inherit
7836
0
2,286
shinobiwan
1,171
Apr 19, 2017 19:26:11 GMT
April 2017
shinobiwan
|
Post by shinobiwan on Feb 27, 2018 18:55:57 GMT
Saying there's an absence of evidence isn't really accurate, though. Just because nothing has been officially stated, doesn't mean there's not precedence. Yes, Anthem could be wholly unique, but the chances that it'll be something nobody expected are absolutely the lowest of the low, simply because, well, the chances of anything really breaking the mold that much are such. Sure, but a lot of people are making a lot of assumptions about which mold Anthem will fall into and how closely it will follow the example of those games. For example, it’s become a common assumption that Anthem will be a direct clone of Destiny, a comparison never given by the devs but made by the community because it includes coop and loot. On the other hand, I think Anthem could follow some of the same conventions as SWTOR. No one is really claiming this will be "a direct clone of Destiny." Even the little footage we have shows that's not entirely true. What they're saying is that making a shared-world game detracts from what has usually been the strength of bioware games, which is well written npcs and the impact that decisions have on the world -- which is absolutely true.
|
|
Heimdall
N6
∯ Interjector in Chief
Staff Mini-Profile Theme: Heimdall
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
Origin: HeimdallX
Posts: 5,647 Likes: 12,855
inherit
∯ Interjector in Chief
279
0
1
Sept 27, 2024 20:07:09 GMT
12,855
Heimdall
5,647
August 2016
heimdall
Heimdall
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
HeimdallX
|
Post by Heimdall on Feb 27, 2018 18:58:47 GMT
Sure, but a lot of people are making a lot of assumptions about which mold Anthem will fall into and how closely it will follow the example of those games. For example, it’s become a common assumption that Anthem will be a direct clone of Destiny, a comparison never given by the devs but made by the community because it includes coop and loot. On the other hand, I think Anthem could follow some of the same conventions as SWTOR. No one is really claiming this will be "a direct clone of Destiny." Even the little footage we have shows that's not entirely true. What they're saying is that making a shared-world game detracts from what has usually been the strength of bioware games, which is well written npcs and the impact that decisions have on the world -- which is absolutely true. I disagree and I think SWTOR proves that having a shared world and engaging characters can coexist.
|
|
inherit
2703
0
2,011
Lazarillo
1,025
January 2017
lazarillo
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, SWTOR
|
Post by Lazarillo on Feb 27, 2018 19:14:38 GMT
I disagree and I think SWTOR proves that having a shared world and engaging characters can coexist. Does it, though? Speaking as someone who played SWTOR pretty consistently until recently, the game was always bad about integrating the multiplayer and single-player elements. If Bioware's trying to sell the game on its multiplayer aspects, and plans to make it like SWTOR, then it'll implode for most of the same reasons SWTOR semi-imploded. Granted, part of the problem was also SWTOR's insanely toxic community, but some of that's still BW's fault for enabling it. If you're looking for evidence that they can maintain a good multiplayer game, then you don't want to use SWTOR as an example.
|
|
inherit
3271
0
1,496
rras1994
856
February 2017
rras1994
|
Post by rras1994 on Feb 27, 2018 19:25:05 GMT
I disagree and I think SWTOR proves that having a shared world and engaging characters can coexist. Does it, though? Speaking as someone who played SWTOR pretty consistently until recently, the game was always bad about integrating the multiplayer and single-player elements. If Bioware's trying to sell the game on its multiplayer aspects, and plans to make it like SWTOR, then it'll implode for most of the same reasons SWTOR semi-imploded. Granted, part of the problem was also SWTOR's insanely toxic community, but some of that's still BW's fault for enabling it. If you're looking for evidence that they can maintain a good multiplayer game, then you don't want to use SWTOR as an example. SWTOR's problems weren't the fact that there was single player stuff (they actually became more sucessful by doing that sort of content, KOTFE and KOTET were their most sucessful expansions by a wide margin and they are story based), it was they released before their end game was ready, so the hardcore player who raced through the content had nothing to do, and at the same time it was way too grindy so the casual player dropped off and the hardcore player wasn't willing to wait and lvl up another class as it was too annoying. Plus they had a subscription model when the genre was moving away from that. And as soon as they made SWTOR free-to-play it became profitable, and had went over the $1 billion revenue mark in 2015, which is why EA decided to show a CGI trailer for it at E3 that year, which doesn't usually happen for an old game. I'd argue SWTOR's problem was at launch it wasn't single player friendly enough, as players who love multiplayer, aren't going to play it all the time, they like to do some stuff by themselves.
