“…you don’t kill CoD [Call of Duty] by trying to be CoD. You kill CoD by making a better shooter,” according to Adam Kertz, Senior Gameplay Designer for Battlefield 3.
That’s an interesting, if not obvious point. The quote came out during an open question and answer discussion between Kertz and Battlefield fans on Twitter. Kertz rattled off some quick tidbits about the game: confirmation of a PC version, upgrading the gun system, upgrading the bullet drop system, urging pre-orders and insisting that Battlefield 3 is a sequel to Battlefield 2, not Bad Company 2. That last one is a fact that a lot of people seem to not understand.
The teaser trailer you see above dropped last week, as did confirmation that Battlefield 3 will be the cover game for next month’s Game Informer magazine. Not too much has been revealed about the game, except that it will take place in Tehran, Iran, a green city that lies at the foot of a mountain range.
Kertz’ point is valid. The last title from DICE and EA in the military shooter genre was Medal of Honor. The game, according to most critics and gamers, was a miss. The multiplayer and story mode were a mishmash of Call of Duty and Bad Company. The result was a game that felt only half-baked. While certainly not a horrible title, Medal of Honor made the mistake of being too much like other, better shooters on the market.
So Kertz, perhaps speaking from company experience, is spot on when he indicates that the Call of Duty killer must come in the form of an out and out better shooter, not a hybrid clone of the game it challenges. The Battlefield series has elements completely unique to the franchise. Ratcheting those bits up while innovating the team-based shooter genre will certainly give EA and DICE a fighting chance at taking down Activision’s titan. Making another Medal of Honor, however, will not.