Post by Steve Farrelly @ 10:34am 07/04/11 | 18 Comments
"This game has been designed to take that game down," he said, before revealing there would be a marketing juggernaut behind both it and Activision's next Call of Duty installment (rumoured to be coming in November, also). He then added that this "battle of the titans" would serve up "a couple hundred million dollars worth of marketing" between the two games and said this was the tipping point for the industry this holiday season.
Rumour also has it the reason EA haven't revealed an official release data for the game yet, is because they're waiting for Activision's official Call of Duty announcement due in the next month or so, to then announce Battlefield a week earlier at retail. The war has most definitely begun.
We have the full address from Riccitiello embedded for you below, and it's a pretty decent watch for those of you interested in how the marketing side of the games industry works.
Watch live streaming video from adage at livestream.com
Latest Comments
18 Comments
Show
Follow Us
Advertisement
Log In
Posted 10:39am 07/4/11
Posted 10:46am 07/4/11
Posted 11:03am 07/4/11
Posted 11:06am 07/4/11
let the game do the talking
if it fails then everyone can laugh and mock them with their own quotes too
last edited by paveway at 11:06:08 07/Apr/11
Posted 12:08pm 07/4/11
Posted 01:43pm 07/4/11
Posted 01:47pm 07/4/11
When EA says they will spend a 'couple hundred million' on marketing I think they should be reducing the price of the game or giving their software developers a pay rise - whichever is more important for the ongoing stability.
I've always laughed at the COD vs. BF 'battle'. It's classic Ford vs. Holden stuff. They know it's good for business and they are just bouncing off each other. At the end of the day the only similarity is that they are first person shooters - they probably even know that most of their market has both games. Hahaha.
Posted 01:53pm 07/4/11
Posted 02:24pm 07/4/11
Posted 02:29pm 07/4/11
Posted 03:11pm 07/4/11
I don't remember anybody even mentioning CoD when we were slawing up BF1942 and so on...
DICE
Posted 08:14pm 07/4/11
You Got F'd in the A
Tags: SOUTH
PARKmore...
Posted 08:20pm 07/4/11
So, really, who the f*** cares?
Posted 08:36pm 07/4/11
QFT.
COD imo experience is an over-used concept. There is nothing interesting about that game whatsoever. EA had battlefield 1942, one of the best games ever imo. At least in CS and cs source you had HP you could not regain, none of this crouching behind a box bulls***. When i think COD, i think console fanboys. Sure COD 4 was ok, but nothing on the battlefield franchise.
Posted 08:53pm 07/4/11
1. You can get into a game fast. COD4 fast
2. Make the movement slightly more responsive and faster than bfbc2 (but not too much)
3. Competitive Mode - Made by the developer but with community input. Just call it match mode or something. has R-UP, admin controls etc.
4. Balance guns
5. Is a f*** load of fun
COD4 was the last really good competitive FPS imo and I think it's time for another one.
Posted 01:18am 08/4/11
You don't really like FPS's do you? BFBC2 is brillaint, and so was BF2 and BF1942 and BF2142. I can only see BF3 being even better.
Posted 01:26am 08/4/11
Answer: Yes, when we find out we've wasted $100 on yet another game that can't connect half the time, requires 3 different services to be logged into in order to play among friends and that's when the game isn't busy crashing randomly.
Dammit, now you've made me want to play CS again.
Posted 11:13pm 08/4/11
Anybody else remember when a good game was based on the hype that happened AFTER the release and not 6 months before anybody has even seen it? EA perfected that, Bf1942 was one of the first games i'd ever seen heavily hyped months before anybody could play it... granted it was great, but now every game follows that formula... of course with a new twist... what you get on release is the way it is... balance? patches? pfft if we make the game perfect you won't go buy the next one... here have an expansion instead.