EA to buy BioWare/Pandemic

[quote name='Blitz']People hate on EA because they are a shit company. Everything they touch turns to shit.

I don't buy anything from them.

You should take your own advice with the whole STFU thing.[/quote]

Look, people don't like their practices as a company and I understand that, but they do turn out good games whether they acquired them (Burnout) or make them themselves (Madden, Def Jam). No company falls ass backwards into THAT much success. Hell, EA even published Squaresoft games for a time.
 
EA bought criterion for renderware plain and simple they could care less what games get made. EA hates originality and new IPs. Skate is the first new IP from EA in along time. EA takes a good game whores it out with so many sequels, destroys the deveolper and then moves it internally. EA sucks and thats about all there is to it.
 
[quote name='daroga']That graph is pretty misleading. It only has 2.0 points on it total.[/QUOTE]

shhhhhh....

it's still funny.
 
[quote name='jer7583']October 07-EA Purchases Bioware

December 07-Mass Effect is released, joy falls upon the world

January 07- EA announces BioWare to be assigned the Medal of Honor franchise now and forever, gamers groan the world around.[/QUOTE]
execpt that bioware made good FPS in MDK 2
 
[quote name='InuFaye']EA bought criterion for renderware plain and simple they could care less what games get made. EA hates originality and new IPs. Skate is the first new IP from EA in along time. EA takes a good game whores it out with so many sequels, destroys the deveolper and then moves it internally. EA sucks and thats about all there is to it.[/quote]

With development costs higher than ever you'll see less original IP from than in the past. New IP are huge risks now more than ever. For every God of War there is an Okami. That whole development studio got canned because as great as the game was, people didn't buy it. All companies try to find one huge hit and make sequels. No one does the old school Treasure "no-sequel, highly innovative" thing anymore. Why do that when a new experience has just as much chance of being the $5 weekly special on CAG in a few months compared to a proved franchise?

And since when is EA the only company in the world to care about creatvity from? There are so many other places a person can get their creativity fix ...the DS and the Wii are proven examples.
 
[quote name='GuilewasNK']Look, people don't like their practices as a company and I understand that, but they do turn out good games whether they acquired them (Burnout) or make them themselves (Madden, Def Jam). No company falls ass backwards into THAT much success. Hell, EA even published Squaresoft games for a time.[/QUOTE]
Did you forget how they disbanded and closed Westwood Studio? In the end many of the original staff left and all EA got is the Command & Conquer name
 
[quote name='62t']Did you forget how they disbanded and closed Westwood Studio? In the end many of the original staff left and all EA got is the Command & Conquer name[/quote]

And destroyed the franchise. How about when they destroyed bullfrog, or how they destroyed maxis. EA is such full of shit.
 
[quote name='62t']Did you forget how they disbanded and closed Westwood Studio? In the end many of the original staff left and all EA got is the Command & Conquer name[/quote]

I never said their all practices were good, but like I said they also helped Square at a time after FFVII hit big so the statement "everything they touch is shit" just isn't always the case.
 
I don't really like EA or Bioware (their games just don't appeal to me), so this doesn't affect me. It just means I probably won't buy an EA published Bioware game. :lol:

There are a few things I said on a few other forums about this, but I feel it's best not to share it here.
 
Well now that EA will be milking BioWare for all it is worth, I guess we will definitely be seeing a Baldur's Gate III. I hope that's a good thing. :/
 
I have to admit I was surprised to see this story today...

Anyone know how much $$$ Elevation Partners made off of the deal?

I think they invested $300mm back in late 2005, and sold it for $775mm+ today. Not a bad return if those numbers are true...
 
[quote name='GuilewasNK']I never said their all practices were good, but like I said they also helped Square at a time after FFVII hit big so the statement "everything they touch is shit" just isn't always the case.[/QUOTE]
Square EA is just a publishing and localizing deal for the US market, Square still owns all their IP.
 
EA has little to do with Valve's products. Basically all they do for valve is provide physical boxes and discs to put their product in and on shelves. That's why you don't see EA's name on the boxes EXCEPT on that little clear seal tape at the bottom. It's almost exactly like what they did with Squaresoft during their period of US expansion, but with even less of a presence.

