Rumor – New Battlefield Spin-Off In Development At Visceral Games

A new Battlefield spin-off may be in the works, according to Wedbush Morgan analyst Michael Pachter, who says a studio other than DICE is looking to continue the stream of Battlefield releases in EA’s 2015 financial year.

Originally, reported by EuroGamer and VideoGamer, Pachter wrote in a note to the press that, “Although EA has as yet to announce a Battlefield extension for FY15, we believe Criterion Games is working on a military shooter that may become a brand extension for the Battlefield franchise in FY15.”

Previously, Criterion Games were known for their work on the Burnout and Need for Speed franchises.

Pachter later updated his position, mentioning that he now believes it is Dead Space developers Visceral Games that will be spear-heading the project. As far as we know, on an official level, Visceral was to be working on a Star Wars project, as per EA’s multi-year exclusive licensing agreement with Disney.

“We spoke with management on Thursday afternoon, and although they have not yet announced a version of Battlefield for FY15, they confirmed that our understanding is spot on and that if a version of Battlefield were to be released in FY15, it would be developed by a studio other than DICE,” Pachter continued.

While it’s likely that EA wishes to produce a steady stream of Battlefield releases in the coming years, it’s not clear if a studio like Visceral would continue work on the Battlefield: Bad Company series, or begin work on an entirely new sub-series all together. DICE Creative Director Lars Gustavsson mentioned earlier that “the Bad Company [team] isn’t forgotten, they are just on a very long vacation,” adding that “… they are out there, they’re coming back.”

The idea might sound far-fetched at first – to put the highly acclaimed Battlefield series into the hands of a developer other than original creators DICE – but it’s exactly how publisher Activision worked the popular Call of Duty series so that releases could become more frequent. By alternating Battlefield development between developers, EA could also produce yearly releases of the franchise.

We take it core Battlefield fans wouldn’t take kindly to the news, but nevertheless, consider these rumblings rumor until an official announcement from EA or either studio is made.

  • 2o1 GaminG

    No credits? =(

    • Storm_Worm5364

      The only thing that BC3 would have different would be the story. DICE will NOT go back to those controls, to that feeling, to that gameplay. BF3/4 is much MUCH better than BC2 in terms of pretty much everything. We have such bad memories of BF3/4 because EA is idiotic and rushes DICE to try and beat CoD…

  • Jamie Marques

    if it isn’t bad company 3, someone will be punched.

    • mechcell

      Battlefield 2143 > BFBC3

      • zacflame

        1944 WOULD ALSO BE NICE.

        • mechcell

          Yes your’re right
          Battlefield 2143 > Battlefield 1944 > BFBC3

          • YOu forgot Battlefield Heroes 2 lol.I honestly do not see where BC fits with the franchise anymore. The main seller is,or was destruction. The multiplayer wasnt groundbreaking other than that. That is a staple im the franchise now and Bf4 incorporates more elements from that game and improves on others, so for what reason would I want to buy another Bad Company other than out of nostalgia and singleplayer campaign which was admitablly better than the last 2.

            I feel it served its purpose.

            • dpg70

              Not a true battlefield game, but a better battlefield game IMO.

            • jj16802

              Are you guys ignoring Battlefield Play5Free on purpose?

            • Lol oh snap I forgot! Is there a beta announced?

            • jj16802

              Of course! And a stats wipe to go along with it!

      • Just saying

        I don’t feel like I’ll play another modern FPS after BF3 and BF4. We need a break with a futuristic Battlefield style FPS which is Battlefield 2143.

      • guitargladiator94

        however a proper battlefront 3 might fill the need for 2143 for awhile at least

      • Jamie Marques

        I…..that is a valid point. and 1944 as well.

