74 réponses à ce sujet

[Lonely_Fat_Guy]

EA is fine, yes they try to make a buck, so is every other company (guitar hero 14???)



as too say EA has taken a new path, games like dead space and mirrors edge.



somethign new and fresh. so ea isnt all that bad...dont blame everything on EA. Bioware isnt a saint either. they are companies that must make a profit.



as long as i think money wise it gives me the pleasure im fine with it.

[DreDk]

EA Effect:



-) Overall quality downgrade in favour of a more similar look across all the platforms.

(just compare ME1 on Xbox and ME2: in the new one there are no anti-aliasing, no motion blur, unreadable texts, different grain filter, worse texture, no effect on texture…)



-) Zero Optimization x platform

(Where is the anti aliasing in ME2?In 2010, it was present in ME 2007!)



-) No RISK at all: so orientation towards “safer” typology of games

(Who said shooters?!? Look at ME2…)



-) Mainstream at all costs

(ME2 is no longer a true RPG!)

(And it will soon come out also for PS3!)



-) A new title every year and half

(ME3 in 2011)



-) Harvest a franchise until it is destroyed

(New ME titles after this trilogy)



Clear signs of EA EFFECT are well evident in the console versions of Dragon Age.



More subtle signs are present in Mass Effect 2… But these signs are much more dangerous…

They are hidden well by hype and press clamour…



ME2 is a good multiplatform game. No more no less.

But ME1, a flawed masterpiece, deserves a totally different treatment, a totally different sequel to live up its name and heritage.



Maybe ME2 mark the beginning of the end of the glorious age of Bioware…

I am going too far? Maybe, but after 10 years of adoration for Bioware, I was deeply disappointed twice in only two month…

An alarming trend, isn’t it?

[_KTA_]

DreDk wrote...

EA Effect:

-) Overall quality downgrade in favour of a more similar look across all the platforms.
(just compare ME1 on Xbox and ME2: in the new one there are no anti-aliasing, no motion blur, unreadable texts, different grain filter, worse texture, no effect on texture…)

-) Zero Optimization x platform
(Where is the anti aliasing in ME2?In 2010, it was present in ME 2007!)

-) No RISK at all: so orientation towards “safer” typology of games
(Who said shooters?!? Look at ME2…)

-) Mainstream at all costs
(ME2 is no longer a true RPG!)
(And it will soon come out also for PS3!)

-) A new title every year and half
(ME3 in 2011)

-) Harvest a franchise until it is destroyed
(New ME titles after this trilogy)

Clear signs of EA EFFECT are well evident in the console versions of Dragon Age.

More subtle signs are present in Mass Effect 2… But these signs are much more dangerous…
They are hidden well by hype and press clamour…

ME2 is a good multiplatform game. No more no less.
But ME1, a flawed masterpiece, deserves a totally different treatment, a totally different sequel to live up its name and heritage.

Maybe ME2 mark the beginning of the end of the glorious age of Bioware…
I am going too far? Maybe, but after 10 years of adoration for Bioware, I was deeply disappointed twice in only two month…
An alarming trend, isn’t it?

The only alarming trend is this type of thoughtless feedback, downgrading ME2 graphics for multiplatform dev??? WTF are you talking about exactly?  ME1 looks like crap compared to ME2.

I'd read the rest but stopped after that.  And your thoughtless EA bashing is misplaced, EA's the hardcore gamers last hope for quality new games from a big corporation.  They've given devs like Bioware & Dice the tools and freedom they need to create great products.

[sticks435]

_KTA_ wrote...

DreDk wrote...

EA Effect:

-) Overall quality downgrade in favour of a more similar look across all the platforms.
(just compare ME1 on Xbox and ME2: in the new one there are no anti-aliasing, no motion blur, unreadable texts, different grain filter, worse texture, no effect on texture…)

-) Zero Optimization x platform
(Where is the anti aliasing in ME2?In 2010, it was present in ME 2007!)

-) No RISK at all: so orientation towards “safer” typology of games
(Who said shooters?!? Look at ME2…)

-) Mainstream at all costs
(ME2 is no longer a true RPG!)
(And it will soon come out also for PS3!)

-) A new title every year and half
(ME3 in 2011)

-) Harvest a franchise until it is destroyed
(New ME titles after this trilogy)

Clear signs of EA EFFECT are well evident in the console versions of Dragon Age.