They are partners. In fact, the PS3 version of Orange Box is the first real development side stuff EA has done for valve.

And I'd say that they've kind of screwed burnout up. Revenge wasn't nearly as good as 3. It went from a top notch arcade racer with awesome crashes to a top notch crashing game with turns every now and then. Paradise looks pretty good, but I haven't played it, and the sandbox stuff could be hit or miss.
 
[quote name='InuFaye']EA bought criterion for renderware plain and simple they could care less what games get made. EA hates originality and new IPs. Skate is the first new IP from EA in along time. EA takes a good game whores it out with so many sequels, destroys the deveolper and then moves it internally. EA sucks and thats about all there is to it.[/quote]
skate
Army of Two
Dead Space
Rock Band
Boogie
Boom Boom Rocket
 
OT: with as sequel happy as EA is with almost everything, why don't they make a sequel / remake of a game I really want?

Mutant. League. Football.
 
[quote name='FriskyTanuki']skate
Army of Two
Dead Space
Rock Band
Boogie
Boom Boom Rocket[/QUOTE]

EVERY one of those was developed to combat/ride onto another successful title or genre on the market that they weren't competing with at the moment.

Skate-Tony Hawk
Army of Two-Gears of War
Dead Space-Bioshock/FPS in general
Rock Band-Guitar Hero
Boogie-Singstar (a pathetic attempt)
Boom Boom Rocket- Rhythm games/Downloadable games

These were all board room necessities to keep up with the market, not bold innovations by a company that just loves doing new things.
 
[quote name='jer7583']EVERY one of those was developed to combat/ride onto another successful title or genre on the market that they weren't competing with at the moment.

Skate-Tony Hawk
Army of Two-Gears of War
Dead Space-Bioshock/FPS in general
Rock Band-Guitar Hero
Boogie-Singstar (a pathetic attempt)
Boom Boom Rocket- Rhythm games/Downloadable games

These were all board room necessities to keep up with the market, not bold innovations by a company that just loves doing new things.[/quote]
So they're not new IPs then? Thanks for the tip.
 
[quote name='jer7583']EVERY one of those was developed to combat/ride onto another successful title or genre on the market that they weren't competing with at the moment.

Skate-Tony Hawk
Army of Two-Gears of War
Dead Space-Bioshock/FPS in general
Rock Band-Guitar Hero
Boogie-Singstar (a pathetic attempt)
Boom Boom Rocket- Rhythm games/Downloadable games

These were all board room necessities to keep up with the market, not bold innovations by a company that just loves doing new things.[/quote]Similar to other games? Yes. But each one seems to be doing its own thing. Such as Rock Band's combining of all the instruments, etc. When we get to Rock Band 7, that'll be a different story.
 
I cant stand EA, but even I have to say that they seem to understand that they've been stuck in 'Sequelitits' mode for quite some time. They are trying new things, albeit in established genres.

Skate is a new take on skateboarding games, but we would never have seen it if not for the phenomenal success of the Tony Hawk games.

Its not like they're dropping the next Katamari Damacy on us, but does anyone expect that kind of innovation from EA anyway?

I dont like these aquisitions one bit, but I'll be happy if they follow the Hollywood studio model, and use the success of yearly mainstream sequels to fund more original IPs.
 
[quote name='daroga']Similar to other games? Yes. But each one seems to be doing its own thing. Such as Rock Band's combining of all the instruments, etc. When we get to Rock Band 7, that'll be a different story.[/QUOTE]

Don't forget, either, that of the major third party developers, EA is the only one to set aside resources specifically for Wii development. They may not always succeed (Boogie), but they're doing a helluva lot more for that console than Ubisoft's "give 'em waggle and charge 'em $50" approach.

EA is often fairly maligned, but they're not bad through and through.
 
Wow i just bought the 360 for mass effect(and halo 3). It's a shame to have to cross that game off my list, i won't give EA my money.
 
[quote name='Medium_Pimpin']Wow i just bought the 360 for mass effect(and halo 3). It's a shame to have to cross that game off my list, i won't give EA my money.[/QUOTE]

What? The game is Published by Microsoft. EA has nothing to do with it AFAIK.

Shitty excuse not to buy one of the best games of the year.
 
