Image Credit: Bethesda
Forgot password
Enter the email address you used when you joined and we'll send you instructions to reset your password.
If you used Apple or Google to create your account, this process will create a password for your existing account.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Reset password instructions sent. If you have an account with us, you will receive an email within a few minutes.
Something went wrong. Try again or contact support if the problem persists.

EA Financial Officer Comments on Possible Battlefield Annualization

After it was suggested in an EA investor call, Blake Jorgensen comments on the difficulties they would face if Battlefield became an annual franchise.
This article is over 10 years old and may contain outdated information

The recent Electronic Arts investor call saw one of what I feel to be the dirtiest words in the modern gaming industry applied to the company’s Battlefield franchise.  It is a word almost guaranteed to consign a franchise to derision and accusations of even more blatant than usual monetization.  The word is annualization, and as a gamer, I have a very strong negative reaction to it.

Recommended Videos

In response to the idea being presented, Blake Jorgensen, EA’s chief financial officer, has stepped forward to offer his own thoughts on the idea.  They are much more sensible than one might expect from someone in charge of the money of those investors who want annualization to make.

The challenges are you’ve got to most likely do it out of two studios because it’s hard. It’s a two-year project.

Battlefield takes us about two years to develop and so you want to make sure that you’re sharing talent across studios, so you keep [the] core talent of the product and the experience for the consumer there. You also want to be really careful that you don’t destroy the franchise along the way. You got to make it exciting and different, but at the same time you want to make sure you maintain a great franchise.

It is not often a major gaming studio discusses how long it takes to make a game as an argument against a new form of monetization.  While we’ve heard talk of timetables before, it is mostly used to explain delays for a game’s release.  A two-year development cycle makes a lot more sense than an annual one, even if the game can technically be put together in a single year, and Jergensen hits on all the main reasons.

He also pointed out a bit later that the game does not just sell when it is released initially, but over the full two-year timeframe, meaning selling the game annually would likely cut into its final sales numbers for the sake of getting the initial sales more regularly.  It is also much harder to market for a game when it comes out every year, as the very knowledge of it being an annual release dilutes excitement.

My favorite of his points, however, is definitely where he warns about destroying the franchise.  The main argument gamers make against annualization is always nice to hear worded in such uncompromising terms.  Fans of the Battlefield series can only hope EA takes Jergensen’s words as seriously as they should.


GameSkinny is supported by our audience. When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn a small affiliate commission. Learn more about our Affiliate Policy
Author
Image of Wokendreamer
Wokendreamer
Writer, gamer, and generally hopeful beneath a veneer of cynicism.