EA CEO: We Failed Well

[ecoho]

Let the EA bashing commence.

The way EA ruined the Mass Effect and Dragon Age franchises was just marvelous. I'm guessing "embracing failure" means buying good studios and turning their games into abominations of what they used to be.

And that's your opinion. I'll agree that DA2 was not what it could have been, but ME2 was worlds beyond it's predecessor.

If you like Third Person Shooters then sure, Mass Effect 2 wasn't bad, it was mediocre. From a roleplaying and story standpoint it was absolutely terrible.

The way EA ruined the Mass Effect and Dragon Age franchises was just marvelous. I'm guessing "embracing failure" means buying good studios and turning their games into abominations of what they used to be.

... in your opinion.

I much preferred ME2 and DA2 to both of the first games.

Like I've said before, as action games both Mass Effect 2 and Dragon Age 2 aren't bad. Unfortunately, they're extremely mediocre. You're playing a dumbed down RPG that tries to be a shooter with shooting mechanics that do not compare to other run of the mill third person shooters.

.......ok man let me try to explain this to you. Mass Effect is not an RPG or a 3rd person shooter its both combined which means its a ***** to balance both parts. Please understand that they focused more on gunplay for the second game because the first game was HORRIBLE to have a gun fight in and that problem was the most hated. Now they are giveing you more rpg elliments in the 3rd game so they are trying to please everyone so give them a break.

BTW DA2 is a great game just not what balders gate fans wanted.

 

[Worr Monger]

The way EA ruined the Mass Effect and Dragon Age franchises was just marvelous. I'm guessing "embracing failure" means buying good studios and turning their games into abominations of what they used to be.

Everyone is entitled to their opinions, though I know for a fact that there is a shitstorm of people who have thoroughly enjoyed the latest Bioware games. I'm proud to count myself amoung them.

Good for you. That does not change the fact that the game was subpar

FYI - You seriously lose all credibility when you state your obvious OPINIONS as Facts. People aren't blind like you, they can see the difference.

Show us a hard copy of your apparent Scientific Study where both Dragon Age 2 & Mass Effect 2 were deemed "bad" or "subpar" by law... and please cite your sources.

Plenty of people enjoyed both games. I'm no fan of EA... but I've enjoyed all of Bioware's games... I don't approve of all the things they do... but I've still enjoyed them regardless.

In my OPINION (See what I did there?), "fans" of Bioware, who constantly complain about Bioware making changes will lead to their demise. If everyone gets brainwashed into hating Bioware, they'll have a negative stigma and maybe will sell less... leading EA to think they are no longer profitable... and bye bye Bioware.

Stop hating on Bioware so much for making changes to their games that they actually think, might be improvements. If they left everything the same, a bunch of people who be complaining that they're stagnant and never change anything... they lose either way.

 

[MercurySteam]

The way EA ruined the Mass Effect and Dragon Age franchises was just marvelous. I'm guessing "embracing failure" means buying good studios and turning their games into abominations of what they used to be.

Everyone is entitled to their opinions, though I know for a fact that there is a shitstorm of people who have thoroughly enjoyed the latest Bioware games. I'm proud to count myself amoung them.

Good for you. That does not change the fact that the game was subpar

FYI - You seriously lose all credibility when you state your obvious OPINIONS as Facts. People aren't blind like you, they can see the difference.

Yeah, this is basically what I was going to say. Both games, (yes even DA2 with all that carrying on that happened) got a generally good reception. Mass Effect 2 was deemed to be a 9.0-9.5/10 game while DA2 was worth a least an 8.5/10. For every person that didn't enjoy it the games there were four more who did which is why EA and Bioware has had such a successful partnership.

Flame wars are pointless, but it'd stake my reputation on the fact that all the good reception that the games got from the industry deemed them successful games. Good, is a matter of opinion and I'm not going to try to discredit myself by saying that my opinion is the correct one like 'AndyFromMonday' has been doing. It's just the facts.

 

[Setch Dreskar]

And AndyFromMonday proves once more, while on the internet ignorance of common sense, the dictionary, and reason will always exist.

Stating that your opinion, as that has what it has been this entire time, as a fact puts you within the realm of hilariously dilusional. A fact is something backed up with irrefutable evidence ie, the game is set in space, the Normandy SR1 is blown up by a Collector ship, the Illusive man has glowing eyes, the game has DLC.

Opinions have a bias, where as facts do not.


Now more on topic, they can say anything and promise the world all they like, actions speak louder then words. I sincerely hope they are turning a new leaf, I have seen them do things to games I love and still enjoy. (I feel sorry for WAR... it just got treated so badly by EA its not even funny.) I have also seen some of the worst marketing ads of my life from EA, making catastrophic decisions that feed the anti-games movement all the ammunition it will ever need for YEARS to come. They have some of the worst DLC and Secu-ROM of the games industry, as a note I am refering to the practice of Project 10 Dollar. However, I also truly believe if given enough support people can change, but if in the process of making steps towards something better they get nothing but hate and scorn then they will just revert right back to what they were.

