191 réponses à ce sujet

[Ridwan]

This thread pretty much reveals some peoples overinflated ego.

Yeah sue us for liking Dragon Age 2.

[slimshedim]

Rickin10 wrote...

I've said it before, Bioware will be gone in 2 years tops, like all the other great devs EA has harvested.

I sincerely hope it'll come to that. They totally deserve it.

[upsettingshorts]

Sarevok Synder wrote...

Why would EA pay so much for a failing company?

Look I'd have to explain economics to you and I don't have time to start with concepts as basic as "branding" and "competition" and "expected value."  I'd also have to explain how common a business practice it is for a larger company to buy out a promising, if struggling, smaller one.  

But it's not my job to educate you.

Take a class or something.  Learn about cause and effect.  Abandon your chidlishly simplistic concept of "failing."

Then we can have a discussion.

slimshedim wrote...

Rickin10 wrote...

I've said it before, Bioware will be gone in 2 years tops, like all the other great devs EA has harvested.

I sincerely hope it'll come to that. They totally deserve it.

 

Your egotism is staggering.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 08 avril 2012 - 06:30 .

[Paragon Fury]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Paragon Fury wrote...

Bioware has screwed the pooch 4 times in 3 years.

[Citation needed]

Dragon Age 2

Star Wars: The Old Republic

Mass Effect 3: From Ashes DLC

Mass Effect 3 Ending

Well, it might be 4 times in 4 years - I'm forgetting exactly when DA2 came out.

And yes, I consider From Ashes and the Ending to be serious enough events to be considered separate events. Hell, you might get to add another pooch screwed if this "Extended Cut" doesn't deliver.

[upsettingshorts]

Paragon Fury wrote...

Dragon Age 2

What about it?  Do you know if it's made a profit?  By what metric are you rating this a disaster?

Paragon Fury wrote...

Star Wars: The Old Republic

Forbes:  World of Warcraft Admits Subscribers are Leaving for The Old Republic 
Star Wars: The Old Republic still growing after strangely smooth launch

Paragon Fury wrote... 

Mass Effect 3: From Ashes DLC

What about it?  Pretty much every developer has DLC, and pretty much every developer takes it on the chin for it.  And pretty much every developer keeps doing it, which might be indicative of something  if people stopped to think.

Paragon Fury wrote...  

Mass Effect 3 Ending

For a game they rightly point out is doing just fine in sales and, again, see DA2's comment.  Do you know if ME3 was profitable?  

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 08 avril 2012 - 06:35 .

[Sarevok Synder]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Look I'd have to explain economics to you and I don't have time to start with concepts as basic as "branding" and "competition" and "expected value."  I'd also have to explain how common a business practice it is for a larger company to buy out a promising, if struggling, smaller one.  

But it's not my job to educate you.

Take a class or something.  Learn about cause and effect.  Abandon your chidlishly simplistic concept of "failing."

Then we can have a discussion.

*YAWN* Your banter is haphazard.

Are EA a charity now? They bought up Bioware to allow them to bloom! And for 750 Million.... Yeah right.

[jimmyw404]

You're assuming too much about EA's influence. EA isn't known for asking developers to make erratic and dangerous choices in their games. They're more known for asking developers to NOT take chances.

But yeah, Bioware's credit is in the ****ter after DA2 and ME3.

[upsettingshorts]

Sarevok Synder wrote...

Are EA a charity now? 

See, you don't understand any of the terms I listed, or you wouldn't arrive at this hilarious interpretation of events.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 08 avril 2012 - 06:37 .

[Sarevok Synder]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

See, you don't understand any of the terms I listed, or you wouldn't arrive at this hilarious interpretation of events.

Terms? You know the terms, conditions and circumstances under which EA purchased of Bioware now!!?

Post them here!!!


Yes, paying 750 Million for a "struggling" company can only be considered charity. Or you're just making it up as you go along, that's far more likely. 

Modifié par Sarevok Synder, 08 avril 2012 - 06:42 .

