Around AOTF ×



Battlefield 3 developer discusses the future of FPS

by William Schwartz on July 6, 2012

Karl Magnus Troedsson of DICE, developer of Battlefield 3, believes that there will be  a shift in the very near future for the first person shooter genre.  Fictional versions of modern conflicts have been all the rage in recent years.  From the Modern Warfare franchise to the Battlefield series, first person shooter developers have over saturated the market with that theme.  Troedsson explains why he thinks a change is coming in a recent interview with Edge Online.

“”I think we’re going to start seeing people moving away from the modern setting, because every now and again settings or themes start to get stale and then everyone jumps over,” Troedsson said. “You know, at some point dinosaurs are the hottest thing and everyone is making games with dinosaurs, but there are trends. It used to be WWII, and recently it’s been the modern era and people are now moving towards near future.”

“But it’s a bit cheap to just say, ‘Okay, we’re going to switch and go back in time or into the future and that will be innovation’. It will definitely drive the franchise forward for whatever game, but it’s not true innovation, it’s more a thematic change that has a perceived value to the gamers out there. But as a developer you can only make so many games in one particular era, and then you personally start to get a bit bored with it.” he continued.

Treyarch might be somewhat ahead of the curve with this year’s release of Black Ops 2.  The game is set in the near future, and could be the popular calling card of first person shooters in the coming years.  Will DICE head down that road when they revisit the Battlefield franchise?  Troedsson didn’t say.

Say Something
  • booji

    DICE already did Battlefield 2142.


    I wish there was more ww2 games brothers in arms was so good i have never been a fan of modern military fps

  • xDamery

    Note to DICE, Lead don’t follow! What makes a Game fun is the story… Just a change in the time reference is NOT going to do it. Create new reasons to fight for something. I thought the idea of Hoard mode is great but I think the AI in games is still a little stale … you should be working on AI that gets smarter as the game progresses…reacts to the real players game play. That is the next step! Dinosaurs is cool because animals are unpredictable and dangerous, as soon as we can predict an animals behavior …boring!


    Future is nice because there is a lot more creative direction. With WW2, you at least have to somewhat follow history. Things are more predictable. Near future is nice because it still feels relevant and modern, but you can go anywhere really. Makes for much more exciting storylines.

    Of course theres always the “cold war gone hot” scenario. I think that would probably be the best place for Battlefield to go. Free storyline and a not stupid excuse for the US to fight Russia.

  • DERP?

    Uhh Treyarch isn’t ahead of the curve at all. BF 2142 was already released, Crysis 1, 2, and 3, Ghost Recon, Blacklight Retribution, so many more. Treyarch is anything but innovative. Near-future FPS games have been around forever, but since CoD is so overrated, obviously it’ll become a trend and BO2 will go down in history as the “father of futuristic FPS games”…


      Cod has never innovated anything. They popularize.

    • Cool dude

      You mean COD has STOPPED innovating? What happened to its glorious days of MW2 and WaW?? I still consider them innovation.

  • That One Guy

    Personally I would love a cold war gone hot scenario. It reminds me of the fun I had in the game “World in Conflict”. It was a pretty good strategy game, I sure as heck would Like the late 80’s theme… Or BF2143 would work well for me.

Related Popular Battlefield 3 Content