    • dieger

      I don’t trust EA with bad company

    • Storm_Worm5364

      DICE never said that Bad Company 3 would be a thing. They said that the Bad Company squad wasn’t dead and that they’re in a Island somewhere on vacation… It will probably be called BC3 but they DON’T want to go bad to the BC gameplay and feeling, since the Frostbite 2/3 gameplay/feeling is far superior. The only think that they would change would be the story, gameplay-wise I think it would be very Battlefield 3/4-ish. Or even better, since DICE normally launches 2 “similar” games and then does a 180 on the engine, making it way superior to the last two games. Bad Company and Bad Company 2 were very similar! Same graphics, same destruction, same feeling, same (pretty much) everything. Then they came up with Frostbite 2, which improved graphics to a whole new level, near perfect animations, JETS!, more guns, better customization, more detailed destruction, way more vehicle variety, more guns, etc… Battlefield 4 is like Bad Company 2, it improved the core gameplay, in terms of graphics looks similar to BF3, improved WATER which is a BIG + for me, levolution, better map design, more guns, better customization, a ton of new gadgets, attachments and paintings, more vehicle variety and all that jazz… I really think that the next Battlefield will have that engine change that BF3 did. But we won’t be seeing another BF game till probably 2016-2017 because they have Battlefront and Mirror’s Edge 2 in the works. (PUMPED FOR MIRROR’S EDGE 2 BTW!)

  • theplantain

    its frightening how obsessed EA is with CoD, thing is CoD will lose steam eventually, and by the time that happens EA will never have caught up and the military shooter genre may be tired, lose/lose

    • EA has said nothing of this yet. Plus, EA will have 3 shooters to compete with evev without this spin off which is only rumored

    • cheeseburger eddy

      Yea they are really “obsessed” with CoD, because one line out of the whole article really proves your point

      • theplantain

        strangely enough, i wasn’t referencing the article with that point…have you been paying attention to all the articles and interviews with somebody from EA claiming their goal is to dethrone CoD? or you’re just a bit slow?

        • cheeseburger eddy

          Well one can only go under the assumption that you were referring to the article. And no I have not seen these articles, I guess you are a bigger EA fan than I am…and ouch nice diss calling me slow through the internet. You must be the bully of your middle school.

          • theplantain

            lol…sure dude,, you win

            • cheeseburger eddy

              Thank you I guess, I was not trying to win. Good luck in 8th grade kid. 🙂

            • DerpSlayer

              cheeseburger ddy = Derp: Detected

            • cheeseburger eddy


        • Storm_Worm5364

          The only thing that EA still didn’t got it is that the only one that is capable of killing CoD is CoD itself. And let me tell you, they’re doing a really good job, slowly “commiting suicide” I mean….

          • It’s not suicide. It’s milking the cow for all its worth. At some point Activision is going to need something better as the FPS landscape is looking pretty impressive over the next few years with Titan fall and others. Activision needs to kill the cow.

      • jj16802

        Do you not see the quote on the box (Puts COD: Ghosts to shame)? “Above and beyond the call” in BF3’s trailer? Or the quote in the BC2 trailer “beats Modern Warfare”? The reference to Riley of Irish punching a dog in the first mission? The rivalry between DICE and Infinity Ward? You are missing out on a lot of details.

        • uwantSAM0A

          Plus the second assault trailer quote “its like youre fighting ghosts”. lol that one was so obviously pointed at cod.

        • cheeseburger eddy

          Woah Woah Woah lets calm down here. What box are you referring to? And no I do not check out these trailers as I have zero interest in the game. I am aware of the rivalry which is quite obvious to anyone. I mean you have to do these little things in your promotion if you are the underdog right? I know bf tries to come at CoD hard I just never really see it in trailers or articles because I do not read or view them.

          • jj16802


            It’s quite obvious that EA, the capitalist corporation they are, are always seeking to eliminate the competition (COD in this era). MOH’s setting was changed to the modern military setting to compete with Activision’s strategy of Infinity Ward and Treyarch working on COD for every other year. And since they put the franchise on hiatus, it looks like they’re willing to wreck their flagship FPS franchise Battlefield and turning that into a yearly franchise.

            I would prefer it if they release the game and then cover the next year with several DLC packs/Premium, just like how BF3 did.

        • Storm_Worm5364

          We saw the BF4 gameplay before we saw anything about Ghosts, so no. There was no refference to Riley since it is the first mission of the game and they’ve been working on the game for 2 years… It is nearly impossible to just know that CoD would have a dog before the game was even announced…

          • jj16802

            Whether it was intentional or not, you have to admit that it still added fuel to the fire.