 

[Vault101]

The way EA ruined the Mass Effect and Dragon Age franchises was just marvelous. I'm guessing "embracing failure" means buying good studios and turning their games into abominations of what they used to be.

dragon age mabye

Mass effect?....FUCK NO!

 

[Dr. wonderful]

Is everyone forgetting that EA also published ME1 and DA1?

Yup, they forgot.

So, the game was bad to begin with.

...

Meh, I loved them both.

 

[thenamelessloser]

Is everyone forgetting that EA also published ME1 and DA1?

No. Mass Effect was published by Microsoft. While with Dragon Age most of it was done I think by the time EA bought Bioware.

However, a better argument would be how dumbed down the role playing mechanics are in Jade Empire to show that Bioware hasn't changed as much as people thought since EA bought them.

 

[odd function]

I could care less about Twilight, I thought that the movies were terrible (my girlfriend downloaded them and I had the bright idea of watching them...), but if so many people buy the books and see the movies, than that is quality to someone.

It's all in the eye of the beholder. I have had great fun with games that most reviewers said were shit, so yeah, I thought that it was good quality.

First off, "I could care less" implies that you do in fact care. "I couldn't care less" is the saying you're looking for methinks. Sorry 'bout the grammar-nazi schtick but that one bugs the hell out of me for whatever reason.

Second, "quality" is not a subjective measure. There are purely objective metrics over the quality of everything in existence. Whether or not it's "good", meaning enjoyable/workable, is subjective, yes, but "quality" is a completely separate beast.

Brief synopsis of "quality" metrics in literature (as I'm unqualified to do so for movies and don't want to put forth the effort to make a list for games):
-Plot - coherent, logical (in-universe, if nothing else), and concise
-Characters - distinct personalities and realistic, understandable behavior
-Prose - engaging and thought-provoking

If a work of literature meets these criteria, it's a high-quality piece of work, regardless of how well it sells or what people think about it. Similarly, if it does not, then it's a low-quality work, once more regardless of what people think about it.

People can like poor quality goods all day, and oftentimes they do. It doesn't mean anything bad, it just means a low-quality work appeals to their sensibilities.

Thus, sales does not equate with quality.

You explained it much better than I ever could. I would like to the obvious example of large sales != quality. McDonald's. Nobody would claim they make quality food, in general what they make is good enough. When somebody is said to have good taste, it means that they recognize and appreciate quality. That said there are people with otherwise good taste that have blind spots, or simply lack the experience with a medium necessary to identify the features in the medium that separate good quality from bad. A case in point could be Yahtzee and fighting games. But not being an enthusiast myself I have to take the word of commenters who discuss things like mechanics and similar (as opposed to things like gore).

 

[Super Toast]

The way EA ruined the Mass Effect and Dragon Age franchises was just marvelous. I'm guessing "embracing failure" means buying good studios and turning their games into abominations of what they used to be.

Your milage may vary on that. I thought Dragon Age II was a great game. It wasn't as good as Origins, and it could've used a bit more polish, but still. And I thought Mass Effect 2 was fantastic.

OT: It would be nice if they used this newfound knowledge in a way that would benefit the consumer.

 

[ChupathingyX]

EA destroyed Pandemic Studios...there is no redemption.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

At least he didn't use the word "Epic".

 

[The Human Torch]

First off, "I could care less" implies that you do in fact care. "I couldn't care less" is the saying you're looking for methinks. Sorry 'bout the grammar-nazi schtick but that one bugs the hell out of me for whatever reason.

Second, "quality" is not a subjective measure. There are purely objective metrics over the quality of everything in existence. Whether or not it's "good", meaning enjoyable/workable, is subjective, yes, but "quality" is a completely separate beast.

Brief synopsis of "quality" metrics in literature (as I'm unqualified to do so for movies and don't want to put forth the effort to make a list for games):
-Plot - coherent, logical (in-universe, if nothing else), and concise
-Characters - distinct personalities and realistic, understandable behavior
-Prose - engaging and thought-provoking

If a work of literature meets these criteria, it's a high-quality piece of work, regardless of how well it sells or what people think about it. Similarly, if it does not, then it's a low-quality work, once more regardless of what people think about it.

People can like poor quality goods all day, and oftentimes they do. It doesn't mean anything bad, it just means a low-quality work appeals to their sensibilities.

Thus, sales does not equate with quality.

