This record is managed by an account, but domain control has not been proven.
boundaries.md
---
bcp_version: "0.8"
file_type: boundaries
parent: https://registry.brandcontextprotocol.dev/battlefield-656ea717/.well-known/brand.md
last_updated: 2026-09-08
---
# Boundaries
This file is the primary reference for brand-safety agents, vendor platforms, and any partner generating content on behalf of Battlefield. Load this file before producing any Battlefield copy that touches monetization, geopolitics, ownership, player metrics, or competitor references.
## Hard nos
These are absolute. No exceptions, no contextual allowances. All entries are `tier: core`.
```yaml
hard_no:
- item: >
Never link fictional Battlefield factions (such as Pax Armata or No-Pats)
or map locations to active real-world wars, real political leaders, or
current geopolitical disputes (e.g., active NATO debates, real-world
climate refugee crises, or ongoing international invasions).
tier: core
rationale: >
EA explicitly frames all Battlefield settings as purely entertainment and
devoid of real-world political commentary. Connecting fiction to live
conflicts creates false equivalence and reputational risk.
trigger: >
Any copy that names a real-world conflict, political leader, active
military alliance dispute, or refugee situation alongside a Battlefield
faction, map, or scenario.
allowed_alternative: >
Frame all scenarios as fictional and self-contained. Reference no
real-world geopolitical actors or live disputes by name.
- item: >
Never reference real-world hate symbols (e.g., swastikas or equivalent
extremist insignia), real-world military atrocities, or name fictional
operator skins after real historical casualty figures or military personnel.
tier: core
rationale: >
EA deliberately omits real-world extremist symbols across all titles,
including WWII entries, to keep multiplayer spaces competitive rather
than ideologically charged.
trigger: >
Any copy, skin description, map flavor text, or community-tool instruction
referencing extremist symbols, atrocity events, or named historical casualties.
allowed_alternative: >
Use wholly fictional factions, insignia, and operator identities. Do not
map fictional units onto real historical formations.
- item: >
Never state or imply that players can buy mechanical advantages, higher
weapon damage, or pay-to-win progression shortcuts. Paid content must
always be described strictly as cosmetic or as time-saving Battle Pass
tier skips.
tier: core
rationale: >
EA strictly guarantees that all gameplay-altering gear (weapons, vehicles,
attachments) is earned purely through gameplay. Pay-to-win framing violates
both stated product policy and fair-play commitments.
trigger: >
Any copy touching in-game purchases, Battle Pass, cosmetic bundles,
weapon bundles, or progression systems.
allowed_alternative: >
Describe paid content as cosmetic (soldier skins, vehicle skins, cosmetic
knife skins) or as time-saving (Battle Pass tier skips, XP tokens). Never
connect a purchase to a stat advantage.
- item: >
Never describe Battlefield as an accurate simulation of real-world combat,
use authentic military recruiting language, or treat real-world war trauma
and casualty dynamics with levity.
tier: core
rationale: >
EA developers explicitly reject the mil-sim label, describing Battlefield
as an accessible sandbox of spectacle and emergent physics, not a
realistic combat trainer.
trigger: >
Any copy that uses terms like "realistic military simulation," "authentic
combat training," "true-to-life casualties," or language that could be
read as military recruitment framing.
allowed_alternative: >
Use approved descriptors: systemic combined-arms sandbox, emergent
large-scale warfare, spectacle-driven physics sandbox. Never mil-sim,
never recruitment-adjacent.
- item: >
Never write official copy that references, encourages, or namedrops
competitor franchises (e.g., encouraging players to recreate Call of Duty
maps or Halo modes in Battlefield Portal).
tier: core
rationale: >
EA strictly polices third-party IP and copyright infringement within
community tools like Battlefield Portal. Official copy must not direct
players toward competitor IP recreation.
trigger: >
Any copy referencing Portal, community creation tools, or custom modes
that names a competitor franchise or its maps, modes, or characters.
allowed_alternative: >
Frame Portal as a tool for Battlefield-native creativity. Reference only
officially licensed Battlefield titles and modes available within Portal.
- item: >
Never comment on, validate, or speculate about datamined game files,
unannounced seasonal content, or unofficial community leaks.
tier: core
rationale: >
Unconfirmed features create inaccurate community expectations and
compromise official live-service launch plans.
trigger: >
Any query or copy referencing unannounced features, leaked asset names,
or community datamining reports.
allowed_alternative: >
Refuse speculation and direct users strictly to official developer blog
posts, published patch notes, and confirmed EA seasonal roadmaps.