        • The dog punching cut scene predates any knowledge of Riley or dog related use in Ghosts.

          • jj16802

            See my response to Storm_Worm5364 below.

    • Storm_Worm5364

      EA themselves said that making Battlefield an annual game would probably kill the franchise and that the only one’s that can game Battlefield is DICE.

      • falahcod

        Bad Company 3?

        • Storm_Worm5364

          Bad Company 3 would still be a Battlefield game.

    • asgaro

      If Battlefield doesn’t step away from the Modern Time setting, it will die even BEFORE the annual releases are at play.
      I am SICK of Modern Time.
      Give us WWII, give us Future, or anything else please.
      Still haven’t bought BF4 because of this.

  • Opt1kon

    BFBC3 and don’t fuck it up or rush it

    • poop

      the only reason why it ever be rushed is EA. EA pushes these companies which is why DICE released a broken game. BF4 would of probably been delayed if DICE had a different publisher or had a different released date

  • uwantSAM0A

    Fuck Pachter

    • oofy

      For being the bearer of bad news?

    • zacflame

      I fucking love Micheal Pachter.

  • David

    And EA still have medal of honor on the books,

    EA need to focus on the strengths of its own studios, instead of always looking at activision.

    • Javon Jackson

      EA Destroyed Danger Close & Gave their studio to DICE which is the DICE: LA Team, which does have some of the members from the Danger Close team, I’m sorry Moh is dead

      Fuck EA,

  • jj16802

    I was wondering what Visceral was doing in BF4’s credits…

    • zacflame

      Actually, they put all their sister development studios in the credits.
      Also notice the dog tags.

  • therapiist

    they should release Brokenfield because that what dice is getting good at now.

    • Storm_Worm5364

      You’re stupid. DICE KNOWS how to make a game. EA doesn’t know how to do the “team-work” and they rush the game. DICE probably wanted to launch the game in February 2014. But NOOO, COD GHOSTS, which isn’t better *cough* worst port since EVER *cough*

      • therapiist

        over the years Dice have been releasing BF almost yearly. They even have people testing to see how the game goes. Hell we even play the beta of the game.. I don’t wait to hear any reason why this BF is by the worst launch of any BF..I have play every BF game beside Modern Combat and Bad company 1

        • Storm_Worm5364

          What are you talking about? YOU ARE SOO WRONG! Battlefield 1942 = 13rd of September, 2002;
          Battlefield Vietman = 14th of March, 2004 (was made by DICE, but a separate team);
          Battlefield 2 = 24th of June, 2005;
          Battlefield 2142 = 10th of October, 2006;
          Bad Company = 23rd of June, 2008;
          Bad Company 2 = 2nd of March, 2010;
          Battlefield 3 = 25th of October, 2011;
          Battlefield 4 = 29th of October, 2013.
          So NO, BF never releases “almost” yearly. The smallest time is around 1 and a half years, which isn’t “almost” yearly. If you gave DICE 6 more months for BF4 I can assure you that the game would be fucking flawless…

          • therapiist

            2013 Battlefield 4

            one year

            2011 Battlefield 3
            2010 Battlefield: Bad Company 2

            one year

            2009 Battlefield 1943
            2008 Battlefield: Bad Company

            one year

            2006 Battlefield 2142
            2005 Battlefield 2
            2005 Battlefield Vietnam Redux

            two years

            2004 Battlefield Vietnam
            2002 Battlefield 1942

            I even left out Their DLC..From what i see, they only took two year to make a game from 2002-2004 and 2011-2013, But if i did include their DLC’s. then it’s pretty much releasing yearly because, their DLC is like another full release game.

