EA CEO: We Failed Well

[MiracleOfSound]

I havent played DA2, so no comment. On ME2, I felt that for all the steps forward it went, other elements went back an equal number of steps. And while it can be argued that they streamlined the experience, I still think they just gutted some of the RPG mechanics to improve the shooting mechanics... oh, and I fucking hate the ammo. The guns had infinite ammo, and no matter how you spin it, they went backwards.

The shooting in Mass Effect 1 was far worse.

I understand you miss the stats and more customisation, but what does any of that matter when for the first half of the game Shepard can't even hit anything? It's just a terrible shooter with some stats attached to make it less terrible over time.

At least in ME2 they focused on making the game more playable.

And I don't like infinite ammo. I like reloading.

 

[thublihnk]

k, get Pandemic back.

 

[AndyFromMonday]

People said EA "ruined APB," even though EA had absolutely *ZERO* input into the development process, and warned RTW that releasing the game in the half-assed state it was in at launch was a bad idea.

People said SOE "ruined Vanguard," despite SOE being the *last* publisher to pick up the game, and despite the developers constantly re-writing entire sections of the game on a yearly basis, missing every single development milestone and deadline by years.

You work at EA? You know what control EA exercises? Has Bioware come out and said that EA forced them to make all the changes? No, they haven't. In fact, Bioware has lauded all the changes they were "forced" to make. They seem to be incredibly happy with the design decisions they made in DA2 and ME2.

Do you work at EA? Do you know they actually warned APB's developer to not release the game in a half developed state?

Publishers can make their studios declare anything. In fact, up until the joining with EA has Bioware ever released dumbed down games? It seems that the moment they joined up with EA they released two games still in development and then released sequels to those two games, one rushed and half assed and another dumbed down. Is this Bioware's track record? Have you seen Bioware release games like that? It seems a little suspicious that they'd choose to go in a new direction exactly after a buyout by a publisher that could only be described as a fucking nuisance to the gaming industry.

 

[MiracleOfSound]

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.

But ME1 was trying to be a shooter too.

A much less functional, more broken and irritating shooter - who want a reticule the size of Illium when they're trying to shoot?

ME2 may have had less stats and numbers but at least it had much more balanced and consistent combat. It felt tough but fair, not like you were struggling against the mechanics, as I often felt in ME1.

 

[AndyFromMonday]

I havent played DA2, so no comment. On ME2, I felt that for all the steps forward it went, other elements went back an equal number of steps. And while it can be argued that they streamlined the experience, I still think they just gutted some of the RPG mechanics to improve the shooting mechanics... oh, and I fucking hate the ammo. The guns had infinite ammo, and no matter how you spin it, they went backwards.

The shooting in Mass Effect 1 was far worse.

I understand you miss the stats and more customisation, but what does any of that matter when for the first half of the game Shepard can't even hit anything? It's just a terrible shooter with some stats attached to make it less terrible over time.

At least in ME2 they focused on making the game more playable.

And I don't like infinite ammo. I like reloading.

They could have improved the shooting and left all the RPG bits in there. There was no reason to make stats useless. Stats are what make an RPG. Without stats, the very thing that lets you personalize your character, you're just playing a shooter with the ability to choose what you say during dialog sequences.

Overheating was used as a way to limit the amount of time you could shoot so as to prevent spamming. Frankly, it worked quite well and at the very least Bioware attempted to innovate, if only a little with that.

Also, I know I'm making a lot of double posts. I'm sorry for that. I'll stop doing so in future replies.

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.

But ME1 was trying to be a shooter too.

A much less functional, more broken and irritating shooter - who want a reticule the size of Illium when they're trying to shoot?

ME2 may have had less stats and numbers but at least it had much more balanced and consistent combat. It felt tough but fair, not like you were struggling against the mechanics, as I often felt in ME1.

Mass Effect was not trying to be a shooter. The shooting was central to the gameplay, yes, but in the end it was still an RPG. Mass Effect 2's focus was entirely on the combat whereas the story and pretty much everything else got a backseat.

 

[RvLeshrac]

People said EA "ruined APB," even though EA had absolutely *ZERO* input into the development process, and warned RTW that releasing the game in the half-assed state it was in at launch was a bad idea.

People said SOE "ruined Vanguard," despite SOE being the *last* publisher to pick up the game, and despite the developers constantly re-writing entire sections of the game on a yearly basis, missing every single development milestone and deadline by years.

You work at EA? You know what control EA exercises? Has Bioware come out and said that EA forced them to make all the changes? No, they haven't. In fact, Bioware has lauded all the changes they were "forced" to make. They seem to be incredibly happy with the design decisions they made in DA2 and ME2.

