EA dishonorably discharges Medal of Honor

Electronic Arts is "taking Medal of Honor out of the rotation" after its poor critical and commercial performance, the company announced today. Overall, the company saw net losses of $45 million through its third quarter which ended December 31, 2012, though that's much improved from the $205 million loss reported for the same period last year.

"We're in a hit-driven business... and frankly we missed on Medal of Honor," president of EA Labels Frank Gibeau said in a conference call with investors.

Medal of Honor: Warfighter performed "well below [EA's] expectations," as predicted in the company's last financial statement. COO Peter Moore said in the call that the company has other plans to keep up yearly military shooter franchises, though EA won't say more until after it unveils Battlefield 4 in coming months.

Sales of Battlefield 3 Premium generated more than $108 million with a total of 2.9 million subscribers, leaving little doubt as to which of EA's military FPS franchises is top dog. That profit's being deferred from this quarter into the next when the Endgame expansion DLC is released, if you're keeping score.

FIFA 13 has also enjoyed decent growth, with 23 percent increased sales over FIFA 12. Need for Speed: Most Wanted also outperformed 2011's entry, The Run.

EA continues to see significant returns from its digital efforts, and is the No. 1 publisher on the iOS store. The company's digital sector saw an 17 percent increase in digital net revenue from $274 million in 2012's third quarter to $321 million this year.

The free-to-play transition for Star Wars: The Old Republic has been successful so far, EA said, but it's still too early to see its measure of success.


  • chazzyman - January 31, 2013 2:44 p.m.

    Geezus it makes me sad to see this happen, when MoH European Assault, Front Lines, Pacific Assault, and Airborne were so great. Hopefully EA re-thinks their approach to the series and decides to return to the WWII roots that made the series such a ground breaker.
  • doominatorx6 - January 31, 2013 10:41 a.m.

    Bring MOH back to World War II or just let it die.
  • GAYMER - January 31, 2013 10:44 p.m.

    Well according to the article I think it's safe to assume that EA well pick the later
  • ObliqueZombie - January 31, 2013 10:17 a.m.

  • zelta38 - January 31, 2013 5:38 a.m.

    Thank God this is done. Now when they scrap their ridiculous and frequently insulting business decisions (Dead Space 3 microtransactions, picking a public fight with Valve and Activision to advertise Origin and Battlefield 3) and (as one Bioware ex-founder said) choking bear hugging of its internal studios, maybe EA has a chance at redeeming itself. Maybe. It's less of a borg than it used to be at least.
  • nelly24 - January 31, 2013 5:23 a.m.

    YES! That's one dull first person war game thrown on the trash heap, just another few dozen to go.
  • Balaska - January 30, 2013 10:53 p.m.

    I don't want a battlefield every 2 years. Give me a decent game like Bad Company 2, which is superior to BF3. Sell me regulary maps and new modes like Vietnam and I will be happy. In fact, I want Vietnam for BF3.
  • avantguardian - January 30, 2013 9:42 p.m.

    this seemed like an inevitable formality from the start. anyone who's been paying attention knows that moh is to black ops what bf3 is to mw3. ea has been slowly shifting bf to the cod model, and now they've just made it official. "Moore said in the call that the company has other plans to keep up yearly military shooter franchises." the next moh will now just be called battlefield: whatever, and will release alongside cod: whatever, in fall 2014. and then every year, until the end of time. at least, that's my guess.
  • Bloodstorm - January 30, 2013 6:25 p.m.

    I'm ready for the annualized shooter to die a burning death like music games before it.
  • Malakie - January 30, 2013 6:07 p.m.

    EA also has not figured out one huge thing.. Many of us out here are NOT buying their products no matter what they are because of the pricing they charge. There is no freaking way I am ever going to pay over $40 for a software game title. Ain't happening. And with some of these titles, EA leads in the gouging of the consumer.
  • Bloodstorm - January 30, 2013 11:23 p.m.

    $60 has been the standard since I started playing games. That's not an EA thing, that is an industry thing.
  • Tjwoods18 - January 30, 2013 5:22 p.m.

    EA is just trying to be "too realistic". Nobody cares about reality, they want fantasy.
  • BladedFalcon - January 30, 2013 3:34 p.m.

    Good, if you're just gonna half ass a franchise, you might as well put it out of it's misery before it just becomes a laughing stock. (I'm looking at you Sonic...)
  • jack-hentschell - January 30, 2013 4:52 p.m.

    At least Sonic has been improving though.
  • Child Of Death - January 30, 2013 6:40 p.m.

    Sonic is defintly getting better. Sonic Colors and Generations were really good.
  • BladedFalcon - January 30, 2013 6:41 p.m.

    Eh, I guess Sonic Generations wasn't terrible, but at best it was a serviceable game that banked mainly on nostalgia. So, the highlight of Sonic for the past 10 years, was a game that was good only because it recycled levels and ideas from the original games... I don't know about you, but to me, that's a sign of a franchise that hasn't been able to be relevant or come up with worthwhile new ideas for the last decade. And as such, maybe it's time to retire the old hog.
  • pl4y4h - January 30, 2013 7:23 p.m.

    After a sea of awful titles (06, black knight, etc) if they can pull a good sonic game with generations mechanics the revival might come full circle.
  • BladedFalcon - January 30, 2013 8:05 p.m.

    Well, with such a stubborn fanbase that believe Sonic still matters, I guess nothing's stopping them from trying.
  • shawksta - January 30, 2013 9:47 p.m.

    The only Newest Sonic games that was ever relevant because they did it well and not being disasters were Rush and Especially Colors, which had interestingly new gameplay mechanics that worked. (On Nintendo systems Ironically) After that, Generations was a mix of the good, while it pretty much IS fanservice, the 2D Transitions of the 3D worlds showed Sega still had it and they could push it if they managed it. BUT THEN CAME EPISODE 2 OF SONIC 4 WHICH OTHERWISE STILL FELT WRONG DESPITE HOW GOOD 2D WAS IN GENERATIONS. Sega doesnt know what the heck to do sometimes, i mean, its already horrible enough their going through Sonic sex toys. They need that ZING that'll help them.
  • TheDCSniper - January 30, 2013 3:18 p.m.

    I actually liked the 2010 reboot, despite it's glitches, but this is just what happens when you forsake quality in favor of annualizing a series. They should take a couple of years and make a polished Bad Company for the 720/PS4

Showing 1-20 of 21 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000