            2013 Battlefield 3: End Game DLC
            2013 Battlefield 3: Aftermath DLC
            2012 Battlefield 3: Armored Kill DLC
            2012 Battlefield 3: Close Quarters DLC
            2011 Battlefield 3: Back to Karkand DLC
            2010 Battlefield Bad Company 2: Vietnam DLC
            2009 Battlefield Heroes
            2007 Battlefield 2142: Northern Strike DLC
            2005 Battlefield 2: Modern Combat “release for ps2,xbox and 360 only i believe”
            2005 Battlefield 2: Armored Fury DLC
            2005 Battlefield 2: Special Forces DLC
            2003 Battlefield 1942: The Road to Rome DLC
            2003 Battlefield 1942: Secret Weapons of WWII DLC

            • Storm_Worm5364

              No, DLC isn’t another full game. You don’t have to make new models/skins, new attachments, enhance the engine, new mechanics, etc. They can do an entire DLC in 1 month, and since most of the maps are made before the game comes out it is irrelevant to our discussion.
              Battlefield 1943, a 3-4 months project can’t be considered a full game. Since it has 3 primary guns, 3 classes, 3 maps and nothing else, which can be made in no time… So NO. That’s why I’ve put the full dates. Let’s say that I released a game in the 1st of January, 2014 and then I released another game on 31th December 2015, would you say that it took 1 year? NO. It would take 2 years…

              Now let’s see:
              Bad Company 2 released in the 2nd day of March, 2010. Battlefield 3 came out on October 25, 2011, so I don’t know what is wrong with your math, but you gotta go check that man. From what I can see, it took 1 year and almost 8 months (7 months and 23 days) for another BF game to be released since BC2. Battlefield 2412 wasn’t made by DICE entirely, it was made by another team within DICE (If you look at the history of the devs that left DICE, it shows that they hop from Studio to Studio. Studios have projects and if those projects end the devs leave or get transferred to other projects within that Studio. Those are mostly the one’s working on those games.) 2412 and Battlefield 2 were probably the only ones to get close to an “annual” release. Eventhough it took 1 year and 2 months. Vietnam wasn’t made entirely by DICE just like 2412, as I mentioned and Vietman Redux is Vietman with all the patches so it isn’t a new game. So NO, “Over the years DICE” HASN’T “been releasing BF almost yearly.”

  • Mohammad Nassir

    No hell no . please don’t do it EA

    • dieger

      cant be worse then what Dice has done to the franchise

      • Storm_Worm5364

        Are you stupid. CAN’T BE WORSE THAN WHAT THE CREATOR DID? DICE created the franchise, and please don’t come with that “Bad company 2 was better than BF3” bullshit, because it wasn’t. Bad Company was ever a real Battlefield game to begin with.

        • dieger

          DICe created Battlefield,George Lucas created star wars,Steven Spielberg created Indiana jones, IW made COD etc what’s your point? just because you made something doesn’t mean you cant fail at making it. also if you haven’t noticed a couple of the senior member have left to pursue other ideas.

          • Tom Miller

            Are you stupid? Reason BF4 is so fucked up is because of EA rushing them. Besides all the crap bugs every single Battlefield game has been a step up. Battlefield would be 10x better now if EA’s filthy ass hands never bought DICE, but you would have to wait more than 2 years between releases.

          • Storm_Worm5364

            Mabye because they wanted to do something more than an FPS. That doesn’t mean that the game’s doing badly. If I were they and I wanted to work on something different, I would. With the reputation that DICE has you would find a job in the first week if you wanted too. DICE never failed at making games, EA failed, there was even a DICE employee at anonymously (OF COURSE) said that EA pushed/rushed BF4 through the quality-testing. That’s why BF4 has so many problems, but without those bugs IT IS the best FPS I’ve ever played, and I played A LOT of FPS games…DICE always did an awesome job. I can’t think of anything that a Battlefield game failed to accomplish, mabye the Bad Company series failed to be a true Battlefield game, but on the other hand Bad Company brought some awesome things to the Battlefield franchise, so I don’t really think what the hell you’re talking about.

  • Katana67

    If they return to Bad Company, I hope they make it a little less ridiculous and/or grounded. I do miss BC2 though. I’m not sure of the utility of continuing Bad Company though, I mean BF3 and 4 sort of encompassed the gameplay present in Bad Company. They’re far more scalable in terms of maps and gametypes.

  • Mr. Thuggins

    If this turns out to be true, I would like to be the first to say “I told you so.” The release of MoH:WF during BF’s “off year” made it pretty obvious what EA is looking to do with their shooters. It didn’t work out as they hoped, but they’ll keep trying.

  • Jack S.

