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

sonicneedslovetoo

New member
Jul 6, 2015
278
0
0
What do they say when they cut out most of the maps and sell the base maps from the first game in the second game as DLC? I want to hear what their PR-speak for that is, actually no this is EA I want to put them on a hotplate and watch them dance so I'll ask them "do you really think that POS first game was worth the money you were charging for it?"
 

Anomynous 167

New member
May 6, 2008
404
0
0
Squilookle said:
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.
But Pandemic's Battlefront games were released to coincide major Star Wars events. The first one mimicked a specific edition of the original trilogy on DVD, while Battlefront 2 came out the same time as Revenge of the Sith.

It just wouldn't be a Battlefront game if it weren't rushed to meet an artificial deadline based on something completely unrelated to the game at hand. That's one thing DICE did right about Battlefront.
 

Xpwn3ntial

Avid Reader
Dec 22, 2008
8,023
0
0
You know what? Fine.

I get it. Releasing a game concurrent with a movie makes sense. People are on the high of the movie or the game when they get the other.

But what doesn't make sense is why they had to release concurrent with episode vii. Why not release concurrent with Rogue One? Because episode vii was the first new movie? Because Rogue One isn't going to be a main series movie? We've known there's going to be one movie a year for quite a while.
 
Nov 28, 2007
10,686
0
0
Daymo said:
Just remember when Obsidian does it it's okay though.
To be fair, Obsidian had LucasArts themselves making the demand to rush it for a Christmas release. If they hadn't agreed to it, there was no way the game get published. It was a case of "do what the publisher says", or "have the game get cancelled, wasting the time you've spent on it".


In other words, probably exactly what happened here, with the exception that DICE is actually owned by EA, while Obsidian was independent, but published by an outside company that held the rights.

Xpwn3ntial said:
You know what? Fine.

I get it. Releasing a game concurrent with a movie makes sense. People are on the high of the movie or the game when they get the other.

But what doesn't make sense is why they had to release concurrent with episode vii. Why not release concurrent with Rogue One? Because episode vii was the first new movie? Because Rogue One isn't going to be a main series movie? We've known there's going to be one movie a year for quite a while.
The reason is probably because "the first new Star Wars movie in 10 years" gets a lot more hype than "A spinoff story filling in a gap that fans have been fine with not being filled for almost 40 years".

ETA: I'm not saying that what EA did is right, because it freaking sucks, and was probably not a good move. There were reasons beyond "Muahaha, gamers suck and my monehs", though.
 

laggyteabag

Scrolling through forums, instead of playing games
Legacy
Oct 25, 2009
3,112
703
118
UK
Gender
He/Him
Well that fucking bullshit. I mean, from a sales standpoint, it makes a lot of sense, but this isn't just any IP, this is goddamn STAR WARS. That shit was gonna sell like hot cakes, regardless of whether or not it came out before, at the same time as, or after the film.

Cutting a pretty sizable chunk of content for that reason is just stupid. That being said, though, it does make me wonder what they replaced it with, if anything at all.
 

Squilookle

New member
Nov 6, 2008
3,584
0
0
Anomynous 167 said:
Squilookle said:
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.
But Pandemic's Battlefront games were released to coincide major Star Wars events. The first one mimicked a specific edition of the original trilogy on DVD, while Battlefront 2 came out the same time as Revenge of the Sith.

It just wouldn't be a Battlefront game if it weren't rushed to meet an artificial deadline based on something completely unrelated to the game at hand. That's one thing DICE did right about Battlefront.
You're saying Pandemic's Battlefront games seemed rushed? II was anything but, and while 1 had a few rough edges, I'm inclined to think that was more about the studio coming to grips with a kind of gameplay they'd never done before rather than a tight schedule.

I could be wrong though. Essentially my point is that EA's Battlefront would have been fine if it sold later than the movie, perhaps even as someone suggested- alongside Rogue One.