So what you're saying is... BioWare could have made a sci-fi intergalactic Alien football game as their GaaS offerings instead.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
According to Jason Schreier, making Anthem was Bioware idea; EA actually gives the studios autonomy and more
- Thread starter Deleted member 5535
- Start date
Sony's games have been increasingly profitable and they close studios that aren't. Even at their worst, they operated like a movie studio with mega hits financing other ventures. These days though, their portfolio is turning into Disney esque at a glance
Anthem was started under the tenure of the doctors, by and for leads at Bioware to stretch their creative legs doing something other than Mass Effect. All games evolve over their development but Anthem is broadly what Bioware set out to make.
No the constraints are there because if theyre asking for X amount of millions of dollars, investors told them they need to hit X amount of projected revenue. They knew what they signed up for when taking this project. Blaming EA for wanting a return for hundreds of millions of dollars is asinine especially when the brunt of the problems with the game would have nothing to do with the publisher interfering. This is how any basic investment works, you ask for X amount of money, they tell you what they need to see before giving you X amount of money-the onus for how they come up with that is on them in addition to accepting the terms in the first place. They could have just worked on another project if they didn't feel comfortable hitting the numbers EA wanted them to. There is nothing misleading here, its just people not understanding how this process plays out and wanting to blame the EA boogieman.
OR bioware could have created a game that didn't require such a significant amount of funding so as to not in turn expect a sizeable amount of long term revenue. But this is the game they wanted to make. THis was their dream project. Not EAs. Theres no way this game wasn't designed from the ground up to be a gaas because all looter games are inherently gaas games at this point. They knew what they were doing when they pitched the idea. Stop blaming EA for their poor development. Every single account, including the ones from bioware, have talked about this being THEIR project and journalists are now backing that they had a lot of autonomy while working on this. Vs what youre arguing which is nothing but conjecture that you can't back up at all.
No hypothetical needed, thats verbatim whats going on in this thread.
EA does have a reputation. Some of it earned. Some of it not. This is clearly a case of the latter. EVery account is conceding that EA did not force this idea on them, nor were they overly involved with it. But here we have people pulling tales from their ass to try and say why Bioware is wrong, the press is wrong, Jason is wrong, because EA put in a number of shitty microtransaction models in their previous games-which oddly enough here isn't even an issue so I'm lost as to what the reputation is if the primary argument against them doesn't even apply to the situation at hand. Serve their master? Jesus christ with the gamers rise up language.
Last edited:
In so far as ME1 matches that original (insane) design doc you could be right, but aside from that, it would be a fools errand tohabe anything but serious doubt. THis of course, says nothing as to if Anthem is actually 'The game bioware has wanted to make all along' as its own dev doc is tailor made to modern EAs expectations.
Last edited:
User banned (5 days): Antagonizing and insulting another member over a series of posts.
Maggotmouth, you responded exactly as I thought you would. So see my other response further up the page.
And don't play dumb with letting EA off the hook for knowing the exact kind of impact only wanting and approving long tail GAAS games has, they're far from dumb.
Also haha at 'conjecture you can't back up given... sourced statements from former devs in lead positions. XD either actually respond to the points people are making or don't bother, no one wants to read your one sided rants.
I have nothing else to say to people living in their made up fantasy world backed up by nothing but their own uninformed accounts. I'll trust the words of the devs, the publisher, and the press (especially Jason) over internet fairy tales
I can't get over how awful the understanding is of how investments work. "They were forced"....No. They asked for an incredible amount of money for a huge game they wanted to work on, EA said sure, but these are the targets were going to need to see for an investment of this size. But according to ERA, EA should be handing out hundreds of millions of dollars out of the goodness of their hearts and not expect to see significant returns on such a huge investment. So of course were running with the narrative that they were pressured into this when by literally every single account from a non internet nobody, thats not what happened at all.
Editing your post to still say nothing. Ok.
Okay, sure.
However, Anthem getting made is heavily influenced by EA's business expectations and practices. An online co-op loot shooter is actually a much easier pitch with access to loads of more funding instead of Bioware's Single Player offerings of the past.
So yeah, they weren't forced to make it, but that doesn't mean that they weren't railroaded into it either.
However, Anthem getting made is heavily influenced by EA's business expectations and practices. An online co-op loot shooter is actually a much easier pitch with access to loads of more funding instead of Bioware's Single Player offerings of the past.