[upsettingshorts]

Sarevok Synder wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

See, you don't understand any of the terms I listed, or you wouldn't arrive at this hilarious interpretation of events.

Terms? You know the terms, conditions and circumstances under which EA purchased of Bioware now!!?

Post them here!!!

Talk about haphazard banter.

Sarevok Synder wrote...

Yes, paying 750 Million for a "struggling" company can only be considered charity. Or you're just making it up as you go along, that's far more likely.

Oh look, more bald assertions.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 08 avril 2012 - 06:48 .

[Sarevok Synder]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

See, you don't understand any of the terms I listed, or you wouldn't arrive at this hilarious interpretation of events.


Talk about haphazard banter.



Oh look, more bald assertions.

http://www.msnbc.msn...oware-pandemic/

No bald assertions, that's what they paid


Not haphazard, you're that one who claimed they paid so much for a "struggling" developer.  

[PaddlePop]

Ah whatever, I need to take a nap. Who cares if Bioware goes under. I certainly don't. 

Modifié par PaddlePop, 08 avril 2012 - 06:50 .

[mesmerizedish]

PaddlePop wrote...

Lol, and like a tiny steam engine, you just go on ...and ...on and... on and... on...  How many threads have posted the same arguments ad nauseaum? Listen I get it you're THAT guy, the dude that flies the bioware flag high, but it's getting old now.   We get it, you love Bioware, and they can never do anything wrong.

But, you're a little ridiculous, mate.

...

Your counterargument to "you have zero facts" is this ad hominem against someone who so clearly is not "THAT guy" as to make one question your competency to use a PC.

'kay.

[upsettingshorts]

Sarevok Synder wrote...

http://www.msnbc.msn...oware-pandemic/

No bald assertions, that's what they paid

You are so out of your depth you actually thought I was talking about how much they paid.

Sarevok Synder wrote... 

Not haphazard, you're that one who claimed they paid so much for a "struggling" developer.  

On what planet is buy low/sell high not a thing companies do in capitalism?  

You know, buy the well known developer that has hit some recent major struggles, gain exclusive publishing rights for their valuable brand, make ****loads of long term money off of them?  "Charity."  Lol.

Here's a basic dramatization since you can't read between the lines at all, for some reason:

"Hey BioWare, you're in a bind and need money.  If we buy you out, you'll have all the money you need."
"But we won't be independent anymore and you'll run us and publish all of our games and we'll be beholden to you,"
"Yeah, but we think with our backing we can make a huge profit together with your name, team, and customer base combined with our resources."

*BioWare goes from barely releasing one AAA game in a multiyear period to releasing 3 AAA titles within a little over a year under the EA umbrella*

That you cant fathom anything like this exchange taking place is dumbfounding.  

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 08 avril 2012 - 06:57 .

[Sarevok Synder]

Upsettingshorts wrote...



On what planet is buy low/sell high not a thing companies do in capitalism?  

You know, buy the well known developer that has hit some recent major struggles, gain exclusive publishing rights for their valuable brand, make ****loads of long term money off of them?  "Charity."  Lol.

Here's a basic dramatization since you can't read between the lines at all, for some reason:

"Hey BioWare, you're in a bind and need money.  If we buy you out, you'll have all the money you need."
"But we won't be independent anymore and you'll run us and publish all of our games and we'll be beholden to you,"
"Yeah, but we think with our backing we can make a huge profit together with your name, team, and customer base combined with our resources."

*BioWare goes from barely releasing one game in a multiyear period to releasing 3 AAA titles within a little over a year under the EA umbrella*

That you cant fathom anything like this exchange taking place is dumbfounding.  

Out of my depth? You're here trying to pass your clueless opinions off as fact and you've the nerve to attempt to belittle others!! Fanboys, you're good for a laugh, I 'll give you that much.


You have yet to provide any evidence that Bioware were struggling. Bald assertions is all you have.

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...
...

Your counterargument to "you have zero facts" is this ad hominem against someone who so clearly is not "THAT guy" as to make one question your competency to use a PC.

