EA forbids DICE from Talking to the Community

[Bouzoo]

2 hours ago, VegetableStu said:

not sure if EA can push the blame away and contract-fuck DICE

 

on another note, it pains me to say this, but possibly RIP DICE

I'm not sure, maybe some branch of DICE, but I don't think they'll kill them off. 

[Cheezdoodlez]

55 minutes ago, Bouzoo said:

I'm not sure, maybe some branch of DICE, but I don't think they'll kill them off. 

Why not? They killed of a bunch of popular studios over the years. Maxis, Blackbox, Westwood and Visceral to name a few.

[Xander Cousins]

9 hours ago, TetraSky said:

When a publisher know they fucked up with their terrible decisions, so they try to prevent devs from speaking out against them...

Well, that's EA for you, I didn't expect anything better from them.

EA doesn't want DICE to speak out due to all that has happened. Even though it isn't Dice's fault the game flopped due to Micro transactions, Some people will take it as "Why didn't you object, Why did you go through with it?" etc What EA is doing now is keeping the Eyes on themselves. EA is a greedy company but the know what to do when it comes to this shiz. They aren't speaking out because any answer they give people will hate. "We where too far into development to start fresh." "Would have cost too much to start from scratch" etc. 

 

What EA have done here is Sit in the chair and allow them to get Slapped Silly without involving any other parties along with it. 

 

Disney? They don't care Star Wars The last Jedi has been released, That all Disney cared about. Them telling EA to wise up was so their pockets didn't get hurt. Again as I have stated in other Thread Posts. EA knows they fucked up and are accepting it. They don't want to add fuel to the fire by going hey speak freely of what we did and why Battlefront 2 turned out like this.

 

5 hours ago, Brooksie359 said:

Always forcing games to release before they were finished or make them rush a game. I mean look at blizzard, even though they are owned by Activision they still make good games because Activision doesn't mess with them at all. 

About forcing releases due to them being a big company and Having multiple AAA games series, More commonly known Battlefield and Battlefront along side their Sport series' of FiFa n NFL etc. Forced releases tend to happen when you game series become a hit and people want to see more. Battlefields Release dates have been fairly spaced out in term of yes until Battlefield 4 where Hardline followed then shortly Battlefield 1 (If I have my timeline correct, Going off top of my head atm). This comes through by trying to keep up with your competitor which is Activision Call of Duty. Activision push out games YEARLY for that series. they do it well because the game always swaps between to companies. Tryarch and Sledghammer. so they get a full year to work on them. 

 

Going on about Activision though They aint no better Blizzard is fine as they seem to be given free will when it comes to their games but you can see the Activision just wants more titles out. Perfect example would have to be Destiny 2 atm. The project lead was changed 16 months before it's release date and the WHOLE game was restarted from scratch. Bungie wasn't given the same free space as blizzard and ended up releasing a game that was TOO focused on Multiplayer Competitive than its Open world (Used Loosely) aspect of the game. What happened Bare bone end games focused on the Micro transaction side to get interesting items which don't benefit you? Huh sounds like Call of Duty's Black Ops III and more recent titles system(IMO) .

 

What I'm saying in short is Every High end game company is doing this. The only thing is EA was blatant with it and didn't purposely try to hide it, They are ignoring their blunder to an extent to have it calm down but you know what the internet is like once you find something to hate on everyone goes digging into their Personal Business. 

 

@AluminiumTech you seem to follow this stuff closely. 

[AlTech]

Just now, Alex Colson said:

About forcing releases due to them being a big company and Having multiple AAA games series, More commonly known Battlefield and Battlefront along side their Sport series' of FiFa n NFL etc. Forced releases tend to happen when you game series become a hit and people want to see more. Battlefields Release dates have been fairly spaced out in term of yes until Battlefield 4 where Hardline followed then shortly Battlefield 1 (If I have my timeline correct, Going off top of my head atm).

DICE and EA have been quite busy.

Note: All of those games listed below had micro-transactions of some sort.