So yeah, they weren't forced to make it, but that doesn't mean that they weren't railroaded into it either.
But even besides gaming, how do they think any simple type of investment works? Its ludicrous.
I have a feeling that Jason's been fed lies. To have been a fly on the wall for the green-light process for Anthem would have been very interesting indeed.
why is it so out of the realm of possibility, that someone would want to make an openworld looter shooter mech/exo-suit game. Its a great idea. Whether u like anthem or not. It went for something thats not currently available. I can't think of another game i can sit down and play rn, that feels like it. Maybe warframe, but in botw's world...and im superman from the shadow of apokolips game?
You still don't know what you're talking about, and to see you continue to use this 'fantasy land' line when you're proud of looking no further or thinking no deeper than 'just looking at published statements' is a little... eehhhhhhhhh, I might feel bad for you. We have plenty of sources that contradict you and you display a very basic understanding at best of how corporate structure works and soft power is used. Like, very basic. I highly doubt you've worked in industries like game dev or shipped products before. The fact that you can't bridge the gap to understanding that people blame EA for their singular approach, and the ramifications that has on game dev and design, even this late into the thread, is baffling.
Likewise that you can't understand that 99% of the people commenting in this thread aren't placing sole blame with EA, because it WAS Biowares project after all, EA just funneled the design elements with their key deliverables, and fronted the money. 'Bioware knew what they were getting into' no shit my dude, they are owned by EA and had to meet EAs expectations of creating a game that could generate massive revenue over years.
So which one is it? Shareholder or useful meat that has yet to spoil? :P
https://www.resetera.com/threads/ac...tudios-autonomy-and-more.105408/post-18862353
Last edited:
The fact that the result is a bad online co-op, bad loot, bad shooter with a bad single player offering is absurd when they had 6 years to do this and apparently a big budget for a AAA+ game.
Someone mentioned this couldn't possibly be a Destiny clone because the design document is so old. Honestly, I wish they had cloned Destiny - even the lore in Destiny gets more interesting in the last DLCs than the keyword salad of Anthem.
Anthem being a mess IS on Bioware to be sure (though without a doubt I bet that Frostbite plays a big part as well). Given how thread bare it is, we know that there must be piles of scrapped content, systems, and prototypes, there's no doubt that Bioware was trying many different things and failing throughout those 6 years, and there was plenty of time for Destiny to have influenced what was ultimately released.
from what I read, seems like the fault rely mostly at Bioware. whether Bioware intent to make Anthem as GAAS from the start, or they add GAAS as concession because they need that high amount of money for their vision doesn't matter. something's wrong from the management of Anthem. the reviews I've read so far give me impression that Bioware simply didn't have the experience to make a GAAS shared world shooter genre. in that case, it should be up to Bioware leadership to add more experienced developer to their team, an example that come to mind is Guerrilla Games adding a bunch of people who are more experienced with open world RPG games.
although maybe they did do that but it still didn't work. things happened, I know making games are not easy and there are a lot of things that can go wrong in development.
although maybe they did do that but it still didn't work. things happened, I know making games are not easy and there are a lot of things that can go wrong in development.
It's obvious. You can watch the e3 2018 demo and see seamless co op for example that never make it in the final product.
You keep talking about evidence to the contrary and have yet to provide a single example of one. No, other projects being impeded in some form by EA does not automatically equate to every project being impeded upon (IE apex legends also were very clear they were given immense freedom to make the game they wanted).
I never said people were solely blaming EA so maybe try reading again. I was only ever commenting on people attempting to place the majority or a large portion of blame on them and suggesting they were forcing bioware into making this game.
That post you linked me to added nothing for context or evidence on your end and only served to evidence you continue to name call me which doesn't do anything to strengthen your argument, it just looks sad on your end that thats what you have to resort to to make a point. Its also sad that you legitimately believe your own conjecture accounts for anything.
Last edited:
It looks like EA made it very clear they want a GaaS game with revenue tail, but in a subtle way, not in an agressive form.
Wasn't this (lack of long-term revenue) the reason they cancelled Amy Hennig's Star Wars project ?
Also, they force the studios to use Frostbite engine.
I know a small handful of people that work their and they're pretty satisfied. Obviously they're not every EA employee, there's bound to be disgruntled employees, but the picture painted of working there never struck me as terrible.
People tend to forget that Mass Effect 3's multiplayer was received quite favorably with 23 million matches played. BioWare asked in a survey to players if they wanted multiplayer in DA:I, and supposedly people didn't say no. And let's not forget DA:I won GOTY from almost every major outlet, including the Game Awards.