|
|
inherit
2703
0
2,011
Lazarillo
1,025
January 2017
lazarillo
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, SWTOR
|
Post by Lazarillo on Feb 27, 2018 20:24:42 GMT
rras1994 how much or what type of content is less what I'm getting at as much as how that content was implemented. Basically, when SWTOR was launched, there were 8 unique class stories written (most of them well-written, at that, although it has a steamer or two). It was a fine single-player experience. But for people who wanted to play those stories, teaming was not just lacking in benefit, but in many ways disincentivized. More time was spent in most cases forming teams and getting together than actually spent on the content that required them, and for much less reward than would be earned simply sticking to the single-player-friendly parts of them game. Granted, players could avoid this by simply teaming with some friends in advance and doing a wide variety of mutiplayer content at once, but the story in the multiplayer content was, as described of other games above, thin and repetitive. You could play story or you could play multiplayer, but you didn't get both. Even when the writers tried to transition between the two (Oricon, Shroud, and more recently, Iokath), it ended up bringing together in most cases the worse of both elements, rather than the best, due to high barriers to entry, among other things. Both aspects could be fun on their own, but they were never harmonious, and further attempts at bringing them in harmony have mostly gone backwards. As a result, both the single and multi-player bases ended up feeling alienated.
|
|
inherit
3271
0
1,496
rras1994
856
February 2017
rras1994
|
Post by rras1994 on Feb 27, 2018 20:41:47 GMT
rras1994 how much or what type of content is less what I'm getting at as much as how that content was implemented. Basically, when SWTOR was launched, there were 8 unique class stories written (most of them well-written, at that, although it has a steamer or two). It was a fine single-player experience. But for people who wanted to play those stories, teaming was not just lacking in benefit, but in many ways disincentivized. More time was spent in most cases forming teams and getting together than actually spent on the content that required them, and for much less reward than would be earned simply sticking to the single-player-friendly parts of them game. Granted, players could avoid this by simply teaming with some friends in advance and doing a wide variety of mutiplayer content at once, but the story in the multiplayer content was, as described of other games above, thin and repetitive. You could play story or you could play multiplayer, but you didn't get both. Even when the writers tried to transition between the two (Oricon, Shroud, and more recently, Iokath), it ended up bringing together in most cases the worse of both elements, rather than the best, due to high barriers to entry, among other things. Both aspects could be fun on their own, but they were never harmonious, and further attempts at bringing them in harmony have mostly gone backwards. As a result, both the single and multi-player bases ended up feeling alienated. It wasn't a fine single player experience, it was extremly grindy, you had to do every content to keep up, including multiplayer content. I played at launch it was awful for both groups. Another major problem you sorta alluded to was that they didn't have a group finder, which made it hard for the multiplayer focused who didn't have friends/weren't on and put off single player people from trying it. You keep saying that they aren't implemented together like it's a bad thing, it's not (also at launch the flashpoints which did have important story had to be done in groups, and there is a reason they changed it). When you force, instead of encourage, people to take part in content they don't want to, it immediately puts them off the content. Forcing single player people into multiplayer won't work, they'll just leave the game. Multiplayers don't necessarily need the story to be only in multiplayer. Why would they benefit by havin single players who don't want to be there or having players leave cus they feel they can't access the content? I agree you want to try and get players to try all the content on offer, but I don't think forcing story in the multiplayer works, it's annoying, as quite frankly after the first time, most players want to rush through, so the story can't be appreciated in that format anyway. I'm sure you've faced the "SPACE! SPACE! SPACE!" spam in chat before, or the complete horror that infolds if you don't know the speed route or accidently pull a mob . The best way I found to get people to do different content, and the one that got me out of my single player comfort zone, was the DvL event that had tiers of awards, were the lower ones were easy that you could do solo, but the higher ones required you to do content from all different parts including PvE multiplayer and PvP. Of course, the SWTOR forums being the toxic waste pit it is, they were complaining about newbies not knowing the content and being rubbish, but that really can't be blamed on BioWare I don't really understand being nasty to newbie, putting people off the content you supposedly love, isn't going to get it made more. To sum up, I think story is a really bad incentive for multiplayer as it tends to backfire and put people against each other. The best way to get people playing multiplayer is to make it fun and make it easy to group. A good example would be ME3 multiplayer, people didn't enjoy it cus it was required for a good ending, it actually put people off, people played cus they found it fun.
