10 réponses à ce sujet

[ModProp]

Do game publishers, like Electronic Arts, have any real say over what developers, such as BioWare, Bungie, and Obsidian, do or not do in a game? Isn't it just the publishers job to promote and make as much money of the game as possible?

And on a side note: How is EA the devil or evil? That statement confuses me.

I'm probably just lame and going to get burned at the stake for asking this question, but I'm genuinely curious.

[jskiles111]

The producer invests the money into the development of the product. If EA is the sole provider of funds to the development team, they can usually direct schedules, such as when the game is required to be released and in turn affecting what will or will not be included in the final product.

[Serogon]

As for why EA is the devil, they're notorious for being money-****s and trying to rush games.

[Phoenixblight]

Serogon wrote...

As for why EA is the devil, they're notorious for being money-****s and trying to rush games.

You are confused that is activision. EA has turned a new leaf and does not enforce infact they have so much confidence in Bioware they gave the two co founders a entire department to be in control of with Mythic.

[ModProp]

Ok. Got it. Now follow-up question, did they rush Mass Effect 2 and all parts and updates dealing with Mass Effect 2?

[Frotality]

jskiles111 wrote...

The producer invests the money into the development of the product. If EA is the sole provider of funds to the development team, they can usually direct schedules, such as when the game is required to be released and in turn affecting what will or will not be included in the final product.

pretty much this. EA as sole publisher of ME means that they could technically cut funding whenver they want (like threatening to do so if the developer disagrees on something).

EA is known as 'evil' because in the past they have given very short development periods, bare-minimum funding, and other such devious schemes that often ended in cheap and rushed games,  ruining many developers financially as well.

[Conjurous Rex]

I highly doubt there was any sort "rush order" pushed onto Bioware from EA. Considering the game was actually delayed from it's original release date last year.

[Phoenixblight]

Conjurous Rex wrote...

I highly doubt there was any sort "rush order" pushed onto Bioware from EA. Considering the game was actually delayed from it's original release date last year.

What original release date? There was no original release date only speculation and hope from the CO founders. There was never an official release date. Ray stated they hope to get the game done by WInter 2009 but by October they announced the Jan date.

[lukandroll]

ModProp wrote...

Ok. Got it. Now follow-up question, did they rush Mass Effect 2 and all parts and updates dealing with Mass Effect 2?

It surely seems so

[CannonO]

Phoenixblight wrote...

Serogon wrote...

As for why EA is the devil, they're notorious for being money-****s and trying to rush games.

You are confused that is activision. EA has turned a new leaf and does not enforce infact they have so much confidence in Bioware they gave the two co founders a entire department to be in control of with Mythic.

EA isn't much better than they used to be. Activision just got so much worse that people mention them more. After all, from October 2008 through now we got around 7 Guitar Hero games. So Activision is worse than EA, but EA still has a tendency to be exactly as Serogon described.

[The Krieg]

EA has been known as the devil ever since Battlefield 2, thay rushed it out months before it shouldve been and then rushed patches out...