Do you work at EA? Do you know they actually warned APB's developer to not release the game in a half developed state?

Publishers can make their studios declare anything. In fact, up until the joining with EA has Bioware ever released dumbed down games? It seems that the moment they joined up with EA they released two games still in development and then released sequels to those two games, one rushed and half assed and another dumbed down. Is this Bioware's track record? Have you seen Bioware release games like that? It seems a little suspicious that they'd choose to go in a new direction exactly after a buyout by a publisher that could only be described as a fucking nuisance to the gaming industry.

Once bankrupt, RTW devs corroborated EA's story.

Baldur's Gate had a second-party patch to correct issues with the game script, as did SoA, after Bioware stopped updating them.

Baldur's Gate II had several game-breaking issues that were only corrected by the community after Bioware stopped updating it.

NWN likewise had bugs in the storyline that took forever to be fixed, with players having to fix them via console cheats. There were also numerous issues with the implementation of SecuROM, and the patching system would frequently cause critical game files to break or become out of sync.

Do you think that Bioware's reduced-complexity development was, perhaps, an effort to reduce the number of script issues they encountered after launch? Or maybe the reduction in complexity was due to having to develop game systems from scratch, rather than relying on AD&D?

 

[vxicepickxv]

People said EA "ruined APB," even though EA had absolutely *ZERO* input into the development process, and warned RTW that releasing the game in the half-assed state it was in at launch was a bad idea.

People said SOE "ruined Vanguard," despite SOE being the *last* publisher to pick up the game, and despite the developers constantly re-writing entire sections of the game on a yearly basis, missing every single development milestone and deadline by years.

You work at EA? You know what control EA exercises? Has Bioware come out and said that EA forced them to make all the changes? No, they haven't. In fact, Bioware has lauded all the changes they were "forced" to make. They seem to be incredibly happy with the design decisions they made in DA2 and ME2.

Do you work at EA? Do you know they actually warned APB's developer to not release the game in a half developed state?

Publishers can make their studios declare anything. In fact, up until the joining with EA has Bioware ever released dumbed down games? It seems that the moment they joined up with EA they released two games still in development and then released sequels to those two games, one rushed and half assed and another dumbed down. Is this Bioware's track record? Have you seen Bioware release games like that? It seems a little suspicious that they'd choose to go in a new direction exactly after a buyout by a publisher that could only be described as a fucking nuisance to the gaming industry.

Once bankrupt, RTW devs corroborated EA's story.

Baldur's Gate had a second-party patch to correct issues with the game script, as did SoA, after Bioware stopped updating them.

Baldur's Gate II had several game-breaking issues that were only corrected by the community after Bioware stopped updating it.

NWN likewise had bugs in the storyline that took forever to be fixed, with players having to fix them via console cheats. There were also numerous issues with the implementation of SecuROM, and the patching system would frequently cause critical game files to break or become out of sync.

Do you think that Bioware's reduced-complexity development was, perhaps, an effort to reduce the number of script issues they encountered after launch? Or maybe the reduction in complexity was due to having to develop game systems from scratch, rather than relying on AD&D?

Neverwinter Nights was D&D 3.0, not AD&D. Now, please name a PC game that's been put out in the past decade that has NEVER CRASHED ON ANY SYSTEM EVER.


Someone mentioned Vanguard, which was purchased by SoE, and then promptly brought to market in an attempt to kill Vanguard, because it threatened Everquest.

 

[ciasteczkowyp]

Judging from:
NFS: World
and
Dragon Age: Legends
and
Dragon Age II
and
World of Star Wars Craft (In development, but we already know that it will be exactly as the name states)

No, they have not.

 

[TheComfyChair]

Name a console game in the last decade that's never crashed for that matter. As programs become more complex, crashes are inevitable.

 

[AndyFromMonday]

People said EA "ruined APB," even though EA had absolutely *ZERO* input into the development process, and warned RTW that releasing the game in the half-assed state it was in at launch was a bad idea.

People said SOE "ruined Vanguard," despite SOE being the *last* publisher to pick up the game, and despite the developers constantly re-writing entire sections of the game on a yearly basis, missing every single development milestone and deadline by years.

You work at EA? You know what control EA exercises? Has Bioware come out and said that EA forced them to make all the changes? No, they haven't. In fact, Bioware has lauded all the changes they were "forced" to make. They seem to be incredibly happy with the design decisions they made in DA2 and ME2.

Do you work at EA? Do you know they actually warned APB's developer to not release the game in a half developed state?

