Bioware's terrible PR/Marketing track record, and where do we go from That Ending

[FitScotGaymer]

Hey folks.

No it's not an ME3 endings thread, don't worry!

The endings are tangentially relevant to what I wanna talk about/ask about regarding Bioware and Dragon Age 3.

Recently EA released a pretty substantive "gameplay" trailer for Battlefield 4: Call of Modern Shooter Let's Blow Shit Up Again. And as near as I can tell the general response amongst gaming pundits/journos and the internet at large was widespread and mocking laughter pretty much universally.

One relevant piece of information that I took from it, when I noted this widespread derision for YET ANOTHER COD-Copy FPS/Spunkgargleweewee coming up, is that BF4 runs on the Frostbite 3 engine - the very same engine that Dragon Age 3 will run on.

So what's my point, you may ask?

Well in the wake of this mocking derision for BF4 I have noticed something else curious, something that you might think given the apparent widespread derision that BF4 has been subjected to in the wake of its trailer is completely obvious. And that is that Bioware have been strangely keen to point out (in various places) that "Yes! Dragon Age 3 DOES run on the Frostbite 3 engine! And it's totally AWESOME!"

Which struck me as kind of stupid, in an obvious-to-a-five-year-old sort of way.

You would think that they would be keen to say something along the lines "Oh yes it uses the same engine, but we heavily modified it for our own purposes so don't worry folks!" instead of "Yes those comparisons to Battlefield 4 are valid."
I mean in the wake of BF4's poor criticle response (supposedly) is it really a good idea to highlight that Dragon Age 3 uses the same engine? When such highlighting would cause concern in the fanbase at the best of times never mind now?

I had thought that a large part of Bioware's horrible marketing was down to David "Button=Awesome" Silverman but he has long since departed Bioware and I believe works in a completely different department in a whole other part of EA now; but it seems like Bioware's terrible Marketing/PR continues unabated.
And given the public mauling that Bioware and EA at large has gotten in the past year or so in regards of its terribad PR (amongst other things including Those Endings), it seems even more nonsensical a comparison to make IMO.

Bioware have been at this making games schtick for around 2 decades now. You would think that they woulda gotten the hang of knowing what to say and when to say it, and more importantly what NOT to say.

One of the criticisms (fair or not) that Bioware have gotten (in large part thanks to the terribad marketing) is that they ought to quit chasing those CoD dollars because they service a different market from CoD.
Keeping this in mind, highlighting the fact that DA3 and BF4 use the same engine, is not good Marketing. At all. Because it will only feed back into the whole "Bioware are dumping us to chase CoD dollars" belief that has arisen in the last few years, and you would think given how poorly that has worked out for them they would want to avoid it in future.

Do you guys think that Bioware will ever get any better at this Marketing thing? Or will they always be terrible at it?

And given that a year on, the fanbase is still largely sore about the ME3 endings (and DA2 being mediocre and TOR being a WoW clone), is there anything that BW could do from a PR stand point to get them and us to the point where we have a somewhat cooperative relationship again where we can feel like we can trust what BW say?

 

[Phlakes]

Nope.

Frostbite is an awesome engine, and it has no more to do with shooters than Unreal 3. You can't really fault Bioware/EA for assuming that people know that.

 

[FitScotGaymer]

@Th3Ch33s3Cak3

If you can't be constructive and on topic why post at all dude?

And I doubt this topic has been "talked to death" because its about the marketing and PR and ive yet to see a single thread anywhere about that particular thing.

@Phlakes

That wasn't really my point. My point was about the Bioware's Marketing and PR and how it can improve?

Also, I think you are giving "people" way too much credit there lol.

 

[AD-Stu]

I'm not saying Bioware hasn't made marketing mistakes in the past, or that they won't make any in the future. But on this particular issue, I would have thought anyone with even a tiny bit of common sense would recognise that Frostbite 3 is just an engine and that in itself is no cause for alarm. They used the Unreal engine to build the Mass Effect games, but it wasn't the engine that drew the COD-pandering claims - it was what they did with it.

 

[UrinalDook]

If people give a shit what engine a game runs on, then they already know it can be adapted to serve as an RPG instead of an FPS. If you seriously believe people are dumb enough to assume that because they use the same engine a game called Dragon Age is going to play even remotely like Battlefield friggin' 4, I gotta say I question your assessment.

To be honest, I don't have an opinion either way on Bioware's marketing; they've made some slip ups in the past, but who hasn't?. For the most part, Bioware's been pretty good in the past about getting me excited for their games. I certainly don't feel any of your allegations, or implicit allegations, have any weight whatsoever. Frostbite is a cool thing to bring to the Dragon Age series and I don't think there's anything strange about Bioware making a point of it. If nothing else, it tells us there's some serious investment going in to hopefully revitalising the franchise.