More subtle signs are present in Mass Effect 2… But these signs are much more dangerous…
They are hidden well by hype and press clamour…

ME2 is a good multiplatform game. No more no less.
But ME1, a flawed masterpiece, deserves a totally different treatment, a totally different sequel to live up its name and heritage.

Maybe ME2 mark the beginning of the end of the glorious age of Bioware…
I am going too far? Maybe, but after 10 years of adoration for Bioware, I was deeply disappointed twice in only two month…
An alarming trend, isn’t it?

The only alarming trend is this type of thoughtless feedback, downgrading ME2 graphics for multiplatform dev??? WTF are you talking about exactly?  ME1 looks like crap compared to ME2.

I'd read the rest but stopped after that.  And your thoughtless EA bashing is misplaced, EA's the hardcore gamers last hope for quality new games from a big corporation.  They've given devs like Bioware & Dice the tools and freedom they need to create great products.

Yea, I agree. I don't even know where to begin with all his ****** comments. ME1 NEVER supported native AA, it's not even possible period with DX9 and UE3. How is it coming out for PS3 mainstream? I'll give you that alot of the textures for clothing and such suck ass on the PC version, but it happened in ME1 as well. ME3 coming at in 2011 - I would think this is what people would want. Would you rather them pull a Valve and not even mention a peep about it after 3+ years? Go back to your troll hole.

[Elder Drake]

It's funny to see all the fanboys come out and stand on soapboxes proclaiming their own intelligence and your stupidity with the use clever jabs and useless rhetoric. I simply stated my opinion, should have expected "fanboys unite!" and watched as the pocket protector brigade came marching out to the Star Wars theme. I will only say two things then I am done:



1.) The argument that Cerberus Network is good is stupid. How can a system that cost $15 that allows you the right to BUY more dlc be good for you. Combats piracy? lmao, apparently you are unaware that the damn pirates are playing ALL the dlc for this game and laughing all the while. How do I know, the damn game was on Youtube 1 week before release with a pirate showing it. More videos of pirates showing people how to do it. Cerberus Network, although I received for free, is an obvious money grab ploy and go ahead and fool yourself if you think otherwise. Else it would be on marketplace like EVERY other game out there.



2.) I like the game, I simply said that I do not like the obvious effect EA has had on it. Can you honestly say it is not more a shooter now than an RPG? Hmmmm, nothing to do with appealing to the shooter fanbase right? When I think RPG I think stats, level diversion, etc...oh, like Baldur's Gate, Never Winter Nights, Oblivion, Fallout 3. Just in terms of game mechanics though, the story here really is a masterpiece, I am grumbling over the dumbed down mechanics, EA touch, and the fact that the game I looked forward most to the beginning of this year is...another shooter. Now please, get self righteous and grandstand. I am someone that spent $85 on the CE and thus feel I have the right to speak my opinion.

[Veex]

Elder Drake wrote...

1.) The argument that Cerberus Network is good is stupid. How can a system that cost $15 that allows you the right to BUY more dlc be good for you. Combats piracy? lmao, apparently you are unaware that the damn pirates are playing ALL the dlc for this game and laughing all the while. How do I know, the damn game was on Youtube 1 week before release with a pirate showing it. More videos of pirates showing people how to do it. Cerberus Network, although I received for free, is an obvious money grab ploy and go ahead and fool yourself if you think otherwise. Else it would be on marketplace like EVERY other game out there.

It is to combat the reselling of their game. People buying second hand games at a reduced cost are still getting the majority of the game for less than those who purchase the game new. The Cerberus Network is an attempt to make purchasing a new copy more alluring. If you want all the toys and trinkets then you purchase the game new. Really, if you buy the game at a reduced price in a second hand copy and purchase the Cerberus Network as DLC you're still probably going to be paying around full price. It's an effort to combat second hand selling from places like Gamestop, not an effort to stop piracy.

Elder Drake wrote...

2.) I like the game, I simply said that I do not like the obvious effect EA has had on it. Can you honestly say it is not more a shooter now than an RPG? Hmmmm, nothing to do with appealing to the shooter fanbase right? When I think RPG I think stats, level diversion, etc...oh, like Baldur's Gate, Never Winter Nights, Oblivion, Fallout 3. Just in terms of game mechanics though, the story here really is a masterpiece, I am grumbling over the dumbed down mechanics, EA touch, and the fact that the game I looked forward most to the beginning of this year is...another shooter. Now please, get self righteous and grandstand. I am someone that spent $85 on the CE and thus feel I have the right to speak my opinion.

