ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 10 ก.พ. 2025
- I can't believe they think live service is the reason this game failed.
Go buy gamersupps with my link, get 10% off.
gamersupps.gg/...
Code "KiraTV"
Other channels:
Magic the Gathering Channel:
/ @kiramtg
Main/Video Essay Channel:
/ @kiratv1
Watch me on twitch:
/ kiraonttv
Sub to my patreon:
/ kirayt
#dragonage #gaming #2025
"Man, I was going to buy Dragon Age: The Veilguard(tm)(c) but it just wasn't expensive enough. If only I had to pay more money while playing the game, i might actually like it" -EA Executive describing the typical gamer experience.
As a gamer what I want more than anything in the world is a game with no gameplay whatsoever, is so buggy and unoptimized that it's basically just a .exe programmed to crash and brick my PC, requires a $100 entry fee, a $500 a year subscription and a series of micro transactions that grow higher in price by orders of magnitude every time you purchase one and the only thing they sell is the concept of me going and fucking myself. I'm just so tired of games with gameplay and story getting in the way of my next opportunity to bankroll a CEO's next yacht and put a big grin on a shareholder's face.
As always, the gamers to blame are the sports gamers.
@@sweepingtime yeah, it feels like they got so used to cater to sports gamers that they forgot how to make anything else for different customers.
Well, the thing is that a game that cost so little couldn't be good. Its price was too suspicious. :D
They dont care about the consumer, they care about that E.S.G. Money rolling making them rich.
We live in a post-consumermarket economy.
Everything is so fake even the economy is fake now.
Clearly it needed more NFT's - its what gamers crave.
I know this is suppose to be a joke, but you do realize most gamers are tech bros, right??
@allthatishere bro, that is peak delusion lmao. If that were the case, then why has quite literally every game created for those types of people failed so completely.
It has electrolytes.
@allthatishere most gamers are casuals. The vast majority. Casual smartphone games are a huge part of the industry.
@@allthatisheretech bros in the tech sense, which NFTs are not
I would love to work in an industry where i can be in a leading position, constantly come to the wrong conclusions and make stupid decisions yet still rake in millions in bonuses each year.
Must be nice.
Oh it's racial and ideological nepotism, plus some useless degree which proves commitment to the ideology. Competence is not important... *obviously*. They all operate on the basis of illusions, meaning words, words, words and show, show, show is of highest importance.
Sounds like the US government
The best bit is that when the devs underneath you make a good game you get to take the claim. When they don't you just sack them off and blame them, no matter if it was your decisions that lead to it's failure. Then when you have no institutional knowledge left you jump ship with a golden payoff.
By burning through staff in a constant state of boom or bust you are setting your company up to fail. There's a reason that a bunch of Japanese studios can make game after game that is good. Whether they have a hit or miss they don't immediately fire all the people who know how to manipulate things, then have to rehire a whole new set of people for the next project. Those of us that have been gaming for a long time remember when a studio could have a miss, or a first game could be just ok, and the team would stay together and the next game would be leagues better as long as the lessons were learned. That doesn't happen now. If you fail you are out. Then a new set of people are in. Then they have to spend an age getting up to speed with the tech and the expectations which burns cash when you could just be getting on with making the next game. Then repeat.
@@brianviktor8212 you're right there are too many mediocre white men in leadership positions.
be a politican, you can do this in every country.
I mean we _all_ the know the only reason Veilguard didn't sell 3 quintillion copies was because it didn't have daily login rewards
This isn't even the worst. No Gacha for Chatakters?! Or Equip????? What is this?!
Not one battle pass!?! How am I supposed to be motivated to play a video game without a battle pass!?!
They dont care about the consumer, they care about that E.S.G. Money rolling making them rich.
We live in a post-consumermarket economy.
Everything is so fake even the economy is fake now.
The saddest thing that new Dragon Age WOULD been actually successful if EA didn't cancelled Joplin (an actual DA4) to prioritise Anthem, then turn it into another live service, lose all the veterans and lead writer because of it, then turn it AGAIN into single player. In the the long term perspective live service model is basically what killed the franchise.
This is ridiculous.
exactly! but cant expect Ea execs to understand that coz they are too far gone in the live service rot.
@@brokenserenity01 i'm just shocked that Bioware released their the most financially successful game ever (Dragon Age Inquisition) and a year after one of the most interesting DLCs in Dragon Age history released building up even more hype... And then EA decided to do nothing. Just like this. They could have prioritise Dragon Age when the iron was still hot but they didn't.
Corporate executives being incompetent? That's unpossible.
