keltickennedy
Member
It baffles how some people will go to defend a company that just cost a ton of people their jobs for reasons unknown.
The reason is known. It's money.
It baffles how some people will go to defend a company that just cost a ton of people their jobs for reasons unknown.
Just get Criterion to do podracing and be done with it.
This EA Star Wars deal sucks.
Micro Tran kills Han Solo Player.
As big as EA is, 1 game every 2-3 years is actually alot for a single IP in the AAA space.
it was idiotic to sign an exclusive deal with EA. Every major publisher would be interested in Star Wars games, especially after Episode VII was announced.
Does anyone know when EA's star wars exclusivity deal is up?
But sales figures aren't evolving at the same rate that the "medium is evolving". That's a huge problem. Something has to give.Devs have already been doing that. They've been coming up with a multitude of ways to make game development "easier." Thing is, at the same time, better asset creation is expensive, creating more complex games is more time consuming, creating more complex engines is time consuming and expensive, creating a sequel more ambitious than the first one is more expensive even with asset reuse, team sizes are larger because of all of the above. And audiences expect even more the next time. And even then, if it's not enough, suddenly that game is faced with "x game 1.5 and "doesn't count as a true sequel." There's no magical "make game dev easier" button. There's no "make completely unique high quality zbrush assets" button. There's no "make AI functions more complex" button. etc.etc.etc. The rising costs are for the same reason as they've always been, because the medium is evolving.
Yea again, what arbitrary number of games should've been made by now? It's almost like cash doesn't magically make game development go faster. YES, two games in four years is incredibly reasonable. Have you not been paying attention to this industry at all?
Yea again, what arbitrary number of games should've been made by now? It's almost like cash doesn't magically make game development go faster. YES, two games in four years is incredibly reasonable. Have you not been paying attention to this industry at all?
Yea no look at net profits and you'll see a huge increase across the board due to factors like a major increase in digital revenue, so yes sales figures are evolving. It may not be what a large section of GAF wants, but yes, revenue is better.But sales figures aren't evolving at the same rate that the "medium is evolving". That's a huge problem. Something has to give.
Where do you see the industry going to compensate?
I frankly don't understand the anger given how much longer studios in general are taking with games this gen. And the fact that most of EA's games use FB. An Uncharted like game has never been made on FB by my knowledge. Let alone at the quality people expect like with the animation blending seen in games like UC4.I don't think a lot of people know EA have multiple studios tied up with a single Star Wars game at a time too. Right now it's Battlefront 2 (DICE, Criterion and Motive), so probably just see DICE's name plastered all over it and assume they're only ones delivering at the moment.
Even knowing it's not just DICE, I'm pretty disappointed with just 2 Battlefront (one of which was very barebones) and one of the more anticipated ones cancelled after 4 years of hype, so get were the anger is coming from.
That's a really nice way of ignoring the reality of profits this gen among major pubs. Did the community really kick back?Ridiculous development costs are a self inflicted wound mega publishers like EA started last gen in an effort to squeeze competition (mid tier and AA games) out from the industry.
Too bad for them, the gaming community kicked back in the opposite direction with the rise of indie games and self publishing.
Shit if theyre looking at market trends maybe were getting an open world sandbox Star Wars rpg, which actually sounds rad! Hopefully everyone at visceral lands on their feet
Also, EA should insource Kojima for a MGSV type of Star Wars game (from a gameplay standpoint)
Sneaking around imperial occupied planets and doing rebel shit sounds neat!
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.
So since DS is basically dead now its safe to say thatat the end of DS3 Awakening.the Necromorphs won
Yea no look at net profits and you'll see a huge increase across the board due to factors like a major increase in digital revenue, so yes sales figures are evolving. It may not be what a large section of GAF wants, but yes, revenue is better.
I frankly don't understand the anger given how much longer studios in general are taking with games this gen.
That's a really nice way of ignoring the reality of profits this gen among major pubs. Did the community really kick back?
They're absolutely not self inflicted. The audience is constantly demanding more, the hardware supports the "more" that's constantly being reflected, people really need to stop trying to pu all blame of rising development costs on devs.
It baffles how some people will go to defend a company that just cost a ton of people their jobs for reasons unknown.
I'm saying it's a multitude of factors that led to higher dev costs. It's just evil men in suits, it's not overly ambitious devs, it's not a community that constantly wants more, it's a combination of several factors.I didn't blame anything on developers, I blame the publisher. The executive out of touch suits on the business side of things who see games as dollar signs and dividends, not the hard working devs who pour their lives and passion into making these games.
On the other hand you sure are blaming customers for ballooning costs of development.
I frankly don't understand the anger given how much longer studios in general are taking with games this gen.
A lovely thing to tell the fired developers.I find it strange that people seem to think that corporations are some kind of social welfare scheme.
