still be crying that their personal problems aren't anally catered to by a massive multinational

    That's a pretty bold prediction. My prediction is in 5 years Microsoft will have bought over EA (at a pretty good discount), and the BF series would be long over, as they focus on free to play titles and stream services. We'll see i guess.
  • alienstout
    680 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    PoppaPappo wrote: »
    xeNizKing wrote: »
    warslag wrote: »
    xeNizKing wrote: »
    I must admit 7 Million is more than what I was expecting. It may be noted somewhere but they said units sold. They count sales as sales to retailers not to end customers. So without knowing the direct digital sales. That number could be and I stress COULD BE misleading unless they confirmed that the number was sales to end players not. Sales to stores. But as I said I fully admit I’m a little surprised. I was expecting around 5 million. It most likely would have been if not for the permanent reduction in sales price. We may get more player numbers at some point. They also have no excuse to hold back population numbers from battlefield tracker.

    Too be honest, sales vs actual revenue needs to be taken into account here.

    For instance many of us here preordered or we payed full price but we are only a small fraction of the community, A lot of people waited and brought it on sale at an insanely cheap price in november/december.

    So while only losing 1 million in sales vs 7 million actual sales doesn't seem bad on the surface, we'd need to know how many of those sales were bought cheap and not at full price because then even if it is infact 7 million with no "odd" data then that means that;

    7 million sales at full price = $420,000,000 (standard edition)
    7 Million sales at full price and cheap (assuming its half the player base like many suspect then it will probably be somewhere in the figure of): $290,000,000

    As I recall the dirt cheap sales some places were doing were almost 70% off. That all said looking at it this way, it was a dismal performance and I seriously cannot see how a battleroyale mode could of changed any of that. Hell these guess work numbers dont even factor in the people who haven't actually bought the game and are using origin access instead.

    We need actual revenue numbers for the specific product here.

    But whether BFV was bought whilst on sale or not, the sales figures are still incorporated into the report.

    It's not like they would be pretending to have sold all the copies at full-price. I think that would actually be against the law. Just suggesting it, though, seems a bit silly. If that was what you were suggesting.

    "Suggesting" is somewhat at the core of it but not from me.

    What I am saying is a majority of people wont know jack about sales, revenue and marketing in general.

    On the surface 7 million sales with 1 million less on the surface isn't that bad at all even to the average person considering the actual price of the game at full price. So when they tell the media "7 million" its obviously not in depth and very suggestive that they still made a lot of money regardless which isn't necessarily true. Which is why I am wondering just how many were brought on sale because as I said, 7 million at full price would be $420 million if discount sales are considered then 7 million sales doesn't translate into $420 million which not everyone will realise (immediately anyway) - This is why I want to know the actual figures per discount + full price so we can really see just how badly its actually done rather than making guess work figures like I have. If not all of them with at full price then 7 million sales monetarily will feel like 5 million especially if its close to half of the players buying at heavily discounted prices.

    In regards to the "pretending" part. Doing saying one thing to consumers and another thing to investers isn't unheard especially concerning AAA companies. I am not suggesting they are "pretending" but I am saying they're being very suggestive with their response despite the negative aspect of the whole thing.


    Not necessarily. If taking about physical sales, then EA got the same amount either way, as they’re paid by the retailer beforehand. A game sitting on the shelf at Best Buy was already sold to the store by EA. The heavy sales and discounts will have impacted how much money retailers made much more so than EA.

    Do publishers like EA buy back their unsold games, like book/magazine publishers will do?
  • warslag
    1395 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    alienstout wrote: »
    PoppaPappo wrote: »
    xeNizKing wrote: »
    warslag wrote: »
    xeNizKing wrote: »
    I must admit 7 Million is more than what I was expecting. It may be noted somewhere but they said units sold. They count sales as sales to retailers not to end customers. So without knowing the direct digital sales. That number could be and I stress COULD BE misleading unless they confirmed that the number was sales to end players not. Sales to stores. But as I said I fully admit I’m a little surprised. I was expecting around 5 million. It most likely would have been if not for the permanent reduction in sales price. We may get more player numbers at some point. They also have no excuse to hold back population numbers from battlefield tracker.

    Too be honest, sales vs actual revenue needs to be taken into account here.

    For instance many of us here preordered or we payed full price but we are only a small fraction of the community, A lot of people waited and brought it on sale at an insanely cheap price in november/december.

    So while only losing 1 million in sales vs 7 million actual sales doesn't seem bad on the surface, we'd need to know how many of those sales were bought cheap and not at full price because then even if it is infact 7 million with no "odd" data then that means that;

    7 million sales at full price = $420,000,000 (standard edition)
    7 Million sales at full price and cheap (assuming its half the player base like many suspect then it will probably be somewhere in the figure of): $290,000,000

    As I recall the dirt cheap sales some places were doing were almost 70% off. That all said looking at it this way, it was a dismal performance and I seriously cannot see how a battleroyale mode could of changed any of that. Hell these guess work numbers dont even factor in the people who haven't actually bought the game and are using origin access instead.

    We need actual revenue numbers for the specific product here.

    But whether BFV was bought whilst on sale or not, the sales figures are still incorporated into the report.

    It's not like they would be pretending to have sold all the copies at full-price. I think that would actually be against the law. Just suggesting it, though, seems a bit silly. If that was what you were suggesting.

    "Suggesting" is somewhat at the core of it but not from me.

    What I am saying is a majority of people wont know jack about sales, revenue and marketing in general.

