http://epicstream.com/news/Bioware-Puts-An-End-To-Mass-Effect-Franchise
Please only Bioware and EA representatives answers. I want a reliable source.
I want to know if there's any truth to this!
Moved cause yeah, not Anthem related...MCSS
@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.
@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
@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.
Well, I don't think that the Mass Effect franchise has the status of cancelled. ME:A is finished as far they're concerned. No dlc and only support for mp is what it is cause I guess they still want people to spend money on gear packs or whatever.
I think I saw an interview with some EA guy who said that ME as a franchise isn't dead but what that means is unclear.
They still made plenty of money with the release it seems and they're happy to leave it at that from a financial point of view. What's unclear is when they might pick up ME again and in what form. Will the ME:A story be continued or have they concluded that this story line isn't successful?
I've got this feeling that ME:A across the board didn't get near the impact ME1-3 had with Shepard at the helm. It would be a weak premise then to continue on. The next question is then will they use ME:A as background still for a new hero within this new setting or will they completely abandon the whole of it and start fresh with a completely new idea making ME:A more of a "we tried, we failed, let's move on and do something completely new again" type of thing.
Clearly they wouldn't want to invest big into a new game within the ME:A scope if people aren't really excited about it. Of course there are still some unfinished story lines within ME:A so that could be...problematic.
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.
Personally, I think we should contact Bioware and tell to give us a expansion (Aquarian Arc, who kill the founder, and who is the benefactor)
@Bioware
@MassEffect
https://www.facebook.com/masseffect
http://answers.ea.com/t5/Mass-Effect-Andromeda/ct-p/mass-effect-andromeda-en
BioWare Edmonton
200-4445 Calgary Trail NW
Edmonton AB
Canada T6H 5R7
Phone: 780-430-0164
Fax: 780-439-6374
BioWare Austin
7700 West Parmer Lane
Suite 250 -- Building C
Austin, TX 78729
Phone: 512-382-8682
Email Inquiries
Contact at Bioware dotcom
@SaintHedgehog wrote:
BioWare Montréal
2200 Stanley Street
Montreal QC
Canada H3A 1R6
Phone: 514-448-8800
Fax: 514-448-8846
@SaintHedgehog BioWare Montreal doesn't exist anymore. They have merged with Motive Studios and are working on Star Wars: Battlefront II.
@Fred_vdp wrote:They make a lot of money with multiplayer purchases. If that helps finance the single player campaign, I'm all for it.
If...
I'm sure they made enough from their game sales to pay back the investment and then some. Of course they don't mind making more money off it but in the end there is nothing SP coming out anymore, so I don't see how your scenario makes any sense. They effectively closed the door on that and MP is the only part that still gets attention as they indicated.
So all this is going to pay for is the EAware profit margin, nothing more. Mind you, that's fair enough if people are willing to pay for that, but let's not have any illusions about it financing the SP side.
