Will EA/DICE Learn From This Failure?

---

@DuaneDibbley wrote:
@Psubond
I would not be so strict. I will buy the next game, IFF they fix the current game and make me not regret spending my money in the end and if that is indeed the case, then also only AFTER the game was released and actual players (not Youtubers or journalists) say that is indeed something good that deserves the name Battlefield.

THEN (but only then) I will buy. And that is what I should have done with this one instead of spending money on the Gold edition (not the Ultimate, but I wanted access to the Beta which turned out to be a 'month old' pre-alpha). Well, some people never learn -- I certainly do.

---

you do what you like.  i can only speak for myself and there is ZERO chance i'm buying the next game.  i didn't buy BFV because of sonderlund and i skipped battlefront 2 as well because of them thinking they could get away with the monetization (yea, they changed their plan but i didn't give them my money out of principle)

i don't *need* these games.  i *like* to play video games but i can easily walk away too.  the only message that EA understands is money

In a nutshell, Dice will learn. EA won’t 

In a nutshell, Dice will learn. EA won’t. Proven time and again. However Dice removing essential (legacy) features of the franchise game was a schoolboy error. 

A couple of factual and very substantial blunders and their associated hard decisions keeps me pondering on who really did take those decisions:

1. From the onset of the game development, the design concept was all centered around making a Battle Royal kind of game, but using a futuristic battlefield environment.  But it was foremost to be an "each player against everybody else" battle royal kind of game.  Reason why in the final game we had Specialists heros to choose our ego character on, but no scoreboard, no VoIP, no squad functions, no relevant XP awards at game round, no community features, no clans, no...  etc etc...  Because all those legacy features are not used in a Battle Royal game. So question remain:
Why call it a Battlefield Game, when it was obviously not and who took that decision, EA or DICE?

2. So the development is not going to plan, and far into the project work it is finally being recognized that relying on the now ancient Frostbite Engine is causing a lot of shortcomings and unstable foundation for this game.  So the plug is pulled on all done so far to give the frostbite engine a complete overhaul.  All while the global market for Battle Royal gaming is quickly flaming out.  So it was decided to repurpose the game from being a Battle Royal game to be a larger team based Battlefield game instead.  And now all hands on deck from across the many different studios that EA/DICE could pull from, because only 18-20 months remain after the Frostbite work was done and then still to meet that now illusory deadline to release still by November 2021.  So question remain:

Who decided still to keep all that clutter in a BF game now inherited from the misconceived flirtation with Battle Royal, EA or DICE?

3. Now we are getting to February 2021 and we now get that epic messaging released from EA saying that "DICE is way ahead of schedule with development of Battlefield 6..." as the publisher geared up to reveal the title in spring 2022.  And yes, despite the very substantial shock and feedback that was provided at the Technical Playtest, EA/DICE stuck to their illusive story line that all was good, we played on a very old build and the release date would stick being November 2021.

Who decided still to release the game despite the very substantial number of game breaking bugs and the very long list of abhorrent missing game functions, EA or DICE?

It is not like this is something new to EA/DICE.  They have been down this self-delusional path before.  Unfortunately it has only gone from bad to worse.  So why should we think they will learn anything from this failure?

Granted, they quickly parted ways with the BF Franchise General Manager and also the lead game designer, both at DICE and both absolutely responsible for this meltdown.  But are we to believe that they, two man alone, totally framed EA leadership to think all was well until the very day of full release?  That the CFO at EA did not know any better the day he went on stage and proclaimed they were far ahead of schedule?  That nobody at EA would be involved to check the bug counts as the testing and beta phases were conducted?  That nobody at EA cared to check what the market/tester feedback was telling them?  That nobody at EA were involved when the GO/NO-GO decision for full launch was made?

Those that were in leadership roles and just sitting on their hands when this was rolled out the door are as responsible as those that already were shown the door.

And those that kept insisting to release despite the overwhelming indications of the product far from being ready are equally responsible for this meltdown, the destroyed brand reputation and imploded customer base.