How EA aims to overthrow Call of Duty

By Fred Dutton Published 10 May, 2011

Battlefield 3 marketing masterplan detailed.

EA hasn't been mincing its words on this one – the plan with the forthcoming Battlefield 3 is to knock Activision's Call of Duty franchise off its lofty perch at the top of the FPS tree.

That's an ambitious goal given Black Ops record-breaking sales figures, but EA's marketing chief has explained how the publisher intends to go about it.

Aside from hoping developer DICE makes a great game, it seems there are three prongs to EA's marketing masterplan, according to an IndustryGamers interview with senior exec Lincoln Hirshberger.

First up, it's hoping to get the launch timing just right this time out, admitting it botched the Battlefield: Bad Company 2 release.

"With Battlefield 3, we believe that we have superior technology and gameplay," he explained. "We just need for everyone else in the mainstream to know that too.

"Last year, Battlefield: Bad Company 2 earned better scores than the competition but, because Battlefield released in March, a lot of the mainstream holiday hit buyers just weren't aware that Battlefield was the better game.

"This year, we're playing offense by launching Battlefield 3 in the holiday and we're starting to get the word out early by kicking off our campaign to the mass market."

Secondly, EA hopes social networks will play a big role in bringing in the punters.

"Another key part of our strategy has been to fan the flames and create a network effect with the Battlefield community. The power of social networks is amazing and fun to watch. The TV campaign has jumped-started that effort by enlisting a lot of new FPS fans looking for something new and better."

Hirshberger added that a new Facebook tool that lets users unlock special content has made a great start, more than doubling the Battlefield Facebook community from 400,000 to 900,000 in a single week.

The final part of the plan discussed was introducing a bevy of new online features to the series.

"We're building an online destination that will not only unify the Battlefield brands, but create a more immersive social network experience for Battlefield players.

"Whether you're interested in the Play 4 Free type experience or full on HD console & PC gameplay, we're investing in a Battlefield portal to ensure FPS fans find what they're looking for."

All this is going to be expensive – earlier this year EA CEO John Riccitiello predicted that between them, Activision and EA would be shelling out "a couple of hundred million dollars" on marketing.

Both Battlefield 3 and the as yet unannounced new Call of Duty title are expected to launch in late 2011.

Picture of Fred.

About Fred Dutton

Fred Dutton is Eurogamer's US news editor, based in Washington DC.

Read more articles from Fred by visiting the Fred Dutton archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (57) Latest comment 1 year ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • harveypooka #1 1 year ago

    Two companies pissing at each other? Couldn't care less. Focus on making the game great, like BF2 and BF2142 were, and I'll buy it.

  • Haloboy #2 1 year ago

    The only thing that can kill CoD Barnes is CoD Barnes.

  • brod #3 1 year ago

    "With Battlefield 3, we believe that we have superior technology and gameplay,"

    Is this belief based on anything other than assumptions? We haven't seen anything of MW3 yet.

    I'm getting tired of these articles about how awesome EA thinks the next EA game is.

  • the_sas_man #4 1 year ago

    Can't wait for L.A Noire...oh wait...

  • Koozer #5 1 year ago

    Please stop it EA. You're going to look like idiots when the next CoD copy/paste sells more, even if it a pile of ferret droppings.

  • LR100 #6 1 year ago

    Whilst Battlefield 3 will most likely be the better game, technically and graphically, it's a 'hardcore' shooter, which won't appeal to the sort of person who plays CoD. Ergo, CoD will inevitably win again. Don't bother trying to fight them, EA, just do you're own thing and make sure it's done well, there'll still be people out there who will appreciate B3.

  • acuratebob #7 1 year ago

    Can't wait for Battlefield 3. It's gonna be amazing to fly jets on targets my mates highlight for me.

    COD sucks balls. Has been crap since WaW. That was the last great COD. From then on it's been the same old unimaginative toss. Zombies was the reason to get Black Ops. But even that ain't enough for me.

    Battlefield has always been better. Even as each Battlefield game get better with each one.

  • metallicorphan #8 1 year ago

    I will just be happy that the servers will be working fine at launch(and beyond)

  • M1chl #9 1 year ago

    I find kind of sad, that they want ot compete with CoD. Its totally different audience in my opinion. Just stick what you do best DiCE and don't look down to the mainstream shooters. Man, I would love to see real succesor to BF2. Hope that everything about B3 comes to happy end. I am just, you know that thing about scripted campaign, the said that BC2 wasn't scripted enough. I mean wan't SP BC1 good because of that non-linear approach? I was pretty dissapointed with BC2 campaign, because I loved different style in BC1 : (

  • Dannyboy1100 #10 1 year ago

    HA!

