EA intends to revolutionize the series Battlefield building a new one expanded and connected universe with games made by multiple development teams, also aiming at new types of experiences and business models. It is no coincidence that this declaration of intent comes a few weeks after the launch of Battlefield 2042, a chapter with very high expectations but which in the test of the facts was a half disaster. However, for such an important recovery plan, a stable foundation will be needed and regaining the credibility and trust of users.
For those who missed the latest news, yesterday basically marked the beginning of a new era for the Battlefield franchise, with major changes at the top of DICE and new perspectives for the future. Specifically, the face of the series, the general manager Oskar Gabrielson has announced that he will leave the company, a few weeks after another important farewell, namely that of the head of design Fawzi Mesmar.
At the same time, Vince Zampella, a man who can boast games of the caliber of Call of Duty, Medal of Honor and Apex Legends in the curriculum, will take the reins of the franchise, with the aim of building a “connected universe” characterized by multiple projects. of different nature. In this regard, another very important news: Marcus Lehto, the father of Halo, will work on the series with his new development team located in Seattle.
In short, major changes at the top, but what can we really expect from this connected universe of Battlefield? There has been talk of more games, with shared characters and narrative lines, so a restructuring of the series to get closer to the Call of Duty model, where more internal studios deal with the series, to ensure the release of new games every year. At the same time, there is also talk of new types of experiences and business models, which could also suggest a possible Battlefield free-to-play, designed to be a real live service, something also suggested by CEO Andrew Wilson.
Big changes, infinite ambitions and potential, but in all of this Battlefield 2042 and all the negativity that surrounds it are an obstacle that could sink this ambitious plan to revive the franchise, also by virtue of the possible drastic changes to the structure of the series, including a possible free-to-play twist, which in itself could generate discontent in the most conservative fans.
Net of excellent sales at launch, it is no secret that Battlefield 2042 (here our review) has not met the expectations of many players between performance problems, bugs galore, design choices not appreciated by all and the lack of features. like the integrated voice chat, considered the ABC of the genre and the series. To this is then added a post-launch support at times tragicomic, with full-bodied patches made apparently in a hurry that solve numerous flaws but also add new ones, and the criticisms for the Christmas skins and in general over the top that could arrive. in the future.
All problems that make players flee (on Steam the user has more than halved in a few weeks) and scare potential buyers. So the first, arduous, task of Vince Zampella will be precisely that of rebuilding the credibility of the series and regaining the trust of the players. “saving” Battlefield 2042.
The game is not done for, God forbid. We are talking about a shooter that will be supporting for a long time and therefore there is plenty of time to correct the shot. But history shows that regaining the trust of players and reasserting oneself on the market is an extremely complicated undertaking. And this is well known by both Electronic Arts and DICE, who have already experienced a similar situation, albeit for different reasons, with Star Wars Battlefront 2, not to mention other cases such as No Man’s Sky and Fallout 76, which have struggled and not a little to recover. However it is one step necessario, although potentially economically disadvantageous, that EA will have to do if it does not want the “connected universe” of Battlefield 2042 to go off on the wrong foot.
Parliamone is a daily opinion column that offers a starting point for discussion around the news of the day, a small editorial written by a member of the editorial team but which is not necessarily representative of the Aroged editorial line.