The Veilguard artbook and its concepts for story and game structure make me so, so, so sad. It'd be one thing if Anthem had been good, but all we've gotten are flops since ME3. Andromeda, made by a diff studio, might actually be the best 'Bioware' thing to release over the last decade, because at least the gameplay is enduringly fun, unlike Veilguard's fun-for-five-hours system.
Anthem the sci-fi live service failed, so they said "okay fine go back to Dragon Age, but make that live service instead" now prepare for mass effect live service
"Who's paying 60-70 dollars for a mediocre video game" I'd like to introduce you to the Pokemon fandom who have been paying around that since the 90's.
the problem whit Pokemon and FIFA is that there is EA FiFA and there is Nintendo Pokemon... and thats it.
there are next to no other option.
same as the Sims for the last 10 years there have never been any Sims competitive.
Excuse you? 120-140 thank you very much. Gotta catch... most of 'em.
Yea we pay the same things over and over again😂
You're not wrong, but also every sports game 😅
@@calvinwilson3617 yeah I never really got those myself, like how much can you change in one of those? Don't they come out yearly?
Are they aware of the existence of BG3? If the executives at EA are so greedy that they can’t even tell why their own games are failing, the company is absolutely doomed.
I mean it's good to see them fail. They ruined the sims franchise so much so that it drove other talented people to develope life simulators. They had the market on stronghold, a complete monopoly and thought "we'll bleed them dry and then some". But that's not a good business model ever lol
EA is one of those companies whose bad decisions are constantly rewarded by customers who can't get enough of loot boxes.
They're hoping that everyone ignores BG3 and all it's success because it goes against their projections, graphs and narratives of making money.
I guess EA never saw BG3 being their nemesis and a real threat for any and every RPG they'll ever produce onwards. They had their own projections based on some stupid shit and now they lost even with lowest of expectations for the Veilguard
EA couldn't bear to think of a game studio where the devs are so passionate about their game they're still putting out free content patches and quality of life updates over a year after the game released. It's antithetical to their entire brand.
You also have to keep in mind this conversation is with investors who only care about EA's stock price going up, they don't actually care if EA publishes good games.
EA is known for hedging their bets in these investor calls, they've said things like this for NFT's and crypto. IMO it's always hot air
A good game raises stock prices, sooo...you'd think they would find that to be pretty important, lol.
@ Profits and potential profits raise stock prices. Are good games profitable? Of course. But $1.2B of Blizzard's profit comes from Candy Crush, Diablo Immortal made $1m/day in 2023. Bad games are fine too if they make money, as far as investors are concerned.
@@rapdactyl Yeah. That's the fucking sad part. Dogshit games like those make billions.
@@BewareTheLilyOfTheValley You'd think. Unfortunately as other commenters have pointed out, a good game that sells well can raise stock prices. But a mobile game with microtransactions will raise it a lot more. Whether or not the game is good is secondary to how much profit it will generate.
Jesus F... NO. Dragon Age: The Veilguard was a mess BECAUSE OF LIVE SERVICES.
For those who dont know, DA4 was going to be made shortly after inquisition, but got killed because EA was idiotic and wanted everything to be a live service. Then, mid production of the New DA live service thing, jedi outcast came out and did well, making the 2 brain cells at EA think "oh hey maybe singleplayer is still wanted", so DA 4 was scrapped AGAIN, to make veilguard.
So this whole mess was caused by live service chasing, veilguard was a victim of it and did poorly, and the "lesson" EA took from all this is to.... double down on what caused veilguard to fail in the first place.
EA needs nuked.
Dont forget that during the whole time 10 year or how long it was.
EA dont see a reset as a reset they see it as a 1 week pause.
so they can reset a game every year for 4 years going through a full staff change 4 times.
and think this is a game whit 4 years of development whit 4 full studios of production when in reality its a game cobbled together by half a team in under 7 month whit 1 year worth of mismatching assets.
@@Zack_Wester sigh, ik. iv hated them sense they killed pandemic studios, and they are gonna do the same to bioware
I swear business people in big companies are the most dense and incompetent people I’ve ever seen. They have no idea why people buy their product, they don’t even know what’s good or bad about their product, they all come in after a company already is established and successful to then change company direction and chase vapid market trends. I’m living through this right now in my work place and it’s so infuriating to work for such people. They have no vision, no ideas, no creativity, are out of touch with both their engineers and their customers, their opinion is fickle and subject to change 180 degrees on a whim if they see a new shiny trend they could chase. All the while you know if it all fails and burns to the ground, you are out of a job, but the buffoon that caused all of it will just run into the next open door of another company.