    There is no way EA can win this war unless mw3 is worse than mw2.

  • dsmx #11 1 year ago

    Just imagine what could of been put into bf3 if all that marketing money had been spent on making the game better.

  • lucas823 #12 1 year ago

    @dsmx the 100 million of advertising has nothing to do with the actual game. DICE was probably given several times that in order to make both the engine and the game. Their funds are nearly bottomless, EA is putting a lot of hope in to this game.

    and @brod when he says superior technology he means against black ops, but also, we know that mw3 will use the same engine as the other cods, so there is a 99.9999% chance that bf3 will have the better tech

  • Reckless99 #13 1 year ago

    Just shows the sad state of gaming industry, it's all about marketing. Pre order numbers don't show how good the game is, just how good marketing is and Activision showed us also that sale numbers don't reflect the quality of the product, but rather marketing. It happened to movie industry, it happened to mainstream music and now the same thing is happening to gaming industry. Bunch of suit wearing snobs with business degrees killing art for sake of profit. But the stupid consumer is to blame for allowing this to happen.

  • Spunkweazle #14 1 year ago

    CODs one big secret is 60 frames a second ALL OF THE TIME, the most popular franchise of the HD area runs in a sub HD resolution because of it

  • the_sas_man #15 1 year ago

    @Reckless

    "Bunch of suit wearing snobs with business degrees killing art for sake of profit. But the stupid consumer is to blame for allowing this to happen."

    I kinda get your point, but speaking from someone who works in marketing for 3 and a half years (and in fact on a videogames console), I can say your view is a little incorrect. You'll be amazed how much information they know about us. They merely drip feed their message into the right areas.

    Why else do you think the Tesco ClubCard scheme exists? So you can collect your loyalty points? Of course not. It's a marketers dream. They can tell you how much toothpaste you buy, what brand it was, when you bought it, how old you, your sex, what other products were bought with it and therefore when best to plug an offer.

    Don't get me wrong, some marketers appear to be out of touch, but you'd be surprised how much data they have and how closely they monitor some sites.

  • trubadman #16 1 year ago

    I predict MW3 will kill Battlefield 3. I understand why people like battlefield, but I played the beta for the second game and its just not my type of game, I do however love the Battlefield 1942 game which you can get on PSN!!

    My favourite thing about battlefield was collecting dogtags!

  • kadooosh #17 1 year ago

    Battlefield has the better tech as it's already been confirmed they're using the same engine in MW3 as they had in MW2, hence it being an updated version and little different. I've bought every cod, liked them all bar WaW as it was garbage but someone needs to change this. We've been playing the same game for years now!

  • Climhazzard #18 1 year ago

    I like CoD but its not improved enough over the past few iterations, been going downhill since CoD 4. I enjoy playing Battlefield but it's a totally different type of shooter to CoD. I cant see it beating it tbh but it'll still be massively successful.

  • nbringer #19 1 year ago

    How about adding some BOTS!?

  • RevanNL #20 1 year ago

    One problem: Battlefield isn't COD. That's what most people (myself included) like about the series, but COD is more accessible for a lot of players. And unless BF3 is going to be COD in disguise, thus losing more complexity and it's more tactical gameplay, they're never going to beat COD in sales (at least, not until Activision blows the franchise to hell).

  • TurboBailey #21 1 year ago

    Im sick of EA's marketing already.

    Its still 6 months until its released.


  • CaptainQuint #22 1 year ago

    "Last year, Battlefield: Bad Company 2 earned better scores than the competition..."

    Um, (on Xbox 360) BC2 was out-reviewed and out-performed by Halo Reach in 2010.

    Seriously EA: Chill the fuck out.

  • DaemonSpawn #23 1 year ago

    @Spunkweazle
    Most of those who buy Call of Duty every year don't even know what frame per second is. I bet they won't be able to tell the difference between 30 and 60fps - maybe a million or two can do that, but that's like 10% of cod's player base.

    Anyway, I play Bad Company 2 on PC and get about 70-80fps in 1080p - can't care less about console limitations.

  • sabbede #24 1 year ago

    Hundreds of millions of dollars worth of advertising? Put that money into the game and it would be so great that you wouldn't have to put up one single ad.
    Maybe Activision figured that it would be more cost effective to advertise a piece of shit instead of make a quality game.

