I think EA, being the impatient idiots as they are, got impatient, told them to rush it out the door, hence the bugs, glitches, unfinished feelings of the game in general and then EA wonders why the game failed to meet expectations.......idiots.
What i would do is give the Studio what we want, the funding for it and tell them to get it done and ask for an update every 2 years until its done....how hard is that? i mean seriously?
I may have my own impatience problems, but even i know, the longer you work on a project, majority of the time, the better the product is when it is completed and these guys are meant to be better at this than i am.......i guess anyone can be a game publisher?
@JamieK81 wrote:
I think EA, being the impatient idiots as they are, got impatient, told them to rush it out the door, hence the bugs, glitches, unfinished feelings of the game in general and then EA wonders why the game failed to meet expectations.......idiots.
EA was willing to delay the game by five months. I wonder who ultimately decided against it.
I think EA wasn't expecting it's Original Mass Effect player base to hate on MEA as hard as they did, along with how unpolished they made MEA compared to the original trilogy by making it the game more open world. While yes this could be a terrible move by the corporation we still have hope that the hype and love of the Mass effect Movie could revitalize the Mass Effect Project.
@mico10052 wrote:
While yes this could be a terrible move by the corporation we still have hope that the hype and love of the Mass effect Movie could revitalize the Mass Effect Project.
The movie has been in development hell for years and I think they were expecting Mass Effect Andromeda to be such a success that the movie's production would get back on track. The Mass Effect series is not currently in the best position, so it seems to risky to finance a big budget movie now.
I dont think EA are in that good a position, let alone the Mass Effect Franchise. Star Wars Battlefront series definitely makes money, but people dont like the pay to win aspect of it, and thats a competitive market. Anthem is delayed and that might be down to them wanting to get it right, or feeling that the stink about MEA is going to hit sales. There seems to be a magic 93%, in that if a game goes out of favour it loses 93% of its players. I think MEA has hit that, or is close to it. Those are the players that look for good games and have the money to invest in them. Destiny 2, with the preorder and season pass is around $200 and people are queuing up for it. I personally dont like it, having checked out some youtube on it, but a lot of people do and one of the main sites that rubbished MEA's facial animations is fawning over it. Chances of a MEA movie are low, game to movie adaptations are historically bad performers at the box office.
I don't hate it, I am still having fun with the single player game, I think I am on my third play-through.
But I do hate the obsession with Multi player. I have no interest in "Ping is King game Play".
I play single player, and that is what I enjoyed about DAO, DA awakening, DA2, DAI, ME, ME2, ME3 ( not so much ME3 ), and ME Andromeda. They give me my personal fantasy.
I just wish they would continue to do what they once did really well, give use great story's, and a wonderful personal fantasy that we can shape, as we go, for better or worse.
DAO had for me the most diverse choice system of any of there games, I still really enjoy that one. MY choice in character made a major difference in the start of the game, and because of the different treatment, of Elf, Noble, and slave cast, as well as choices in Race. It was and amazing experience.
I would really like to have more Bioware magic like that in DAO.
But mainly I just want the Really good single player games.
Let Doom, and The rip off artists of Blizzard, and others like them, do the "Ping is King game Play" thing.
They make a lot of money with multiplayer purchases. If that helps finance the single player campaign, I'm all for it.
@Fred_vdp wrote:
@JamieK81 wrote:I think EA, being the impatient idiots as they are, got impatient, told them to rush it out the door, hence the bugs, glitches, unfinished feelings of the game in general and then EA wonders why the game failed to meet expectations.......idiots.
EA was willing to delay the game by five months. I wonder who ultimately decided against it.
BSN.boards.net were responsible for this game being published like this. they were impatient for it to come out.
It had nothing to do with bsn.boards.net being impatient and I'm pretty sure you know it. You have some very personal issues against that forum for whatever reason, but that is not fuel to just make every post you make about them now is it? There is plenty of information now out there published in various locations that should clue you in on some of the reasons why it reached the public in the state it got to us in, but i can tell you now i wasn't impatient for it, but i was very much eagerly awaiting its release.. just as i would any big title that is in the series of games that i really enjoy.