|
|
Heimdall
N6
∯ Interjector in Chief
Staff Mini-Profile Theme: Heimdall
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
Origin: HeimdallX
Posts: 5,647 Likes: 12,855
inherit
∯ Interjector in Chief
279
0
1
Sept 27, 2024 20:07:09 GMT
12,855
Heimdall
5,647
August 2016
heimdall
Heimdall
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
HeimdallX
|
Post by Heimdall on Feb 27, 2018 21:40:34 GMT
rras1994 how much or what type of content is less what I'm getting at as much as how that content was implemented. Basically, when SWTOR was launched, there were 8 unique class stories written (most of them well-written, at that, although it has a steamer or two). It was a fine single-player experience. But for people who wanted to play those stories, teaming was not just lacking in benefit, but in many ways disincentivized. More time was spent in most cases forming teams and getting together than actually spent on the content that required them, and for much less reward than would be earned simply sticking to the single-player-friendly parts of them game. Granted, players could avoid this by simply teaming with some friends in advance and doing a wide variety of mutiplayer content at once, but the story in the multiplayer content was, as described of other games above, thin and repetitive. You could play story or you could play multiplayer, but you didn't get both. Even when the writers tried to transition between the two (Oricon, Shroud, and more recently, Iokath), it ended up bringing together in most cases the worse of both elements, rather than the best, due to high barriers to entry, among other things. Both aspects could be fun on their own, but they were never harmonious, and further attempts at bringing them in harmony have mostly gone backwards. As a result, both the single and multi-player bases ended up feeling alienated. Honestly that seems a constant issue. Even in Destiny, the multiplayer specific missions must be more shallow story-wise than the singleplayer content. Substantive singleplayer story content can coexist within a multiplayer shared world, but they don’t really intersect.
|
|
inherit
7836
0
2,286
shinobiwan
1,171
Apr 19, 2017 19:26:11 GMT
April 2017
shinobiwan
|
Post by shinobiwan on Feb 27, 2018 22:53:51 GMT
rras1994 how much or what type of content is less what I'm getting at as much as how that content was implemented. Basically, when SWTOR was launched, there were 8 unique class stories written (most of them well-written, at that, although it has a steamer or two). It was a fine single-player experience. But for people who wanted to play those stories, teaming was not just lacking in benefit, but in many ways disincentivized. More time was spent in most cases forming teams and getting together than actually spent on the content that required them, and for much less reward than would be earned simply sticking to the single-player-friendly parts of them game. Granted, players could avoid this by simply teaming with some friends in advance and doing a wide variety of mutiplayer content at once, but the story in the multiplayer content was, as described of other games above, thin and repetitive. You could play story or you could play multiplayer, but you didn't get both. Even when the writers tried to transition between the two (Oricon, Shroud, and more recently, Iokath), it ended up bringing together in most cases the worse of both elements, rather than the best, due to high barriers to entry, among other things. Both aspects could be fun on their own, but they were never harmonious, and further attempts at bringing them in harmony have mostly gone backwards. As a result, both the single and multi-player bases ended up feeling alienated. +1. The story and mmo components really didn't mesh, and I could tell time spent on mmo nonsense detracted from some of the story. Even though it was Star Wars and bioware, basically my two favorite things at the time, I cancelled my sub pretty quickly.
