{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
5/18/2013 12:35:41 AM
20
Someone should ask this engineer why EA is the reigning champion of worst company in a America for two years running... I also want to know why EA decided to copy/paste FIFA this past year? Why has Madden been milked for 25 years in a row without any hardly any changes each year? Why does Battlefield needs to rival CoD every year with an annual release? And why did EA run Bioware into the ground?
English
-
People still buy their games, so I don't think that they'll be changing anything anytime soon. If you want them to make changes you have to convince people to stop buying their games.
-
Because an online poll that was easily manipulated by butthurt gamers is a great indicator of "worst company in America."
-
Battlefield 3 came out late 2011 though, or did I misunderstand something?
-
Bioware ran Bioware into the ground. Not EA.
-
Edytowany przez użytkownika OmegaCircuit: 5/18/2013 4:54:29 PMNot entirely, but ME3 did seem very rushed, and I'm sure EA had something to do with that. I remember reading something about how EA rushed DA2 out as well.
-
EA apparently rushed out DA2 at "alpha quality" according to some Bioware dev. EA did create quite a bit of problems for ME3 (day one DLC, etc.) but most of the pressing problems were Bioware's fault (*eyes writing team*).
-
Well, yeah, that's true. I get the feeling some of the writing flaws were due to them trying to appeal to new players, though.
-
Focusing the main plot on Cerberus was complete retardation across the board, and not because of new players either.
-
Edytowany przez użytkownika OmegaCircuit: 5/18/2013 11:28:55 PMTrue , and that was completely BioWare's doing. I really can't wrap my head around how they thought that would be a good idea.
-
EA didn't screw BioWare. The fans didn't screw BioWare. BioWare screwed BioWare.
-
Edytowany przez użytkownika kgj: 5/18/2013 2:39:48 AMBioware? Yep. Bioware.
-
-
Edytowany przez użytkownika kgj: 5/18/2013 2:15:07 AMWhat? Are you saying they did? EA runs many companies into the ground. But with ME3, Bioware ran themselves into the ground. Not because they're a$$holes, but because they're idiots.
-
I'm saying lol that you think Bioware have been ran into the ground. Bioware are a fantastic company.
-
Oh. Well that's your opinion. And it differs from mine. [I]Greatly.[/I]
-
-
Because I found ME3 to be an absolute trainwreck. ME2's "plot" was pretty bad, but ME3's [I]everything[/I] was bad. (IMO)
-
Edytowany przez użytkownika Noshotskill: 5/18/2013 4:41:35 PMBioware's downfall has a lot to do with spoiled fans and the owners of the company leaving. The hate Bioware got for Mass Effect 3 was from a bunch of spoiled fan boys whining about the ending. Even I, someone who couldn't care less about Mass Effect, saw they put a lot of quality into the game that was greatly overlooked due to the original endings. Similar to the hate Bungie gets for Reach, and 343i gets for Halo 4. Both games are good, just people find changes that they don't like and complain for years about.
-
[quote]Bioware's downfall has a lot to do with spoiled fans[/quote] You mean fans expecting a game of the quality of the last two they made? [quote]and the owners of the company leaving.[/quote] ... Ray Muzyka and the other guy left AFTER the ME3 ending debacle. [quote]The hate Bioware got for Mass Effect 3 was from a bunch of spoiled fan boys whining about the ending.[/quote] I'm not one of them. While the endings are absolutely atrocious, the game has A LOT of other problems. Fetch quest side missions, Autodialogue, choices amounting to nothing (not just in the end, but throughout the game), random a$$ continuity errors and plot holes, and above all, a plot that focused on Cerberus rather than the Reapers. [quote]Even I, someone who couldn't care less about Mass Effect, saw they put a lot of quality into the game that was greatly overlooked due to the original endings.[/quote] And I, as a person who's been with the series since the original, saw all the shortcomings that were also overlooked due to the obsession with the endings. The main flaws are within the things that is most important to Mass Effect- the writing (Cerberus focused plot, random continuity) and the dialogue and non-gameplay RPG elements (autodialogue, choices mattering in terms of story). [quote]Similar to the hate Bungie gets for Reach, and 343i gets for Halo 4.[/quote] Not at all similar. Bungie and 343 didn't straight up lie to us, and the problems that they have are mainly to do with the multiplayer aspect of the game. [quote] Both games are good,[/quote] Subjective. I agree, but others might disagree. [quote]just people find changes that they don't like and complain for years about.[/quote] Are you implying the bad things about ME3 are the changes to its core systems like Halo Reach and 4? That's totally incorrect. ME3's combat and RPG changes were [I]welcomed[/I] by the community after the lacklustre combat in the previous games and the terrible streamlining of RPG elements in ME2. ME3's main problem lies in its execution and writing. It had a hell of a stable base to work off. It's just Bioware didn't work properly off it. As opposed to Halo 4 and Reach, where Bungie and 343 altered the base but still created a high quality game. Just one that tampered with the core of the series, thus pissing everyone off.
-
[quote]Someone should ask this engineer why EA is the reigning champion of worst company in a America for two years running[/quote]Please dont tell me people actually take that poll seriously.....