You aren't alone in this regard. I think BioWare intended for this series to be more of a shooter than an RPG in the first place. If they had wanted stat based combat to be the tenant of the game they wouldn't have made the switch to combat where aim and placement counts. Was the complete overhaul of the inventory system necessary? Probably not, no. But the bloated inventory of Mass Effect wasn't difficult or tactical in anyway, Colussus armor and Spectre gear. A medium probably would have been preferred with more customization options for the sequel. It all rests upon BioWare making changes they feel are best for their franchise. We can voice our concerns and see what happens but in the end if BioWare wants to make a TPS with an interactive story and go RPG light that is their perrogative.

[Kalfear]

I dont know how much influence EA had or how many strings they were pulling!



I judge on what I see and know and the only thing I have noticed since the buyout is Bioware is lieing to its fans now to hype games.

They use to be straight shooters (not game style, honest, ethical) but now it seems they will tell everyone what they want to hear regardless if its true and flat out lie at other times rather then make a no comment reply!

Thats the change I have noticed and I dont think its for the better to be honest.

[Evil Johnny 666]

I don't get how taking some rpgs elements is dubbing down a game. What, any shooter is a sub-par game just because it's not an rpg? They just wanted to make something different, and while I liked ME's system, I think it's a good idea they went over the traditional rpg system like by "dubbing down" it's rpg elements. Well that's pretty much dubbing down, but it has a negative connotation which I don't associate the game with. Don't get me wrong, I love rpgs, but playing some less traditional ones is a breath of fresh air seriously.

[screwoffreg]

I am sure EA had some influence, but bear in mind they also helped tremendously in terms of marketing dollars, exposure, and making sure people knew to buy the game.

[Niorcs]

I don't get why everyone's getting hung up on IT'S NOT A TRUE RPG. Do you guys just exclusively play RPGs or what?

[Evil Johnny 666]

Lonely_Fat_Guy wrote...

EA is fine, yes they try to make a buck, so is every other company (guitar hero 14???)

as too say EA has taken a new path, games like dead space and mirrors edge.

somethign new and fresh. so ea isnt all that bad...dont blame everything on EA. Bioware isnt a saint either. they are companies that must make a profit.

as long as i think money wise it gives me the pleasure im fine with it.

Yeah, EA is a lot better than before actually.
And isn't one of Bioware's CEO, EA's vice-CEO or something like that?

[Tetsuii]

I agree.. they really dropped the ball on this one. DX9? Are you kidding me?

[Gorn Kregore]

_KTA_ wrote...
And EA has done a great job supporting it's developers green lighting new and ambitious games like Mirror's Edge.

[Evil Johnny 666]

And I don't know how ME2 is that mainstream, I've heard plenty of people complaining that it was boring because of everything else than the shooting. Seriously, if it was that mainstream, there would be not nearly as much dialogue and we would have to hold your hand like in MW2.

[Veex]

Evil Johnny 666 wrote...

I don't get how taking some rpgs elements is dubbing down a game.

It isn't. There isn't anything difficult about picking a weapon that has +7 damage over a weapon that has +5 damage. The contention is that by removing the illusion of choice that the game is somehow simpler. If everyone winds up using Spectre Gear and Colussus then BioWare took the logical route and simple provided the best gear at the beginning. You don't have to trudge through levels of mediocrity and go from +1 to +7 anymore.

What would be nice is some class oriented customization. More armor pieces that relate strictly to biotic and tech powers or augment specific weapons. They could take the same piece meal approach to the weapons that they did with the armor. Offer scopes which add damage or slow down time in zoom. Offer clips which can extend rounds at reduced damage or something similar. Gameplay and inventory choices that actually have a tangible effect and aren't just throwaway inventory items.

Modifié par Veex, 02 février 2010 - 12:09 .

[jegillan]

DreDk wrote...

EA Effect:

-) Overall quality downgrade in favour of a more similar look across all the platforms.
(just compare ME1 on Xbox and ME2: in the new one there are no anti-aliasing, no motion blur, unreadable texts, different grain filter, worse texture, no effect on texture…)

What?  ME2 looks better and runs better in every conceivable way than ME1.  If you are complaining about the PC versions...this game was originally intended to be an Xbox 360 exclusive.  Period.  You should be saying thank you just for the ability to play it on a PC.

-) Zero Optimization x platform
(Where is the anti aliasing in ME2?In 2010, it was present in ME 2007!)

Read above.

