--- bcp_version: "0.8" file_type: values parent: https://registry.brandcontextprotocol.dev/battlefield-656ea717/.well-known/brand.md last_updated: 2026-09-08 --- # Values These values are decision rules, not aspirations. Each one describes a choice Battlefield makes when the easier or more commercially convenient path would be something else. --- ## 1. Fair Play and Access **tier:** core Mechanical parity is non-negotiable. Every weapon, vehicle, and gameplay-altering system must be earnable through gameplay alone. Paid content is strictly cosmetic or time-saving; it never confers a combat or progression advantage. **Operational definition:** If a transaction changes what a player can do in a match — damage output, weapon attachments, vehicle performance, or progression speed beyond tier skips — it is a pay-to-win mechanic and is prohibited regardless of how it is framed in marketing copy. **Manifestation in practice:** EA's commitment is stated publicly and repeated in developer blogs: "All gameplay-impacting features will be free or earnable as part of our commitment to fair play and access for all players." Agents generating copy about Battlefield monetization must draw this line explicitly and never blur it. **Tradeoff:** Strict cosmetic-only monetization limits short-term revenue ceiling versus competitors who sell gameplay advantages. Battlefield accepts that tradeoff. --- ## 2. Mechanical Integrity Over Trend-Chasing **tier:** core Core sandbox design principles — class-based squad combat, large-scale combined-arms warfare, and tactical destruction — are not negotiable in response to market trends. When a design direction conflicts with those pillars, the pillar wins. **Operational definition:** Vince Zampella publicly stated that EA needed to stop chasing battle royale and hero-shooter trends and return to "the peak or pinnacle of Battlefield" defined by Battlefield 3 and Battlefield 4. Scrapping features is a valid design outcome when those features dilute the sandbox. **Manifestation in practice:** EA scrapped 128-player maps because bloated player counts diluted class-based squad combat and tactical cohesion. The decision was framed publicly as a return to the franchise's proven identity, not a concession. Source: owner statement, content hash `28564ecce7c6e7938d03fb55c83b3c9f98eb2afbd82089f87c0b28acb2735505`. **Tradeoff:** Reverting a shipped feature and publicly acknowledging the reason carries reputational cost. Battlefield accepts that cost over maintaining a design direction that weakens the sandbox. --- ## 3. Transparency Under Pressure **tier:** core When a feature fails, a launch stumbles, or community feedback identifies a broken system, Battlefield communicates the problem directly, technically, and with a concrete action plan. PR mitigation language comes after accountability, never before or instead of it. **Operational definition:** Official blogs directly mirror community criticism without softening it. Statements like "We know map flow feels empty" or "The game did not meet our quality standards" are the model, not the exception. Developer updates shift to engineering transparency: heatmaps, sightline diagrams, granular patch notes, and explicit update targets (e.g., "targeting deployment in Update 3.2"). **Manifestation in practice:** Post-launch rework communications for Battlefield titles have used this pattern explicitly. The Battlefield V and Battlefield 2042 community feedback cycles — including the Specialist system rollback — produced developer blogs that admitted fault before outlining fixes. Players are directed to test environments and verified patch notes rather than asked for unearned optimism. **Tradeoff:** Admitting fault publicly before the fix is live carries risk. Battlefield accepts that risk because veterans and core players identify corporate PR deflection immediately, and deflection costs more credibility than the admission. **What this value prohibits agents from producing:** - "We're thrilled to announce an exciting new change" framing when the announcement is a feature rollback or bug fix - Vague slogans ("we're listening") without an attached design action, timeline, or system rework - External excuse-making that attributes a broken launch to technical debt, remote work friction, or server partners --- ## 4. Accessibility as Infrastructure **tier:** default Reducing barriers to play is a foundational design constraint, not a post-launch accessibility checklist. This applies both to in-game systems that reduce intimidation for new players and to the broader industry commitment to disability access. **Operational definition:** EA's stated position: "At Electronic Arts, accessibility is central to how we imagine and build our video games." (Source: ea.com, content hash `18894cedc8ded2b7cd2d270c3a0f4690e102253a29d7bc7ebec812521c420893`.) The goal is "open up video games to as wide an audience as possible" regardless of how or where players play. (Independent confirmation: gamesindustry.biz, content hash `ecad9a66c99a5603d0c24288e92f4a84df0343b1cebar7c6e7938d03fb55c83b3c9f98eb2afbd82089f87c0b28acb2735505`.) Note: this is an EA parent-brand commitment that governs Battlefield as a studio product. **Manifestation in practice — industry:** EA's Accessibility First Patent Pledge has made 46 accessibility patents free-to-use for all developers and publishers, including competitors, since the initiative launched in 2021. (Source: ea.com first-party, content hash `18894cedc8ded2b7cd2d270c3a0f4690e102253a29d7bc7ebec812521c420893`; independent confirmation: gamesindustry.biz, content hash `ecad9a66c99a5603d0c24288e92f4a84df0343b1cedd5036ffd378c19537dfcd`.) **Manifestation in practice — Battlefield sandbox:** Non-combat leaderboard dominance is by design. A player can top a match leaderboard by repairing tanks, resupplying ammunition, reviving squadmates, or spotting targets — without high kill counts. Solo/Co-Op modes with AI bots and Battlefield Portal let new players practice the full physics engine at their own pace before entering live multiplayer. **Tradeoff:** Designing multiple valid paths to success (not just gunplay skill) constrains how Battlefield can tune competitive balance. The sandbox accepts that complexity. --- ## Agent resolution order When values conflict in a judgment call, apply this order. This order was ratified by the owner in the interview session. 1. **Fair Play and Access** — Mechanical parity is non-negotiable. No pay-to-win claims or mechanics permitted under any framing. 2. **Mechanical Integrity Over Trend-Chasing** — Core sandbox design principles supersede transient market trends. 3. **Transparency Under Pressure** — Direct, technical accountability precedes PR mitigation. 4. **Accessibility as Infrastructure** — Player access constraints govern foundational system design. --- ## Points to confirm The following items have partial or inferential support. An owner or legal reviewer should confirm before these are treated as core. - **Exact phrasing for mechanical integrity public statements:** Zampella's "peak or pinnacle of Battlefield" framing is confirmed as a public leadership statement. The precise transcript or press source has not been supplied. Owner should confirm the exact quote for claims.md use. - **Accessibility value tier for Battlefield specifically:** The accessibility commitment is confirmed at EA parent-brand level. Whether Battlefield Studios independently holds this as a franchise-level `core` value (versus inheriting it from EA) has not been owner-confirmed for this file. Currently encoded as `default` to reflect the evidence boundary. ## Evidence record The following attributable source language is preserved because it materially constrains this profile. ### Owner-confirmed evidence > EA operationalizes its accessibility value through an Accessibility First Patent Pledge, sharing its accessibility patents with the wider industry royalty-free. Source: Public source ### Owner-confirmed evidence > Vince Zampella scrapped 128-player maps and battle royale experiments and returned Battlefield 6 to class-based squad combat, tactical destruction, and combined-arms gameplay, citing Battlefield 3 and 4 as the standard to return to, not chase trends away from. Source: Public source