The "I could care less" part of my post was to let you know that I have no personal stake in Twilight. That I am subjective enough to recognize it's quality.
And I do care less.
And you are still wrong in my opinion. If I buy a bike, and it breaks in half simply because I sit on it, it's poor quality. If I buy another bike and it lasts me for 10 years without breaking down, then it's good quality. That's the kind of quality you can measure when it comes to an object.

The same would go for the quality of a book. Staying with the book example, if the pages would fall out, if the cover was made out of tissue paper and the glue had the same properties as silly putty, than you would have a low quality book.
Content-wise it's a different story, someone enjoys reading the story, than that's good quality to them.

 

[The Human Torch]

Sales say otherwise.

Sales do not equal quality.

But apparently your opinion does. Sales do equal quality. Just because you may not agree with a certain title, does not mean that it's not of proper quality.

DO THEY NOW?
Ok mr smarty pants ANALYSE THESE FIGURES AND TELL ME WHICH SOLD BETTER
I would like you tell everyone so I dont have to quote everyone in this thread individually about which sold better DA2 Or DAO
http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/141/index/7236826/1
Thanks

Yes, fan-made sales charts are a reliable source of information. *cough*

 

[Agayek]

The "I could care less" part of my post was to let you know that I have no personal stake in Twilight. That I am subjective enough to recognize it's quality.
And I do care less.
And you are still wrong in my opinion. If I buy a bike, and it breaks in half simply because I sit on it, it's poor quality. If I buy another bike and it lasts me for 10 years without breaking down, then it's good quality. That's the kind of quality you can measure when it comes to an object.

The same would go for the quality of a book. Staying with the book example, if the pages would fall out, if the cover was made out of tissue paper and the glue had the same properties as silly putty, than you would have a low quality book.
Content-wise it's a different story, someone enjoys reading the story, than that's good quality to them.

I'm not really sure why you had to bother with the "could care less" thing then, it's basically irrelevant by your own admission.

Also, if you don't actually care about something (meaning apathetic, with no vested interest in it whatsoever), then you "couldn't care less". Saying you "could care less" literally means that you care about it, that you have some level of emotional investment in it. If you have no stake in something, you don't care about it, thus you could not care less.

Anyway, as you describe here, a book that falls apart is a poorly made book. I was discussing the quality of the content. And yes, you very much can measure this. Using the three categories I listed earlier:

-Plot - Events must follow logically. A sequence of random, unrelated events is a bad plot
-Characters - Similar to above, characters that consistently do things someone of their personality would never do are demonstrably low quality
-Prose - there are objective, fixed rules of language the prose must follow, or it is bad

These are objective, standard rules to measure the quality of a work of fiction. You literally cannot say these are in anyway subjective without outright lying.

As a point of example, I despise the book "To Kill A Mockingbird" with the burning passion of a billion fiery suns. If I had my way, every copy of that book ever made would be put to the torch, as it is an affront to good taste in just about all ways.

That does not mean it's a poorly-written or otherwise low quality book. Matter of fact, it's one of the highest quality works of fiction in the last century. My opinion of it does not change that fact.

The simple fact of the matter is that no matter how much you like or dislike something has absolutely no bearing on the quality of the piece. Could something you hate be high quality? Absolutely, just like something you love could be terrible. It won't change the fact that you dis-/like it though, and it shouldn't. If you like something, by all means love it to death. Your opinion does not change its quality though.

 

[Vault101]

The way EA ruined the Mass Effect and Dragon Age franchises was just marvelous. I'm guessing "embracing failure" means buying good studios and turning their games into abominations of what they used to be.

dragon age mabye

Mass effect?....FUCK NO!

I agree with this.
I wasn't to bothered with the changes in Mass Effect 2.
It wasn't trying to be the spiritual successor of anything.
Dragon Age 2 on the other hand....

in regards to DA2 (which I am yet to play) I think the only thing you could actually blame on EA is that it was rushed (which is what most people are saying) I didnt think EA messed with Bioware too much

 

[Setch Dreskar]

Sales say otherwise.

Sales do not equal quality.

But apparently your opinion does. Sales do equal quality. Just because you may not agree with a certain title, does not mean that it's not of proper quality.

DO THEY NOW?
Ok mr smarty pants ANALYSE THESE FIGURES AND TELL ME WHICH SOLD BETTER
I would like you tell everyone so I dont have to quote everyone in this thread individually about which sold better DA2 Or DAO
http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/141/index/7236826/1
Thanks

Yes, fan-made sales charts are a reliable source of information. *cough*

Im sorry did you miss the links that were given to where the information was sourced?
Well its ok * pat pat*
Ill save you the trouble from clicking the link again and then scrolling 5 cm down for you to see them.
http://gamrreview.vgchartz.com/sales/44010/dragon-age-ii/

http://gamrreview.vgchartz.com/sales/44012/dragon-age-ii/

http://gamrreview.vgchartz.com/sales/44011/dragon-age-ii/

Thankyou have a nice day.

