Trending Games | WildStar | Guild Wars 2 | Ecol Tactics Online | Elder Scrolls Online
Network: Gamertube FPSguru RTSguru
| 187 posts found | |
|---|---|
|
9/28/12 10:36:27 PM#121
Originally posted by jerlot65 And what I'm saying it is not just MMO players, go read reviews of your local resturants or pretty much any product review. If the product is bad, people will not hold back and will bash it to oblivion, if it is good they will praise it as the second coming. You read a lot of MMO negativity because you're on an MMO forum. Saying MMO players are the scum of the earth or the crappiest fans because they are vocal with thier displeasure is inaccurate and a little offensive to me personally. I want to be Uncle Owen again. |
|
|
9/28/12 10:37:14 PM#122
Has the 200m dollar budget ever be confirmed? From what I recall, it was mentioned once, in a newspaper as some figure and there was no real source mentioned in that article. In this age of Fox News style of journalism and generally sloppy news reporting (too many examples to mention), I am quite sceptical.
As for EA, maybe it was BW's fault, maybe it was EA's fault. But it's hard to deny the fact that all game companies that were great when they joined EA, deteriorated quickly. That's simpluy too much of a coincidence. It isn't also limited to EA btw. Companies falling under Activision like Infinity Ward and Blizzard also become prone to a mentality and culture shift, although maybe not that evident. But still. I think it's simply because those big gaming corporations have a different rank of their priorities, which can have pervasive and big consequences in the long term: less fanservice that aren't maybe directly and concretely translatable into money generation, and more focus on production and financial results.
SWTOR wasn't a bad product as an MMO. It just wasn't one that a lot of hardcore SW/SWG fans or BW fans wanted. And (some) sandbox fans will ofc burn any AAA themepark MMO to the ground in their boredom, in the mindset of 'if I can't have any fun, then no one should have any fun and the MMO genre as it is may burn to the ground for all I care' >.>
Like some have said, I think indeed that it was a combination of things that all added up that led to their leaving. I also think that compared to 10-15 years ago there has been a hardening of the mentality of gamers. More boredom, more viciousness and entitlement. I can recall that in earlier years of gaming there was generally a far higher acceptance of features or flaws in games, many of which were far simpler in their gameplay; mechanics, features and flaws that would be burnt to ashes in the current player base atmosphere but were overall accepted or tolerated back then while people still had fun. |
|
|
9/28/12 10:42:45 PM#123
Originally posted by SuperDonk Agree on everything but I'm wondering about the portion in red. Would a new thread about the buyout of BioWare by EA help? Just wondering because I see many people confused about the non-existance of BioWare and their parent company EA. ..And the more and more I communicate, the more it becomes evidant that people still blame BioWare for everything. (BioWare was sold in 2007 and ceased to exist, only by name) Want a nice understanding of life? Try Spirit Science: "The Human History" |
|
|
9/28/12 10:45:42 PM#124
Originally posted by Karteli The ONLY reason I have been seperating Bioware from EA in this case is the reports before SWTOR launched that EA was being very hands-off for the project. Of course those reports might not of been true and might of been a tactic of EA's to seperate thier bad name from what was a good name for Bioware. I want to be Uncle Owen again. |
|
|
9/28/12 11:04:19 PM#125
And now you're confusing me. Did EA fire every single dev who worked for Bioware before the purchase? Did the doctors have zero say in the developement of SWTOR? Please enlighten me. I want to be Uncle Owen again. |
|
|
9/28/12 11:11:30 PM#126
Originally posted by SuperDonk A bigger clone with even more quest hubs close to each other? |
|
|
9/28/12 11:24:32 PM#127
Originally posted by SuperDonk Well, I'm guessing that SuperDonk likened it to how when China took over Tibet, or how when the European nations took over North and South America in their expansions: the local population was still there, but it wasn't really their country and culture anymore, not really. Kinda like how with former big and legendary companies that EA took over, a lot of the devs stayed too after the take over, yet still a significant decline could be noticed starting from the same time as when EA took over. |