|
|
inherit
2550
0
1,958
majesticjazz
2,015
January 2017
majesticjazz
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Jade Empire
|
Post by majesticjazz on Feb 27, 2018 23:00:21 GMT
Sure, but a lot of people are making a lot of assumptions about which mold Anthem will fall into and how closely it will follow the example of those games. For example, it’s become a common assumption that Anthem will be a direct clone of Destiny, a comparison never given by the devs but made by the community because it includes coop and loot. On the other hand, I think Anthem could follow some of the same conventions as SWTOR. No one is really claiming this will be "a direct clone of Destiny." Even the little footage we have shows that's not entirely true. What they're saying is that making a shared-world game detracts from what has usually been the strength of bioware games, which is well written npcs and the impact that decisions have on the world -- which is absolutely true. You forgot to mention companions as well. Bioware does this best. I
|
|
inherit
7836
0
2,286
shinobiwan
1,171
Apr 19, 2017 19:26:11 GMT
April 2017
shinobiwan
|
Post by shinobiwan on Feb 27, 2018 23:05:08 GMT
No one is really claiming this will be "a direct clone of Destiny." Even the little footage we have shows that's not entirely true. What they're saying is that making a shared-world game detracts from what has usually been the strength of bioware games, which is well written npcs and the impact that decisions have on the world -- which is absolutely true. You forgot to mention companions as well. Bioware does this best. I That's what I mean by well written npcs.
|
|
inherit
7106
0
4,137
samhain444
1,669
April 2017
samhain444
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by samhain444 on Feb 27, 2018 23:24:37 GMT
You forgot to mention companions as well. Bioware does this best. I That's what I mean by well written npcs. Yeah, even if you end up as a lone Freelancer out in the wild, having the ability to have complex and multi-branching NPC character interaction once you are back at the fort behind the wall could be pretty rewarding and engaging.
|
|
inherit
✜ Forge Mechanic
352
0
Jun 12, 2024 13:49:30 GMT
6,256
PapaCharlie9
3,851
August 2016
papacharlie9
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age Inquisition, Neverwinter Nights, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by PapaCharlie9 on Feb 28, 2018 1:25:40 GMT
So to summarize: 1) you want more of what you like (who doesn’t?) and 2) you haven’t considered the possibility that if Anthem fails, DA, and any other traditional Bioware SP style game you like that they might have on the drawing board, might be at risk. You don’t have to like or buy Anthem. But you ought to be right out in front rooting for its financial success, if you want to increase the probability of getting more of the types of games you like. It’s not a certainty, but Anthem failing is more likely to hurt the future of DA than Anthem succeeding. That’s why I said you hate DA. Anthem isn’t going to be what you want, so what’s the point of constantly complaining about it? Instead, get on board as a supporter of a new cash cow for Bioware to help fund the kinds of games you do like! I dont believe that if Anthem fails Bioware might be shut dont. I believe that if Anthem fails, Bioware WILL meet the fate of Visceral and other EA victims. To me that wouldnt be a bad thing cause if Anthem succeeds, that means that DA and other Bioware SP franchises will be at risk. Bioware is already talking about having a "live" service as was apparently rebooted to fit a new style. Well, DAI had a live service which was the very optional MP horde mode. However considering that Bioware just wont say that DA4s live service is similar to that of DAI means that DA4s is different and possibly will be more MP focused than SP focused. That is why I dont care if Bioware goes down. I believe (through EA) that Bioware if Anthem is a massive hit will become more focused on MP. Rumor is that Visceral is going more MP, assuming “people don’t like linear games” is code for SP. Given that, I can’t make sense of what you wrote. It’s like you’re saying if Anthem fails, it’s more MP for Bioware, but if Anthem succeeds, it’s more MP for Bioware.
|
|
invisibleman
N2
i'm just begging for change at the liqueur store... *face palm* no, not really.
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Origin: CasperTheLich
Posts: 108 Likes: 93
inherit
8428
0
Jun 17, 2018 10:23:04 GMT
93
invisibleman
i'm just begging for change at the liqueur store... *face palm* no, not really.
108
May 15, 2017 13:54:24 GMT
May 2017
invisibleman
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
CasperTheLich
|
Post by invisibleman on Feb 28, 2018 9:51:44 GMT
mmo's aren't usually my first choice, but even so... given the current climate in the industry itself, not just bioware mind you, i've found that i have little confidence in major game studios these days, and thus little faith in anthem. however, like i've said a few times before, i'll wait till i've seen the finished product before i make any judgments about it.
|
|
inherit
57
0
1
Sept 28, 2024 0:43:59 GMT
33,627
SofaJockey
Not a jockey. Has a sofa.
