Recent Posts

Now specifics and context will vary from case to case and the long term effects of this case are probably not going to see the consequences of this particular decision for a long time to come. But the basics of the logic is still rather sound. Teams can still be too large and unwieldy. Too bloated. Too many indians and not enough chiefs as well as the vice versa. So large where effective decision making is made a lot more complicated and thus things get harder to do, harder to communicate these decisions through an entire team and then get feedback. Hell now that I'm thinking about it I think Mark made a video which at least touched on this subject. So a larger team can be just as much of a problem for these companies as having a small team, and corporate speak or no, a smaller team can be more responsive, reactive, and creative, as a larger one. 
I've never really thought that this overly melodramatic argument is especially effective or helpful to any debate. 

BioWare still exists and they will continue to do so for the forseable future. Indeed since the 'corporate speak' has reaffirmed their commitment to both Dragon Age and Mass Effect moving forward then this still means they have years still. As for the team there have been several people which have been there for years and reprsent the 'old guard'. Fewer and fewer, sure, but BioWare still has people in key leadership positions which have been with the company as long as Mary Kirby. Leadership which will continue to ensure some continuity as they train the next generation, hopefully, of BioWare devs and continue to ensure the companies standars remain. 

Which while it does suck for the specific people involved we were going to lose Mary Kirby eventually. People retire and people move on from companies all the time or are laid off. Mary Kirby isn't BioWare, BioWare is BioWare and given how much I enjoyed Andromeda and even Anthem having some BioWare staples in it I'm not that concerned by the loss of any one dev. At least not yet. Though a lot will depend on how much these people will be able to pass onto the next generation.

No, you are just being deeply bad faith at interpreting my comments.

You know, it's people like you that made me uncomfortable in being part of the Bioware fandom when I first joined. I like their current games and don't think it's dead is that so hard to comprehend? 

But did they have to let go of Mary Kirby? Like Gaider said, is there no loyalty these days?

But did they have to let go of Mary Kirby? Like Gaider said, is there no loyalty these days?

I'm going to be that guy. AKSHULLY EA is a public traded corporation and the board of directors have a fiduciary duty to its shareholders. Which means the company has an obligation to act in the best nature of the shareholders. That MAY be to make quality games, it doesn't HAVE to mean to make quality games. Basically it means they really want, and by want I really mean it's really their responsibility, to make money for their owners.

You can make a bunch of really quality, good games and sell them all but that's actually pretty risky. Not all of those games will be a hit. And companies are just a couple of busts away from just failing. Sven Vincke of Larian bet everything on Divinity Original Sin, even his house. Quite literallty. And to add insult to injury the margins are lower. Nonono, actually the best way to make money for shareholders is to get a really popular game and figure out how to monetize the bejeesus out of it. What's two of the biggest money making games of the past 5 years? Honor of Kings, which made 2 billion in 2022, and Genshin Impact. Both Live Service. What's EA's biggest money maker? Probably FiFA ultimate team which brings well over a billion a year. Ahhhhhh, now we're talking. Milking a single live service game for billions (or in FiFa's case releasing the same game every year or two to be milked for billions) is much better financially and less risky then outputting 5 different quality games.

There's exceptions, GTA 5 is one. But how much money did GTA, the game that sold almost 200 million copies (you heard that right) make since it's release over a decade ago? Well about (7.7 billion.) How much did Genshin make in 2.5 years? About 4 billion. Okay, so for a game to make as much as the best live service they only have to sell a couple hundred million. That makes things much easier.

So what am I saying? I'm saying that EA isn't in the business to necessarily make quality video games, they're in the business to make money. And sometimes making quality games doesn't make as much money as doing other things (like gambling. The owners of the studio who made Suikoden in Japan gave up making games to run pachinko gambling parlors lol. If only they were around when lootboxes took off, they might still be making games today ...) Why is Bioware making open world games? According to a former Bioware dev, it's because open world games are easier to monetize. What was Bioware trying to turn DA:D into originall? Live service. What was Anthem? Live service. I'm shocked by all these decisions btw

That's not to say DA:D won't be good, but you shouldn't make the mistake of thinking companies are looking out for your interest. They're looking out for the interests of their shareholders almost all the time. And sometimes your interests and the shareholders are the same, but sometimes it is not.

Oh please it's getting old, Bioware is still here after all these years and still developing DA:D and Mass Effect. Honestly, based on how people keep saying it, it makes me think that people on here want Bioware to die rather than predicting that EA will be the ones to kill it. 

People have been predicting Bioware's death for years going waaaay back to BSN prime.