    I'd like to see some evidence that all these marketing dollars actually make a real difference. Minecraft does pretty damn well without any ads.

  • RedSparrows #25 1 year ago

    Quint: the battle for FPS only ever seems to be between CoD and BC. In terms of sales, maybe. Quality, it's nowhere near a two-horse race!

  • HyperTails #26 1 year ago

    While I doubt it will overthrow CoD, I say good luck to them. Treyarch are one of the most talentless companies out there, and Infinity Ward just got lucky with CoD 4, so a company like DICE should have no problem showing them (esp Acti's bitch Treyarch) how to make good games.

  • AmarMah #27 1 year ago

    Im looking at this from the wii portal, I am a wii fan, a big wii fan, I hate whiners of the system and I speak only of my opinion and I am not trying to cause upset or am I looking for an arguement, but EA have been a joke, they have produced some decent stuff over the years on wii and some games have actually been a lot better than rival systems but I think they blame a lot on wii and so do other lazy developers. Oh it did not sell on wii its wiis fault "not ours"!!! They are right cos look at uDraw - that sold well for THQ on Wii, so lets blame.......eh......nintendo for having the uDraw.......now it will go multiplat, surely its nintys fault! move and kinect are inferior to wii, I will get wallys trying to argue with me but they are! look at ea active the better one was on wii, shooters work better on wii, and precision counts for nothing (sorry move) when you are more motion accurate with wii! I will be a fan of wii when it hits 100,000,000! And it will, I will be the fan of wii now when people are bitching and by this time next month jaws will have dropped! and Ea can forget it if they think they are getting anymore money from me if they keep resorting to half assed and excuse driven softwear I have seen games on cgn that look better than 360 titles wii is more powerful, a lot more powerful, come on Lazy developers, Impress me, and they wonder why only ninty games sell on ninty machines!

  • Dannyboy1100 #28 1 year ago

    @sabbede

    Why don't yo

  • Dannyboy1100 #29 1 year ago

    @sabbede

    Why dont you look up the black ops sales figures?

    It was a terrible game with not so great reviews much worse than mw, WaW and mw2 yet it sold more. Difference?
    Much more advertising... It does help a lot more than you would think. Why do you think there is so much money in advertising?

    Also fail^ fiddly phone buttons and i cant delete it on my phone.

  • HyperTails #30 1 year ago

    @AmarMah

    EA maybe lacking on the Wii front now but that's because nobody's stuff sells on the Wii unless its casual shite. Honestly. You know it, I know it, and publishers know it. Companies have tried to sell core games on Wii, as the fanbase has been crying out for them. Then the game (like Dead Space: Extraction) falls on its face. PS3+360=Where the money is. You said it yourself, only Nintendo games sell on Nintendo systems, and they do. That's always been the case, and it never won't.

    Oh, and shooters work better on the Wii? Killzone 3 with Move is better than any Wii FPS, fact. Sorry MotionPlus.

  • aphex187 #31 1 year ago

    @haloboy! The only thing that can kill CoD is if the zombified, brainwashed drones of retards stop buying the shit.

  • Cryotek #32 1 year ago

    If they want it to appeal to the casual CoD fans, just get any appropriate celebrity to help advertise it. A rapper probably. Sadly not Parappa. Instant cash.

  • Mister-Wario #33 1 year ago

    I wish them the best, but really, I have two points to make. First of all, all the quality in the world can struggle against a familiar and established brand name. Secondly, what exactly is Battlefield 3? A gritty, modern military shooter? Yeah, because THAT's never been done before.

    Personally, at this stage a shooter is only going to interest me if it tries to be new. The shooters (or shooter-esque titles) that stand out to me the most are Portal, Team Fortress, Left 4 Dead 2, Mirror's Edge, and Bioshock. They tried new things, and didn't always succeed, but they weren't unplayable by any means. To me, the military shooter is just a stagnant genre that doesn't leave much wiggle room, but going by its continued success this is clearly a sign I'm in the minority.

    HyperTails: I don't know, I think shooters work pretty well on Wii. I haven't gotten a Move so I can't strictly compare, but I haven't found the Wii's pointer controls that unbearable. In any case though, the number of shooters that use motion control is pretty low right now.

