The part where he said he doesn't even like the game that much but likes seeing "chuds" get dunked on makes it even funnier in hindsight. People with political brain rot constantly turning things like video games into political battlegrounds is one of the more pathetic and annoying cultural developments of the past few years so it was a shame to see one of the best video game journalists take part in that a bit.

If you know, you know. 

I tried Origins and Inquisition, the latter mostly because I really wanted something to play on PS4, which was in a bit of a dry spell. Those games were some of the the blandest, tropiest RPGs I'd ever played. They were like store-brand D&D. 

I mean, why would I want to go to Applebees when I can get a good steak (i.e. a game like Baldur's Gate III)?  That was as much a problem for EA as anything else. Bioware, like a lot of other studios that hit it big in 7th generation, never grew out of that phase. 

Not a dragon age enjoyer. Applebees of RPGs indeed. But from the outside looking in, with how expensive it was to develop, I'm not sure it had any hope of being successful enough to be profitable.

Bioware got a bigger reprieve, but they're following the same trajectory as Origin, Westwood, Maxis, Bullfrog, Pandemic (which was bought alongside Bioware), and so many other studios to the EA graveyard. 

What a disaster, 1.5 million players (not copies sold) in 2 months is very bad considering the history of the franchise and many many years of development

Let's just say Jason's views skew to a certain leaning side of a spectrum. He also wrote that book on his finding from Blizzard's debacles, which I find deplorable to make money from. 

I must look into it, gotta doubt it sold well. 

EA stocks are flat over last 5 years but had a steep slump in the last months (since Veilguard was released).

I think that point of view was also skewed towards the fact that there's knowadays a lot of weight put on the CCU performance on Steam to determine a game early success.

Veilguard seemed to have a more than decent enough if not big enough CCU to determine it was at least putting out a decent front ... At first.

I mean, the word of mouth for this game has simply been bad for the most part and they definitely struggled on the marketing to sell the game as it is.

Here's that proof now.

Ouch. Honestly, even my 4M  prediction now seems like on the high end of the game will prolly tally in sales by the end. 

People often do put too much emphasis on CCU performance on Steam. It's very useful data and extremely welcome considering none of the consoles show this sort of thing so it's understandable that it gets as much attention as it does but at the end of the day it's only one piece of the pie in determining how a game is performing even if it's a big piece. It's when the number is really high or really low that it's at its most useful since being able to instantly see how huge something like Palworld is gonna be vs how much something like Concord is gonna bomb right away is very nice.