Kotaku - Sources: Mass Effect: Andromeda Will Not Get Single-Player DLC

Does it always inevitably get personal with you? Noticing a pattern. I'll steer clear of guesting in podcasts.

The only fanboyism I'm struggling with right now is my MEA fanboyism. I'm not particularly happy about this news. But again, just because I don't like it, doesn't mean it's bullshit.

Because there's no such thing as bad publicity?  Because any attention shines a spotlight on them and stirs interest?

*shrug*

For my part, if they release DLC, I'll probably buy it, play it, and enjoy it.  Otherwise, I'll do other things instead.

We're defending that garbage Gamergate movement now, just to get some cheap licks in at Jason? LOL

I keep hearing about this gamergate, but I must've missed all the news on it.

Conversely, it doesn't make it true either.

Look, ultimately this all tracks back to the sinclair hoax. There were a few off-hand comments about Jason's articles simply because he's the only one with a high profile on the matter, but its ultimately been focused on how this 'source' was able to push stories out without being questioned when it turned out it was a load of fluff.

The only real reason Jason is being discussed here is that he's done another 'LOOK AT ME' response then did this bizarre thing on twitter. The whole 'shoot the messenger' ship has sailed here.

That's an interesting way to spin all the times Jason's insider reports turned out to be accurate but not before some fandoms went total apeshit on him because they didn't believe it. Pointing out those apeshit reactions are now called "fits."

Whistle-blowers are protected only if they are leaking criminal activity or other unethical activity of company they work for.

They are not protected from leaking company secrets or anything that NDA disallows them to say as long said thing isn't illegal or unethical.

If they were protected under every circumstance, NDA's would serve no purpose.


EDIT#1

I had prematurely submitted.

While by law they are now required to reveal sources, unless there's a court ruling they have to( in hypothetical they get sued and lose court hearing), they would need to then reveal sources.
But in most likely case, a company would launch it's own investigation, root out the leakers, fire them, fine them for violating NDA and blacklist them.

That last part makes me certain that nobody at BioWare would so casually give him that info in such short time. They are risking their careers, for what?

One interesting thing about his articles is that in the two about DLC he only mentions people close to Bioware being his sources, but in the article about the troubled dev cycle he specifically says that it was Bioware devs that told him.

The Story Behind Mass Effect: Andromeda's Troubled Five-Year Development

"I’ve spent the past three months investigating the answers to those questions. From conversations with nearly a dozen people who worked on Mass Effect: Andromeda, all of whom spoke under condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorised to talk about the game, a consistent picture has emerged."

Sources: BioWare Montreal Downsized, Mass Effect Put On Ice For Now


"In the wake of BioWare’s polarising Mass Effect: Andromeda, fans have wondered where the lauded sci-fi series will go next. The answer, according to people familiar with the studio, is nowhere—at least for the time being."


Sources: Mass Effect: Andromeda Will Not Get Single-Player DLC

"The bad news: they guessed correctly. Mass Effect: Andromeda will indeed not be receiving any single-player DLC, three people familiar with BioWare’s plans have told me."

So in one he clearly states that he talked to people working on the actual game. That's where he got information about the dev cycle. But all the "MEA on Ice" and "No DLC" articles, he just mentions people "familiar with the studio" or "familiar with Bioware's plans". So that, too, questions the credibility of his statements. He obviously has no qualms saying that he got the information from actual Bioware employees, as he did in the first article, but in the other two it's just from, what, employee's friends? Dog-walkers? That guy at the deli where they get their sandwiches? Who knows? Could be credible sources, could be people guessing as much as he is.

If he is as good a journalist as some of you seem to think, then words matters and he should be experienced enough that we can take his words for what they say and not say "Oh, you're just playing semantics. People 'close to' and people who 'worked on Andromeda' are pretty much the same thing, yeah?"

I think this is a legitimate cause for some skepticism.

So how reliable is Kotaku? I don't ever visit the site, but it seems that someone here is creating a thread about an article they wrote fairly often.

They're very unreliable.

It used to be part of Gawker which should tell anyone all they need to know.