Their product isn't games, it's stock. Simple as that, their target audience are investment funds. They know that their bonuses are tied to stocks, not games.
Wait until you hear the CFO's take: "today's gamers don't appreciate blockbuster storytelling anymore"
What does CFO stand for?
@@Langharig_Tuig Chief financial officer iirc
Currency Funneling Organism.
Cretinous F***up Offal
CFO gotta live in California if Veilguard had blockbuster storrytelling
Im even more scared of the next Mass Effect. Theyre probably gonna make it a live service like they initially wanted with Dragon Age.
EA are most likely gonna allow them build out the bare bones of the game, mechanics and story.
See what they come up with and either greenlight it or just scrap the whole thing before they buy another few hundred million disaster.
I'd be honestly surprised if Bioware get ME5 over the line. I can see it getting canned a year or two down the road
Let them do it and pay the price 😂, bioware is dead anyway
I completely gave up on mass effect when Andromeda came out. Won't be buying the new one.
As a huge Mass Effect fan, I just lost all hopes and stopped caring. It is sad but it´s the only way. I am very excited for Exodus, if you don´t know it - check it out, space RPG from some OG Bioware guys. Looks very promising. Mass Effect is simply not coming back imo, not in a way us og nerds would be happy about it.
wdym scared? how could you have any hope?
Veilguard on its own is just a bad game made poorly that failed, but making it a live service would've been an absolutely hilarious faceplant to rival Anthem and Concord.
Hey anthem isn't *bad* it just has 30min of content, and that's it.
@@LibbyGrimm the content is making your character and then walk around fly one time and gg.
@@banishedbr essentially, yeah.
it's a cool demo with two bosses, then it ends.
funfact, it was gonna be a live service after its first pitch was canned, but due to the success of the jedi games, that caused them to pivot.
what do you think was bad about it? I put nearly 100 hours into it and legitimately had a blast.
I have played Dragon Age: The Veilguard, the problem was not a lack of live service. Had it been a live service game I would not have bought it.
Their conclusion is "BG3 isn't important"??? This person needs to be yeeted from all gaming.
*completely ignores baldurs gate 3 and everything around it* there is no way we can make single player role playing games enjoyable without them being live service,
You're inviting an unfair (and unhelpful) comparison here. There isn't a studio up today that can pull off something like BG3.
Dragon Age had its own identity and while lower quality than BG3, it worked both for players and investors. They didn't have to match the best, they had to continue what they were already doing instead of uprooting the franchise and converting it into somebody nobody asked for.
@@Shizlgizlthere isn’t a studio that can pull that off because they are lazy devs which is why they all yelled at the bg3 devs for putting so much effort into their game
@@Shizlgizl Except that smaller studios pull off similar feats ALL THE TIME! Hellblade was brilliant, Terraria continues to stand the test of time, Stardew Valley keeps getting major updates, and that's just three from the top of my head. Maybe if the CEOs, Marketing, and Finance would stop trying to do the Developers jobs for them other companies might be able to repeat the successes of Larian, ReLogic, ConcernedApe, and Ninja Theory.
@@Ashtariseriously. It's almost like having a massive bureaucracy over your head does nothing but impede your ability to make a product full of love and care like all those other games you listed have. Playing those you can just tell that the devs were encouraged to go wild and as a result they are all great products. More layers of leadership almost never makes things better, but it DOES make more obnoxious wealthy people.
@@Ashtari Similar feats? Are you saying Hellblade the mostly scripted walking simulator is similar to BG3 the insanely complex sandbox with a massive amount of scripted content on top? Terraria is like 20-40% of what BG3 is and despite being successful for over a decade it's still too big of a feat for anybody to AT LEAST clone. Starbound dev and even had a great start, but gave up like half way, because the scope of that game is far larger than your average game. Exceptional games are exception by definition.
Saying "well BG3 did it" is like saying "Well Jeff Bezos can afford it". What are you supposed to do with that info? Become a billionaire? Ask Jeff to buy it?
As for people saying bureaucracy. I kinda agree, but the only solution is self funding or public funding. For one these massive projects are unlikely to be backed in the first place, and even if they are investors are likely to enforce schedules, and release the game early. Also, as with any shareholders, employees are bound to waste time explaining progress to people who want to know without learning.
19:00 - So basically: "it can't possibly be our fault that it didn't do well, it must be that the market is changing"....
Exactly. The market hasn't changed in over a decade. We still play the same types of games we played before.
Sure, different genres have popped up and things like fortnite have been incredibly successful, but as a whole our expectations haven't changed.
