In other words: "Hey guys, everyone's going to be playing it. Buy this game so you won't be left out!"
Not if the next COD is a good WW2 Game.
Provided this next battlefield isn't going to be a WW2 Game.
Ahahahaha, came here to make a joke: "Sounds like something Pachter would say".
First line in the article did not disappoint me.
and this is why EA's push for competitive gaming is a joke.
Who the fuck is going to take a game that only has a year lifespan seriously?
I'll buy it on release if it isn't a buggy pile of wank at launch.
Which is a bit like saying I'll go outside tomorrow morning if the sun doesn't rise, but still.
Okay after watching the actual Video where he said this, his words were
"Okay guys I gonna make a bet, and I'm totally prepared to be wrong on this, but I think the best selling game of 2016 won't be Call of Duty." and then he continues with saying, well it's Inifity Wards Cycle this year and many people still have a bad aftertaste of Ghosts, and when Dice plays their cards right it's looking good for them.
I'm not really a fan of Pachter, and a lot of the stuff he says is absolutely ridiculous. But this article kinda makes it sound like more than he did, because he said if Inifity Ward fucks up and Dice has luck they will probably move more units next year.
So this is more of a "PCGames Quality" screw up than Pachter Bullshit.
remember when Red Orchestra 2 was supposed to be a cod killer too
[QUOTE=General J;49361573]and this is why EA's push for competitive gaming is a joke.
Who the fuck is going to take a game that only has a year lifespan seriously?[/QUOTE]
Except BF4 is still very much alive? The most anti-comp part of BF5 will probably be the eighteen DLCs that will get announced a week before release.
[QUOTE=General J;49361573]and this is why EA's push for competitive gaming is a joke.
Who the fuck is going to take a game that only has a year lifespan seriously?[/QUOTE]
BF4 has been out for more than two years and no announcement of BF5 yet
Hardline was a side-game that no one cared about by a different dev, doesn't really count
[editline]21st December 2015[/editline]
Apparently BF5 is set for Q4 so that will be a three-year gap, not too bad
[QUOTE=General J;49361573]and this is why EA's push for competitive gaming is a joke.
Who the fuck is going to take a game that only has a year lifespan seriously?[/QUOTE]
But EA isn't really pushing for e-sports in Battlefield, there's stuff to enable it sure but it wasn't like that atrocious Call of Duty: Elite that Activision shoved down peoples throats then quickly killed it when it didn't work.
[QUOTE=General J;49361573]and this is why EA's push for competitive gaming is a joke.
Who the fuck is going to take a game that only has a year lifespan seriously?[/QUOTE]
BF4 is still getting big patches and free maps and stuff so I have no idea what you're talking about
[QUOTE=Scorpo;49361474]Not if the next COD is a good WW2 Game.
Provided this next battlefield isn't going to be a WW2 Game.[/QUOTE]
its by infinity ward, so no it'll just be ghosts 2.
[QUOTE=seba079;49361648]Except BF4 is still very much alive? The most anti-comp part of BF5 will probably be the eighteen DLCs that will get announced a week before release.[/QUOTE]
BF3 is still pretty alive too.
[QUOTE=Melnek;49361642]remember when Red Orchestra 2 was supposed to be a cod killer too[/QUOTE]
No
[QUOTE=General J;49361573]and this is why EA's push for competitive gaming is a joke.
Who the fuck is going to take a game that only has a year lifespan seriously?[/QUOTE]
The one year lifespan is both untrue and not at all relevant to whether it can be a competitive game or not.
What's more important is that competitive Battlefield in all the formats EA has tried to push is [I]boring as fuck[/I]. Despite EA throwing tens (hundreds?) of thousands of dollars at Battlefield 4's launch to gin up a competitive community, absolutely no one watched it.
[QUOTE=Melnek;49361642]remember when Red Orchestra 2 was supposed to be a cod killer too[/QUOTE]
[citation needed]
[QUOTE=Raidyr;49362038]The one year lifespan is both untrue and not at all relevant to whether it can be a competitive game or not.
What's more important is that competitive Battlefield in all the formats EA has tried to push is [I]boring as fuck[/I]. Despite EA throwing tens (hundreds?) of thousands of dollars at Battlefield 4's launch to gin up a competitive community, absolutely no one watched it.[/QUOTE]
The fun of battlefield is the infantry-vehicle interactions. EA's vision of Esports bf4 is purely infantry focused and it's terrible to watch.
[QUOTE=cdr248;49362041][citation needed][/QUOTE]
PC Gamer, January 2011 issue.
[QUOTE=Melnek;49361642]remember when Red Orchestra 2 was supposed to be a cod killer too[/QUOTE]
it never was
BF4 is still pretty much as alive as GTA V currently is.
Battlefield Hardline didn't even dent the playercount.
[QUOTE=Melnek;49361642]remember when Red Orchestra 2 was supposed to be a cod killer too[/QUOTE]
Remember when Red Orchestra 2 was supposed to be a functioning game that didn't have crippling/annoying bugs years after release?
I don't
[QUOTE=Sweet Berries;49361852]No[/QUOTE]
you lads need to refresh your memories then
there was even a thread right here where people were hyped as fuck
[QUOTE=PCGamesN;49361078]Everyone's favourite games analyst Michael Pachter[/QUOTE]
Who?
[QUOTE=Dirty_Ape;49362753]Who?[/QUOTE]
A man who somehow makes a living by being wrong about things.
[QUOTE=Dirty_Ape;49362753]Who?[/QUOTE]
Overpaid guy working in the videogame industry as an analytic, knowing shit about videogames.
[img]https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/460929533097426944/DHfofihe_400x400.jpeg[/img]
[B]
“I have long been baffled as to why RTS games don’t work on consoles.
I think it is partly because of the nature of the gameplay, it’s single-player and it’s turn-based."[/B]
[url]http://nintendo.about.com/od/wiiliving/a/Does-Michael-Pachter-Know-What-Hes-Talking-About.htm[/url]
He also claimed that the Xbox One will outsell the PS4 by miles.
[QUOTE=Melnek;49361642]remember when Red Orchestra 2 was supposed to be a cod killer too[/QUOTE]
Literally no one ever said that
If EA wants their game to be unique for e-sports they should have normal maps, include vehicles. Each team will have the same number and type of vehicle spawns, and once they're destroyed, they're gone.
If the devs could get it right, I could see competitive play being pretty fun, but it's not fast paced like CSGO or CoD, so it probably won't garner much recognition.
[QUOTE=Keychain;49362971]Literally no one ever said that[/QUOTE]
Surprisingly, there's a 5 page steam post of people agreeing/disagreeing.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/WfCWxoT.png[/img]
:v:
But... Bad Company 3...
I suppose hardcore mode Bad Company 2 for another few years :(
[QUOTE=Dirty_Ape;49362753]Who?[/QUOTE]
A dumb idiot who in 2009 said "nobody has a PC faster than a PS3".
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