Based on the website links provided, there is alot of missing data, specifically that it says on that Website that DA:O sold 0 copies on the PC in the US.

Now across the board we have:

-={Dragon Age 2}=-
PS3 = 724,530 Units

PC = 532,380 Units

Xbox 360 = 1,419,860 Units

Total = 2,676,770 Units

-={Dragon Age: origins}=- (Up to week 10 of launch same as DA2's numbers)
PS3 = 1,342,460 Units

PC = 489,040 Units (Using their data)

Xbox 360 = 2,781,150 Units

Total = 4,612,650 Units


Now this is data based on Week 10 to Week 10 sales, as Dragon Age Origins price drop more and more units are being sold of it, as will be the case with Dragon Age 2. But I see a couple problems with the data, they are all too even so this looks more like a rough estimate of each sale on eace platform, and there is missing data especially considering Steam sales are not taken into account, as confirmed by the operators of Steam, and the US sales are missing for PC DA:O.

Ok now Dragon Age 2 has sold over half of Dragon Age: Origins at the same launch week time, hitting 2,676,770 Units which makes it a huge success for an RPG (Or Action RPG) launch. I am not sure of the development time for DA:O but when we consider DA2's development time was 10 months, or 11 if we say setting up production and manufacturing only took 1 month, then DA2 did amazingly well.

2.6 Million units is not something to blow off especially considering some of EA's other titles that, while they are still released, have yet to even push the 2 million mark. In a way you are correct Dragon Age 2 isn't doing as well as Origins but what the company is going to look at is for an extremely rapid dev cycle it works, it cut down their costs and made roughly as much revenue within the same time span.

Also of note, flame baiting to make yourself sound better is not the way to have a discussion.

 

[Bobbity]

If you take a look at DA2's sales, they're shockingly bad - presumably because of word of mouth. Hopefully this is another lesson that EA can learn, in that you have to actually put effort into some games; the Madden approach doesn't work universally.

snip

Dragon Age 2 initially based its sales on the greatness of its predecessor.
I for one will never buy another Bioware game after Dragon Age 2.
Alot of people will never PREORDER another Bioware game without waiting for the reviews and information about it.
Unless you had your head in sand the internet community started a huge flame war about the changes in Dragon Age 2.
Alot of people were unimpressed with the changes.
For acrosss the board Im count just over 1.5 million sales ( not including digital) so I dont know where you got 2.6 million from.

To be fair, the studios producing DA, ME and TOR are all different parts of Bioware; that one is terrible doesn't necessarily reflect badly on the other two. Most of Bioware's brightest have been working on TOR for the last couple of years, so it's understandable that the quality of ME - in terms of writing, RPGiness, etc. - might go downhill a little, but I don't think that anyone saw DA2 coming.

I actually have really high hopes for TOR at the moment, because it has Bioware's best working on it. That said, it'll be interesting to see how well they adapt to MMOs, as opposed to their traditional and much more polished single player games.

 

[Flailing Escapist]

Mirror's Edge 2 had better be damn amazing, EA

 

[Setch Dreskar]

snip

Dragon Age 2 initially based its sales on the greatness of its predecessor.
I for one will never buy another Bioware game after Dragon Age 2.
Alot of people will never PREORDER another Bioware game without waiting for the reviews and information about it.
Unless you had your head in sand the internet community started a huge flame war about the changes in Dragon Age 2.
Alot of people were unimpressed with the changes.
For acrosss the board Im count just over 1.5 million sales ( not including digital) so I dont know where you got 2.6 million from.

I did make a derp I basically doubled the sales on both DA:O and DA2 because I added all three lines within each of the subsets (PS3, PC, 360) which is silly as Worldwide was the adding of the 2 subsets being EMEAA and US which is a simple thing to correct for.

-={Dragon Age 2}=- [FIXED]
PS3 = 362,260 Units

PC = 266,190 Units

Xbox 360 = 709,880 Units

Total = 1,338,260 Units

-={Dragon Age: origins}=- (Up to week 10 of launch same as DA2's numbers) [FIXED]
PS3 = 671,230 Units

PC = 244,520 Units (Using their data)

Xbox 360 = 1,390,000 Units

Total = 2,305,750 Units

Now again for a niche market, which sadly is what RPG's are, having sold half as well for I would assume at least half the dev process of Origins is very good, I would be more inclined to think DA:O took either 3 or 4 times as long to make but if someone has the knowledge on how many years DA:O took to make please post it.

Again flame baiting gets you nowhere.

 

[The Lugz]

200k units for pc, that's a depressingly low number it's really no wonder were being slowly abandoned for the consoles