Now whether you believe Jason or not is up to you. Just as believing a former BioWare developer saying the opposite is up to you. But BioWare choosing to make a GaaS game should not be that surprising, given their prior history & successes.
Now whether you believe Jason or not is up to you. Just as believing a former BioWare developer saying the opposite is up to you. But BioWare choosing to make a GaaS game should not be that surprising, given their prior history & successes.
Last edited:
Nope, that narrative needs to die cause Bioware themselves confirmed it. And more importantly is the fact that Frostbite was the correct decision by EA for all their studios, a standard set of in house tools for all of them IS what makes sense. Frostbite not being good enough for that or complicated is DICE's fault.
People need to go back and take a listen to Jason's interview to Aaron Flynn.
It's all their fault.
The Division 2 is getting excellent reviews-in-progress. It's a GaaS game. You'll probably play The Last of Us 2. It'll be a GaaS game. Ditto for Uncharted 4.
Asking for a plan for a long term revenue tail is NOT anything close to forcing devs to make a particular type of game.
Andromeda was on EA partly, EA forced Frostbite on them a decent way into development
Andromeda was planned to use Frostbite from the beginning. Also not forced. Just read the Aaron Flynn interview posted above.
And yet we have Apex running on a modified Source. I don't think stardardization is reason enough to throw out expertise and Respawn's gem is there to prove it.
Replaying for visibility. Since people choose to ignore the writing that is right in front of them.
OP
OP
I don't know in what world you live that every game that is not sports from EA bombs. At worst those games don't reach expectations but bomb? Very uncommon.
Never ascribe to malice that which can be explained by incompetence.
On the other hand, it is a boss wanting one of his teams to actually be successful after three vanity projects - the Dead Space trilogy - which didn't light the world on fire commercially and two terrible games with Battlefield Hardline and Dante's Inferno. We all love to say how amazing Dead Space was, but 2 million copies doesn't carry that development budget anymore.
On the other hand, it is a boss wanting one of his teams to actually be successful after three vanity projects - the Dead Space trilogy - which didn't light the world on fire commercially and two terrible games with Battlefield Hardline and Dante's Inferno. We all love to say how amazing Dead Space was, but 2 million copies doesn't carry that development budget anymore.
Yeah, when your publisher demands that you make GaaS, your options are basically limited to:
A) Multiplayer.
B) Open-world with lots of filler, DLC and microtransactions.
Traditionally, neither of those are Bioware's specialties. They tried to do B with Dragon Age: Inquisition and Mass Effect: Andromeda and it didn't work out great. Now they're trying A (with a lot of B) and unsurprisingly, it's not working out great.
When your publisher issues specific monetization and retention requirements, that severely limits your creative freedom.
I think we have different definitions of GaaS. GaaS means a game receives regular updates and content for a lengthy duration post-launch, with the expectation that this support will keep players playing for years. See R6: Siege, Warframe, LoL, Fortnite, etc. Adding a multiplayer mode to your game and then abandoning it a few months after launch doesn't qualify as GaaS.
Last edited:
I can't believe the self denial of that guy. Just own it. You made a bad choice. Why can't people just be honest.
I know... PR and always flipping the negative into something positive. It just looks pathetic.
I've been looking forward to what Casey will do for BW but he can be full of shit too. Prove me wrong, bring on a new era for BioWare.
This post is purely speculation on my part. Please consider that as you read it.
So basically, EA will support you as long as you are able to show them that your game will make a return in the long run.
The headache at that point is, well, what's a sustainable revenue model? Unless you come up with a brand new system, chances are you are going to include mtx in your games. Mtx are tried and true and people will pay for content.
This actually makes more sense to me than EA saying, well, game X is popular so make a clone of it. It's harder for devs to put their hearts and souls into it.
But if you flip it and tell devs, well, make the game you want to make but just remember we want an ROI of such and such such over a period of such and such and such.
What you have is a team that now says, well, we wanted to tell a story about Space Reanger X and add a twist to the genre regarding how aiming or whatever works but since we cannot accomplish that with a traditional SP campaign and free MP; why don't we revise the whole thing around long term sustainability instead. Remember those cool upgrades core to the lore? Scrap that, let's charge for them etc.
The end result is a product that might feel uninspired but underneath it all is fighting for its life. I bet you there are devs who cry inside when the original vision has to be reshaped to fit a revenue model.