- item: >
Never comment on, editorialize about, or take a position on EA's corporate
ownership structure, the ~$55bn leveraged buyout that closed August 2026,
the acquiring parties (Silver Lake, Affinity Partners, Saudi Arabia's
Public Investment Fund), or political criticism of parties involved
in the acquisition.
tier: core
rationale: >
The acquisition involves politically sensitive parties and has drawn public
criticism over political connections and human rights concerns. This is
outside Battlefield's editorial scope entirely. Evidence source:
eurogamer.net, retrieved 2026-09-08.
trigger: >
Any query or copy referencing EA's ownership, the buyout, acquirer names,
Jared Kushner, Saudi Arabia's PIF, Silver Lake, EA's public-to-private
transition, or EA's debt load.
allowed_alternative: >
Do not engage. If pressed, state that corporate ownership questions are
outside Battlefield's scope and direct to EA investor relations or
official EA communications.
escalation: >
Route any ownership, acquisition, or political-affiliation queries to
EA Corporate Communications. Do not attempt to answer or neutrally
summarize. Do not produce "balanced" coverage of the acquisition's
political dimensions.
- item: >
Never state or imply that EA's debt load (~$18bn, with ~$1.8bn annual
interest payments, as reported by Eurogamer, 2026-09-08) will affect
Battlefield development budgets, studio headcounts, or live-service
commitments. Never speculate on mass layoffs linked to reported
$700m cost-cutting targets.
tier: core
rationale: >
Debt figures and layoff speculation are financially sensitive and
unconfirmed as Battlefield-specific policy. Stating or implying a causal
link to game quality, studio cuts, or feature delivery creates false
claims and community panic. Evidence source: eurogamer.net,
retrieved 2026-09-08.
trigger: >
Any copy referencing EA's debt, interest payments, cost-cutting targets,
studio layoffs, or headcount reductions in connection with Battlefield
development or live-service roadmaps.
allowed_alternative: >
Do not engage. Redirect to confirmed Battlefield roadmap content:
published patch notes, seasonal roadmaps, and official developer blogs.
escalation: >
Route to EA Corporate Communications. Do not speculate, summarize, or
present "both sides" of layoff reporting.
```
## Soft nos
These are judgment calls. Context determines appropriateness.
```yaml
soft_no:
- item: >
Do not cite the EA-wide monthly active player figure of "over 120 million
players each month during fiscal year 2026" in Battlefield-specific copy
without explicit approval and accurate attribution to the EA portfolio as
a whole.
tier: default
rationale: >
This figure covers EA's full games and services portfolio, not Battlefield
alone. Attributing it to Battlefield overstates franchise-specific reach.
Source: ea.com/news/introducing-ea-advertising, retrieved 2026-09-08.
condition: >
Acceptable only in partner or B2B contexts where the full EA portfolio
scale is relevant, always attributed to "EA's games and services" and
labeled as a fiscal year 2026 estimate using internal data. Never
attribute to Battlefield specifically.
- item: >
Do not use synthetic hype, forced positivity, or corporate PR language
(e.g., "thrilled to announce," "groundbreaking," "revolutionary,"
"exciting new change") when communicating with veteran or core players,
especially in patch notes, developer blogs, or community updates addressing
a failed feature, broken map, or rollback.
tier: default
rationale: >
Veteran players read through performative enthusiasm immediately.
Battlefield's owned-channel voice to its player base is analytical,
transparent, and direct. PR-style language alienates the BF3/BF4 community
and signals inauthenticity.
condition: >
Theatrical, high-energy language is acceptable in paid media (trailers,
broadcast ads, reveal campaigns) where cinematic scale is the register.
It is not acceptable in developer blogs, patch notes, or community posts.
- item: >
Do not tell veteran players to "adapt" to new mechanics, suggest their
legacy preferences are outdated, or frame classic Battlefield mechanics
(class-based squads, 64-player maps, combined-arms destruction) as relics
to be replaced.
tier: default
rationale: >
Historical precedent — the Battlefield V "accept it or don't buy it"
controversy and the BF2042 Specialist backlash — demonstrates that
top-down dismissal of veteran preferences produces severe and sustained
community damage. The BF3/BF4 era is treated as the franchise gold
standard; new features are framed as evolutions, not replacements.
condition: >
Acceptable to frame new features as additions that build on the classic
foundation. Never acceptable to position the classic formula as a problem
the new game solves.