    I really like DICE though.. If this is true I hope visceral games can pull through

  • Leon

    Too bad that it’s not Criterion Games. I was hoping for “Battlefield: Shoot-outs in Ferraris”.

    • Haha yes! Some of the physics from earlier Crash Burnout games would be pretty awesome for wreckage moments 😀

  • Storm_Worm5364

    It’s a fucking lie, EA themselves said that making Battlefield an annual game would probably kill the franchise and that the only one’s that can game Battlefield is DICE. It’s a bit sad how someone can just create fake rumours and everyone believes it… Not talking about you David, I heart you man, you’re just doing your “job” after all. But I could start some rumour like rocket said that DayZ would release next week, post it all over ZE INTERWEBS and it would become a “viral” rumour!

  • WomenAreStupid

    If DICE could just create BC3 I would be so fuckin happy, and I don’t even care how long it takes as long as the game is flawless on release. *BF4 cough cough*

  • SamRock

    I have a bad feeling that EA is going to screw and dump DICE for all the BF4 failures, stock crashes, even though its EA’s fault. Now they got Frostbite 3 engine from DICE so they dont need the entire team anymore. 🙁

    • jj16802

      I sincerely hope DICE goes indie after this. I’m done with EA now.

      • SamRock

        Yeah but they still need a Publisher. Activision may be 😀

        Bi-Annually BF series!!

        • jj16802

          With all the money they made, I was thinking they should self publish. Or go with Devolver Digital, they have been publishing some good indies these days.

      • Storm_Worm5364

        NO! DICE is the best at FPS games, they just need time, not be rushed, EA rushed BF4….

        • jj16802

          By indie I meant become independent from a large publishing company, not by making some unique non-FPS game. I would die if they actually made non-FPS games, lol.

    • Storm_Worm5364

      Are you stupid? I’m sorry but without DICE, EA is dead. No one can do a better job than DICE at FPS… The thing IS that EA rushes DICE, a DICE employee said that EA skipped the quality-testing of BF4 and that’s why there’s so many issues with the game.

      • SamRock

        Yes I am on BF from past 10 years and probably stupid. I know they are EA’s best subsidiary. But BF games have always be in trouble. Now EA is probably exploring other developers to see if they can come up with something new and different. What if Visceral comes up with the best BF game ever made? People will probably forget DICE.

        Saying all that, I still love DICE and their games. And wish they continue making great BF games.

        • Storm_Worm5364

          BF games have been in trouble because EA rushes the game, they set a time and DICE has to kill themselves and try to make the game innovative, graphically better, improve the frame-rates, find bugs and test every item everytime someone changes/adds news codelines, etc. It isn’t easy and the Battlefield franchise isn’t a simplistic franchise like Counter-Strike, or even CoD. It takes some huge minds to do it, hard work and TIME. We look at games like Skyrim which take 6 years to make, they have “all the time” in the world and still the game has tons of bugs and glitches that haven’t been even been fixed. Watch Dogs was supposed to be already out, but it was pushed back to 2014, 3 or 4 months more. They’ve probably found some nasty bugs that would kill the game/experience, so they pushed the game back. Same for The Last of Us, it was supposed to be released this year in March I think, but it was pushed back to mid June. 3 months later. The Crew was pushed back as well as Driveclub. But EA would NEVER, EVER push a game like Battlefield back, and that’s the problem. If it was something like Sims, Simcity, Mass Effect they probably would. But since Battlefield HAS to compete with CoD, EA doesn’t allow that. Same if Titanfall had to be pushed back. So if we really think about it, it’s EA’s fault since they pressure DICE and Battlefield into those Release date. And I think that DICE will be “physically/mentally” dead if EA does the same with Mirror’s Edge 2 and Star Wars: Battlefront.

  • SamRock

    Also isnt Visceral the same team that made MOH:MW? And wasnt that game bad?
    Correct me if I am wrong. Didnt google for it

    • Soldier

      that was danger close, who apparently was responsible for some of bf4 (likely because of its so many horrible elements).

  • I used to work with people who dealt with this stuff and from what I heard several times, DICE and EA started the ground work on Battlefield:Bad Company 2 almost 8 months ago. I was telling my BF friends all summer long about it. Maybe David can somehow confirm this?