“The gamers want live action service games that have loot boxes and battle passes, obviously”
The biggest laugh about EA trotting out this line is that the reason their profits were down mostly wasn't anything to do with Dragon Age.
The much bigger problem for them is that EAFC is underperforming this year by quite a bit. Its obvious in game that they've noticed this because they are throwing out rewards at a way faster rate and for less money. They are undercutting themselves and its not working because you can get a decent team together with spending anywhere near as much in micro transactions. This is far more worrying for them because its always been a cash cow. Dropping off by 5-10% is a huge hit. If the trend keeps up its not a good sign.
So its a live service that is actually what they should be worrying about. And I think they know it. They are bigging up the failure of Dragon Age as cover. It masks a deeper problem that would worry shareholders. This announcement about needing more live service is yet more flak. I'm not claiming that DA was great. I'm saying that they are throwing meat to the wolves to hide a much deeper issue. They aren't going to come out on an investor call and say "Hey look at one of our biggest franchises tanking". They get to bash Bioware, keep chucking out titbits to the media about getting rid of certain staff, constantly highlighting its failure. Its basically shouting "Squirrel" and pointing in the opposite direction.
Again I'm not saying DA was great or Bioware should be immune to criticism. But it seems pretty plain to me that its a sacrificial lamb at this point.
Gamers don't want live service. CEOs want live service. Failguard failed because it was shit, not because it lacked live service. Who wants to pay 60$ to get lectured? I can get lectured for free on twitter. Where's the live service in BG3? I know he doesn't really believe it, but my god, we deserve better lies. It's insulting to pretend we'd believe this nonsense.
word!
you can't say "gamers don't want live service" when the most popular games every year are consistently live services games. I feel like thats such an online take that just dismisses the reality of the current gaming industry, which is a lot of gamers do enjoy live service games, they just have to be good which a lot aren't and that is the real problem.
@@yearsoftears They enjoy the franchises that they've enjoyed for years now, just that the big publishers have transitioned those franchises over to being live services because they think that's where the money is.
"I didn't play the game but twitter told me what was wrong with it so now I repeat that next to every piece of media related to it" - you. How do I know? I actually played the game. The "lecturing" is
Are you high, dude?? Gaming culture is all about flexing and shitting on one another, and live service games gives you just that.
Just like how plant's crave electrolytes, gamer's crave live service games.
Veilguard had its problems, but no one who played it was like "wow, I wish there were live service content to this game" figures that's the only lesson EA got out of it not doing well.
They obviously needed a line of gacha "gender reveal" boxes
I love when I can save a game to my SS or HardDrive and not need to be connected to the Internet for a a single thing but the time of day...
That's a great idea!
Remember when James Stephenie Sterling Son called the "live service will stop people from buying your other games" about 7 years ago? I'll never forget the Ubisoft live service infinite money wheel.
If it had been a live service game, it would've ended up just like Anthem before it. Shallow (more than it already is), poor game mechanics, excessive monetization, and dead within a year
The fact they managed to do this without making the game life service, is quite an achievement.
How was Veilguard fine or ok? There was basically zero roleplay or consequences.
It's not OK as a Dragon Age game, but it's OK as a game. If I'd known nothing about Dragon Age and I got it for half price, I would've thought 'Oh, these animations are really cool, and what a gorgeous setting. I wonder if I can use this as a gateway drug on my niece.'
It's at least a playable game. It's mid. It's "okay". It's working, and it looks somewhat good.
It's not a great game, it's not heaven's blessing, but it's not a hellspawn marinating in horseshit either.
The dialogue, the writing was a travesty. I think a younger audience would've found it enjoyable, to play at least. It came off as if it were written by a kid trying to hit the minimum word count for an essay.
@@acudaicanit’s not even okay as a poster
@@thetrashcanman7537 I'd take a shot of uptown Minrathous as a poster. Among all the complaints about Veilguard, gotta say that 'it looks ugly' is a really rare one, but taste is taste.
This is why Bioware made three crap games in a row. Mark Darrah has said he wanted to release three sequels to Inquisition one after another by 2019 or 2020, followed by two sequels, each developed in about 18 months. Whatever the merits of this plan Bioware instead, at the behest of EA, wasted time chasing two games that nobody asked for then pivoting back to their promised Dragon Age sequel a decade later. All three titles suffered from crunch culture, slapdash development and crucially, attempts to shoehorn in live service elements nobody asked for. Seriously, you have the consumers you have. Not the ones your marketing gurus are grifting greedy investors into believing exist. That's why your games are failing.
"Shared-world" has got to be the least specific term they could've used. Baldur's Gate 3 and Elden Ring are "shared-world" too but absolutely not in a live service way, just in the way that you can share a world with others while you play.