-) No RISK at all: so orientation towards “safer” typology of games
(Who said shooters?!? Look at ME2…)

This game is nowhere near a straight shooter. I've played every major shooter (1st AND 3rd person) released in the last 5 years (Call of Duty, Gears of War, Orange Box, etc), and this game is nothing like any of them.  The combat is at most slightly reminiscent of Gears of War, and any complaints about that are pure idiocy.

-) Mainstream at all costs
(ME2 is no longer a true RPG!)
(And it will soon come out also for PS3!)

Hahaha.  Definitions of a "true" RPG are obviously very subjective.  This game has a system of leveling, upgrading, and shaping your character/s.  It has an in-depth, branching, epic story that YOU influence.  By any form of the definition, ME2 is a true RPG, even if it is considered "lite" by a few disgruntled players who were expecting Dragon Age in space.

As for the PS3 thing...Microsoft owns the rights to Mass Effect.  There is absolutely no way they are going to allow the HIGHEST RATED GAME on the Xbox 360 be published for the PS3 any time soon.

-) A new title every year and half
(ME3 in 2011)

Judging by the quality of the entire ME series so far, we can only pray that it comes out that soon.

-) Harvest a franchise until it is destroyed
(New ME titles after this trilogy)

Nothing has been announced for sure, and if the quality of the titles remains up to par, who could possibly say it was a bad thing?  I would love to keep experiencing the Mass Effect universe.

Clear signs of EA EFFECT are well evident in the console versions of Dragon Age.

More subtle signs are present in Mass Effect 2… But these signs are much more dangerous…
They are hidden well by hype and press clamour…

ME2 is a good multiplatform game. No more no less.
But ME1, a flawed masterpiece, deserves a totally different treatment, a totally different sequel to live up its name and heritage.

Really?  ME1 was great.  It was great IN SPITE of its numerous flaws, both technical and design flaws.  ME2 has drastically improved what the majority of players recognized as errors in the development of the first game, and is, by every statement made by Bioware, far more in line with their original designs for the series.

Maybe ME2 mark the beginning of the end of the glorious age of Bioware…
I am going too far? Maybe, but after 10 years of adoration for Bioware, I was deeply disappointed twice in only two month…
An alarming trend, isn’t it?

Not alarming at all.  Over the past ten years, Bioware's games have been achieving greater and greater commercial and critical success.  Dragon Age is fantastic for the PC (its original intended platform), and ME2 is beyond fantastic for the 360.  What you are complaining about are personal preferences, not facts about the company and the populace as a whole.  Get over yourself.

[Jigero]

Nice conspiracy, but that's all it is nothing but conspiracy fodder.



1.) How is there are lack of weapons and armor? there are 19 different weapons that all feel different fire different. and the armor is Customizable, although it's alittle lacking, it's still able to convey your look. But if you mean lacking as is in just re-textures on the four same old guns/armor, then yea your an idiot.



2.) It was never an RPG in the True classic sense in the first game either. The old stats bogged down the game play, most of them were useless forced you to use only one weapon and some just let you god mode it through the game even on insane. It;s been stream lined now. And how the **** are they cookie cutter?





3.) Should have gotten a new copy. that's their fault and you aren't forced to buy DLC, it's meant for people who want to expand their game. But this is nothing new Dragon Age did the same exact thing.



People really need to take their had out of their ass and think for five minutes before they start cry babying all over the forums, and besides EA isn't the Evil Empire anymore it's Activison and Ubisoft now.

[submarinex1]

Elder Drake wrote...

I am a fan of Bioware and loved the first game. This game continues Bioware's tradition of excellent storytelling, immersive characters, and captivating backdrops (I won't even mention the ending, did the devs actually think that would fit or be cool with the story..wow.) My gripes and reason for the thread title:

1.) Lack of armor and guns=obvious ploy to entice people into buying new dlc armor and weapons in the future that should have been here in the first place.

2.) ME2 is not an RPG anymore, not in the true classic sense. The interface and role playing mechanic was obviously dumbed down to an idiot level to attract a wider audience and increase sales. The story is great, the conversations have depth, but Shepard's RPG element consist of choosing a generic cookie cutter class and plugging points into skills like "Cryo Ammo". No stats, no feeling of truly making Shepard what you want...just a small handfull of dumbed down psuedo skills. 

3.) Cerberus Network=Obvious EA move to capitalize dlc revenue. Seriously, people that didn't get it new can pay $15 for the priveledge of buying dlc content in the future...that strikes me as a bit wrong.