  • Pingback: Anonymous()

  • Jamic

    I dont see it as that big of a deal that other development would make a BF spin off. Current DICE has very few of its original members left so yeah…

  • Alexander Loos

    the moment when everyone is “EA is the bad boy” but noone thinks: maybe it was dice that fucked it up? – even if BF4 was released 1 or 2 months later: it wouldnt change anything. if you set your mark too high , everytime (BF3, BF4) and fail again, and again – it cant be the publisher fault – sure EA rushed games like DA2, but they learned ( at least it looks like so if you look at DA:I for example) – maybe people should ask themself : “could it be that DICE just thouht they could do more but failed?”

    • Storm_Worm5364

      And what IF it is DICE? Battlefield isn’t like the other games. Games like CS, CoD, HALO, etc are way easier to make than Battlefield. You have some guns, small maps, etc. Battlefield has tons of weapons (around 116 without DLC guns) ton of vehicles, destruction, levolution, thousands apon thousands of attachments combinations, etc (not to forget that the game is multiplayer, which is way harder to work on than single-player)…. And EA pushes the game trought the fucking quality test, OF COURSE the game is gonna be full of fucking bugs and glitches. It isn’t really DICE’s problem, because if they didn’t had a time limit, the game wouldn’t be so full of bugs.

      • Ben August

        So, you’re saying that the sheer variety and depth of content, coupled with a deadline, is the cause of the bugs/glitches?

        I would ask:

        Who decided to put that much content in?

        It wasn’t EA…

        Which means it was Dice. So, by your own admission, Dice is at fault.

        Just pointing out, using your words, how easy it is to prove that Dice is just as liable as EA.

        As in, they know there is a deadline. Why pack so much content in at launch, knowing the glitches that will be there?

        Why not add it later, in DLC?

        • Storm_Worm5364

          Because if they wanted to add it as DLC, BF4 wouldn’t exist. There’s BF3 for that. It’s called marketing. If the game came out without anything new it would just be a 60 dollar DLC… Patrick Bach already said that they have ideas and new things to add in BF5. The thing IS, they didn’t add it to BF4 did they!? And why? Because it’s all about marketing. They could put every single idea in BF4. But then BF5 would just be BF4 with enhanced graphics.

          • Ben August

            Why does the depth of content, define BF4?

            I’d rather see them release a functional, complete game at launch, then add in content that can’t be accessed flawlessly, until all launch-bugs are fixed. Who cares about 1000’s of Loadout combos, when it crashes every 3-6 rounds?

            There’s no reason to stuff that much in at launch. If CoD (primary competitor) has less content, but still outsells BF, isn’t it possible that maybe people don’t care so much about number of guns, as they do actual game play? As much as I hate CoD, even I have to admit, CoD is The Standard for FPS e-sports…must mean something.

    • ____

      I don’t Recall BC2 launch being bad at all besides minor sever lag.

  • dpg70

    Oh my

  • Don_Panini

    Criterion should make a sequel to Black.

  • roland0811

    Sweet, maybe now I’ll finally get to buy a finished Battlefield game. It’s been years since I’ve had one of those.

  • twinspectre

    stop buying this shit and we can have some respect

    • Ben August

      Thank you! Been saying this since the atrocity known as BF3 (PS3 version: Input Lag denied for over a year, and FINALLY fixed; No Mic support/squad support for multiple MONTHS.! It nearly killed teamwork regarding in-game randoms).

      I haven’t bought BF4, and have no intention in doing so.


    Visceral games at least know how to make a game work upon release, in all their dead space games i saw only one major bug in dead space 2 and that was the door on the satellite that crashed the game when you opened it. So if Visceral games bring out a Battlefield spinoff then I’m more likely to buy that than a buggy and unfinished Battlefield from DICE on the PC platform. From all the time i put into Deadspace i have to say it was an awesome looking game, zero bugs and the performance on even an entry level gaming PC was amazing. I love the engine Visceral use, it’s simple and used to great effect.

  • Pingback: » Visceral Games: Bisher unbekanntes Spiel des Studios soll im Herbst erscheinen by