EA going back and forth on online-centric games has been the cycle for over a decade. C&C4 was meant to be live service but got turned into a singleplayer game that killed the franchise, SimCity was a live service game that killed the series and scared The Sims' upcoming live service game into becoming singleplayer.
*but because they had to scrap and remake it in a year, it was a bare-bones skeleton that took years and 980 dollars of DLC to match what Sims 3 did with it's base game and 2 40 dollar expansons. (seriously, it costs 500 dollars worth of DLC for what came with Ambitions for 40).
They clearly dont care about quality of the game, as long as they make enough profit its all fine. And how AAA companies make profit? Not from quality of the game but from selling shit in their cash shops and exploiting idiots. AAA companies constantly expose themselves and their goals.
It's so funny that the biggest most successful single player fantasy RPGs in recent memory, Baldurs Gate, was very much praised for NOT being a shared world online experience and this dude was like "Gamers want shared world online single player games". Like is this dude paying a single piece of attention?
Makes sense, since it's Andrew Wilson. His only claim to fame is putting gambling into an unregulated market. He's done literally nothing else innovative since then, and his success up until now was due wholly to people gambling in FIFA games. Now that they don't have that anymore, Wilson is forced to actually think about the industry his company is a part of. Shame he's illiterate.
Human stupidity has no limits, we all can agree on that. How ever, how such a person becomes a CEO of a $34 Billion company? CEO is more powerful that the owners/shareholders. Share holders don't care 'bout why, when, where, how.... They care bout HOW MUCH !!! So at the end of the day, I'm starting to question myself, is HE the delusional one..... Or am I ???
What, you don't believe in meritocracy especially among the tech industries? Seriously though, I've never seen such a disconnected, unaware group of people with so much money and power despite having zero idea of how anything works in the real world and nothing meaningful to contribute to their own supposed industry.
I subscribe to FFXIV. I still want to finish Baldur's Gate 3. I didn't buy a single game in 2024.
The only game I got that was made in 2024 was Nightmare Kart. The price is right.
Bg3 = gamings savior during a drought
There’s only 1 live service game I want- it’s called Warframe and it’s about 11 years young. That game is live service. 11 years of constant massive updates new things to do and play and be comfy and fun
i love how they ignore non live service games that took off like BG3 & Elden Ring
Both are more or less due to overhype. Let's not pretend like Elden Ring was suddenly out of blue. It had that Souls game cult mentality attached to it. Larian was mollycoddled by industry since DOS 2, and just like DOS 2 BG 3 has slew of problems. Heck just five seconds ago game bugged my save on a freaking cutscene locking me into it endlessly. Let's be real. Industry always fakely poses "Darlings" Larian simply replaced CD Projekt Red as industry "Darling" because Red's betrayed everyone with Cyberbug. There is nothing really worth praising for Larian.
At very least Veilguard respected my time. Can't say that for BG 3 where it's rng on top of rng followed by rng ... and badly programmed rng at that.
@@cracmar03found the paid bot for veilguard.
@@cracmar03 I have my own gripes with BG3 being a shallow story at best , but Veilguard fails in every aspect of being a game besides the combat .
@@cracmar03 bro has never played D&D.
@@cracmar03. Yeah, overhype, whatever you say. 😂😂😂😂😂
They basically cobbled it together as a single player RPG from the live service game. The developers who hate live service to the core already left and who needs good writers for a live service, pff.
It feels like the main story is the only thing they had time for, and the usual ‘filler’ that fills the world with life doesn't exist. It's no longer ‘you, the rogue elf from XY’, it's just ‘the main character’. The background you choose doesn't matter and won't have any effect.
The problem with these "only looking at the numbers" CEOs. Yeah I don't mind Live services, but have they considered that I'm already playing 3 or more games with Live services, and not considering adding a new one to my current routine?
android wilson saying android wilson things, has he learned fuck all from the live services EA has shat out (and failed spectacularly)
this is exactly the problem ea had before their renaissance when they dropped dead space back in the day
Not really sure how it’s possible for EA to learn all the wrong lessons from their recent history, but it seems that’s what they’ve done.
When your job is to sell loot-boxes and season-passes, you'll find any way possible to justify it.
They're scared Ubisoft is gonna take their crown as Worst Company.
"Let's all laugh at an industry that never learns anything teeheehee"
Blind idiots steering a once mighty ship into the iceberg of doom. These CEOs are very disconnected from the pulse of the gamers that they serve. It's astounding....
Agreeded I pretty much have the same 2-3 games on rotation and it takes something super special to get my attention now.