You know that when Mass Effect first came out, they mentioned it was done with the Unreal engine, right? And I really, really hope that you know the Unreal engine was developed for an FPS (hint: it has the same name as the engine). This is... literally no different.

 

[Auron]

Battlefield 4 is being railed because it's very close to the release of the third, the battlefield series precedes and has little to do with Call of duty in gameplay in fact, don't get your angle at all.

Dragon Age III is nothing to worry about at least regarding engine, frostbite just means it'll look good and have more interesting effects overall.


captcha - seems legit

So proper...

 

[GodzillaGuy92]

Forgive me if I'm mistaken, but I thought the scorn for Battlefield 4 was due to its dull, aggressively railroady gameplay combined with the usual lack of concern for good storytelling and obsession with action movie-wannabe setpieces - not because it uses Frostbite 3. The recent Battlefield games share their problems with all modern military shooters in that they rely solely on spectacle and faux realism in an attempt to impress the player rather than engage on any deeper level, and they do it regardless of what engine they're on. Dragon Age II, The Old Republic, and Mass Effect 3 were received poorly for a different set of reasons altogether, so I don't see what the use of Frostbite 3 has to do with it outside of a concern that Dragon Age III's development will need to devote resources to graphical fidelity at the expense of the gameplay and use said graphical improvements as a crutch. Which is a valid concern to a point, but the idea that Dragon Age III must be seeking to emulate Battlefield 4 based on the mere fact that they share an engine is more than a bit of a stretch.

 

[Cabisco]

Forgive me if I'm mistaken, but I thought the scorn for Battlefield 4 was due to its dull, aggressively railroady gameplay combined with the usual lack of concern for good storytelling and obsession with action movie-wannabe setpieces - not because it uses Frostbite 3.

Thats what I assumed also, Frostbite 3 as an engine I thought was fine and will make Dragon Age look all pretty and such. The engine was one of the few good things of that trailer.

 

[Zhukov]

What?

I have no idea what you're trying to say.

What does the reception of the BF4 trailer (haven't actually seen it yet) have to do with the engine?

You're making some kind of weird logical leap in there and I might need a few blows to the head before I can follow you.

 

[NewYork_Comedian]

So you're saying that it is bad marketing for Bioware to advertise the engine for their next game because it is primarily known for being the one used to make Battlefield 4?

I... what?

Yeah, just as many others have said, just because they are using an engine for an FPS doesn't mean that DA III is going to be the next spunkgarglegodthistermwasusedtodeath4monthsagowhyarewestillusingit game.

Hell, the next C&C game is going to be using the Frostbite engine and from what I've seen of it, it isn't using FPS mechanics in anyway shape or form, so I don't really understand how your argument holds water.

 

[Xdeser2]

Honestly, all Bioware can really do to relive all the tension is to make a genuinely great game. If they can pull that off, the fans will come back in droves, and for good reason.

But then again, Making a good game isn't exactly an easy thing to do :/ (especially when EA is breathing down your neck)

 

[ThriKreen]

But then again, Making a good game isn't exactly an easy thing to do :/ (especially when EA the playerbase is breathing down your neck)

... and willing to jump pounce onto any transgression, real or imaginary, no matter how large or small it is in comparison to everything else.

Yes, making a game is hard enough. Making one when you're walking on eggshells is even harder, since there's no tolerance offered.

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

With EA at the helm (even if Ricitello has left their helm) and the BW co-founders leaving the company, I don't think so. I don't know how much of the pre-EA BW still exists within the organisation and I think it's the pre-EA BW that's needed if their name will ever be what it once was.

I was a BW fanboy since BGII. Played every game, bought everything they made, multiple times in most cases. Just the name BW on a box was enough for me to part with money. I was into NWN in a big way, and their continued support of the game for years, and the community and ethos behind it were incredible and set the benchmark for what a developer could be. I've never been part of a game community like the NWN community was. Now, the name means "betrayal", "making mass-market appeal games", sequels that failed after their predecessors successes, losing the plot. I doubt we'll ever see another BW game again that includes a toolset and support for the community.

The best thing EA could do, IMO, is leave them the hell alone. If enough of the original BW still exists, give them a project and let them make it without exec interference. Seriously, corporate interference wasn't needed with old BioWare because they were the KINGS of the RPG genre. It's like editing Tolkein or Shakespeare...seriously, it's just not done! They know what they're about, they know (knew?) how to make GREAT games; let them make it without EA involvement, then EA publish and sell it. You'll be onto a critical and commercial success. Include a toolset and support the community and you'll have a legendary game and a reputation to be proud of.

Won't happen tho. EA want to emulate CoD and WoW and thus every game they make will play like one of those two. We've had Mass CoD Effect, Cry-CoD, Kingdoms of AmaWoW, Dragon WoW II, Star Wars: The WoW Republic (in fairness, I actually think it's a very good MMO), CoD Space III, BattleCoD 3 and soon, 4, Medal of CoD, etc, etc.

