EA Gave BioWare "Complete Creative Control"

[TsunamiWombat]

I don't buy it.

Why else would Bioware shove a completely unnecessary multiplayer mode into a singleplayer franchise, if not to appease their corporate paymasters?

Oddly enough, I felt like that Multiplayer was the best aspect of the game.

 

[Diana Kingston-Gabai]

We only get to see things from the perspective of the games released and the odd industry shakeup that makes the news. We have our ingrained ideals of how it "Should" operate and how it "Does", and then there's what the Publishers and Devs think based on flow charts and demographics. Ergo, none of us can handle that Bioware made a couple of subpar games so we blame EA (not that there isn't any truth to that idea)

If this were an isolated incident, sure, but BioWare is hardly the first company to experience a downturn in product quality after being absorbed into EA. It happened to Maxis, it happened to Westwood, it happened to Bullfrog and Pandemic. Clearly there's something more at work here.

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

Bioware had complete CREATIVE control. Development deadlines are not part of the "Creativity" so when EA gave them a release date, Bioware was forced to rush their game and get 'creative' with the ending rather than flesh it out better if they had more time.

Lie of omission. EA is good at this.

....EVERYONE has deadlines, everyone. Because if deadlines aren't set, artists tend to piss away WAY too much money to be healthy. When you're dealing with enormous amounts of funding it's best to set a damn deadline.

 

[NinjaDeathSlap]

You know that there are plenty of other reasons for someone to move on from their job other than 'their bosses are arseholes' right? If I remember rightly, this was the guy who left to start brewing beer, so just maybe, after so many years of working in the videogame industry, he was just burned out and wanted to try something new. Even if that not the case, the possibilities are still wide open. Perhaps he moved house somewhere further away and didn't want to commute, or perhaps there was a change in family priorities, and so on and so forth.

Remember, this guy isn't beholden to EA anymore. They're not paying him, he's not under contract. In short, he owes them nothing. So, if he had anything majorly negative to say about the company, what exactly would be stopping him from coming out and saying it?

All good points and sure you are more than entitled to think that way if you like. I decide not to however.

Both he and his partner decide to finish at the same time for random reasons. Sure. Maybe EA didn't exercise complete control creatively like this guy said but they did create the deadlines. And So after leaving the industry the guy decides to destroy his legacy by admitting that basically every bad decision his company made recently came from...him?his partner? Fairies? Or possibly the corporate monolith whose policies Bioware seemingly started following shortly after being taken over by said corporate monolith.

Like I said, it just seems a bit bullshitty to me. But fair enough it could be just an innocent few positive comments an amateur brewer might say about his ex bosses just after they had been voted most evil company or...whatever.

Call me a cynic

I don't know so much about "destroying his legacy". It's entirely possible (I'd even say likely, considering he made them) that he's proud of the work he and his co-workers did, and wouldn't describe them as bad decisions. Not only that... you'll want to sit down for this part because I may be about to blow your mind... there may well be large numbers of consumers who agree with him! I know right! The very thought that somewhere out there there are people that honest to God like Dragon Age 2, and Mass Effect 3, and even in some cases Star Wars: The Old Republic (No really, I'm not even kidding)! :O

Was that too much sarcasm? Anyway, while I'm not a fan of EA's approach to business lately, all this guy is saying is that he never got the impression working for Bioware that there was an armada of faceless suits from EA constantly looking over his shoulder, and I see no reason why he isn't to be believed in that.

 

[6SteW6]

I wonder how much money EA paid him to say that.
Kind of a surprise how he says that RIGHT after Ea is named Worst company of America, isn't it?

No not really, the press is probably gathering a lot of statements from EA staff members on why they think their company was voted worst in America. What is surprising is that somebody had something positive to say about the company.

 

[1337mokro]

This is not something you really want to say.

If you're gonna say that hiring Mac Walters, a man who not so much writes as flings feces at paper, was a decision made entirely by Bioware and no one else. If you are gonna tell that basically Dragon Age 2, Mass Effect 2, Mass Effect 3 and Sonic Chronicles (yes Bioware did make a Sonic Game) were all basically Bioware doing what Bioware does then you leave me no choice.

I can no longer detect a pulse of creativity and quality. I have to pronounce this developer dead. Time of death March 6, 2012.

 

[BloodRed Pixel]

that makes it actually, even worse. Because now we KNOW that Bioware sucked.

 

[LordMonty]

A) This Dude got paid a lot of money on the way out of EA/Bioware his words may be sugared.

B) With that said he probally is telling the truth - like Blizzard(in relation to Activision) Bioware was a golden goose for EA upto when it stopped being one... so they would've trusted them with alot of control.

C) Corperation law states make money... i may have abridged there but long short of it they need to make cash and are by law forced to try with all there might.