These people have skills, they can seek other jobs with other companies. Does it suck? Yes, but that is capitalism.
Visceral's track record in recent times is also mixed, both critically and commercially. Dead Space 3, The Devil's Cartel, and Hardline were not outstanding games and it's hard to pinpoint exactly why they faltered. Design and directional issues? Publisher meddling? Poor workflow? Uninspired marketing campaign? Or just bad luck; wrong games at the wrong time? Maybe a little from every category.
I mean same, yea it's disappointing, but only the game in it's current form is cancelled, holding my breath to see what the retooling of it is.It's more just disappointment from me, but after closing a fan favourite studio and add to that the reasoning coming across like it was because they can't add enough MTs to it, I guess it's just the tipping point for some, who were already disappointed with EA's offerings so far.
I think when EA starts to shows off more of their Star Wars games, it'll quickly calm down, but this kinda just really sucks at the moment. I was really looking forward to seeing how Hennig's and Visceral's Star Wars game turned out.
I think when EA starts to shows off more of their Star Wars games, it'll quickly calm down
I mean same, yea it's disappointing, but only the game in it's current form is cancelled, holding my breath to see what the retooling of it is.
At the moment I can scarcely blame folks if they feel like there aren't any more EA Star Wars games to see. I know Respawn's working on one; I know this one technically still exists in the sense that a Star Wars game will get released out of it one way or another. But with zilch to go on in either project until further notice, it feels like a ghost town to people like me who heard "Amy Hennig" and "Star Wars" in the same sentence and jumped for joy.
Meh.
I'll keep an eye out on those other games for sure. Hopefully something decent comes of it. For now however I went from two must-have upcoming titles (this + Dragon Age 4) to 0.5 (this is gone and DA4 has me very worried in light of recent events).
But Bioware still exists?
Doest it really though? ME: Andromeda says otherwise.
I find it strange that people seem to think that corporations are some kind of social welfare scheme.
These people have skills, they can seek other jobs with other companies. Does it suck? Yes, but that is capitalism.
more at the link at the top.A lot of single-player games haven't sold to expectations in the past year or so, including Prey, Dishonored 2, Resident Evil 7, Deus Ex: Mankind Divided, and others. Dead Space 2, according to one developer who worked on it, cost $60 million to make, sold four million copies, and that "wasn't enough."
And the third category that isn't crazy. We buy stuff if it's worth it and we don't when it's not.
To be fair, that was a brand new Bioware studio in Montreal and their first major project was a huge test. That's like buying a relatively popular football club and buying a bunch of decent to great players and hoping to throw enough money at the problems for it to go away.
Sometimes it works, like what Sony were able to do by transforming Guerilla Games similar to Chelsea in the Premier League.
Other times it fails real hard like Bioware Montreal and Queens Park Rangers.
Best wishes.
Amy Hennig kicked off two AAA games in a row now. Hmmmm.
And yet the best selling PS4 games are Uncharted 4 and Horizon.Just read this article at Waypoint: Today's Star Wars News Makes the Future of Single-Player Look Very Messy . Very good article by Klepek's.
The article points out a great example of why the industry is not willing to pay for AAA SP experiences.
From the article:
more at the link at the top.
The reason is known. It's money.
And yet the best selling PS4 games are Uncharted 4 and Horizon.
I almost feel like they're flukes, diamonds in the rough.
And, yes, I know Uncharted has a multiplayer mode too (at least I think it does. Never actually checked when I played it...)
You honestly think a Star Wars game would flop?
Star Wars: The Open World Loot Box Saga with asynchronous Multiplayer Loot boxes.
Amy Hennig kicked off two AAA games in a row now. Hmmmm.
Amy Hennig kicked off two AAA games in a row now. Hmmmm.
Thing was selling like hot fire.did Battlefront (1) flopped? I really don't know.
The opposite. They fully satisfied. And I was happy for a satisfying, single-player, content-rich adventure without most of the fluff and fat AAA games get saddled with.Why? Do you feel they lack something?
Didn't they largely put the ME3 MP team on Andromeda? That didn't particularly work well. I don't think it's too respectful when people start up the A team and B team posts. Such as with From Software. Sometimes though you really are putting your B team on your flagship IP. Too many previous ME SP writers and staff were missing and it showed. I think some of them actually left Bioware though which didn't help. Still it was up to Bioware to try and fill talents shoes that moved on.
But Bioware still exists?
Wait what the fuck
What happens to the Star Wars game
Why? Do you feel they lack something?
did Battlefront (1) flopped? I really don't know.
The opposite. They fully satisfied. And I was happy for a satisfying, single-player, content-rich adventure without most of the fluff and fat AAA games get saddled with.
But they're getting more rare by the year.
It's sold at least 14 million copies. Seen people saying it's as high as 16 million though.
http://uk.ign.com/articles/2016/05/10/star-wars-battlefront-sales-top-14-million