Battlefront's Campaign Was Cut so it Could Launch With Episode VII

rcs619

New member
Mar 26, 2011
627
0
0
Saelune said:
I can. If DICE want to live under EA's shitty roof, they will suffer the blame too. Sure, I generally blame EA more than I do DICE (or Bioware) but they also let themselves be crappy developers who fault under EA's thumb.
Ehh, I don't know if that's really completely fair to DICE. It's very likely the EA owns the rights to all of their IP's as part of the publishing agreement (a very common practice these days), so if DICE ever wanted to go their own way, they would literally have to start from scratch. They'd need a new IP, a new infrastructure to develop it, probably a lot of new staff since there's no way that kind of move wouldn't split up part of a company... and the whole time, they get to watch EA hand off their series like Battlefield and Mirror's Edge to some other developer to make it without them.

Then they either have to jump in with another publisher (who will likely make them work on someone else's IP, or require ownership of any new IP they create there), or try to go the independent route and never make the same kind of money or have the same kind of sales numbers again.

It's just a shitty situation all around. The publishing system for videogames (especially the big ones) is just terrible for the actual devs. Gamers too. If a publisher doesn't hand off an IP to someone else after they part ways with a developer, then they'll hoard it like a dragon for years and never let it see the light of day.
 

Saelune

Trump put kids in cages!
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
8,411
15
23
rcs619 said:
Saelune said:
I can. If DICE want to live under EA's shitty roof, they will suffer the blame too. Sure, I generally blame EA more than I do DICE (or Bioware) but they also let themselves be crappy developers who fault under EA's thumb.
Ehh, I don't know if that's really completely fair to DICE. It's very likely the EA owns the rights to all of their IP's as part of the publishing agreement (a very common practice these days), so if DICE ever wanted to go their own way, they would literally have to start from scratch. They'd need a new IP, a new infrastructure to develop it, probably a lot of new staff since there's no way that kind of move wouldn't split up part of a company... and the whole time, they get to watch EA hand off their series like Battlefield and Mirror's Edge to some other developer to make it without them.

Then they either have to jump in with another publisher (who will likely make them work on someone else's IP, or require ownership of any new IP they create there), or try to go the independent route and never make the same kind of money or have the same kind of sales numbers again.

It's just a shitty situation all around. The publishing system for videogames (especially the big ones) is just terrible for the actual devs. Gamers too. If a publisher doesn't hand off an IP to someone else after they part ways with a developer, then they'll hoard it like a dragon for years and never let it see the light of day.
Its not fair to consumers to get a shitty product that wasn't finished. Plus maybe DICE shouldn't have sold their soul to the devil that is EA.
 

rcs619

New member
Mar 26, 2011
627
0
0
Saelune said:
Its not fair to consumers to get a shitty product that wasn't finished.
Absolutely agree there. Unfortunately, the pre-order and hype culture of modern mainstream gaming all but guarantees this will continue. They can make a mediocre product, hype it all to hell and make all their money in the first couple days before anyone actually knows just how lacking in content something is.

The culture needs to change and AAA game budgets need to decrease if we're ever going to get better, more feature-rich products again.

Plus maybe DICE shouldn't have sold their soul to the devil that is EA.
1: They joined EA back in 2004. It was a different world and a different gaming industry back then.
2: EA isn't even the worst game publisher these days. Konami, Ubisoft and Warner Brothers are way worse. Honorable mention goes to Square-Enix Capcom, and the shambling corpse of what used to be Atari. They're all arguably worse than EA is now too.

I'm just saying that, as for the developers themselves, a lot of the time they're caught up in a shitty situation and most of the really bad decisions rest with their publishers, not them.
 

Saelune

Trump put kids in cages!
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
8,411
15
23
rcs619 said:
Saelune said:
Its not fair to consumers to get a shitty product that wasn't finished.
Absolutely agree there. Unfortunately, the pre-order and hype culture of modern mainstream gaming all but guarantees this will continue. They can make a mediocre product, hype it all to hell and make all their money in the first couple days before anyone actually knows just how lacking in content something is.

The culture needs to change and AAA game budgets need to decrease if we're ever going to get better, more feature-rich products again.

Plus maybe DICE shouldn't have sold their soul to the devil that is EA.
1: They joined EA back in 2004. It was a different world and a different gaming industry back then.
2: EA isn't even the worst game publisher these days. Konami, Ubisoft and Warner Brothers are way worse. Honorable mention goes to Square-Enix Capcom, and the shambling corpse of what used to be Atari. They're all arguably worse than EA is now too.

I'm just saying that, as for the developers themselves, a lot of the time they're caught up in a shitty situation and most of the really bad decisions rest with their publishers, not them.
I don't recall how EA was early 2000's, but I did check when DICE was bought by EA. I will admit there is a difference between a tiny developer selling themselves to a poor developer cause they had little to work with to begin with, versus say...Bioware who had no reason to go under EA's label. (I used to think Bioware doubled as a publisher the way Bethesda did). I don't really ever remember EA not being shitty, but it could be possible, since Capcom and Konami used to be stellar companies who really went down the drain. I absolutely HATE MGSV and Street Fighter V, and probably wont buy either's VI.

Maybe I'm too idealistic here, but I'm the kind of person who curses out shitty people, even if it gets me in trouble. (Just ask one of my art professors from college). Id want DICE to stand up to EA and try to deliver a good product, even though that's not the best business choice. I know profit dictates a lot of things, but it shouldn't dictate art or creativity.
 

CrimsonBlack

New member
Mar 10, 2011
109
0
0
Makes me very glad I never bought it.

Now if only I could get a refund on my copy of Assassin's Creed, um, Wassitcalled, the one in London? I'm such a sucker.
 

