For twenty-plus years, Battlefield has done things on its own timeline.
Unlike Call of Duty, which became an annual fixture in the gaming calendar, Battlefield traditionally launched with big gaps between titles.
The wait between Battlefield V and 2042 stretched to three years, and now fans are looking at a four-year gap leading into Battlefield 6—the longest in the franchise’s history.
That slower cadence gave the series time to build ambitious projects and shape its identity as different from the rest.
But according to industry analyst Michael Pachter, EA may be preparing to abandon that strategy.
He said on a recent Pachter Factor episode that he spoke with Battlefield General Manager Byron Beede, who walked him through the company’s long-term direction.
As Pachter put it: “Their goal is three studios making Battlefield on a three-year basis so that they can get to Battlefield annually. He said it’s going to take five or six years before they get two in a row, so we’re not going to get there for a while.”
That single quote triggered speculation. If accurate, it signals EA wants Battlefield to compete on both content and cadence with Call of Duty.
Why Would EA Chase Annual Releases?
Business-wise, the approach makes sense as yearly Call of Duty drops train players to anticipate them, and Activision profits from both launch numbers and long-term monetization.
EA has built its name on yearly series like FIFA and Madden, so turning Battlefield into the same kind of cycle looks like the most reliable way to keep profits flowing and shareholders satisfied.
Some also argue that Battlefield has, at times, been closer to this model than people remember.
Between 2010 and 2015, players saw Bad Company 2, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, and Hardline land one after another, four titles within five years.
In that sense, EA has already experimented with a faster cycle before, even if it wasn’t as rigidly annual as Call of Duty’s system.
What Are the Risks of Going Annual?
Many fear that without enough breathing room, Battlefield could fall into the same trap as 2042—a rushed release that struggled even after years in the works.
If a game struggles under a four-year timeline, what happens when that window is cut down to three years per studio, with yearly launches expected?
Critics warn that the risk goes beyond technical instability and extends to creative burnout.
A yearly release cycle can trap developers into recycling familiar ideas, leaving little room for the creativity that once set Battlefield apart.
Can Battlefield Survive the Shift?
EA’s long-term plan is still far off, with Pachter stressing that annual Battlefield releases won’t line up until late in the decade.
Battlefield 6 now carries the weight of being the last "traditional" Battlefield before EA changes direction.
Early feedback from its beta has been promising, with fans praising it as a return to form after the rough years of 2042.
But the franchise’s future rests on finding balance. If EA can coordinate its studios, avoid overworking developers, and maintain Battlefield’s trademark scale and squad-based identity, annual releases could succeed.
The obvious outcome is a once-proud franchise flattened into sameness, sacrificing what made it special for revenue.
Right now, EA’s rumored plan feels like a gamble. With the right approach, Battlefield might finally find the momentum to go head-to-head with Call of Duty year in and year out.
A sloppy approach could worsen the franchise’s trajectory and fracture the trust of its core audience.
For now, all players can do is enjoy Battlefield 6 and brace themselves for what comes next because if Pachter’s quote is to be believed, the Battlefield of the future will look very different from the one fans grew up with.
For more like this, stick with us here at Gfinityesports.com: the best website for gaming news.