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
― Upton Sinclair
We gamers *do* want live service games and many of us actively play one right now its just that we need, like, 1 every 3-5 years or so
That's the problem right there, you already actively play one. And just one, no one has the time for more than just one, because they're designed to extract as much time and cash as humanly possible. With fortnite taking billions, and the warcrafts, warframes, ffxiv, lols, and call of dutys taking millions each, what room does that leave for any more? This isn't even taking mobile gacha into the equation as well.
Pushing a narrative, being it from AAA CEO's or regarded youtube pundits, while not figuring out the lesson laid out in front of you is a tale as old as time.
EA: Needed more live service! *while ignoring the solid non-live service games that do well*
Woke Critic: It was woke! *while ignoring the solid "woke games" that do well*
Reality: Game kind of just sucked...
I'll be honest, I haven't played the game, but I doubt it's even "woke". Weird thing that term was being used by people who had 2018 Twitter politics and now people use it to encompass all of "leftist ideologies" even though by that logic 1984 is woke.
What’s the narrative?
@@ottomade "Gamers want live service, games want lootboxes, gamers want pay-to-win" etc
@@cherry9787 Thing is, the term "woke" was originally used by African Americans during the Jim Crow era as a reminder to each other to remain aware of the dangers of living in a racist white society. During the Jim Crow era, it was fairly common for an African American man to be beaten simply because he looked at a white woman. My mom grew up before the Civil Rights movement and told me the stories.
It was only recently that the word was twisted into what it is today.
I don't want live service, but not having co-op was a missed opportunity. Baldurs Gate 3 had it and it was simply awesome!
The issue is that unfortunately the money doesn’t lie.
And when you are Android Wilson, or an EA shareholder your vision is coloured by:
‘Money number go up equal gamer love product.’
They make billions off live service sports games. Of course they think we want more.
sure but they must have data that show that fifaks are very distinct people from non-sportsball people
"The customers dont k ow what they want, WE know what they want!"
Everyone talking about Veilguard failing but the reality of the situation is that these game publishers overfund game development to an inefficient and completely unsustainable degree. It had 2.5 million players, which apparently 1.5 million copies sold. That's about 100 million dollars. And that's a failure? That's more money than most studios see in their lifetime.
It did not sell 1.5 million, they came out and said it engaged 1.5 million players, so question is what is ''engaged'', its not copies sold as then you would just say copies sold.
And 100 million for a triple A studio is not even close being unreasonable, dragons dogma 2 sold 3 million copies in 2 weeks, low balling it with 50 dollars for a copy is 150 million.
Even the exact same franchise with its lowest player number is 2 million in a month.
@Kira, the last good Bioware game was Mass Effect 2 which released Jan 26, 2010, OVER 15 YEARS AGO.
Eh i loved Mass Effect 3 - the ending.
If BioWare made a game like DAO, I would have paid $70 day one easily
4:33 anyone who thinks a game they love was good and they haven’t played it recently - would take that opinion with a grain of salt. Nostalgia is a powerful filter.
In theory live service games should work. But the biggest issue is that these companies are releasing half assed products and thinking we'd be ok paying them to keep developing it into shit.
There's also only so many players for each game.
the problem with live service games is that they are competing out of the box with other live service games out there,with people that already sunk thousands of hours and money on them so its almost impossible to attract them
pretty much biggest reason justice league game failed
@@vxicepickxvexactly. Most gamers already have their "home" game where they always go back to when they get tired of other stuff. You'd need to make a goddamn miracle of a game to get those players to move on. Hell, I'm still playing D2R and WoW because for everything the industry claims about the killers of those, you can't actually replace what bonded people to their favorite games in the first place. That and I feel like most people are getting less free time right now, not more, and live service games are by design time vacuums.
The lack of sense by these higher ups is insane. It's like opening a restaurant, everyone hates it and all the non-troll reviews are people directly showing pictures of raw food, moldy bread, hair and pieces of plastic in the food, items missing, the place is dirty, only for the owners to be like "Clearly the problem is that we don't offer catering".
They miss the forest for the trees. It's crazy how often they can't grasp that the product needs to be good and in line with expectations they set for people to want to buy it.
People need to lose their jobs if they can not adequately do their jobs. I hate the whole "Oh, I don't want people to lose their jobs" bit that people do.
Second this. People really need to quit being soft little pansies. Yes it's going to hurt people's feelings. They can't do their jobs so they don't deserve to have a job.