I've summarised SOME of the info that's out there about mass effects development period, but i'm only going on what i've read here and there, please do your own research to find out more. In fact I encourage it.
Mass Effect was supposedly 5 years in the making, it is no secret whatsoever that they had a model for procedural generation of planets in mind when they were first putting the game together, and wanted a truly exploration feel to the game, as well as realise many of the things they wanted to do when they first started the mass effect project in the first place. With resources stretched to make certain things work, and that includes the hard task of making the frostbite engine work within this type of game, time marched on and various issues crept in.. map size for one.. major hurdle, they wanted large maps and they were trying to make it work and naturally this delayed the product yet more. Then there was the supposed attrition of staff members, the two main bioware studio's being at odds over timescales which in a main was likely down to team sizes being too small for the size and scale of some of the development requirements etc..
Anyway, long story short, 2014 was apparently a very very trying year for ME:A's development, and in 2015, had to make a call on the actual fun aspect of the procedural generated system and by then and had to then build the planets manually instead, and also drastically as we've seen reduce the number of planets you can actually visit down to small amount that made it to the final game.
They were running to a likely imposed deadline by then, the game had been 'in-development' for that long and they had to get a product to market.. at the end of the day money and time had been spent by the bucket load, and the fans in general, NOT JUST BSN.BOARDS.NET, but probably everyone who had already been eagerly waiting 5 years had already been told by then that the game was due to be released by a certain point not knowing of course the troubled development the product had had, either.
So we got what we got by release date, by then it was likely tied in, and probably they would have liked just a bit longer to polish the game a bit more, but just like anything you can keep polishing but do you ever achieve the shine you are truly after.
@Skauron wrote:Mass Effect was supposedly 5 years in the making, it is no secret whatsoever that they had a model for procedural generation of planets in mind when they were first putting the game together, and wanted a truly exploration feel to the game, as well as realise many of the things they wanted to do when they first started the mass effect project in the first place. With resources stretched to make certain things work, and that includes the hard task of making the frostbite engine work within this type of game, time marched on and various issues crept in.. map size for one.. major hurdle, they wanted large maps and they were trying to make it work and naturally this delayed the product yet more. Then there was the supposed attrition of staff members, the two main bioware studio's being at odds over timescales which in a main was likely down to team sizes being too small for the size and scale of some of the development requirements etc..
Anyway, long story short, 2014 was apparently a very very trying year for ME:A's development, and in 2015, had to make a call on the actual fun aspect of the procedural generated system and by then and had to then build the planets manually instead, and also drastically as we've seen reduce the number of planets you can actually visit down to small amount that made it to the final game.
They were running to a likely imposed deadline by then, the game had been 'in-development' for that long and they had to get a product to market.. at the end of the day money and time had been spent by the bucket load, and the fans in general, NOT JUST BSN.BOARDS.NET, but probably everyone who had already been eagerly waiting 5 years had already been told by then that the game was due to be released by a certain point not knowing of course the troubled development the product had had, either.
So we got what we got by release date, by then it was likely tied in, and probably they would have liked just a bit longer to polish the game a bit more, but just like anything you can keep polishing but do you ever achieve the shine you are truly after.
This is the timeline I've seen reported elsewhere as well. Who knows what exactly went wrong, but we know something clearly wasn't going well with development in those first 2-3 years. Who's fault that is... hard to say. But it's NOT the player's fault (this comment isn't aimed at you, but at those who say the players are the reason for ME:A's failure).
ME:A as it was released, regardless of bugs, regardless of lack of character customization, regardless of weird animations, etc. was NEVER going to be a great game. It's a fine game, and that's that. It's worth buying and playing, but it's not what it should have been.
@CassandraSaturn wrote:
BSN.boards.net were responsible for this game being published like this. they were impatient for it to come out.
Is that an assumption or is this backed by developer comments? I strongly doubt a major publisher would purposely release a game in an unfinished state because of commenters on an online forum.
According to this poll on the BSN forum, the vast majority of players believe that in hindsight the game needed a delay: http://bsn.boards.net/thread/12365/willing-delay-andromeda-months-needed