 

BF4 - 2013 (Created by DICE)

Battlefield Hardline - 2014 (Created by the now defunct Visceral)

SW Battlefront - 2015 (Created by DICE)

Battlefield 1 - 2016 (Created by DICE)

SW Battlefront 2 - 2017 (Created by DICE)

Just now, Alex Colson said:

This comes through by trying to keep up with your competitor which is Activision Call of Duty. Activision push out games YEARLY for that series. they do it well because the game always swaps between to companies. Tryarch and Sledghammer. so they get a full year to work on them. 

Umm no? There's 3 companies making COD.

 

Treyarch

InfinityWard

Sledgehammer.

Just now, Alex Colson said:

What I'm saying in short is Every High end game company is doing this.

Take Two interactive and all the rest are doing it as well. Every "AAA" game publisher pulls shady shit to some extent. It's just how they operate at this point.

[Bouzoo]

26 minutes ago, Cheezdoodlez said:

Why not? They killed of a bunch of popular studios over the years. Maxis, Blackbox, Westwood and Visceral to name a few.

Iirc no one had a huge name as Battlefield behind them. That is a huge cash cow. 

[AlTech]

Just now, Bouzoo said:

Iirc no one had a huge name as Battlefield behind them. That is a huge cash cow. 

Visceral made a Battlefield game once.

 

Reviewers didn't like it. Consumers didn't like it. The game died really fast for a battlefield game.

 

It was mostly blamed on feeling like DLC and not a standalone game. It allegedly (according to reviewers) felt like BF4 with a different theme and a fresh coat of paint.

[Xander Cousins]

1 minute ago, AluminiumTech said:

Umm no? There's 3 companies making COD.

Treyarch

InfinityWard

Sledgehammer.

Had a feeling I was missing something from there. Ty 

 

2 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

DICE and EA have been quite busy.

Note: All of those games listed below had micro-transactions of some sort.

BF4 - 2013 (Created by DICE)

Battlefield Hardline - 2014 (Created by the now defunct Visceral)

SW Battlefront - 2015 (Created by DICE)

Battlefield 1 - 2016 (Created by DICE)

SW Battlefront 2 - 2017 (Created by DICE)

Yes they all had Micro-Transactions among them and all within a year apart from each other. The likes or BF4, SW Battlefront and Battlefield 1 , their Micro-Transaction system have never had a great impact on the gameplay. Most you get from Buying booster packs is a burst in level for whatever class you use. Within Battlefield 4 that was LITTERALY pointless as most weapons you need to complete challenges to unlock (For the Good ones) and only a select few where level unlock on those class' Not to add the boosters only worked once for class levelling and didn't put you to that class' max rank either. 

 

SW Battlefield, I played very little and noticed not much influence from the Micro-Transaction system. This goes for BF4 and BF1. two games I play A LOT. and don't notice the difference between someone who has paid for an 'advantage' and the grinding player who have just played the game. I still use the Starting Snipers from BF4 and BF1 and still do better than ones that use the end class snipers. all that is you found a weapon you like and not one someone recommended. I take this stance in a lot of games and with it I haven't once been put down going "ugh I need to buy this to be better" 

 

Obviously SW Battlefront 2 is different as you can get power cards etc which do play a big role in the combat system (A lot more than it did in Sw Battlefront) So I can see how the complaints came from.

 

My Two cent's it Yes everyone has the right to be angry at the big greedy company but don't punish the smaller ones under them just because of a few screw ups. 

I have only noticed Battlefront 2 with being a big mistake from EA's end of things

The likes of the sporting area FIFA - UFC they have been like that from when they started, I'm sorry you can't go back and complain about a game series flaws that have been their since the start and no-one argued then just because you find a FPS that has it. 

 

Those sport games are seen as a type of fantasy team (In the likes of FIFA and NFL) So the people who play it are generally gonna be not fussed with throwing some dosh at it. 

 

[Cheezdoodlez]

11 minutes ago, Bouzoo said:

Iirc no one had a huge name as Battlefield behind them. That is a huge cash cow. 

Maxis created the Sims and SimCity which I would say is probably even bigger than battlefield.

[IntMD]

17 minutes ago, Bouzoo said:

Iirc no one had a huge name as Battlefield behind them. That is a huge cash cow. 

Yes they did... 2 of those 4 had truly epic selling series back in the day.

 

Maxis had the SimCity series & The Sims, both of which were massive.

