well you gotta stay competitive if you wanna be successful
From an management or ceo point of view that might be true. But from a Dev's point of view it might be all about innovation and making your fan base happy. Each of the battlefield's had something unique about them while keeping that battlefield feeling.
Battlefield 1942 was vanilla, made conquest popular, mod tools -> desert combat, server side hit reg
Battlefield Vietnam added booby traps, deployable mortars
Battlefield 2 created as a result from desert combat, added unlocks, guided missiles, commander, made machine gunner into ammo man, select fire weapons, added VOIP
Battlefield 2142 added more unlocks, armor, titan battles, condensed 6 classes into 4, added battle mechs, drones, drop pods
Battlefield Bad company reduced player count to 24, gameplay was made faster paced
Battlefield 3 removed modibility, buffed to 64 players, focuses more on the center of the map, pseudo destructible terrain, bloom, motion blur, removed commander, dlc map packs, removed VOIP, ammo system similar to cod, client side hit reg
You had things like limited splint and your ammo came from magazines which meant when you reloaded any unused ammo was lost. Also cap points were scattered rather than being in the center.
Poll