I could go on but my biggest gripe is the disappointment of Biowware, a giant (if not THE giant) of RPGs, selling out to the biggest money hungry gaming corporation that only cares about churning out sales and not about it's customers. To see EA's paws marring such an amazing franchise really is demoralizing. I still think ME2 is a good game and worth the money I spent. I simply am voicing my disappointment in the direction the have taken it and I somewhat dread seeing what EA does to further mar the game in ME3. Will we be buying the "Start Game" button as dlc next...getting crazy out of hand.

1) please state source

2) it has been cut back i agree but dont feel its made it worse for it.

3) its all to do with pre-owned money and fact companys want to make money after its been traded and this is simple method for them to do it. you should consider this alot better than what they could do and make pre-owned against terms/conditions and stop shops buying/selling pre-owned.

4 ) thats down to you, rest of us would rather games kept coming out than risk of not selling out and disappearing, then you would have something to whine about when mass3,4,5,6 didnt appear.

[Aezarian]

You all do remember that Bioware had orininally planned for Mass Effect 1 to have loads of DLC? EA has nothing to do with the fact that ME2 was designed to more fully support that.

[Dansayshi]

I just wish I had my RPG elements back, level up certain weapon sets or maybe just having a "base" shepard with 3 skill trees, 1 for weaponry, 1 for defence, and 1 for biotics, would give flexibility and be easy to follow and for the idiots you could just make the classes again anyway, but set them to follow a certain set of skills.



I dont like how linear it is either. Playing the missions is just "go that way, kill kill, GG" ME1 also felt ALOT bigger on missions and cities. Just compare ME1 citadel with ME2's. The storyline too... I see alot of people praise it, but cmon, 2 derelict ships, 2 viruses, the middle was very poor, beginning and end were great tho.



I do like the game, its a great playthrough, fun and exciting, but its just the little things that let it down for me. EA arnt as bad as people say though, they learnt their lesson with spore. Now activision are next in the firing line, what sucks is that their going to pull blizzard into the vortex.



The ceberus network payment thinggy is just EA trying to cash in on 2nd hand sales imo, doesn't really hurt some1 who buys the game new.



As for item issues, I wish they would just cut up the DLC armours, so instead of being the entire suit, you could just use the legs with the N7 chest etc.

[Eladren]

DreDk wrote...
-) Zero Optimization x platform
(Where is the anti aliasing in ME2?In 2010, it was present in ME 2007!)

What are you smoking?

[Abriael_CG]

Elder Drake wrote...
It's funny to see all the fanboys come out and stand on soapboxes proclaiming their own intelligence and your stupidity

1.) The argument that Cerberus Network is good is stupid.

Yay coherence!

How can a
system that cost $15 that allows you the right to BUY more dlc be good
for you. Combats piracy?

You must have some problem with the understanding of simple english. Let me spell it out for your sake: Piracy and the Preowned market are two entirely different things.

Initiatives like the Cerberus Network have very little to do with piracy, as much as with encouraging to buy the game new (giving their money to EA/Bioware) instead of preowned (from which only Gamestop or similar retailers profit, lowering the actual sales of the game in turn).
You buy the game new -> You pay full price, but you get some stuff coming from it
You buy the game preowned -> You pay less, but if you want the aforementioned stuff you will have to still give some money to the publisher by purchasing Cerberus network access.

To put it down simply, the preowned gaming market has become big, and has started to seriously damage the earnings of software houses and publishers, in favor of retailers, that can grab profit from a game multiple times, and deprieve the developer from further sales.

My best friend is the store manager of a Gamestop, we decided to have a little experiment. We marked the inside of the case of five preowned copies of Assassin's Creed 2. Of those five, one was resold just once and we never saw it again, three were returned and resold once again. And one was returned and resold TWICE, this before the end of december.
That was, a total of 5 (original sale, the only one for which the publisher/sh saw any money) +5 (first resale) + 3 (second resale) + 1 (last resale) = 14 people that, in less than two months, played the game, and only 5 (30%) of those sales actually supported the developer.

You seriously think that developers are going to stand for that much longer? 
You should be already happy that they're not using more draconian measures to fight that (like for instance limited activation codes). Instead they're still allowing people to but it preowned if they so wish, with a lil less content but still perfectly enjoyable. It's a very balanced approach. 

The preowned market, while sure advantageous for many, is a leak in the gaming market, through which lots of money pours out of the cycle, and is basically lost to the market itself.