D) Meh, the gaming market is changing and changing fast - how this all comes to an end will be of great intrest. Hate EA now but when Disney buy up there corpse like remains for giggles your'll rue the day

 

[FalloutJack]

I'm sorry, but I have to blame the owners still. Think back to...A Bug's Life. When you are the one in charge, IT IS YOUR FAULT.

 

[Ed130 The Vanguard]

Bioware had complete CREATIVE control. Development deadlines are not part of the "Creativity" so when EA gave them a release date, Bioware was forced to rush their game and get 'creative' with the ending rather than flesh it out better if they had more time.

Lie of omission. EA is good at this.

....EVERYONE has deadlines, everyone. Because if deadlines aren't set, artists tend to piss away WAY too much money to be healthy. When you're dealing with enormous amounts of funding it's best to set a damn deadline.

Yes, but it doesn't help when the deadline isn't feasible. See DA2 for the results.

 

[duchaked]

doesn't explain why ME3 had the EA mandatory MP bit lol
don't get me wrong I actually quite enjoyed the co-op experience there since it played into the bigger picture of the campaign (props to BioWare for that one) but still

 

[ZombieMonkey7]

How EA views it's customers

Now gee I wonder why they decided to use such a deflection tactic at a time like this? Hmmmm *glances over at worst company award* Well there is no way to truly figure out who is to blame or why EA is doing this, so I guess it was all Bioware's fault to begin with. Sorry EA please forgive us!

 

[hentropy]

This actually sounds feasible, it seems like the biggest problems with the last two Bioware games have been rushed development, which isn't creative control. I didn't really see anyone blaming EA for ME3's ending, in fact they were probably the ones who shat themselves over the Internet fallout and ordered them to make the extended cut.

But as the wide old sage Miyamoto once said, a rushed game is never good... and EA does set the release schedule. I'd say EA needs to give them more time to work with and Bioware needs to go back to its roots, and if you ignore the ending ME3 was a big step in the right direction. They seem to have taken their time a bit more with the new DA game, and hopefully they'll go back to the proven formula there, too.

 

[LiquidGrape]

Spoiler

ROFL!!!

look I am normally a reasonable individual, perfectly willing to look at both sides of a story, and to give developers and publishers the benefit of the doubt. I will often play Devil's Advocate in their defense. But I'm sorry, I am also capable of applying independent observation to a situation.

In this case it is very easy to see the change in the nature and caliber of Bioware's games that began as soon as they were aquired by EA. They may say that they were given a free hand, and I am sure in many ways they were. But ALL of the games that they have put out since have the unmistakable feel of rushed development, early release, poor QC, and a certain patern of corporate oversight that we have seen far to often in EA acquired companies.

Since being bought out Bioware has released DA2, SWTOR and ME3. And the problems with all of them are quite frankly nearly identical. And they all clearly reek of a company that while they may have had full control of the games content, gameplay and stories, had lost final control on funding decisions, development schedules and release schedules. And the problem is mirrored almost completely in virtually every well known development house that EA has borg'ed. Mythic and WAR anybody? How about what happened to Origin back in the day? The list goes on and on. Yes EA may have left the creative decisions intact. But they started doing the accounting. In some cases that might have been an understandable decision, but the end result is we end up with games who are primarily driven by corporate accountants and MBA's rather than actual creative people. And it shows with every single one of EA's games released in the past 10-12 years.

And this, kids, is how you take conjecture and turn it into a mini-essay.

 

[Olas]

Hello, this is Bioware, I am speaking of my own free will. EA is a great and wonderful company, ignore everythign you've heard from the outside media. It is all lies. EA never did anything to influence us when we were creating Mass Effect 3. I think OW!! [sub]stop it! I'm reading it just like you asked.[/sub] Um... EA is, no wait, ...I think you are all being too hard on EA. EA is not evil, EA is a fair and just company that wants nothing more than to satisfy you plebes [sub]you really think that's a good word to[/sub] OW!!! OKAY!! OKAY!! Um.. We at EA, I mean Bioware, know that our apologies have largely come across as insincere, that is why they have asked us to speak for them. Please continue to buy excellent EA products through our new convenient client Origin.

[sub]please help us!! They stopped feeding us, I don't know how much long[/sub] OWW!!! GOD!!! STOP!! PLEASE!!

I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T MEAN IT, I'LL DO ANYTHING!! NO, NOT THE BEES!!! AAAUGH!!!!

-end transmission.

 

[Nurb]

Maybe you shouldn't have let EA buy you, big guy.

I can't imagine pre-EA Bioware would have witheld content, sell it for extra, and put a commercial for it in-game that takes the player to a website as with Dragon Age.

 

[ThriKreen]

doesn't explain why ME3 had the EA mandatory MP bit lol
don't get me wrong I actually quite enjoyed the co-op experience there since it played into the bigger picture of the campaign (props to BioWare for that one) but still

Cuz maybe the people working on it had plans for multiplayer since the first incarnation and finally got a chance to implement it in a meaningful way rather than have it feel tacked on with shallow deathmatch style gameplay?