'kay.

There's something brown on your nose.

Modifié par Sarevok Synder, 09 avril 2012 - 09:39 .

[axl99]

This is such a one-sided discussion. I bet none of you would be talking like that if you ever worked in game development.

But who am I kidding. Forget Bioware. A lot of you don't give a rat's ass about the crap a game dev goes through to make something everyone picks apart anyway.

Go on. Keep voting with your money. But don't expect studios to do everything you say just because you have something in your wallet. Unless you're an actual investor.

[upsettingshorts]

Sarevok Synder wrote...

You have yet to provide any evidence that Bioware were struggling. Bald assertions is all you have.

I've provided a bloody mountain of circumstantial evidence, that you've chosen to ignore in favor of your counter-explanation that "money talks" without actually providing any evidence as to what it said.  Which makes your discounting of said circumstantial evidence hypocritical and unjustifiable.  

I have circumstantial evidence.  You have no evidence.  But you continue asserting, by implication, that your lack of evidence is "better" than my circumstantial evidence.  That's a bald assertion.

You are literally incapable of understanding how baseless your own position is.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 08 avril 2012 - 07:06 .

[Darth Krytie]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Sarevok Synder wrote...

You have yet to provide any evidence that Bioware were struggling. Bald assertions is all you have.

I've provided a bloody mountain of circumstantial evidence, that you've chosen to ignore in favor of your counter-explanation that "money talks" without actually providing any evidence as to what it said.  Which makes your discounting of said circumstantial evidence hypocritical and unjustifiable.  

I have circumstantial evidence.  You have no evidence.  But you continue asserting, by implication, that your lack of evidence is "better" than my circumstantial evidence.  That's a bald assertion.

You are literally incapable of understanding how baseless your own position is.

It's simple, really. Companies that are financially viable on their own and don't need help to maintain success generally don't get bought out. BioWare wanted the benefits being a part of EA could provide. If they didn't need EA, I doubt they'd have made the decision.

Shorts, hon, the truth is that people want to blame EA for loctus swarms eating crops in Egypt and the fall of the Rome...so, it's pretty pointless trying to say otherwise.

[Sarevok Synder]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Sarevok Synder wrote...

You have yet to provide any evidence that Bioware were struggling. Bald assertions is all you have.

I've provided a bloody mountain of circumstantial evidence, that you've chosen to ignore in favor of your counter-explanation that "money talks" without actually providing any evidence as to what it said.  Which makes your discounting of said circumstantial evidence hypocritical and unjustifiable.  

I have circumstantial evidence.  You have no evidence.  But you continue asserting, by implication, that your lack of evidence is "better" than my circumstantial evidence.  That's a bald assertion.

You are literally incapable of understanding how baseless your own position is.

"Circumstantial evidence?"   It's a good thing you're not a lawyer, you would be disbarred in a day.

There is no circumstantial evidence, you gave a link that they merged with another company, this doesn't mean they were struggling. You're making the claim, the burden of proof is on you.

axl99 wrote...

This is such a one-sided discussion. I bet none of you would be talking like that if you ever worked in game development.

But who am I kidding. Forget Bioware. A lot of you don't give a rat's ass about the crap a game dev goes through to make something everyone picks apart anyway.

Go on. Keep voting with your money. But don't expect studios to do everything you say just because you have something in your wallet. Unless you're an actual investor.

Ah, your statement is contradictory.  

Hint: without consumers, Bioware won't have any investors, they will be out of business.

Modifié par Sarevok Synder, 09 avril 2012 - 09:47 .

[Sarevok Synder]

Darth Krytie wrote...


It's simple, really. Companies that are financially viable on their own and don't need help to maintain success generally don't get bought out. BioWare wanted the benefits being a part of EA could provide. If they didn't need EA, I doubt they'd have made the decision.

Shorts, hon, the truth is that people want to blame EA for loctus swarms eating crops in Egypt and the fall of the Rome...so, it's pretty pointless trying to say otherwise.