[quote name='CaseyRyback']There is too much EA hate on this board. I for one am glad to see EA pick up Bioware. That means that Bioware can get back to making PC games and more people can experience their games since they will more likely than not be multiplatform.

Also the whole assumption that EA makes shit is so stupid. EA makes a ton of great games.[/quote]
It's because their ratio of fairly good to terribly sub-par games is something like 2:5. That's a completely unscientific estimate (not to mention based off of subjective data), but it's probably something similar to that, if you average the games' review scores. People are quite justifed when a great independent developer gets bought out by EA, whose spot record is quite...spotty.


[quote name='GuilewasNK']I just find it odd no one bitches and moans at the companies that sell their souls to EA. It's a two way street. EA can't buy unless someone wants to sell.[/quote]
Well, that's definitely true. Many companies are indeed selling out. But just because they sign the papers doesn't mean they're selling their soul to Satan. A lot of indie developers are limping along financially. For every innovative team that succeeds, there are many more that fail. If you were watching your company hemmorhage money while your creditors are breathing down your neck, wouldn't you take an offer from EA?

Companies can get into financial trouble no matter how large they are. Atari needed a huge influx of cash to finish the 2600; selling the company to Warner Communications helped them finish that project. Warner took a huge gamble in backing the 2600, and it paid off big time. Of course, the irony here is that Atari was eventually driven into the ground by Ray Kassar, the iron-fisted "czar" of the newly formed Atari divison of Warner Communications. So the parallel between that story and this new development for Bioware and EA is simply this: are we going to see this generation's E.T.: The Videogame?

God help us all.

On the other hand, Bioware/Pandemic was the only videogame developer owned in part by Bono. Not that that makes a difference; I just wanted to say that. But I doubt they were really hurting for money, so the Bioware execs probably do deserve some anti-kudos for this deal.
 
[quote name='VipFREAK']LMAO!

eaxw3.jpg
[/QUOTE]

FYI, the reason EA's stock went down is not because of this announcement, the whole damn tech sector sold off this afternoon at the exact same time due to (supposedly, yeah right) a negative report on Baidu. Looked like program trading to me. Damn quants!

Anyway, I haven't supported EA in years, and this aquisition doesn't sway me one way or another. If a game is good I'll buy it. Just like 99% of all of you on here. If EA continues to make crap, they won't get my dollar.
 
[quote name='Calamityuponthee']What? The game is Published by Microsoft. EA has nothing to do with it AFAIK.

Shitty excuse not to buy one of the best games of the year.[/quote]
EA owns Bioware/Pandemic now, so they have something to do it. To say this negates all the work they've done for the past few years on Mass Effect is another issue altogether.

It's the EA effect. Just hearing their name alongside another developer causes an intense hatred.
 
[quote name='InuFaye']Im not gonna buy any more EA games. fuck EA fuck the bastards thinking they can just buy everything. All EA makes is recycled garbage anymore.[/quote]FIFA 08 was actually good so I still support EA.That and NFS.
 
If you can't see that those "new IP" are more reactionary than anything, well.. I don't know what to say.
 
Not buying a good game so that EA doesn't get any money doesn't make a lick of sense.

Let me let you in on a little secret. Have you seen sales of Madden and the other EA sports titles? Your little boycott ain't going to do jack. Just because you wait 2 weeks to pickup Mass Effect or the latest Burnout used from GameStop (won't support one "evil" corporation but will another?) won't change a darn thing. In fact, you're shooting yourself in the foot if anything.

If EA sees that the good games make them no money, but people continue to buy rehashed, reactionary, roster-changed titles at full price, what incentive do they have to change what they support and how they support it? You can say all you want about how awful EA is and full of crap their games are, how their business model sucks, and how you'll never support them; EA'll take it all in stride as they roll around in their bins of money.

The one objection to this is the information that came out a few years ago about EA was treating some of their employees. That would be a justifable ground for a boycott on a moral level, even if it makes no sense what so ever on a practical level. However, I'm hard-pressed to understand how someone could have a legitmate moral issue to EA buying talented developers.
 
Exactly right.

I dont buy EA's cookie cutter yearly updates, but I did buy the Orange box. I tend to stay away from EA developed games, but Orange box was simply published by EA, Im 'voting' for Valve by buying that title.