13,351
August 2016
sofajockey
SofaJockey
SofaJockey
6000
7164
|
Post by SofaJockey on Feb 28, 2018 11:31:52 GMT
Honestly, did anyone actually play Inquisitions multiplayer? I know I didn't. Your survey is one lacks validity Yes, many played it, I remember full lobbies for the several hundred hours I put it, though it wasn't as compelling as ME3MP.
|
|
inherit
738
0
4,633
Link"Guess"ski
3,882
August 2016
linkenski
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda
Linkenski
asblinkenski
Linkenski
|
Post by Link"Guess"ski on Feb 28, 2018 12:10:59 GMT
[tr][td class="content"][article] That's what I mean by well written npcs. [/article] [/td] [/tr] [tr] [td class="foot"][/td][/tr][/quote] This post isn't spam. I just love quick quoting.
|
|
inherit
7836
0
2,286
shinobiwan
1,171
Apr 19, 2017 19:26:11 GMT
April 2017
shinobiwan
|
Post by shinobiwan on Feb 28, 2018 14:47:36 GMT
I dont believe that if Anthem fails Bioware might be shut dont. I believe that if Anthem fails, Bioware WILL meet the fate of Visceral and other EA victims. To me that wouldnt be a bad thing cause if Anthem succeeds, that means that DA and other Bioware SP franchises will be at risk. Bioware is already talking about having a "live" service as was apparently rebooted to fit a new style. Well, DAI had a live service which was the very optional MP horde mode. However considering that Bioware just wont say that DA4s live service is similar to that of DAI means that DA4s is different and possibly will be more MP focused than SP focused. That is why I dont care if Bioware goes down. I believe (through EA) that Bioware if Anthem is a massive hit will become more focused on MP. Rumor is that Visceral is going more MP, assuming “people don’t like linear games” is code for SP. Given that, I can’t make sense of what you wrote. It’s like you’re saying if Anthem fails, it’s more MP for Bioware, but if Anthem succeeds, it’s more MP for Bioware. No, Visceral was shut down at the end of last year.
|
|
inherit
✜ Forge Mechanic
352
0
Jun 12, 2024 13:49:30 GMT
6,256
PapaCharlie9
3,851
August 2016
papacharlie9
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age Inquisition, Neverwinter Nights, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by PapaCharlie9 on Feb 28, 2018 16:36:57 GMT
The excuse I often hear for wanting "Anthem" to fail is "if they succeed, they'll make mooaarr like it"... Oddly enough, the chance exists that, if "Anthem" succeeds, they can continue making content for "Anthem" AND "Dragon Age"/"Mass Effect" because they'll have the resources to do it. Bioware already has a massive multiplayer game in SWTOR and yet Bioware doesnt have resources? EA has massive cash cows like Madden, FIFA, Battlefield etc and yet EA still cannot cover Bioware to just do MP? Wasnt that one of the deals to go under EA? That they would get the funding they need to make great traditional Bioware games? It depends on how product lines and the portfolio is managed for growth. If EA treats all product lines as equals, you'd be right, those cash cows should already be funding Bioware's lower earning product lines. But if EA segments the business along divisions or genres or some other categorization, the fact that FIFA rakes in fat stacks won't necessarily help Bioware. It's a good point, nonetheless. Perhaps we could take that as evidence of the "Anthem success disaster" risk. Given a choice between investing FIFA earnings in new product lines versus just more FIFA, it looks like EA prefers just more FIFA. Although I suppose an argument could be made that those FIFA earnings are going into Anthem, which after all is a new product line ...
|
|
inherit
✜ Forge Mechanic
352
0
Jun 12, 2024 13:49:30 GMT
6,256
PapaCharlie9
3,851
August 2016
papacharlie9
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age Inquisition, Neverwinter Nights, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by PapaCharlie9 on Feb 28, 2018 16:45:33 GMT
Rumor is that Visceral is going more MP, assuming “people don’t like linear games” is code for SP. Given that, I can’t make sense of what you wrote. It’s like you’re saying if Anthem fails, it’s more MP for Bioware, but if Anthem succeeds, it’s more MP for Bioware. No, Visceral was shut down at the end of last year. That doesn't help, because now this majesticjazz statement makes no sense: "I dont believe that if Anthem fails Bioware might be shut dont. I believe that if Anthem fails, Bioware WILL meet the fate of Visceral and other EA victims." Unless ... the whole point is might vs. WILL. I guess that's what was meant. Too subtle for me. Clearer to say, "WILL, not might, be shut down," and leave Visceral out of it altogether.
