After Mass Effect: Andromeda and Star Wars: Battlefront II, can we write off EA as a company incapable of releasing a quality product? Quality is apparently not part of the company's culture. I don't see why we should expect Anthem to be any less of a disaster than these two games. At least EA still has sports titles.
[spoiler]For reference, here's the sad story of Mass Effect: Andromeda:
[url]https://kotaku.com/the-story-behind-mass-effect-andromedas-troubled-five-1795886428[/url]
And here are the review scores for Star Wars: Battlefront II:
[url]http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-4/star-wars-battlefront-ii[/url]
Need for Speed Payback also looks like a crap game, but who hadn't written off that franchise?[/spoiler]
-
Edited by [SiN]大き氷: 11/28/2017 10:56:28 PMBottom line is that business level decisions are being made and trickle down into the creative aspect. This is especially true, and to an obnoxious degree, in the triple A industry. There are exceptions to this like CD Projekt Red, but for the most part all of the others are nearly all in or venturing into it. If you want games with any sort of passion behind them avoid triple A frankly. The more investors run a company the less about creativity it is. EA is ran by investors, so you are only getting investors trying to get the creative team to make things based on a theorized market model. It has to be a shooter, multiplayer is required, lootboxes are in now, people like RPGs, open worlds, realistic graphics. That's how they work, and especially when the company wants to look good on their financial report they will release a game early before it is actually complete. They know it will sell well enough if they don't allude to the incomplete nature of it. This is proven through demonstration every year. I could keep going but I won't so again just avoid triple A.