EA Boss Originally Rejected Battlefield 1 World War 1 Setting - News
by William D'Angelo , posted on 18 May 2016 / 4,202 Views
Electronic Arts boss Patrick Soderlund originally rejected the setting of World War 1 for Batttlefield 1 saying that trench warfare would not be fun to play.
"[World War 1] wasn't the most obvious choice," Soderlund said. "If you look at what other partners in the industry are doing, they're going into sci-fi; we've had a lot of success in the modern military space. But we felt like there was a need for a change."
"When the team presented the idea to me of World War 1, I absolutely rejected it," Soderlund added. "I said World War 1, it's trench warfare; it can't be fun to play."
However, he changed his mind and now says the setting is "right for the franchise and right for EA."
"We have to remember that so far, we have only shown one trailer," he added. "Yes, it's gotten a lot of success, but what's important is that we have to go back and make sure we deliver on the full promise of what Battlefield can be. And that we will do."
Thanks GameSpot.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
A life-long and avid gamer, William D'Angelo was first introduced to VGChartz in 2007. After years of supporting the site, he was brought on in 2010 as a junior analyst, working his way up to lead analyst in 2012. He has expanded his involvement in the gaming community by producing content on his own YouTube channel and Twitch channel dedicated to gaming Let's Plays and tutorials. You can contact the author at wdangelo@vgchartz.com or on Twitter @TrunksWD.
More Articles
Because of course he would. Big publishers are too busy chasing the top dog of the industry most of the time, stifling any creativity in the process. Ironically that also means that they'll never become top dog themselves because they offer nothing unique, creative and new to the customer. You can see that same mentality seeping through in his comments about 'other partners in the industry' going 'sci-fi'. Read: I wanted the team to make a call of duty clone, instead of something unique. Thankfully somebody seems to have been very persistent about the WW1 setting.
Is it just me or does it sound like the people making decisions at companies like this have literally never played any of the games they make? Haven't there been a ton of "trench warfare" games that have been hugely successful? But he seriously couldn't be bothered to think of it outside the realm of his own uninformed opinion.
I think a ton is stretching it, especially in the casual shooter market that BF now aims for. If we were talking like war of attrition gameplay in something more core-focused like Planetside, yeah you're correct, but the 15 million people buying BF or SW: BF or what have you all tend to lean towards the high octane shooters more.
Typo in the title, 3x T's in battttttlefield :)
The only thing that i hate about shooters set in WW times, are the crappy guns.
