|
vivster said:
If they have to sell themselves to stay alive there is virtually no difference if they die right then or if the Publisher "kills" them. Which is why I don't understand why so much of the ire goes against the publisher instead of the developer. I mean they sold themselves for money and then the Publisher closes them for money, everyone got what they wanted. |
Again, if they are in a desperate situation and that is why they sell themselves, they might not see a diffrent choice. They have employees to take care off.
The 'ire' comes from the fact that the publishers could theoretically be a nourishing influence on the studio, but more often than not isn't.
AngryLittleAlchemist said:
"Dragon Age inquisition was a critically acclaimed and well loved entry into the franchise" You literally took the one example I was thinking of, haha. I'm talking about Mass Effect 3, Dragon Age 2, The Old Republic, Mass Effect Andromeda. You know ... a huge majority of their catalog since 2011? I'm sure your reply will be "but but metacritic reviews!" or "but people liked ME3 just not the ending!" - let's be honest, critic scores have almost never mattered and that's a silly metric. All those games got massive backlash for various reasons, The Old Republic was considered pretty damn mediocre or even disliked when it launched, Andromeda was hated, Dragon Age 2 was hated, Mass Effect 3 I think by in large has gotten MORE dis-favorable as time goes on and more fans seem to not enjoy it's more action oriented approach. That's up for debate, but what's not up for debate is that as a whole - meaning the market opinion - these games were at best considered divisive and mediocre and at worst considered terrible. Not a great track record. And if your reply to that is "Well, that's just like not fair! Only two of those were recieved absolutely terribly!" Well ok, the defense that Bioware is still a good developer literally relies on one game ... "If you think the studio has any actual say in this you're at best very naive, when it comes to the way certain publlishers operate. Even if you think somehow all of EAs studios are just running wild and just doing whatever the fuck they want, it isn't a good look for EA and just spells incompetence all over again." You normally make really good replies so it's very odd that you would write something this off-base. I mean, you literally take a leap from "if you think the studio has any actual say" to , and I'm not exaggerating, "if you think somehow all of EAs studios are just running wild" - WHAT? Do you have to resort to such faulty logic to make a reply? No, you really don't. So don't do it. Not only that, but I don't understand the whole "naive" aspect of that sentence. Let's be honest, most of the internet outrage is from people that watched three YongYea videos and think they know all the ins and outs of EA. When it comes to pretty much any forum poster, you're always going to know way less than a developer(and even they know less than the corporate chain). It's great that there's outrage over bad companies like EA - it's well deserved, but let's not pretend like most people bashing on their control of creative developers are coming from an educated scholarly perspective. There's always going to be speculation. "Also EA has a long and storied history of doing this. When you have 13+ dead studios under your belt, you have systemic issue, not a few rouge studios." You're right, where did I dispute or deny this? "Not sure what you're trying to achive by calling 'good-guy EA' here. It just isn't the reality of the situation." Playing 'good-guy EA'? Surely you're more mature than that? That's absolutely, and not even close to, what I'm doing. Holy god, people get so defensive of their preconceived notions. A notion I don't even disagree with, just one that I think is over extending it's reach. I think you seriously need to reread my comment, because even if it's in slight disagreement it's a way more innocent intention than you seem to think. I'm simply suggesting that something is clearly wrong with the developers as well as the publishers. You're going to far, and not just that, but you're acting like Bioware is a toddler that needs to be babied. They decided to sign with EA, and surely they have some level of responsibility for their games. I'm not saying it's a 100% or that they wouldn't do better under a different publisher either. |
Oh boy. I seem to have royally pissed you off. It was honestly not my intention.
I think you should probably reread my comment as well, because you seem to have already had a conversation with me in your head and decided how it went.
No, aside from the thing I literally already said in my comment, I was not going to say any of those things because I'm not interested in childish fanwars. I have not stake in Bioware. Heck I haven't even played Mass Effect. And I honestly did think that most of the games you listed aside from ME3 launched to critical acclaim and at least satisfaction of fans. I know fan reaction to DA II was a little tepid, but they corrected with DA:I.