Quote

The success of The Sims resulted in Guinness World Records awarding the series five world records in the Guinness World Records: Gamer's Edition 2008. These records include "World's Biggest-Selling Simulation Series" and "Best Selling PC Game of All Time" for the original The Sims game, which sold 16 million units, 100 times EA's original projection of 160,000 units.

Westwood had Command & Conquer, again, massive back in the day.

Quote

The Command & Conquer series has been a commercial success with over 30 million Command & Conquer games sold as of 2009.

 

The other two had some quite big series like Deadspace & Skate too.

[Xander Cousins]

19 minutes ago, IntMD said:

The other two had some quite big series like Deadspace & Skate too.

Absolutly Love/Hate Deadspace. Was a great game but F*** those jump scares at times they where like hey ominous door way *Walks through, Nothing happens* Perfect clean looking hallway (Well clean in terms of Deadspace) three bloody creeps crawl out from the wood work...

[cj09beira]

53 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

Visceral made a Battlefield game once.

 

Reviewers didn't like it. Consumers didn't like it. The game died really fast for a battlefield game.

 

It was mostly blamed on feeling like DLC and not a standalone game. It allegedly (according to reviewers) felt like BF4 with a different theme and a fresh coat of paint.

i played the beta for it, it felt excactly the same, although if it was a DLC i would have bought it, the idea of the game was very good, just not for a hole different game

[JoostinOnline]

"EA Allegedly forbids DICE from Talking to the Community"

 

Fixed it for you.  Don't make accusations based on rumors and speculation.

 

Edit: And before anyone says it, I'm not backing up EA.  All I'm doing is pointing out that it's best to be clear it's unconfirmed.

[AlTech]

Just now, JoostinOnline said:

"EA Allegedly forbids DICE from Talking to the Community"

 

Fixed it for you.  Don't make accusations based on rumors and speculation.

At this point, the only thing stopping it from being 100% correct is a confession from a high ranking EA employee.

 

Of course with this kind of thing, a confession isn't very likely.

[JoostinOnline]

2 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

At this point, the only thing stopping it from being 100% truthful is a confession from any EA employee.

 

Of course with this kind of thing, a confession isn't very likely.

None of the evidence specifically points to EA.  Even if the developers are telling the truth (I'm not saying they're lying, it's just another possibility), there are people between EA and DICE developers.  You yourself pointed out that it could easily be Lucasfilms.

 

Right now it's "maybe true".  If a developer said EA was stopping them, then it would be bumped up to "probably true".

[Xander Cousins]

5 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

-Snip-

Tbh @JoostinOnline does kinda have a point. EA haven't came out with any real reason to why they Done what they did with Battlefront 2 and tbh I don't think they will either so why silent DICE one of their big income when EA haven't even put out a statement that would need backed up by Dice. 

 

So could be someone else saying so. For all we know peoples hands are tied due to something else happening among EA

[CTR640]

EA =/= Electronic Assholes. Nuff said.

[JoostinOnline]

1 minute ago, Alex Colson said:

So could be someone else saying so. For all we know peoples hands are tied due to something else happening among EA

Or among themselves.  If someone important at DICE is fighting against it, then it could be all them.  There is a hierarchy in business.  The opinion of the person paid the most is what matters in the end, even if it's stupid.

 

I can't think of a reason for EA (or anyone else) to prevent discussion.  There's no use in making assumptions.

[IronSoldier]

In other news water is wet. 

 

Every company stops employees talking out/directly letting people know what is happening. It's how business works. You don't get LMG employees talking about internal stuff nor do you get apple employees. It's how stuff works these days. When someone can talk they will. If you talk/show something to early such as the apple dev with the iphone x shown by his daughter.. you're gone. 

[Xander Cousins]

2 minutes ago, IronSoldier said:

Every company stops employees talking out/directly letting people know what is happening. It's how business works. You don't get LMG employees talking about internal stuff nor do you get apple employees. It's how stuff works these days. When someone can talk they will. If you talk/show something to early such as the apple dev with the iphone x shown by his daughter.. you're gone. 

Ya but that's Different. people who make mistakes like the apple dev did showing something that shouldn't have been seen yet is understandable. 

 

I'm sorry but EA and all the others ain't like the FBI or security organisations where talking about what you do will get yourself and people not involved in the company in trouble. 

