MrCunningham
Member
Time to update the image....
RIP Visceral
RIP Visceral
Terrible mismanagement over there. EA secured the hottest property in pop culture and have produced fuck all, save for one middling Battlefront reboot and its lootbox-infused sequel. The entire sequel trilogy will have passed before EA releases one Star Wars game not named Battlefront. Pathetic.
Time to update the image....
RIP Visceral
So? You got underperforming online-focused games as well - like For Honor iirc.
Crosses Visceral off the list.
Soon Bioware... soon... :|
Didnt Inquisition already have boxes?They both make games as a service now. It looks like EA doesn't make games if they're not a service anymore.
I wonder how Stigs game is doing. Actually, wait I dont want to know
Isn't he at Respawn?
I'm aggravated that we don't know more. Enough speculation... reporters, dig! Unearth everything.
If your focus test groups told you that an Uncharted-like Star Wars action-adventure game wasn't going to review well/sell/engage people, your focus test groups are fucking idiots and should be kindly asked to fuck off.
But yeah, let's cancel the game instead. God damn it EA.
Didnt Inquisition already have boxes?
They didnt mention quality once in their statement, they made it pretty clear that the game being linear was the problem, and that's what Visceral is good at making.
It could be a combination of both factors. It being a no show after that footage and it being linear like an uncharted game. We'll never really know unless there's a post mortem of some kind from anonymous devs.It could mean that but it could also simply tell us the game was in early development which doesn't mean development is going poorly. As I said in my previous response to you the game's development could have been troubled or EA might see the project as less valuable because they couldn't continue to nickle and dime the player after the game was sold. I see this situation as similar to when Microsoft cancelled Scalebound it's possible that a veteran team of game devs screwed up so bad Microsoft had to pull the plug. Or seeing how almost all of Microsoft's first party games have featured microtransactions Scalebound didn't fit the mold and was canned. I feel this StarWars game may have had a similar fate.
They're releasing one this year in the form of Battlefront 2's campaign.They didn't really shy away from the truth in the PR statement. It's a linear single player game, EA isn't interested in linear single player games.
Personally I find all this games as a service stuff to be monotonous and boring. Really don't like the way the industry is heading, more shills than ever repeating their rubbish, more ways to squeeze the players wallets with that loot box shit. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if the online pass came back into play for used games soon.
Terrible mismanagement over there. EA secured the hottest property in pop culture and have produced fuck all, save for one middling Battlefront reboot and its lootbox-infused sequel. The entire sequel trilogy will have passed before EA releases one Star Wars game not named Battlefront. Pathetic.
EA said:Throughout the development process, we have been testing the game concept with players, listening to the feedback about what and how they want to play, and closely tracking fundamental shifts in the marketplace. It has become clear that to deliver an experience that players will want to come back to and enjoy for a long time to come, we needed to pivot the design.
Wouldn't they make an exception for Respawn? Considering the numbers TF1 did only Halo and Gears come near on Xbox exclusively.Not sure about that. MS seems to be trying to find every way they can to spend less money on game development than more at the moment
Loot boxes are in Inquisition, believe it or not. Multiplayer though.Bioware is probably under pressure for the next Dragon Age.
Loot box and micro transaction paradise incoming.
They're releasing one this year in the form of Battlefront 2's campaign.
Time to update the image....
RIP Visceral
Respawn and Bioware right now
Nintendo first used loot boxes in 1988 and nobody cared. (I'm kidding.)
I think the problem is that there is no real squeezing of people's wallets. There are two types of players...the ones that hate that shit and don't spend any money on microtransactions, and the other ones that have no problem whatsoever spending hundreds or thousands of dollars on all that bullshit.
They're releasing one this year in the form of Battlefront 2's campaign.
EA makes 800M from Ultimate Team every year. They not trying to hear that single player shit in 2017.I don't get it. Didn't linear story games like the Last of Us almost reach 10 millions copies sold? Shouldn't that be enough? Star Wars would probably do way better.
It's clear now more than ever games need to go up in price in the US to match what the rest of the world have been paying for years now. $60 is too low considering games decades ago costed more. AAA Single player games are dying, and being replaced with AAA services with microtransactions to offset development costs.
Dead Space 3 was basically this already.Don't ask for Dead Space back. It'll be awful and filled with lootboxes.
It's clear now more than ever games need to go up in price in the US to match what the rest of the world have been paying for years now. $60 is too low considering games decades ago costed more. AAA Single player games are dying, and being replaced with AAA services with microtransactions to offset development costs.