    But yeah, if you're going to make a shooter now, I just feel you should be different. Be a Team Fortress: hell, be a Brink. Please don't be a Call of Duty.
    Edited by Mister-Wario at 11/05/11 @ 00:50

  • Number1Laing #34 1 year ago

    I love Bad Company 2. Love it. I think it's a brilliant game.

    But all this nonsense is actually turning me AWAY from Battlefield 3. It started with all of Dice's Twitter talk about how they are blowing themselves away. Then came the stupid teasers. Then the BF3 "like us on Facebook to get a trailer!" Now all this dick wagging from the brass. It reminds me of annoying owners in sports talking trash. Just shut up and sign the checks!

    I really don't want to reward EA's obnoxiousness and arrogance.

  • Peter_LIAR_Molyneux #35 1 year ago

    I agree with Number1Laing. All of this daily arrogance and bravado from EA pricks is pissing me off from a consumer perspective. I wasn't planning on getting the new Call of Duty this year and was leaning towards Battlefield 3 but unless these EA mouthpieces zip it up right away I am either getting COD or passing on them both and live in Skyrim land for a few months.

    EA is like a bloody phone company who phones at supper time every few days to tell you why you should change to their service. At a certain point I don't care how much better they claim their service is I am so put off by their pushy attitude that they have lost my potential business while trying to get my business. For me, EA is at that point now in this FPS dick-waving contest with Activision Blizzard. Let your game speak for itself!

  • stegabba #36 1 year ago

    cod will sell more but most sane people who played both know bf2 was better

  • TheLittlestHobo #37 1 year ago

    LOL at all the nerd rage. Stop taking this shit seriously, and (god knows why) personally. Go outside and smell the flowers.
    We should be glad of this dick waving; this fight for the number one spot. It's us gamers that win in the end.

  • hippyjump #38 1 year ago

    BF: quality; COD: mainstream.

  • Inmediasress #39 1 year ago

    @Reckless99

    Totally agree that's what I have been saying for years now. Gaming is shit because big companies like EA/Acti etc have realized that with the almost unlimited budget, they have it is easier to develpo quickly a shit game and than throw unlimited money at advertising it. The sheep will buy it anyway. Of course the real responsible people are the gamers us or at least the majority who can be swayed by marketing practices.

  • Gunship #40 1 year ago

    *sigh* Everyone trying to outCoD CoD. Why not make a great game that is not the same copy pasta formula, but good enough to get CoD-level sales... Or do the suits think that's impossible.

    And funny how their marketing departments always call CoD clones or games that merge into the CoD formula- "innovation".

  • PixelPirate #41 1 year ago

    HANG ON.

    Battlefield 3 is coming out?

    I really had heard this.

    //sarcasm

  • carlitoswagon #42 1 year ago

    Could not give two shits about who wins whatever fps war. It's the same shit as console fanboy's.

    Being a fan of both over the years I'd honestly prefer the brats playing blops would not play bf3. Objective based teamplay will be out the fucking window completely. Still think EA/Dice should release some viral vids which show people roughly what they should be doing on the battlefield. Help make the transition a little smoother for those who pick it up.

  • metalangel #43 1 year ago

    I would rather CoD stayed dominant so all the chavs and screaming elms stayed there. I really don't want to get to the helipad in BF3 only to find half a dozen teabagging soldiers all vehicle camping; when the chopper finally does spawn the pilot flies into the air, spins out of control and crashes into a building.

  • zedzee #44 1 year ago

    Why should EA "mince it's words", when all publicity is good publicity and anything will be fine, to drive their marketing campaign, including EG falling for every single word that comes out of their mouths.

  • Yodith #45 1 year ago

    I wish EA would just stop the playground "My Dad would batter your Dad" antics. Let the game speak for itself.

  • geeza2020 #46 1 year ago

    go capitalism!

  • NKHdesign #47 1 year ago

    Not even going to read this article, I think I have lost count off how many times I have said they are two different games, two different audiences and two different experiences, make it a battlefield game and you will make a better game. goodbye!

  • metalangel #48 1 year ago

    The thought occurs that the marketing budget would cover the "Project Ten Dorrah" costs for everyone who buys the game several times over.

  • Skooch #49 1 year ago

    I really find it odd the number of comments saying that the marketing spend is "disgusting" and that it "just shows the sad state of gaming industry, it's all about marketing". These are very naieve comments. There is always a balance, you can make the best game in the world but if nobody knows about it you won't sell anything. Publishers wouldn't spend this much advertising something that a) wasn't very good or b) where there weren't suitable rewards for doing so. Any major product that is going to revenue many millions of pounds, whether it is a new console (3DS?), electronic hardware (iPad 2) or game (Battlefield 3) must be marketed correctly, and this costs money. If it didn't work, they wouldn't do it, and if you had to make the same decision you would spend shitloads on marketing too! I agree that sometimes the hype can get a little silly, but to expect that if they spent the same money on making the game better that overall they would end up selling more is naieve in the extreme.