|
|
inherit
3271
0
1,496
rras1994
856
February 2017
rras1994
|
Post by rras1994 on Feb 28, 2018 16:56:59 GMT
Bioware already has a massive multiplayer game in SWTOR and yet Bioware doesnt have resources? EA has massive cash cows like Madden, FIFA, Battlefield etc and yet EA still cannot cover Bioware to just do MP? Wasnt that one of the deals to go under EA? That they would get the funding they need to make great traditional Bioware games? It depends on how product lines and the portfolio is managed for growth. If EA treats all product lines as equals, you'd be right, those cash cows should already be funding Bioware's lower earning product lines. But if EA segments the business along divisions or genres or some other categorization, the fact that FIFA rakes in fat stacks won't necessarily help Bioware. It's a good point, nonetheless. Perhaps we could take that as evidence of the "Anthem success disaster" risk. Given a choice between investing FIFA earnings in new product lines versus just more FIFA, it looks like EA prefers just more FIFA. EA is putting 25% of it's R&D budget (basically it's development budget) into new IP's. That's not a small amount of money. Making a new IP costs alot of money nowadays. I read somewhere a new IP AAA game can easily cost $100 million at the moment. It's a risky project. The only new IPs that EA have so far announced are Anthem and the Jade Raymond IP which is being made in EA Motive which is likely another reason that BioWare Montreal got merged into them. Also, it's weird to assume that EA forced BioWare to make Anthem multiplayer, as from all accounts it seems like BioWare have wanted to do Anthem in some form for a long time, I remember an Ask a Dev post that stated they were planning it in some form since 2009 (that's not it being made though). And it's not like BioWare haven't wanted to do multiplayer themselves before either, it was BioWare that came to EA about the SWTOR MMO and they also were knocking around with that coop Shadowrun game that was in production for a while before they scrapped it. Also, side note, the big hitters for EA, don't just pay for development of the not as big hits, they also pay for the ones that don't come out or complete lose money. The games industry is extremely high risk, and when a project is unsucessful, it's really unsucessful. There was one of the Dark Space's that needed to sell 4 million copies (Just checked, Dead Space 2, cost 60 million to make in 2011) to just break even. Games are expensive nowadays and fewer AAA games are being made per year to minimise the risk.
|
|
inherit
✜ Forge Mechanic
352
0
Jun 12, 2024 13:49:30 GMT
6,256
PapaCharlie9
3,851
August 2016
papacharlie9
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age Inquisition, Neverwinter Nights, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by PapaCharlie9 on Feb 28, 2018 17:09:17 GMT
It depends on how product lines and the portfolio is managed for growth. If EA treats all product lines as equals, you'd be right, those cash cows should already be funding Bioware's lower earning product lines. But if EA segments the business along divisions or genres or some other categorization, the fact that FIFA rakes in fat stacks won't necessarily help Bioware. It's a good point, nonetheless. Perhaps we could take that as evidence of the "Anthem success disaster" risk. Given a choice between investing FIFA earnings in new product lines versus just more FIFA, it looks like EA prefers just more FIFA. EA is putting 25% of it's R&D budget (basically it's development budget) into new IP's. I had the same thought, but you ninjad me before my edit could take hold.