Well EA did try to buy Rockstar, they certainly were not* struggling at the time. It all comes from investors wanting a return on their investment. Money talks.


Edit: not*

Modifié par Sarevok Synder, 08 avril 2012 - 07:35 .

[Darth Krytie]

Sarevok Synder wrote...

Darth Krytie wrote...


It's simple, really. Companies that are financially viable on their own and don't need help to maintain success generally don't get bought out. BioWare wanted the benefits being a part of EA could provide. If they didn't need EA, I doubt they'd have made the decision.

Shorts, hon, the truth is that people want to blame EA for loctus swarms eating crops in Egypt and the fall of the Rome...so, it's pretty pointless trying to say otherwise.

Well EA did try to buy Rockstar, they certainly were not* struggling at the time. It all comes from investors wanting a return on their investment. Money talks.


Edit: not*

I didn't say that EA wouldn't try...I was pointing out that companies generally won't let themselves get bought if they don't need it.

And of course they want to make money. If they didn't profit, they couldn't continue to make games.

[Wolvy]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Paragon Fury wrote...

Dragon Age 2

What about it?  Do you know if it's made a profit?  By what metric are you rating this a disaster?

Paragon Fury wrote...

Star Wars: The Old Republic

Forbes:  World of Warcraft Admits Subscribers are Leaving for The Old Republic 
Star Wars: The Old Republic still growing after strangely smooth launch

Paragon Fury wrote... 

Mass Effect 3: From Ashes DLC

What about it?  Pretty much every developer has DLC, and pretty much every developer takes it on the chin for it.  And pretty much every developer keeps doing it, which might be indicative of something  if people stopped to think.

Paragon Fury wrote...  

Mass Effect 3 Ending

For a game they rightly point out is doing just fine in sales and, again, see DA2's comment.  Do you know if ME3 was profitable?  

lol! Becareful shorts, someone may come along and said EA paid them to write those articles. 

[Sarevok Synder]

Darth Krytie wrote...


I didn't say that EA wouldn't try...I was pointing out that companies generally won't let themselves get bought if they don't need it.

And of course they want to make money. If they didn't profit, they couldn't continue to make games.

I know, but there is absolutely no evidence or reason that the powers that be in Bioware at the time didn't sell simply because enough cash was flashed at them, it was around 750 Million afer all. I'm not saying this is wrong, investors expect a return on their investment, and EA provided it quicker than Bioware gaining market share could. 

Rockstars investors turned EA down.

[Darth Krytie]

Sarevok Synder wrote...

Darth Krytie wrote...


I didn't say that EA wouldn't try...I was pointing out that companies generally won't let themselves get bought if they don't need it.

And of course they want to make money. If they didn't profit, they couldn't continue to make games.

I know, but there is absolutely no evidence or reason that the powers that be in Bioware at the time didn't sell simply because enough cash was flashed at them, it was around 750 Million afer all. I'm not saying this is wrong, investors expect a return on their investment, and EA provided it quicker than Bioware gaining market share could. 

Rockstars investors turned EA down.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, then... EA offered them money which allowed them to do more than they'd been able to do previously. I know people keep citing short Dev cycles, but overly long ones aren't good either. It makes any game, even the best game ever, less profitable. 

If you're trying to say there's a distinction between BioWare struggling and allowing EA to buy them out and BioWare selling to EA because they simply wanted more money but could have made it on their own...and that specific distinction is important to you...I don't see how it matters.

[ahandsomeshark]

Dridengx wrote...

ahandsomeshark wrote...

All the N7 missions were recycled MP maps.

MP are n7 missions, and this is how a lot of games do it even COD lol.

And did you understand why? MP is about a team holding the area for the alliance. Hence why it's Horde/wave mode in MP, trying to "hold the line" and keep the area under alliance control after shepard retakes them, he even radios in for the team to come in and hold it in single player

um I'm not playing COD so I don't see how that has relevance. They're recycled maps. If they wanted to play up the holding story-line...then they could have actually mentioned it in SP and maybe them more involved then just go here and shoot these things.