|
|
9/28/12 11:35:18 PM#128
Originally posted by smh_alot Bad analogies are bad, smh indeed. I want to be Uncle Owen again. |
|
|
9/28/12 11:36:11 PM#129
Originally posted by SuperDonk I'm getting sleepy SuperD .. but to your question, I doubt every single person in a decision making position was laid off or fired. But many of them did quit, and some were fired. The high position spots are now all vacant, waiting to be filled by EA personell. Gordon Walton, pioneer of the Hero Alpha Engine adoption is big on the list, he quit in 2011 and was the BioWare office General Manager. Most people know about Stephen Reid (when he left, bye bye customer relations!) There were many others .. but there are still some left .. Olsen, Dickinson for instance. Thats not saying much really, for those who remember the SWG NGE. :/
Well and if you are talking about programmers, nobody really has names, but I don't recall seeing many bugs in BioWare games prior to 2007. Same with Origin games too, just as an off example, prior to Origins acquisition to EA in 1992. Origin used to Create Worlds .. Now .. /cry EA creates craps and uses Origin as a trademark :( Want a nice understanding of life? Try Spirit Science: "The Human History" |
|
|
9/28/12 11:39:32 PM#130
The mistakes that were made are almost surely mistakes that came "from the top," because it's really the core concept of the game that's the problem; e.g., putting most of the money into voice acting and story elements while phoning in the actual gameplay. On the other hand, Bioware's decision to emphasize story over gameplay was rational, because Bioware never has been very good at gameplay. The problem is, mmos are all about gameplay. Lucasarts just gave the IP to the wrong studio. |
|
|
9/28/12 11:41:27 PM#131
Originally posted by Karteli Well good night then, I think I'm going to do the same. My point was that Bioware and the people who ran it both prior to the purchase and after still had a lot of say in the developement of SWTOR. EA turns everything to shit that they touch, but the good doctors are not blameless in this mess and neither are some of the other decision makers at what was formerly known as Bioware, may it rest in peace. I want to be Uncle Owen again. |
|
|
9/28/12 11:48:39 PM#132
Originally posted by SuperDonkOriginally posted by smh_alot Shrug. An analogy is just an analogy, don't make a big deal of it. Whether it's about countries, cultures or companies, when they get taken over you'll often see a culture shift and things run differently than when they were independent. Sometimes to a lesser, sometimes to a larger degree. Reading the last pages, in essence everyone's saying the same, only with different accents. Yes, EA has influence on how things run and are, and no, the BW leaders aren't completely without influence either. Now how much influence and power everyone concerned really had, that's up for debate. Truth usually lies somewhere in the middle. |
|
|
9/28/12 11:53:01 PM#133
Originally posted by mxbx This is complete and utter nonsense. I've played BG to KOTOR to DA to ME, I had little problem with the gameplay in those games. In fact, they were games that managed to combine good story with fun gameplay. But hey, whatever, to each their own, I guess. |
|
|
9/28/12 11:58:25 PM#134
Originally posted by smh_alot I can agree with this post, I just thought you were trying to take my arguement in a direction that was unnecessary. Most things are not black and white, they are various shades of grey. The Doctors might be upset about the backlash SWTOR and other Bioware games received over the last couple of years, but they are not victims in all of this. I want to be Uncle Owen again. |
|
|
Purutzil
 Elite Member
Joined: 10/02/11
If you see no good or you see no bad in a game, chances are you are bias. |
9/29/12 12:00:08 AM#135
Sure you can put some blame on them, but I bet much of the problems come from EA. Typically if a game has issues, its the publisher at fault not the developer. Developers who make their game wanting it to be good will typically do what they can to make it the best as possible and willing to take risks, publishers just want the money and in the end, they don't care what they game is so long as it makes them money, and if it means making it something that cashes in initially and is forgotten the next day, they really couldn't care.
|
|
9/29/12 3:22:29 AM#136
I can't say why they left. I can say, however, they were warned....clearly warned during beta. Many MANY times.