Another reason I dont buy yearly updated games is simple economics. Why buy something for $60, when you know it will be $20-30 in a few months? Im pretty sure there wont be a 'Orange Box '08' Just because EA published it.


[quote name='daroga']Not buying a good game so that EA doesn't get any money doesn't make a lick of sense.

Let me let you in on a little secret. Have you seen sales of Madden and the other EA sports titles? Your little boycott ain't going to do jack. Just because you wait 2 weeks to pickup Mass Effect or the latest Burnout used from GameStop (won't support one "evil" corporation but will another?) won't change a darn thing. In fact, you're shooting yourself in the foot if anything.

If EA sees that the good games make them no money, but people continue to buy rehashed, reactionary, roster-changed titles at full price, what incentive do they have to change what they support and how they support it? You can say all you want about how awful EA is and full of crap their games are, how their business model sucks, and how you'll never support them; EA'll take it all in stride as they roll around in their bins of money.

The one objection to this is the information that came out a few years ago about EA was treating some of their employees. That would be a justifable ground for a boycott on a moral level, even if it makes no sense what so ever on a practical level. However, I'm hard-pressed to understand how someone could have a legitmate moral issue to EA buying talented developers.[/quote]
 
[quote name='jer7583']If you can't see that those "new IP" are more reactionary than anything, well.. I don't know what to say.[/QUOTE]

Who cares if they are? Is Sonic any less of a good game because it was reactionary to Super Mario Brothers?
 
[quote name='The Mana Knight']I don't really like EA or Bioware (their games just don't appeal to me), so this doesn't affect me. It just means I probably won't buy an EA published Bioware game. :lol:

There are a few things I said on a few other forums about this, but I feel it's best not to share it here.[/quote]

2009: Bioware announces PS3 "Exclusive" RPG. TMK raves about how awesome they are.

BELIEVE.
 
[quote name='Mr Unoriginal']Who cares if they are? Is Sonic any less of a good game because it was reactionary to Super Mario Brothers?[/quote]

Everything after Sonic Adventure 2 was shit. (Not Including DS games)
 
[quote name='InuFaye']Everything after Sonic Adventure 2 was shit. (Not Including DS games)[/quote]Sonic was a reaction to Super Mario Bros. a little bit of time before Sonic Adventure 2. Like 10 years.

And jer, Frisky's list there was not to say how unique their gameplay was. It was a reaction to someone saying that EA only made sequels, thus the point was that there are several new IPs. Debating whether they were new genres or not was never on the table. You're setting up strawmen here. :)
 
[quote name='InuFaye']2009: Bioware announces PS3 "Exclusive" RPG. TMK raves about how awesome they are.

BELIEVE.[/QUOTE]Yeah right. Even though GTA was exclusive to PS2 for a bit, I absolutely despised the series. I just find Bioware's RPGs boring (or most any western RPG. I'm 99.9999999% JRPG fanboy with spikey haired anime characters losing their memory).
 
... so I guess my hopes and dreams of BioWare making another Baldur's Gate game are shattered?

Have fun with your Mass Effect 09 guys, I'm done.
 
[quote name='Zoglog']People hate on EA for no reason other than them being a huge company. Same crap happens to Microsoft and it's just plain stupid.[/quote]

This isn't true. People hate EA because they've bought and then destroyed countless brilliant developers. Just off the top of my head I can think of Westwood, Bullfrog, and Origin. I'm sure someone could compile a dozen great developers like that they've destroyed.

They buy these companies, and then seem to almost purposely destroy them. A poster on another board speculates:

The steel, oil, financial, communications, computer, and assorted consumer product industries have been doing this for years. It's called competition prevention for the enhancement of the bottom line.....
Click to expand...

Microsoft is a nasty, evil company. But I think they're a good publisher-really seem to know quality games when they see them, and to my knowledge haven't run any game developers into the ground like EA does.

Maxis is the only developer I can think of that wasn't completely destroyed, and in their case it was probably just dumb luck. Had The Sims not become a gigantic hit, I have little doubt they too would have been destroyed completely.