The level of online engagement I want from a (primarily) single player game is basically a summation of what I did in a chapter/act and what everyone else did (similar to what Telltale did and Supermassive does).
there are novels for dragon age kira, they're...a mixed bag
Give me an offline, single-person, non shooting related game and I'm all over that, lol. Definitely not crazy about playing with others online and especially don't want to pay more than once for my game.
Andrew Wilson knows exactly why the game failed, he's just putting on this act that he's identified the problem for his shareholders.
And, in a way, he is right... if you just look past all the bullshit he's packed in around the core point - if the game had more live service elements (read: had microtransactions and was structured to be mostly busywork) EA/Bioware lap dogs could have spent far more money on it. Even if every other aspect of the game was the same, and it had the same reception, if it made money he wouldn't give a shit, and neither would the shareholders.
I think mediocre games can exist in this market. Games don't need to be endless multi thousand hour experiences, live service, or even super story heavy. They just need to be solid and enjoyable for what they are. That's what Astrobot is, just a solid and enjoyable platformer.
Veilguard failed cause it failed to execute on the aspects that the Dragon Age fans wanted to play. Its characters werent interesting enough to warrant anyone to attach to them, the choices in game has little to no impact on the outcome of the game, the combat didn't have a good enough variety or control to vary the encounters/gameplay, and the story was incredibly linear where DA has always been about taking the routes with the characters you want.
People wanted their experience with Veilguard to be a continuation and upgrade to what came before it, and instead they floundered all the things people loved about these games. It doesn't matter if it was "alright" as a regular game, it was a bad "Dragon Age" game.
Also no hate to Shylily and gamersupps but their Trading card game is not good. It's really really bad. They seem to be trying to improve it but that release was terrible and the game rules aren't good.
Mediocre games can also exist in the market if they are cheaper. A cheaper mediocre game can probably make how much it costs back with a higher profit margin much more easily, even with the cost being closer to AAA, but no everything has to be a massive spectacle.
@aethertoast4320 also true, knowing the value of your game and how large of an experience you are trying to make matters a lot. So knowing that you are making a game you plan to sell for $30 may mean you cut things or leave some stuff in a lacking state to create a tighter focus on what matters instead of the larger experience overall like many AAAA games do and fail at.
That’s a lot of words for “DEI FAILURE” anyway I commented because I like ACTUAL mediocre games sometimes (DAV is far below mediocre) so I agree, like technomancer!
Dd2 didn't sell well because of their inability to optimize the game (PC port) and releasing at 30 fps on consoles.
I put in the 50 hours to beat DAtV and it really felt like the first Dragon Age game that didn't have glaring issues. It also didn't have anything that excited me besides like, "oh wow that's a lot of real time animations that must've been suoer fucking expensive!"
As I told my mother the other day, this is like blaming a power plant's underperforming on not utilizing cold fusion.
This is a great example of how people tend to believe whatever is emotionally pleasant for them to believe. Once you know that principle, you start seeing it everywhere.
(And no, it's not only the people you dislike who are doing it. Pretty much everyone does it.)
There is this magical thing that sits between a single player game and live service called a co-op game. RPGs are prime real estate for co-op.
great seeing You coming back to a bit more regular schedule :) always a fan of Your rambling. On the topic itself, I think You made solid points, EA execs are delusional but also it's totally understandable that they say it out loud they want to make more stuff that consistently makes them money...I just wish they would release/sell the IP to someone else...maybe a small studio with a different budget and expectations. There are success stories in the market where a small scale but passionate (could even say hardcore focused) company ends big (i.e. Larian or even Owlcat would be a good example). But that won't happen they will just stick with Dragon Age name (probably doing nothing with it now) till the OG fans of Origins just die out.
to be fair, i do select one game and play it A LOT (we talk about thousands of hours). i prefer grinding and dissecting every aspect of it. So unless a game has that depth, its out the window.
I feel the same way as you already having more games than any normal person could ever play... lol
I'm not a big multiplayer person, I like co-op, and if I had to choose a multiplayer type, I would pick PVE over PVP. I am cooperative, not competitive. Having said that, I really enjoyed the concept of "single player in a shared world" that Death Stranding did. It was really cool seeing buildings and roads that other people built/contributed to, and I felt like I was helping somebody when I deposited items in the mailboxes. That's the type of shared world I would like to see in future games.
It's baffling how EA doesn't learn and conclude that people want live service. Is this the second time? I swear they had said some time ago.
Every other company makes a product in hopes that people will buy it and then either use it to failure or get bored with it and then go out and buy a similar new product to replace it. I feel like the game industry has forgotten what consumerism is.