NinjaDeathSlap

Leaf on the wind
Feb 20, 2011
4,474
0
0
Yes, because a game everyone had already been asking for for 10 years anyway just couldn't have gone without that brand boost, especially now AFTER the release of Episode VII, the brand is bigger than ever. ?.?
 

Neurotic Void Melody

Bound to escape
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
4,953
6
13
And this highlights precisely why EA have the reputation they have earned. Still a player first company? Or has that been put on the backburner too? Their utter contempt for consumers is...worn on their sleeve. A useful rule is never buy an EA game that is brand new or sold at higher than half price. Because they sure as shit don't put the value into their little hype projects. Though this particular decision comes off as either really dumb or really sneaky. I hope at least the fans have learnt something from their experience, don't keep encouraging EA to take advantage of you!
 

Jandau

Smug Platypus
Dec 19, 2008
5,034
0
0
Then you drop the price. Or you put out the missing content later down the line for free. But if your strategy is to still sell it at full price, and then proceed to charge for all the DLC, you don't get a free pass. You get to enjoy bad reputation and low reviews because that's the product you put out. And an apology is meaningless, as are promises of "doing better next time".
 

Squilookle

New member
Nov 6, 2008
3,584
0
0
A certain list of quality Movie Tie-In Games.


Game: Disney's Aladdin (1993)
Film: Aladdin (1992)
Years the game came out after the movie: 1

Game: GoldenEye 007 (1997)
Film: GoldenEye (1995)
Years the game came out after the movie: 2

Game: The Chronicles Of Riddick: Escape From Butcher Bay (2004)
Films: Pitch Black (2000)
Years the game came out after the movie: 4

Game: Blade Runner (1997)
Film: Blade Runner (1982)
Years the game came out after the movie: 15

Game: Ghostbusters: The Video Game (2009)
Film: Ghostbusters (1984), Ghostbusters II (1989)
Years the game came out after the movie: 20

Game: The Warriors (2005)
Films: The Warriors (1979)
Years the game came out after the movie: 26!!

When will publishers finally figure out that the release date doesn't mean squat when the game is given time to reach it's fullest potential? Especially for something as big already as Star Wars? You think TIE Fighter or KOTOR (or for that matter, Pandemic's Battlefront games) sold like hotcakes simply because a Star Wars film came out around the same time? Of course not!

It's just utterly shameful that EA's Battlefront sold as much as it did. To anyone... everyone who put down a pre-order for that game, sight unseen, before it released. You are killing the games industry. Stop it now.
 

K12

New member
Dec 28, 2012
943
0
0
I! AM! SHOCKED!

You've got to feel sorry for EA though. I mean literally no one would have bought a Star Wars game (especially Battlefront) if it released at any other time. They had literally no other option. Poor guys.
 

bobdark

Regular Member
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
36
12
13
so my question is what one is the lie that they cut it due to time or that they didn't think it would be popular? I think everyone forgot about this....

http://www.pcgamer.com/ea-skipped-star-wars-battlefront-campaign-because-nobody-would-play-it/
 

Naldan

You Are Interested. Certainly.
Feb 25, 2015
488
0
0
Are we supposed to buy the sequel now out of empathy?

Holy shit, this time we live in, man...
 

Lightspeaker

New member
Dec 31, 2011
934
0
0
No, EA! Bad! Bad EA! *smacks with a rolled-up newspaper*

You know...I can't actually gather any genuine anger about this. I massively disapprove of the attitude, certainly. But it was just so damn OBVIOUS that what I mainly feel is just frustration and sadness at being right...
 

Daymo

And how much is this Pub Club?
May 18, 2008
694
0
0
Just remember when Obsidian does it it's okay though.
 

thewatergamer

New member
Aug 4, 2012
647
0
0
"Yeah we cut content from the game too meet a bullshit deadline, aren't we great!"

I guess I can give them Kudos for being honest, but its still bullshit and stupid
 

Silentpony_v1legacy

Alleged Feather-Rustler
Jun 5, 2013
6,760
0
0
Oh sure. When I say the game was cut to pieces to make the Christmas release window, everyone calls me a cynical son of a ***** who just doesn't like games.
When EA says it everyone knew it all along.

This is almost old news. Like what did people think was the reason for no campaign before this?
 

FillerDmon

New member
Jun 6, 2014
329
0
0
Why does anyone honestly care?

It's EA. Why does anyone bother supporting them after all the crap they've done and pulled? They've proven time and time again that as far as the industry goes, the customer is nothing but fuel for the fire, not part of the organism. There's no care to be had in appreciation for the investment given. We're sheep to them. To everyone, really, but more so to people like them. They don't wonder why savy consumers hate them. They hate that savy consumers exist to be able to point out their bullshit.

That aside, this lesson is one I'm surprised the Game Industry still doesn't understand. Trying to tie a game to a certain time period and then rushing it out the door for it is -NEVER- a good idea. Has there -EVER- been a game where "cut content to meet deadlines" has been mentioned during development and the end result is still a -good- product? Not even a top seller, but still a genuinely good game?
 

Quantum Glass

New member
Mar 19, 2013
109
0
0
While I appreciate the honesty, I'm kinda scratching my head over the fact that they thought that interest in a good Star Wars game would really wane all that much between episodes VII and VIII.

I mean, maybe the hype would die a little, but you'd think they'd more than make up for it by being able to tell the gamer community, "Sorry guys, we wanted to release the game alongside Episode VII, but it wasn't finished yet and we couldn't in good conscience release a subpar game for the sake of more money. Please forgive us for the delay."

Then again, I'm not in marketing.
 

Redlin5_v1legacy

Better Red than Dead
Aug 5, 2009
48,837
0
0
I am so happy I didn't get suckered into this game. No campaign, announcing a sequel which means DLC will be neutered... I have absolutely no trust in the Battlefront name.