    On the surface 7 million sales with 1 million less on the surface isn't that bad at all even to the average person considering the actual price of the game at full price. So when they tell the media "7 million" its obviously not in depth and very suggestive that they still made a lot of money regardless which isn't necessarily true. Which is why I am wondering just how many were brought on sale because as I said, 7 million at full price would be $420 million if discount sales are considered then 7 million sales doesn't translate into $420 million which not everyone will realise (immediately anyway) - This is why I want to know the actual figures per discount + full price so we can really see just how badly its actually done rather than making guess work figures like I have. If not all of them with at full price then 7 million sales monetarily will feel like 5 million especially if its close to half of the players buying at heavily discounted prices.

    In regards to the "pretending" part. Doing saying one thing to consumers and another thing to investers isn't unheard especially concerning AAA companies. I am not suggesting they are "pretending" but I am saying they're being very suggestive with their response despite the negative aspect of the whole thing.


    Not necessarily. If taking about physical sales, then EA got the same amount either way, as they’re paid by the retailer beforehand. A game sitting on the shelf at Best Buy was already sold to the store by EA. The heavy sales and discounts will have impacted how much money retailers made much more so than EA.

    Do publishers like EA buy back their unsold games, like book/magazine publishers will do?

    I wondered that. Maybe there is some kind of indemnity against those kind of situations.
  • spartanx169x
    698 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member

    [/quote]

    Do publishers like EA buy back their unsold games, like book/magazine publishers will do?[/quote]

    I wondered that. Maybe there is some kind of indemnity against those kind of situations.[/quote]

    It depends on the relationship with the retailer . Big Box stores like Walmart and Best Buy usually won’t force the issue, what they end up doing is getting an agreed on credit on a future purchase(s). That way the seller saves face and the buyer gets what they want, a recoupment of some of the losss off potential sales.
  • parkingbrake
    3202 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    They are either deluded, stupid or lying to say a difficult release window and the lack of Battle Royale is what hurt the launch.

    It's the bad design, incomplete and missing features, bugs and, yes, the pre-launch furore that hurt the game.

    In comparison to the launch of BF4, this is a picnic in the park. BF4 had technical issues that really were game-breaking, it crashed at a horrendous rate, the audio would disappear on one map, there were terrible network performance issues, it was a complete train wreck. But now we're supposed to believe that the annoying bugs in BFV like ammo crates dropping into the ground are on the same level as that? It's not even close. As for people still grinding their teeth over female characters etc., yikes, that became a non-issue almost instantly, how amazing that some folks still can't move past that.
  • DrkBlueXG
    32 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Single player is what gives your game an identity imo. Imagine playing BFV or BF1 without that required 1st level? It would feel hollow.
  • barnesalmighty2
    1475 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    They are either deluded, stupid or lying to say a difficult release window and the lack of Battle Royale is what hurt the launch.

    It's the bad design, incomplete and missing features, bugs and, yes, the pre-launch furore that hurt the game.

    In comparison to the launch of BF4, this is a picnic in the park. BF4 had technical issues that really were game-breaking, it crashed at a horrendous rate, the audio would disappear on one map, there were terrible network performance issues, it was a complete train wreck. But now we're supposed to believe that the annoying bugs in BFV like ammo crates dropping into the ground are on the same level as that? It's not even close. As for people still grinding their teeth over female characters etc., yikes, that became a non-issue almost instantly, how amazing that some folks still can't move past that.

    The worst launch bug for me personally was bad company 2 losing my levels every other time I turned the game on for the first six months. Constantly being reset to zero broke my spirit and I put the game down for an entire year until I knew it was fixed.
  • xBCxSEALxTEAMx6
    1432 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    DrkBlueXG wrote: »
    Single player is what gives your game an identity imo. Imagine playing BFV or BF1 without that required 1st level? It would feel hollow.

    Nobody believes their nonsense on that. There as much a sp on this as BF1. Did that impact their sales? Or SP on BF3, or 4? There was nothing to this campaign for them to have worked on it more than other things, and nobody wanted or asked for Battle Royale. In fact, they were sideswiped by their own company anyway with Apex.

    All they're doing, is telling us in a way, there will be no SP Campaign on their next title, seemingly Bad Company 3 (where you would really want a campaign), as they focus on BR over there, sinking that title as well.
  • CoD_Is_Number_1
    303 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Ugh battle royale. Even reading it makes me sick. They might as well call it sell out mode.

    What companies fail to understand is that oversaturation is only going to kill the genre off quicker, especially since there's not a whole lot more you can do with Battle Royale.

    I have zero faith in EA that they will allow DICE to put out the content they want, and I'm expecting that quite a few cuts are being made behind the scenes.
  • Sixclicks
    5073 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Of course they conveniently leave out how bad EA PR and the whole controversy around women in a WW2 game and the dev's comments regarding that affected sales.
  • warslag
    1395 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    Ugh battle royale. Even reading it makes me sick. They might as well call it sell out mode.

    What companies fail to understand is that oversaturation is only going to kill the genre off quicker, especially since there's not a whole lot more you can do with Battle Royale.

    I have zero faith in EA that they will allow DICE to put out the content they want, and I'm expecting that quite a few cuts are being made behind the scenes.

    Apex was just released and seems to be doing well. It's the most watched game on Twitch at the moment, with 257k viewers.

    This is what I mean when I say that some of us are feeling a bit left out by game produces, including EA, chasing the BR dollar, as it were. But they're entitled to do that. It's not them it's us.
  • xBCxSEALxTEAMx6
    1432 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Dan Mitre gone. New that was coming. Probably many more to follow.
  • BaronVonGoon
    6728 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Dan Mitre gone. New that was coming. Probably many more to follow.

    ? Mitre was filling in for Braddock here on the forums, he's still with Dice. Braddock was always the forum guy, BFVs release was the first time Mitre was on the forum on a regular basis, it's always been Braddock. Though I find myself having better luck interacting with devs than the aforementioned community managers
Sign In or Register to comment.