As for Andromeda, I've already covered how it got to be the mess it is, so in that case I really don't see the studio at fault. Or with the majority of the fault.
My 'naive' comment was in regards to 'bioware ruins their franchises', wich EA certainly had a hand in especially in Andromedas case. And yes, I was using hyperbole to accentuate the point, wich I'm sure you understood so no need to be so offended at it. If the studios were really free enough in their decisions to mess up games as bad as they have out of their own incompetence, then EA as a competent publisher should have either cancelled the project, handed it to another studio or given them more time to fix it instead of forcing them to push it out unfinished (or, you know, not handed them a project they weren't ready for in the frist place).
You seemed to me to be sour on Bioware for some reason and excusing EA for being a bad publisher in favor of blaming them, when to me it is pretty clear that they've been pushed at least into their current situation by EA, when they were on a good track. That's how your comment read, to me. I might not have worded it correctly when I used 'good-guy EA' as shorthand for that, but it wasn't with malicious intent.
Look, I did not want to get into a fight, but you gave me an edgy comment and I answered in fashion, wich on reflection maybe I shouldn't have done. I'm honestly sorry if I somehow offended you that was not my intention. I was just honestly puzzled by your initial comment and its mode of delivery.
sergiodaly said:
I'm not here to defend EA but are they really the cause for all these things that are wrong with the industry? People complain now about online games but they sell single player games to the second hand market without any care of what that will influence the future decisions of publishers, people bought the yearly releases, online focus games like COD, Destiny and overwatch and all the things you complain are present in these games but Activision gets a free pass, same as Take Two with GTA online, and if people set these trends, why are people mad that EA follow them? Why is following the trends your customers set, now called incompetence? EA makes mistakes, yes, no doubt, but follow their customers isn't one of them. The devs are their employees but with a honest dialogue many things could be prevented like missed dead lines and rushed games full of bugs (BTW Ubi is king here) because I've worked in a software development company and dead lines were missed all the time, not because of management, but because the software developers were always very confident at the beginning, and then they would fail, and I worked with several teams and many were advised to be more realistic but that didn't change the outcome of the next project. Not saying that this happens inside EA, i don't know, but neither do others that claim the fault is in the management. As a business they are doing what they think is good for them and I agree with most, not all. As their customer, i also like their new approach of trying something else instead of season pass and I like that because season pass are stupid as stupid can be... I couldn’t care less about MT because I will never use them, and if that means the end of season pass for competitive MP games, then so be it... Of course I believe there's other ways, better ways, but for now not having Season Pass for BF II and Titanfall 2 is a good start. |
Personally, Activision, and Take Two certainly don't get a free pass from me and neitehr does Square enix for what they did to Deus EX, but that is not what this topic was about. Personally I find GTA dreadfully boring. But that is also beside the point.
What I'm criticising here is how fresh and creative ideas get snuffed-out in favor of trend-chasing. Rockstar made a great game with GTA by all (but my :P) accounts and take two propositioned them to make an online that could make them even more money, wich they did. And it probably felt fresh in GTA and Rockstar made it work with the concept of the game at large.
But certain publishers see this success and think every game has to be a GTA like seller now, completely neglecting the concept of medium and even high profits in favor of chasing ultra profits. It's not a healthy system. And to an exent, yes it's incompenent because they are sacrificing medum profits in an attempt at much higher profits, wich they will not achieve because the golden goose has already been slain. Ultimately they're also sacrificing their chance at the biggest profits, because they're killing innovation. EA only had an actual COD competitor, something they've been chasing for years, once they reluctantly let the team run with a creative risk with BF 1. Did it outsell COD? No, but people took notice and it got close.
I'm not saying that some studios don't need oversight, or more open communications, or more realistic deadlines. But there is a diffrence between managing a studio, while letting it do what it is good at and forcing them to take on projects they cannot fullfill of have no expertise or passion for. Not to mention literally killing a games balancing in favor of microtransactions.
I can not agree on BFII that lootbox chase with p2w was one of the worst management meddles in recent history and while you might be glad to be rid of the season pass (wich I agree is bull) the alternative is not better in any way shape or form, imo.