For one reason or another they ignored those warnings at thier own peril. If they left the company because they released a game that didn't stand up to the addictive quality their prior products had then they made the right choice. As I Bioware game and a AAA MMO it was, in my opinion, a complete and utter failure. It just doesn't have any meat past the VO and sound. It's AoC/STO/Warhammer good. It's not WoW/EVE/GW2 good. It needed to be the latter for it to have a chance to hold subs. At any rate I think the industry is better off. Thier glory days are obviously behind them. |
|
|
NBlitz
 Advanced Member
Joined: 2/16/08
"Give a man a mask and he will show you his true face." |
9/29/12 3:52:34 AM#137
"Far and away I expect their decision to leave was mostly based around the failure of The Old Republic. People underestimate just how much was riding on SWTOR being a smash success for both EA and Bioware. It was likely the most expensive game ever produced and marketed, and was supposed to propel EA to dethrone Activision/Blizzard’s World of Warcraft, or at least pose it serious competition. It has not, and likely will not, if current figures are any indication."
"Some fans may still enjoy it, but their numbers are dwindling and they’re not nearly enough to make the game the hit it was supposed to be." Expectations were high, perhaps too high. They went all in, gambled and lost.
"But for that game to fail to live up to expectations? It might actually crush you." What I don't get is, how many people were working on this one title? Not a single soul could come up with half the complaints that the customers came up with in a matter of hours of gameplay? That they decided to leave, I get it. I totally get it. Try putting yourself in their positions. It seems impossible to me for them to have been oblivious about how good/bad their own game was. Something else was going on...we might never find out until perhaps some time has passed and a documentary is made about this massively failed project titled  |
|
9/29/12 4:33:46 AM#138
As someone who enjoyed the games they made for decades (NWN, BG series in particular) it is sad they've left. But then again, gaming communities are just some of the most awful ones out there so it isn't surprising. Wonder why there seems to be more haters on the internet? Read this by an actual marketing guy to find out why. |
|
|
9/29/12 7:42:00 AM#139
EA is one of four EA divisions - and the only thing above those divisions is EA board (and shareholders). When independent Bioware will have been driven by the need to "make a profit" - borrowing money from banks if necessary. And whilst people say that if they, Bioware, were independent of EA they would have been able to spend an extra year or two years polishing SWTOR that probably wouldn't have been the case. Employees like to get paid! As heads of one of the four divisions the two docs will have had significant input into the running of EA including things like internal borrowing and profit targets. In that sense "EA" replaced whatever bankers "independent Bioware" used. And as such whatever success or failure might be attributed to SWTOR it sits fair and square with "EA" / "EA Bioware". And for all intents and purposes the two are the same. And to be clear EA Bioware is a bigger beast than Bioware; the two docs role having expanded way beyond simply running a single studio. And EA are "in trouble" as far as shareholders are concerned; hence the fall in the share price. And when that happens people start to look for board changes. Whether they are in trouble or not doesn't matter, until EA stop using the markets to raise funds (via bonds) they need to deliver a certain level of success. It all turns into pressure that filters down the corporate structure. Doesn't surprise me that the two docs left; just add then to the pile of Zynga directors that are leaving! And here is a link for the latest problem that includes a comment about investors not being prepared to overlook the return on investment on a AAA game in order to gain market share - different AAA game but the primciple is the same. And EA do not publish that many titles these days either! http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/178493/EA_drops_the_ball_with_NBA_Live_cancellation.php |
|
|
erictlewis
 Hard Core Member
Joined: 11/08/08
The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over while expecting different results. |
9/29/12 7:57:09 AM#140
A few months ago I listed in on the board meeting. One investor asked why he should continue giving EA his money, they ran the because we are ea by that one. Right after that another investor asked if Richeo or however you spell the ceo's name was going to step down, ea said that Richeo had their full support. Not even the investors are happy at this point, it is just not gamers. |
Friends: vgchartz.com
Not a member? You can still subscribe to our newsletters and daily updates here!
May 23, 2013 8:26 PM
- Page Created in 1.326 seconds -