  • AmarMah #50 1 year ago

    @hypertails: No move is not better! Dont be a fanboy, there are loads of publishers that worked fantastic on wii! Just ea and these multiplat drone companies who put little in and expect it to sell I have no time for, there is exceptions to the rule for example tiger wood have been constantly better, but its nothing got to do with hardwear, or storage, its the whole: "too lazy to use the systems strenth, but rather plaster it with rubbish". And its comments like yours that have the gaming indusrty the way it is. You want now now now, and when ninty does it they destroyed a franchise and when they dont they take too long. there is no pleasing fanboys, so Ill stop while I can!

  • Ryze #51 1 year ago

    @Reckless99

    I agree with you to a certain extent, but - most people out there don't read these gaming websites. They don't follow every new release, and they don't read gaming magazines.

    Many of them are, however, the decent people who we WANT to be playing games online in place of the arsehole American teenagers screaming into their headsets.

    A decent marketing campaign is CRITICAL if they want 'NORMAL' people to even have a CLUE about the game. It's the same for a decent album, and a decent film. If it's AMAZING, then you don't want it to be quietly released, and to fade into obsurity, do you? It NEEDS decent marketing.

    The problem you speak of, is when a medium or genre becomes popular beyond a hardcore fanbase who would be planning and waiting for new releases, and wouldn't need telling to buy a product. We'd all buy BF3 based on the review, for example.

    It's the shite games / films / music that hijack the system and use marketing to gain mainstream sales for shit products that ruins matters. What can be done to counter that, I wonder?

    I also wish that games publishers would 'soft' launch their games to the hardcore fanbase a month before the mainstream launch. Hopefully this will happen in the download space as the highstreet retailers begin to lose their power over scheduling.

    It'd be beneficial to the quality and word-of-mouth marketing of the game if the hardcore fans could download it 1 month before the main release, by registering on the website (or Facebook page or whatever).
    Edited by Ryze at 11/05/11 @ 13:13

  • Geordiemp #52 1 year ago

    Its a one way war of words, EA says this, EA says that...

    BF2 fans go on aboyt superior this and that and how COD players are zombies / mindless / chavs I could go on..

    No retort from activision, Bobby yawns....CoD players play COD, COD will sell 20 + million, EA will be lucky to get half of that...

    Some people want 60 FPS, no vehicle, presiging class type multiplayers with perks and twitch fast gameplay. Buy COD.

    Some want larger levels, 30 FPS with more detailed grpahics, more strategic and ranged gameplay..Buy BF3

    I buy both.

  • Madder-Max #53 1 year ago

    EA must have money spewing out of their bumholes considering the NFS fanchise

  • t8yman #54 1 year ago

    I absolutely love BF games, and I am already sick to feck of this marketing bollocks. there is one thing that they need to do to help sales, and that is to release a kickass SP demo (sorry for saying kickass there). the unwashed masses wont like the mp unless they really persevere, but a really good SP demo might turn a few heads.

  • cyber_nicco #55 1 year ago

    You know, I really enjoyed BFBC2, but didn't immediately get caught up in the multiplayer. Something about the gun and aiming dynamics made it difficult to do well. Maybe I'll load it up and try it again.

    Is the Xbox Live! online community still strong for it? Oh, and is everyone playing the Vietnam expansion (want to know if I should get it...)

  • silversun #56 1 year ago

    This game could do it , i know some people that play alot of call of duty and are really intrested in this game , me i just hope it does not become to much like call of duty.
    If it does maybe battlefield could go in two different directions , one the bad company style game play and the other whatever battlefield 3 ends up being like.

  • Gulag #57 1 year ago

    Apparently there is some sort of mode focusing on one player per map being added to the next Battlfield game. Why hasn't anyone thought of this before?

    Oh yeah, because it's pointless.

    I'll wait until some multiplayer footage/beta shows up before getting excited. And then I'll lap it up like a dyke in a vagina factory. I love me some BF3.

    Until then, back to Bad Company 2 for me. Had a single player game, but had the decency to be about as serious as a clown supply store.