Battlefield 1 Xbox One Branding Doesn't Turn Off PS4 Gamers, EA Says

For advertising, it's a questionable idea, given how at least 70% of all games these days are multiplatform.

It's pointless, just advertise the damn game and be done with it. None of us gamers give a damn what platform it's advertised with.

It would be like that hot redhead girl in the bar who's into you but is also advertising beer - do you care about what beer she is advertising, or trying to get her into your bed?

Personally, I think these companies waste more money on advertising than they realize. But then again we don't know what perks may come from said advertising. Maybe reduced costs for patches, dev kits, etc? Who knows. But ultimately, do we care? No.

EA news, always comes with words like "business", "marketing", "deal"... words gamers don't give a single f%&k!!

The worse of all, is the fact that the games always get in the middle of the money. Sad reality.

3rd party bundle are okay, but people could wait for a game coming for that system.

Ms and Sony are wasting money imo on these non exclusive deals....even a fool can see they dont amount to anything.

instead of this why not invest money on a new Banjo Koozie or a new Twisted Metal...

Who would buy battlefield until the premium edition comes out anyway?

It's just for advertising purposes, not sure what the big deal is. Aside from that, the only perk is that Xbox gamers get to play the game 3 days early via EA Access and if I'm not mistaken the DLC hits a week or two early.

LOL of course its EA, I mean 40m sold on ps4 thats alot of potential sales in there $$$$$$$$$

of course thyre gona come clean

so

I will be playing this on Acer x34 predator and a gtx 1080 powered PC

but if I had to pick a console to play it on it would be my ps4

Real Gamers don't care for Fan-Boy Nonsense .. We just Game on whatever system we like and leave the whining to the kids !!

EA does this and MS does that and Sony does something else. How about we point the finger at the puppeteer who's really pulling the strings: Makuch. He wants us to quibble between MS and Sony so none of us can see what he's up to. We are his social experiment. "Shake the jar and see if they'll fight" he says.

We can't allow the wool to cover our eyes any longer. Wake up gamers! Unite against the Makuchiarchy!!!

Of course not, we know we will get the game anyway and at a higher framerate

EA turns me off

Game will be bombarded with microtransactions anyways. Gonna wait and maybe buy it used later on.

So essentially, companies spend pointless millions.

I say go right ahead! Let Microsoft have SOMETHING this generation. Some sort of edge somewhere. It's no worry to me since the PS4 and PC will outperform the Xbox version anyway.

It doesnt necessarily prevent me from buying the game, but seeing that cancer logo (in almost every multiplatform game ad) doesnt lift my mood either, and thus produces negative associations in my subconscience.

I would be more welcoming if they clearly show PC as lead platform and dont even think about doing xbone ports.

it does... I'm not interested now...........

Xbox one has ea access so it makes sense for ea to side with Microsoft on there games, since Sony wanted nothing to do with ea access.

Sony is like a little child that will cut its own heart out unless it gets its own way. Sony shrugged off a potential offer to work with Microsoft to possibly bring in gamers even closer together and help bridge the gap even more allowing gamers to play together between Xbox one and ps4, that was a wonderful move rite there Sony.

Japan developers are well known for being to hard faced when it comes to making the rite moves unless it's one that benifits them, they certainly won't do it for the fans. I'm not sayin Nintendo and Microsoft are angels but the fact that Sony now sits on the throne has made them more hard faced when it comes to opportunity's.

Sony had that opportunity to have ea access, Sony mite of also ended up with the brand on battlefield 1, but Sony like many other Japanese devs, just love to look out for themselfs. I've seen no end of bad mistakes since I was a kid happening in the gaming industry, but by far the worst have come from Japanese devs and they do honestly make some of the best games out there.

So far in the way of media, battlefield 1 is dominating call of duty, from views to first look trailer reviews. YouTube has over 32 million views on battlefield 1 while call of duty has over 23 million views, that's a pretty big gap. The two trailers with the amount of views has given an incite as to where most gamers should be flocking towards and that says battlefield 1.

Gamers have been saying to both developers for some time now to go back to the world war era, but the devopers of intimate war chose to ignore and now they have a mountain to climb.

The new battlefield looks as though it's what the majority of gamers want, that gritty old style shooter set in a period that has realism and had so much pain and torment, ruined lives, country's and nearly destroyed the world and brought it under the rule of the Germans with an insane mad man at the helm, a crazed dictator who thought little of humanity and was bent on destroying peace.

None of us to this day can imagine what troops on the ground went through during world war 1 or 2, it's one of those you would have to be there to experience it, many millions dieing for something and a cause they were made to believe in. Politicians losing on all sides without any regard or thought to all the people they have sent to die in wars that should of never been. There are plenty of story's to be told from the great wars, many sad story's and I believe when turned into games if the history is researched properly those story's could be told great. I would always choose a world war game over a sci fi game, I had family who fought in the wars, my grandad fought on Normandy in world war 2 so that part of history always grabs me.

Maybe that's just it, we have no history of war space yet, but when it does happen, history will remember it but let's hope it never does because it would be something bigger. A war in space would mean that other worlds would now be populated from humanity branching off from earth and where once these new civilizations worked with earth, now they would move away peace would be under threat as well as probably trillions of people's lives. If a space war ever happens which I hope it does not the kill count would far surpass that of the world wars it would be very sad indeed, no war is worth the lives it ruins.

Back to games though. If done rite call of duty could be great. Don't know if anyone ever played segas chromehounds, but the game had a few factions, there was a world war system in there, each faction had a faction shop, each with its own arms to buy and tech. At the end of each season a winner would be declared, as faction fought for dominance over maps each faction would get a % on that map, they should have somthin similar in call of duty and I would soooooo get the game, I loved it on segas chromehounds.. I do think battlefield will be the clear winner though because it goes to show how history is still deep within us and how much of an effect that these bloody wars had an affect on the human race.

It wont turn off hardcore playstation gamers, but the casual audience still thinks that when they show the Xbox/PS4 brand at the end of the commercial, that you can only play that game on that console. If stuff like this didnt have some type of impact, companies wouldnt pay for these types of deals. Microsoft will come out fine from this deal but EA might lose some sales. IMO

Can Xbox One even run this game?