Fun Stuff > CLIKC
Battlefield Bad Company mixed in with EA slagging
KvP:
Sometimes they do, usually during the holiday season, as Bryan pointed out. I'm thinking particularly of Knights of the Old Republic 2, which probably needed at least 2 more months of development time to be even coherent. But they threw it out there. O' course Lucasarts was hemmorhaging cash at the time and is now a shadow of its former self.
Dimmukane:
I just wanna point out that Melodic's comment about the engine not being finished is still relatively important. Too Human got pushed back 2 years after the predicted date (once it was on 360) because they had to overhaul the engine. It still has noticeable, though not terrible, framerate issues. Prey and DNF both went through at least two complete engine changes. One of them just came out a while ago, we're still waiting on the other one. The one that did come out is known for having very laggy and broken multiplayer. Even with extra time, some things still don't turn out as well as expected because of things like that.
I'm in no way saying the deadline EA set isn't partially responsible, I'm just saying there can still be other factors.
dennis:
--- Quote from: Storm Rider on 05 Jul 2008, 21:45 ---What caused the change is irrelevant, the point is that the improvement is there.
--- End quote ---
It's relevant to how much credit gamers are going to be giving EA in the future. Just because you force someone to change doesn't mean that they learn anything from it.
--- Quote ---Furthermore, what difference does it make whether or not the IP is coming out of a studio that they bought or not? They're still financing and distributing the game, so they're instrumental to its release to the public. And I never said they had creative control over Valve anywhere in that post, only that they facilitated distribution.
--- End quote ---
The difference is that the studios have their own thing. It doesn't matter where the money comes from or who distributes the game. On the other hand, the studios *belong* to EA, so they do stick their fingers in, and every time they do, something goes wrong. Valve is a special case because the relationship with EA is limited. EA can't stick their fingers into a Valve production, yet you seem to think that EA is essential to Valve's creating a quality product.
--- Quote ---Really, what this ultimately proves is that they must have added in multiplayer pretty late into the equation, since it was intended as a single-player only game in the first place. Ultimately, if the single player part succeeded, then I'd say DICE achieved its original goal, and the buggy multiplayer is an unfortunate consequence of that focus during development.
--- End quote ---
Well, I guess it's too bad for me and my $60 that multiplayer is so buggy then. What was I thinking, buying the game intending to play both modes? Surely EA will give me back $20 since they didn't deliver on that part of the game.
--- Quote ---I'm not arguing anywhere that EA isn't a profit-motivated company, only that their methods have substantially improved in recent years but nobody's giving them credit for it and instead heaping shit on them based on events that were nearly a decade ago.
--- End quote ---
I'm not saying you are. I am saying that they still deserve a lot of the shit they do get.
Storm Rider:
You seem to be an expert at putting words in my mouth. I never said anywhere that EA was essential to Valve making anything, only that they helped getting the products to gamers. Or that I wasn't expecting you to play both modes, only that the single player was the focus of Bad Company and always had been, so it explains the disparity in quality between the two modes.
jeph:
:x :x VIDEO GAMES :x :x
Seriously though bummer about Bad Company's multiplayer. I might pick it up anyway for single player though, I am sick to fuck of RSV2 and if I start another playthrough Cristi will break up with me.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version