|
|
inherit
2550
0
1,958
majesticjazz
2,015
January 2017
majesticjazz
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Jade Empire
|
Post by majesticjazz on Feb 28, 2018 17:22:29 GMT
mmo's aren't usually my first choice, but even so... given the current climate in the industry itself, not just bioware mind you, i've found that i have little confidence in major game studios these days, and thus little faith in anthem. however, like i've said a few times before, i'll wait till i've seen the finished product before i make any judgments about it. Naughty Dog, Nintendo, Bethesda, Guerrilla Games, and CDPR would disagree with you.... Not all devs have drunk the "ZOMG!!!! Nobody likes SP!!!! MP is the only way to go!!!!" Koolaid
|
|
inherit
7836
0
2,286
shinobiwan
1,171
Apr 19, 2017 19:26:11 GMT
April 2017
shinobiwan
|
Post by shinobiwan on Feb 28, 2018 17:38:15 GMT
No, Visceral was shut down at the end of last year. That doesn't help, because now this majesticjazz statement makes no sense: "I dont believe that if Anthem fails Bioware might be shut dont. I believe that if Anthem fails, Bioware WILL meet the fate of Visceral and other EA victims." Unless ... the whole point is might vs. WILL. I guess that's what was meant. Too subtle for me. Clearer to say, "WILL, not might, be shut down," and leave Visceral out of it altogether. He's saying that if Anthem fails, it's not just a possibility that BW will be shut down, but a certainty. It's the difference between "might" and "will" in his first and second sentences. He then notes how Visceral was canned when they couldn't deliver a product within EA's vision. The whole thing was pretty clear to me :/
|
|
inherit
3271
0
1,496
rras1994
856
February 2017
rras1994
|
Post by rras1994 on Feb 28, 2018 17:45:10 GMT
That doesn't help, because now this majesticjazz statement makes no sense: "I dont believe that if Anthem fails Bioware might be shut dont. I believe that if Anthem fails, Bioware WILL meet the fate of Visceral and other EA victims." Unless ... the whole point is might vs. WILL. I guess that's what was meant. Too subtle for me. Clearer to say, "WILL, not might, be shut down," and leave Visceral out of it altogether. He's saying that if Anthem fails, it's not just a possibility that BW will be shut down, but a certainty. It's the difference between "might" and "will" in his first and second sentences. He then notes how Visceral was canned when they couldn't deliver a product within EA's vision. The whole thing was pretty clear to me :/ It took 3 or 4 projects to not work out at Visceral for them to be canned even with them being one of the most expensive studios EA owns. It had more to do with the fact they didn't have a project ready for the staff at Visceral to go to and the fact a lot of senior staff had seen what was happening with the project and already left. If Anthem doesn't work out, they can move the staff directly on to Dragon Age and SWTOR, which just wasn't the case with Visceral. It also the reason why BioWare Montreal was merged and not shut, as they had Battlefront II and the new Jade Raymond IP that needed staff (also not as expensive per staff as Visceral, $16,000 per month compared to $10,000 in Montreal is a big differemce)
|
|
inherit
7836
0
2,286
shinobiwan
1,171
Apr 19, 2017 19:26:11 GMT
April 2017
shinobiwan
|
Post by shinobiwan on Feb 28, 2018 17:46:26 GMT
Honestly, did anyone actually play Inquisitions multiplayer? I know I didn't. Your survey is one lacks validity Yes, many played it, I remember full lobbies for the several hundred hours I put it, though it wasn't as compelling as ME3MP. As long as the matchmaking code isn't complete shit, whether lobbies you entered fill quickly has little bearing on how populated a game is. My recollection is that people left in droves when the key glitch that made roughly one third of games incompletable was left unaddressed for months, which was the final nail in the coffin for many.
|
|
inherit
7836
0
2,286
shinobiwan
1,171
Apr 19, 2017 19:26:11 GMT
April 2017
shinobiwan
|
Post by shinobiwan on Feb 28, 2018 17:47:54 GMT
He's saying that if Anthem fails, it's not just a possibility that BW will be shut down, but a certainty. It's the difference between "might" and "will" in his first and second sentences. He then notes how Visceral was canned when they couldn't deliver a product within EA's vision. The whole thing was pretty clear to me :/ It took 3 or 4 projects to not work out at Visceral for them to be canned even with them being one of the most expensive studios EA owns. It had more to do with the fact they didn't have a project ready for the staff at Visceral to go to and the fact a lot of senior staff had seen what was happening with the project and already left. If Anthem doesn't work out, they can move the staff directly on to Dragon Age and SWTOR, which just wasn't the case with Visceral. It also the reason why BioWare Montreal was merged and not shut, as they had Battlefront II and the new Jade Raymond IP that needed staff (also not as expensive per staff as Visceral, $16,000 per month compared to $10,000 in Montreal is a big differemce) I didn't make the comment, I was just explaining what he meant. You're responding to the wrong person.
|
|