EA talking about live service like they don't remember how hard Anthem tanked. Even given the option to update and re-launch Anthem they went back on it. These companies have already learned this lesson. The big publisher bubble deserves to crash. My heart goes out to all the talented, passionate dev crew being sacrificed by these corps.
What I need is for AAA companies to live-service these nuts while they either make a worth-while 60€ singleplayer experience with maybe a multiplayer mode attached, or a multiplayer-only game with server browser support from the get-go so when official servers go under, people can keep playing the game they paid for.
Imagine how many more "destroy 3 things to proceed" missions they could create if it was life service.
I cant remember the last time EA made a game worth a damn lmfao
I can. Spore. Probably the last one they even tried. It wasn't a great game ill admit. But it wasn't just an obvious cash grab.
Also that was like 20 years ago.
Mirrors edge was a good one.
Sims3 the Expansions was worthwhile (yes there is probebly a stinker but for the most part each expansion was worth the price and had content).
Spore, Mirror Edge 1 (not sure about 2).
a few Battlefield games (the older ones not sure whats the last good one as I never got around to play anything after COD 2 I think(2003 ish) ).
I’ve always maintained that Mass Effect 1 was their last game that they released that I didn’t have major issues with. In my eyes they’ve been failing to live up to that standard for literal decades at this point.
If this is what EA got out of Veilguard’s failure, then ME5 is going to make Andromeda look like Mario 64 by comparison.
Executives are out of touch with the whole games business. We need some executives who have been gamers as young adults to bring perspective in. Plus these large companies should be doing research to make sure they make games that make sense.
0:22 Maybe you can forward this little part to that guy SmashJT who seems to be having a god damn stroke over AAA video games being too woke.
Trust EA to draw the wrong conclusion from their games not selling.
Alternate title for that PCGamer article: "EA upset their new game didn't sell well and they can't milk who is left."
"Book doesn't have to be a movie". but it can, and think of all the money it can make :D
No no, let him cook. I for one, will not be sad to see EA fail as much as Ubisoft has.
All the people i heard about veilguard in france had that one thing in common : "it's an okay game if you can stomach the dialogues"
Gonna be honest and say: I want much more live service.
In fact, I want so much live service, that people get absolutely sick of it asap and all these big corpos that shovel out live service slop, like games are something that can be created on an assembly line, just collapse and stop existing.
The best way to accelerate the collapse of all these dogwater companies/publishers is for them to just continue creating live service slop. MORE, PLEASE!
Investor calls has to be the worst type of stage plays that is ever held. The only one that is saying something real is the audience, and they're often somehow participating in the show.
Good thing is that I no longer care what EA thinks. This game killed the last remaining shreds of faith I had in what's left of Bioware. I'm looking for my RPGs somewhere else.
Their vision is Ready Player One.
Us living in shacks, hooked on a live service vr game, milked 24/7 :>
Nobody can wake up AAA studios cuz they are diving so deep on their delusions for eternity.
It’s infuriating how utterly out of touch the people with all the power in game development are…smdh 🤬
“Woo! This is the moment we’ve all been waiting for!” - Moist reacting to another EA live service game he won’t play
He's totally right: I would love for this game to be live service! Live service means promised future content so if it flops the company has to continue making stuff for a game nobody plays like SSKTJL or force everyone to take their money back like Concord because they can't pull the plug without being sued.
Thank you for saying this. I had a group of friends that glazed BioWare for years. I never liked Dragon Age 2 or Inquisition but I bought them because they promised they'd be good. Finally I said no to Andromeda and even last year warned them not to get hyped for Veilguard. Now they're surprised it wasn't AMAZING.
These are the same guys that are like, "what happened to Bethesda" years too late.
Remember, executives do not read reviews, they read spreadsheets on profits. They see 1 billion dollars a year from games like Fortnight, and loses on games like Dragon Age and they think... oh yeah, Live Service is what people want.
They only think in terms of money.
They don't realize that these are totally different markets filled with different players with different needs and wants.
We aren't all whales in MMOs but they want us to be.
I buy gameplay not promises of additional content.
Mass Effect 4 being live service disaster will be hilarious
More people playing Mass Effect LE these days than Veilguard
from the moment it went from Dreadwolf to Veilguard it was a clue how this thing was set to fail
What I don't understand is how Bioware is somehow still open when EA has shuttered better studios with better track records and significantly smaller failures, for less. World isn't fair.
Justice for blackbox.
What I personally missed most was the writing and the characters. The dialogue and relationships were pretty shallow, and you could not really interact with any of the characters other than 5-line dialogues at set points in the game...
Birds swim, fish fly, and EA execs fundamentally misunderstand their own industry