 

This goes back why deny someone from talking if you haven't said anything prior. EA could literally use this as their rabbit hole, Have someone else explain what went wrong and then EA can build a story from it that will minimise hate to both companies. 

 

My view is EA is protecting someone else, They have no reason to hide info when gamers and others know they have screwed up royally they might as well explain what went wrong IF it was their own fault. So ya in the sense of Gaming companies this is abnormal. 

 

They wanna answer question without giving stuff up. "We have a team working on the issue now" , "We are looking into it" , "This hasn't been discussed but will be brought up in the near future". Their is a lot they can say to calm the people who are questioning and but people at ease. This isn't 

[Snadzies]

Not going to get too worked up over the possibility of EA not wanting Dice to talk, sometimes it is best to just have everyone shut up and try to sort things out rather than allow anyone to do or say anything that could ad to the pile of shit they are already trying to dig themselves out of.

[jasonvp]

18 minutes ago, Alex Colson said:

Ya but that's Different.

It's not different, though.  Like it or not, EA is a publicly traded company.  As such, they have PR people that are in charge of talking to the public.  It's way cool that Dice and the other dev studios within EA were allowed to chat with gamers (see: community managers).  But the reality is they were treading on thin ice the entire time.  Any public company worth their salt would have put an end to that quickly.

 

That's the way business goes.  Again: you don't have to like it.  And the timing of this is suspect, to say the least.  But it's not unexpected at all.

[Subtle Corruption]

Stopped caring a long time a go.

[Xander Cousins]

2 minutes ago, jasonvp said:

-Snip-

Again going to the fact that it is a games company having devs talk about their own game is gonna be normal in general. So they wouldn't be on thin ice unless they where talking about stuff specifically not meant to be disclosed. Which comes again why is the dev's being shut for answering simple questions which can easily be evaded as if you where talking to a politician. Obviously something that has happened doesn't involve EA drastically. Not every public trade company in all areas work the same some thing are slightly different in other areas. so not allowing devs to talk about what went wrong even in the vaguest of responses means someone's pushed something when they shouldn't have.

 

Again come to why does EA want them silent when they haven't told anyone what went wrong. Like seriously the games been out for a good while yet nothing has been disclosed from EA about why or how this happened.

 

EA has already accepted the blame if they are not trying to sweet talk it of give an excuse.

[jasonvp]

1 minute ago, Alex Colson said:

Again going to the fact that it is a games company having devs talk about their own game is gonna be normal in general. So they wouldn't be on thin ice unless they where talking about stuff specifically not meant to be disclosed.

That's not the way PR works, and it's sorta clear you don't work for a publicly traded company.  Employees, with the blessing of PR, can be interviewed publicly.  That sort of stuff happens all the time.  Sure.  But to have an open dialog with the public isn't something that's generally allowed by the folks running PR.

 

Image is everything when it comes to the stock market (and investors, and ...)  PR folks are hired/trained/schooled/etc to handle these sorts of things.  Game coders aren't.

 

That's reality.  You don't have to like it.  But there's jack-all you can do about it.

[Xander Cousins]

Just now, jasonvp said:

-Snip- 

And this is a negative image. From what A LOT of people will see it as. 

 

EA hasn't said anything to do with the game due to their Image, It is already tarnished by this and they know it. They accept what they done and are continuing on. They haven't released a statement on why they did this with star wars battlefront. you know why? kicking up an excuse or even if it is the truth will just agitate the community. They have let the rage take it's course and are happy with what maybe thrown their way. Them deciding to go NONE OF YOU SHALL TALK TO THE COMMUNITY (if it is EA who done this) is very far fetched let alone stupid on EA's behalf as it makes their image look like they have something to hide. 

 

These action just seem too out their from what EA has currently done about this. if EA made a statement with what went wrong then this is understandable but they haven't why deny devs to talk when they could end up making a good cover up for you guys to follow with. My assumption is this came from somewhere else not EA. As greedy as they are they wouldn't hurt their own image more by doing this. Devs having the ability to speak to the community showed that EA where Open and didn't have things to hide. Same with when loot boxes came out they didn't sugar coat it they where blatant. 

 

Just my two cent's on this.