As a Battlefield player it is clear that DICE have not taken any advice from Activision on how to produce sequels (Thank god). Im not a battlefield 'fanboy' and I did enjoy COD but the past 4 games have been the same with only a slight variation of perks and different guns. The game as a whole has not changed a great deal. For me black ops was real let down this year with modern warfare 2 seeming far more superior. It seemed like Infinity Ward really tried to create the same effect that COD4 had on players by giving it a massive update. Although the gametypes remained the same, the changes made through perks, maps, engine and customization were a real improvement but Treyarch just seemed to have discontinued these upgrades with black ops making it more comparable to COD4 and not an improvement on Modern warefare 2.
The difference with DICE is that they had huge success with battlefield 2 and did not want to make small alterations and release similar games keeping the same titles hence the introduction of the Bad Company subtitle. This tells fans that its not a whole new battlefield but its an additional game to the series. Some people have opinions that the bad company series was produced to spot faults and suggest improvements that could be made with Frostbite 2 engine and this seems believable but does not seem like this was DICE's primary goal when producing these games. When Battlefield 3 launches it will be the true sequel to Battlefield 2 and will be marketed in that way. In my opinion it is this marketing approach that is very important to this industry to stop fans being disappointed when publishers put all the effort into producing as many cash cow titles as they can.
On a final note I shall leave you with a quote from the DICE creative director;
'You dont beat call of duty by making another call of duty. You beat it by making a better game.'
takedown50's forum posts
Log in to comment