Battlefield: Bad Company's original lead is happy to bring his ideas for a third game to life, but he knows EA won't do it

If there’s one card EA has yet to play to salvage the reputation of the embattled Battlefield franchise, it’s bringing back the Bad Company sub-series. Back around the launch of Battlefield 2042; when everyone was feeling down about the quality of the game and the direction DICE had taken it into, there was a lot hope for the follow-up to simply be a blast from the past.

Many suggested that, as something of a palate cleanser, EA should remake the Bad Company games. Bad Company 2, in particular, is remembered fondly by many modern Battlefield fans. The two games also share a unique quality no other Battlefield game has: their single-player campaigns.

If EA ever wants to recreate that special sauce, the head chef is seemingly happy to lend their expertise.

David Goldfarb is name that should be familiar to many shooter fans, especially those who enjoyed the Bad Company games, as well as Payday 2. Goldfarb has helped create seminal shooters that are all remembered for bringing something new to their respective sub-genres.

Goldfarb, however, left the triple-A scene for more focused, smaller projects years ago. His work with The Outsiders, his studio, has explored other areas of the shooter space, such as the highly-acclaimed rock shooter Metal: Hellslinger. But is there ever a universe in which he’s back leading a new Bad Company game? The answer may actually be yes, despite how unlikely that is to actually happen.

Goldfarb, who wrote an outline for the story of a third Bad Company, told PCGamesN that he’d be open to going to back and working on Battlefield again. “I am right here,” he said. “They [EA] know where I am if they want to do one.”

Despite his willingness, however, Goldfarb doesn’t feel that EA would ever greenlight a new Bad Company game, or a sequel to that original series.

“There aren’t games like [Bad Company] at that production quality anymore,” he explained.

“Most big productions will not take those bets because they believe they can look backwards to predict successes and looking backwards makes Bad Company and its humour and approach look like an anomaly.”

Bad Company, of course, had a distinct identity among military shooters of that era. The campaigns both featured lighter tones that, while set in warzones, only really used that as a backdrop. They focused instead on their cast a cast of loveable characters. Even back then, that pitch wasn’t easily approved by EA’s higher-ups, according to Goldfarb.

“I can’t speak for anyone else, but I know there was a collective feeling that we had our own identity for Bad Company, weird or not, and we were going to enjoy making it,” he said. “It is actually something of a miracle we got to do it”

So if publishers are looking for unique projects, why aren’t we any likely to see a Bad Company 3? The answer, according to the veteran game designer, is that it may simply be too risky.

“[...] that’s why we don’t see those kinds of games anymore, because economics and risk aversion and all the other s**t turn people away from it,” he pointed out. “In many ways, Bad Company 2 was a perfect storm, though. I don’t know if we could do it again like that.”

There is, of course, some chance that the next game in the Battlefield series, set for release in 2025, could end up being a Bad Company sequel. Or, at the very least, it could be a spiritual successor in a way; channelling some of what made that sub-series special.

EA and DICE have yet to properly reveal any major details about the next Battlefield, but the two have made clear that it’s going to be a return to basics, and feature a modern-day setting. DICE is also keen on getting the community involved early, so a few of us may be playing it early next year.

More broadly, reports suggest that EA is keen to create its own Call of Duty with the next Battlefield, with a supposed free-to-play battle royale mode, more regular content drops, and connected releases that all feed into one another.