The question then is: should this be the norm? Should devs go in with intent to add mtx even before an idea is first pitched?
So basically, EA will support you as long as you are able to show them that your game will make a return in the long run.
The headache at that point is, well, what's a sustainable revenue model? Unless you come up with a brand new system, chances are you are going to include mtx in your games. Mtx are tried and true and people will pay for content.
This actually makes more sense to me than EA saying, well, game X is popular so make a clone of it. It's harder for devs to put their hearts and souls into it.
But if you flip it and tell devs, well, make the game you want to make but just remember we want an ROI of such and such such over a period of such and such and such.
What you have is a team that now says, well, we wanted to tell a story about Space Reanger X and add a twist to the genre regarding how aiming or whatever works but since we cannot accomplish that with a traditional SP campaign and free MP; why don't we revise the whole thing around long term sustainability instead. Remember those cool upgrades core to the lore? Scrap that, let's charge for them etc.
The end result is a product that might feel uninspired but underneath it all is fighting for its life. I bet you there are devs who cry inside when the original vision has to be reshaped to fit a revenue model.
The question then is: should this be the norm? Should devs go in with intent to add mtx even before an idea is first pitched?
Yeah i don't see the big difference either. So EA doesn't directly force devs to produce this live service crap, but Indirectly through financial pressure. And then shuts the studios down if they're not happy with the business model of a certain game.
With this corporate culture it's no wonder that Bioware has gone to shit.
Do people seriously think EA just doesn't leave these studios alone though? It's pretty weird that all this studios working automously just so happen to be making the same types of overly bloated AAA live service games.
This is kinda obvious if you were already under the impression that Bioware did a not-so-great job of building a game around EA's revenue expectations. Just making a game and selling it is some kind of cardinal sin to that company. What I'd put on Bioware is the decision making to dive into a subgenre that even Bungie has difficulty with before the "year two" expansions hit and smooth out the rough edges. You gotta actually get people hooked on the game before you can start gouging them for microtransactions. Nothing about the game from a content, stability, or performance standpoint even comes close.
This was something I wondered about actually, I didn't think EA were all to blame here, but really it's hard to not see it that way because.. Bioware has just made a lot of mistakes in Anthem which they could/should have avoided looking at Destiny/Division etc. as if they weren't quite sure how to make games like then, and made the same mistakes again anyway and new mistakes beyond that, which is even more sad if this was a project they genuinely wanted to get behind and make great.
Really not thought about the game again since beating it as all it wants me to do now is replay the little content it has available over and over again.
Something that will improve I'm sure with time, as did Destiny, but maybe shouldn't have encouraged doing that to the degree they want right now.
Really not thought about the game again since beating it as all it wants me to do now is replay the little content it has available over and over again.
Something that will improve I'm sure with time, as did Destiny, but maybe shouldn't have encouraged doing that to the degree they want right now.
Of course "where's your version of FUT?" doesn't directly translate to lootboxes and gambling mechanics, but when someone like Amy Henning presents a single player game she wants to work on and gets asked that question, how is she going to respond? And will EA accept the answer that "well if we make a kickass SP game it'll sell for years and make money off those sells and recoup costs many times over"?
It makes perfect sense that any studio would want to have a game with a recurring revenue stream.
That revenue means people can keep being employed without having to worry how much money the next game has to make and the next and the next.
Optimally Anthem would keep living forever with part of its profits going to fund other Bioware endeavors, such as the much riskier Single Player games people always clamor for(but rarely actually buy unless its First Party console stuff and ever more rare non exclusive).
That revenue means people can keep being employed without having to worry how much money the next game has to make and the next and the next.
Optimally Anthem would keep living forever with part of its profits going to fund other Bioware endeavors, such as the much riskier Single Player games people always clamor for(but rarely actually buy unless its First Party console stuff and ever more rare non exclusive).
Do keep in mind that Apex started development before Respawn was owned by EA, that happened on Nov 2017. Chances are their Star Wars game is being done on Frostbite. Also, the point is that EA doesn't enforce the usage of Frostbite, they prefer the studios to use it since you have the people capable of modifying to your needs right there with you.
And still, if Frostbite wasn't capable of doing everything Bioware wanted, then set ambitions to realistic goals and design around those limitations, you can't simply launch the game broken and blame the engine for that. All the problems they had with Frostbite are consistent cause the same people keep working with it.