Personally, I'm much more happy if money from my purchase goes to support the developer and in turn finance more content/sequels/games that I can enjoy, Instead of going to lay dead in the coffers of Gamestop with the developer not seeing a dime.

So, yeah, the Cerberus Network is a very positive thing. It doesn't FORCE you to buy the game new, but it encourages you to do so, or if you don't, to still give some money to the developer, keeping at least part of the money from your purchases in the cycle of the market instead of fattening a retailer that contributes nothing to the market itself.

2.) I like the game, I simply said that I do not like the obvious effect EA has had on it.

"Obvious"? Dragon Age was published by EA, and was a full fledged (and damn good) RPG. EA most definitely doesn't publish just low-risk mass-appeal games. Brutal Legend was ditched by Activision (which has exactly the role that you wrongly paint on EA) exactly because it was an high-risk niche game. Guess what, EA picked it up and published it. And it's not the only example.

Your "Obvious" effect is much less obvious that you's like to lead people to believe. Why do you think that Bioware didn't independently think to diversify their offering? They cater to pure-rpg fans with the Dragon Age series, to MMORPG fans with the upcoming KOTOR and to shooter/action with an hint of RPG with Mass Effect. While I'm not a shooter fan, as a strategy it makes sense, and there's absolutely no reason to believe that it comes from EA and not from Bioware themselves.

[kiyyto]

Elder Drake wrote...

I am a fan of Bioware and loved the first game.

1.) Lack of armor and guns=obvious ploy to entice people into buying new dlc armor and weapons in the future that should have been here in the first place.

2.) ME2 is not an RPG anymore, not in the true classic sense...

3.) Cerberus Network=Obvious EA move to capitalize dlc revenue. Seriously, people that didn't get it new can pay $15 for the priveledge of buying dlc content in the future...that strikes me as a bit wrong.

Will we be buying the "Start Game" button as dlc next...getting crazy out of hand.

DLC was never designed from the perspective of the consumer, but it was marketed as such.
DLC is a scam to release unfinished games at retail prices, then charge extra for a quasi-complete game.

You make some good points.
Unfortunately, there are quite a few things beyond armor that are missing from the retail version. 

[Elder Drake]

Abriael_CG wrote...

Elder Drake wrote...
It's funny to see all the fanboys come out and stand on soapboxes proclaiming their own intelligence and your stupidity

1.) The argument that Cerberus Network is good is stupid.

Yay coherence!

How can a
system that cost $15 that allows you the right to BUY more dlc be good
for you. Combats piracy?

You must have some problem with the understanding of simple english.

2.) I like the game, I simply said that I do not like the obvious effect EA has had on it.

 

Your "Obvious" effect is much less obvious that you's like to lead people to believe.

I wasn't going to post back but wow, you are an ass. Some people actually chime in with feedback that I respect, not agree with but still gives me a new perspective to think about. Then a jerk like you comes along that obviously thrives on nitpicking apart people with the sole intention to slander, inflame, and degenerate a topic into a "I'm the man" reply. Seriously, jerks like you never cease to amaze me. Do yourself a favor and find meaning in life somewhere else. Thanks to everyone else that gave constructive feedback. Nice to see some maturity and people that don't have to grandstand. Maybe I was a little over judgemental on some aspects and arguements because in the end ME2 is still a gem. They, meaning Bioware, can't be expected to meet the expectations of everyone...that is impossible.

Cheers to Bioware still for an excellent game, even with my grumblings. Here is to hoping for a stellar finish in ME3, lots of exciting future dlc, and a continuation of epic storytelling.

[halO bendeR]

Look, I like corporation bashing as much as the next guy, but all this anti-EA sentiment seems sort of ridiculous without proof of wrongdoing. If someone were to provide evidence that EA were tampering with Bioware's games in a negative way, then I'd be happy to climb up on that soapbox right next to you, but as it stands your complaints hold no water.

First off, The Cerberus Network is free to all original purchasers of the game. It's a smart way to combat secondhand sales of games that would otherwise provide no revenue to the game's creators. As someone who does buy Bioware games brand new, I hope they continue this trend.

Everything I've heard from the divisions within EA suggests that EA corporate is mostly hands off the actual development. Sometimes I too get conspiratorial on why such-and-such a decision was made in a game --DLC nudity in the Saboteur for example-- but no one I've heard complain about 'EA's influence' has ever offered anything other than their own conjecture as evidence. It makes them sound whiny and juvenile.

Modifié par halO bendeR, 02 février 2010 - 01:32 .