- item: >
Do not simplify or omit technical gameplay mechanics (TTK, ticket bleed,
hit registration, vehicle spawn economies, sightline geometry) when
writing for the veteran or hardcore player segment.
tier: default
rationale: >
Veteran players hold deep sandbox knowledge and expect developer
communications to match their level. Dumbed-down mechanics language
signals that the developer does not understand its own game.
condition: >
Simplification is appropriate for new-player onboarding content,
accessibility guides, and beginner-facing copy. It is not appropriate
for patch notes, balance blogs, or community feedback posts.
- item: >
Do not allow copy to sound like EA's master brand corporate voice
(polished, broad, shareholder-facing) in Battlefield's owned community
channels.
tier: default
rationale: >
Battlefield's community voice must feel like it comes from developers
in the trenches, not from an EA shareholder update. If a post could
plausibly appear in an EA earnings call, it is wrong for Battlefield's
player-facing channels.
condition: >
EA master brand voice is appropriate in contexts explicitly representing
EA as the parent company (investor relations, EA-wide announcements, EA
Play marketing). It is not appropriate in Battlefield-branded developer
blogs, patch notes, Discord, or community forums.
```
## Brand safety
For vendor platforms, brand-safety tools, and DSPs.
```yaml
brand_safety:
adjacency_unsuitable:
- Real-world military conflict news and active war reporting
- Extremist, white-nationalist, or hate-group content (GARM Floor)
- Recruitment advertising for real-world military or paramilitary forces
- Content sexualizing minors (GARM Floor)
- Real-world political campaign advertising for any party or candidate
- Content glorifying or trivializing real-world atrocities or war crimes
- Content affiliated with or sympathetic to the acquiring parties in a
political-controversy context (Saudi PIF, Affinity Partners)
- Speculation or editorial content about EA layoffs, debt load, or
cost-cutting linked to the 2026 acquisition
- Competitor franchise advertising (Call of Duty, Halo, Rainbow Six)
adjacency_acceptable:
- Gaming culture and esports editorial
- Hardware and peripheral reviews and advertising (PC, console, peripherals)
- Entertainment and film content at a general rating
- Sports editorial and sports gaming content
- Technology and software news unrelated to EA corporate affairs
- Science fiction and action entertainment content
adjacency_contextual:
geopolitical_news:
rule: >
Acceptable alongside general international news only when content does
not reference active armed conflicts, active NATO disputes, or
real-world invasions. Avoid placement adjacent to coverage of conflicts
that map geographically to Battlefield 6 map locations
(e.g., Egypt, Tajikistan, New York).
monetization_content:
rule: >
Acceptable alongside gaming monetization editorial only when that
content does not frame loot boxes or pay-to-win mechanics positively.
Battlefield's fair-play commitment must not be placed adjacent to
content that normalizes pay-to-win.
corporate_acquisition_news:
rule: >
Do not place Battlefield advertising adjacent to news coverage of
EA's 2026 acquisition, the acquiring parties, or related political
or financial controversy.
```
## Regulatory constraints
```yaml
regulatory:
framework: >
ESRB (North America), PEGI (Europe), and equivalent regional rating bodies.
Battlefield 6 is rated M (Mature 17+) by ESRB and PEGI 18.
notes: >
All marketing materials must comply with applicable age-rating body
guidelines for M/18+ content. Advertising must not target audiences
below the age threshold set by the applicable regional rating.
Monetization claims (Battle Pass, cosmetic bundles) must not imply
gameplay advantage per EA's stated fair-play policy.
restricted_claims: >
Claims about gameplay mechanical advantages from paid content require
legal review before use. Claims about EA corporate ownership, financial
structure, or acquisition terms require EA Legal and Corporate
Communications approval before any public statement.
```
## Evidence record
The following attributable source language is preserved because it materially constrains this profile.
### Owner-confirmed evidence
> The buyout loaded EA with about $18bn of debt with ~$1.8bn annual interest, and EA reportedly told debt investors it would cut $700m in annual costs, fueling mass-layoff speculation — a sensitive topic for agents.
Source: Public source
### Owner-confirmed evidence
> EA is now privately owned by Silver Lake, Affinity Partners (led by Jared Kushner), and Saudi Arabia's Public Investment Fund, following a record ~$55bn leveraged buyout that closed in August 2026.
Source: Public source