Publishers can make their studios declare anything. In fact, up until the joining with EA has Bioware ever released dumbed down games? It seems that the moment they joined up with EA they released two games still in development and then released sequels to those two games, one rushed and half assed and another dumbed down. Is this Bioware's track record? Have you seen Bioware release games like that? It seems a little suspicious that they'd choose to go in a new direction exactly after a buyout by a publisher that could only be described as a fucking nuisance to the gaming industry.

Once bankrupt, RTW devs corroborated EA's story.

Baldur's Gate had a second-party patch to correct issues with the game script, as did SoA, after Bioware stopped updating them.

Baldur's Gate II had several game-breaking issues that were only corrected by the community after Bioware stopped updating it.

NWN likewise had bugs in the storyline that took forever to be fixed, with players having to fix them via console cheats. There were also numerous issues with the implementation of SecuROM, and the patching system would frequently cause critical game files to break or become out of sync.

Do you think that Bioware's reduced-complexity development was, perhaps, an effort to reduce the number of script issues they encountered after launch? Or maybe the reduction in complexity was due to having to develop game systems from scratch, rather than relying on AD&D?

How do you know RTW did that?

Yes, in the past correcting mistakes was hard. Shouldn't that be easier? It's 2011 after all. Also, bullshit. Scripting had nothing to do with the reduced complexity. Again, the games started sucking after being bought by EA. It's not that hard to make a connection and frankly, saying that scripting is the reason their recent games have sucked is absolute bullshit when they managed to get past that and deliver with every single game before being bought by EA(Mass Effect 1 was almost finished when EA bought them and Dragon Age was in development since 2004). As soon as the buyout occured suddenly Bioware starts focusing on DLC and the quality of their games started dropping. It's not to hard to make a connection here.

Bioware delivered before and is now suddenly not doing so. They're rushing out games(Dragon Age 2) and dumbing down others by removing stats, which they easily implemented in past games, and focusing entirely on the combat. Bioware showed a wilingess to go past those problems and hardships and deliver and now suddenly they've gotten lazy? I call shenanigans.

The issues with NWN did not affect all players. In fact, it was a limited number of players that experienced those gamebreaking bugs.

 

[Sizzle Montyjing]

You cannot 'fail well', you can learn from your mistakes but you cannot 'fail well'.

 

[Latinidiot]

Sales say otherwise.

Sales do not equal quality.

sales equal company succes.

 

[Quesa]

So much hate for what they did to Spore.

 

[whaleswiththumbs]

He felt that it had been the right thing to do, however, and EA was strengthened by embracing its past failings. "We were students of our own failure, we used our failure to shape and impel us to a better strategy, one that we believe will ultimately succeed in ways that our previous strategy, even if perfectly executed, could never have done." Riccitello said that the struggle wasn't over though, and that while the company had won a few of its battles over the last four years - and investors were starting to respond to the changes it had made - there was still lots more to do. "I'm not standing in front of shareholders in a flight suit claiming mission accomplished," he said. "The lesson isn't over, [but] we've learned a lot."

I really don't think you can say that until you've WON! EA, you are still losing. But i can see this is your thing, I want to compare it to Sony's pre-hacked attitude. Very cocky, and i hope for the day someone brings you down a few notches too.

 

[joystickjunki3]

I thought this meant the end of Project Ten Dollar...

 

[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.

 

[ThisIsSnake]

Good on em, although it is common sense really. I see the Bioware hipsters are in already spouting their rhetoric (according to one changing attack animations in DA2 make it an action game xD).

http://www.google.com/recaptcha/api/image?c=03AHJ_Vuvtwcp7YjfZGVAnmLo3UB58EIBllW8xKL2LIEAH7roDEFFDrkeSCac5WA9szxPqTH6kZuAICmH5l39VSLrKROk2g0UujhJTtfcVgNWq8xDWq2D_IvqqaC4f_q5XaERBXZlB1Q3GToeNgC5ctH9yYOI_svwKwA

damn they put it in asshole sans.

 

[Azaraxzealot]

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.

i agree. however, most people will usually see this topic as a gateway for "legitimate" hatred for EA, as though they are a group of childhood killing soulless nazis.

change is good, don't just be the angry old guy on the porch yelling at kids to get off "your" lawn (when in fact you just live in a rest home)

besides, i'm not sure what qualifies "us" to judge "quality" since we're basically part of the masses, and the masses think Transformers 2 and X-Men Origins: Wolverine were movies worthy of "A" grades.

 

[Kevlar Eater]

EA is still bad. Since they recovered, they returned to villainy and never looked back.