This is almost certainly a bad thing for us, at least short term. Long term though Bioware's founders will probably be essentially forced out of the company, start a new one, and go back to making great games. We know that because that's happened to countless developers that EA swallows (which again makes me wonder if they're only eating them to get rid of competition for their mediocre garbage they spit out).

And all these posts defending EA by saying they've published good games...well yes, but take away Maxis and how many great games have they DEVELOPED since the early/mid 90's? Yeah, Buffy's an awesome game...and it's by the Collective, which so far has avoided assimilation (how ironic is that!)
Well, I guess a lot of people love the Burnout games, so I'll exclude Maxis and Criteriem (however you spell that), and of course sports games, which I think are drek, but people enjoy...

People attacked Ubisoft-but come on, they've done good work with like Splinter Cell, even despite churning it out fast. They did some nice stuff with Farcry despite the same thing (and Farcry 2 actually looks like it's going to be a great game, even though I'm kind of biased against it since it's not Crysis).
 
Smart move by EA. Probably one of their best purchases.

and EA did not destroy Westwood, Bullfrog, and Origin. The key developers simply left or got absorbed in. It's not a big deal, if EA really causes issues, they just leave and form a new studio.............. Gamers are overreacting to nothing.
 
God why is it so hard for studios to say no to huge paychecks and stay creatively indie.
With EA's rep, I would think the studio employees would want the freedom that staying out of EA's conglomerate brings. What is a few bucks more a day worth when you have no free time and crazy slave driving supervisors.

I cant wait to see coke and car ads in the next bioware rpg!!! SWEET!
 
[quote name='Noodle Pirate!']God why is it so hard for studios to say no to huge paychecks and stay creatively indie.
With EA's rep, I would think the studio employees would want the freedom that staying out of EA's conglomerate brings. What is a few bucks more a day worth when you have no free time and crazy slave driving supervisors.

I cant wait to see coke and car ads in the next bioware rpg!!! SWEET![/QUOTE]

#1 it's more than a few bucks
#2 big companies like EA can help with resources to make a better game, not only hinder them with.
#3 EA can help bump up sales of their games.

As usual you've forgotten game companies, no matter how big or small all exist to make money. Just because what they do is fun for you doesn't mean their work is fun. It's definetly gratifying, or else they wouldn't be in this industry, but living in SoCal, some of these guys have families.
 
Funny.jpg


Breaking News!

Following the announcement that EA had absorbed BioWare and Pandemic Studios, EA announced that certain "changes" were in store for their newly acquired employees. CEO Larry Probst stated that "we want to make former employees of BioWare and Pandemic feel that their office is like a second home, especially since they'll be physically shackled to their desks for 95% of the week". Probst also went on to state that the newly acquired studios would be required to conform to EA's uniform standards, specifically, they will now be required to wear tracking devices in the form of pink dog collars with the words "EA's Bitch" from now on. As the new employees were ushered into their priso.......offices, Probst was overheard downplaying the necessity of rooftop snipers; "they won't have to shoot as long as you keep working!"

In addition, many online bloggers have noticed that wikipedia entries for both BioWare and Pandemic Studios now share the title "Property of EA". Wikipedia confirmed that recent edits have IP addresses which originate from EA's corperate offices.
 
Lets just say that this is bad. EA does not like creativity. End of Story. If it cant be sequeled then EA wants nothing to do with it.
 
InuFaye makes a point I didn't think about.. BioWare doesn't usually leave games open to sequels or create them with sequels in mind. EA loves a sure thing. KOTOR 2 wasn't even done by bioware.
 
img052.jpg


Still says Pandemic Studios, not EA. You guys are going nuts over nothing. And the current Bioware offices are shit, so change will do them good.

And if you do want to blame someone, go blame Bono. Assuming the Devs didn't want to, it was Elevation Partners that probably pushed deal.
 
[quote name='daroga']Wouldn't be the first software developer/publisher to jump into the ring. Maybe those Plug-and-Play Madden Genesis controllers were product tests ;)[/QUOTE]


as was the amazing 3DO.

3DO2 (4DO?) - 2009 confirmed.
 
[quote name='Apossum']as was the amazing 3DO.

3DO2 (4DO?) - 2009 confirmed.[/quote]It's over. Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo are finished.

I wonder what Madden exclusive to one console would do to the whole scheme of things...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top