 

[Teh Jammah]

We've had Mass CoD Effect... CoD Space III...

Hey, hey hey, enough of this baseless slander.

Gears of Mass Effect and Dead Space of War 3 totally rip off another game than CoD.

... unless CoD has recently become a cover based 3PS, in which case I retract this objection.

 

[Kmadden2004]

Hey folks.

No it's not an ME3 endings thread, don't worry!

The endings are tangentially relevant to what I wanna talk about/ask about regarding Bioware and Dragon Age 3.

Recently EA released a pretty substantive "gameplay" trailer for Battlefield 4: Call of Modern Shooter Let's Blow Shit Up Again. And as near as I can tell the general response amongst gaming pundits/journos and the internet at large was widespread and mocking laughter pretty much universally.

One relevant piece of information that I took from it, when I noted this widespread derision for YET ANOTHER COD-Copy FPS/Spunkgargleweewee coming up, is that BF4 runs on the Frostbite 3 engine - the very same engine that Dragon Age 3 will run on.

So what's my point, you may ask?

Well in the wake of this mocking derision for BF4 I have noticed something else curious, something that you might think given the apparent widespread derision that BF4 has been subjected to in the wake of its trailer is completely obvious. And that is that Bioware have been strangely keen to point out (in various places) that "Yes! Dragon Age 3 DOES run on the Frostbite 3 engine! And it's totally AWESOME!"

Which struck me as kind of stupid, in an obvious-to-a-five-year-old sort of way.

You would think that they would be keen to say something along the lines "Oh yes it uses the same engine, but we heavily modified it for our own purposes so don't worry folks!" instead of "Yes those comparisons to Battlefield 4 are valid."
I mean in the wake of BF4's poor criticle response (supposedly) is it really a good idea to highlight that Dragon Age 3 uses the same engine? When such highlighting would cause concern in the fanbase at the best of times never mind now?

I had thought that a large part of Bioware's horrible marketing was down to David "Button=Awesome" Silverman but he has long since departed Bioware and I believe works in a completely different department in a whole other part of EA now; but it seems like Bioware's terrible Marketing/PR continues unabated.
And given the public mauling that Bioware and EA at large has gotten in the past year or so in regards of its terribad PR (amongst other things including Those Endings), it seems even more nonsensical a comparison to make IMO.

Bioware have been at this making games schtick for around 2 decades now. You would think that they woulda gotten the hang of knowing what to say and when to say it, and more importantly what NOT to say.

One of the criticisms (fair or not) that Bioware have gotten (in large part thanks to the terribad marketing) is that they ought to quit chasing those CoD dollars because they service a different market from CoD.
Keeping this in mind, highlighting the fact that DA3 and BF4 use the same engine, is not good Marketing. At all. Because it will only feed back into the whole "Bioware are dumping us to chase CoD dollars" belief that has arisen in the last few years, and you would think given how poorly that has worked out for them they would want to avoid it in future.

Do you guys think that Bioware will ever get any better at this Marketing thing? Or will they always be terrible at it?

And given that a year on, the fanbase is still largely sore about the ME3 endings (and DA2 being mediocre and TOR being a WoW clone), is there anything that BW could do from a PR stand point to get them and us to the point where we have a somewhat cooperative relationship again where we can feel like we can trust what BW say?

I... I'm not really sure what you're trying to say here...

Bioware's not marketing any games at the moment, and I don't exactly see how saying your next game is using a pretty well-respected game engine is bad PR.

Just for some perspective; did Gears of War 2, Batman: Arkham Asylum or any game that was made with the Unreal Engine 3 suffer at all as a direct result from being released after Too Human?

 

[major_chaos]

Won't happen tho. EA want to emulate CoD and WoW and thus every game they make will play like one of those two. We've had Mass CoD Effect, Cry-CoD, Kingdoms of AmaWoW, Dragon WoW II, Star Wars: The WoW Republic (in fairness, I actually think it's a very good MMO), CoD Space III, BattleCoD 3 and soon, 4, Medal of CoD, etc, etc.

Ugh really? Are we still doing this? Fine, I'll bite:

"Mass CoD Effect"
Really? I roll my eyes when people say Gears is "like CoD" but Mass Effect? What exactly does ME have in common with CoD? Except maybe "they both have guns"

"Cry-CoD"
Assuming you are referring to the later 2 Crysis games I agree to an extent, although I find them more to be generally meh, rather than trying to be "CoD". Crysis one on the other hand was a decent game, and about as far from CoD as a military FPS can go without going the ARMA route of being a simulator.

"Kingdoms of AmaWoW"
I'll admit that Amalur was vaguely WoW-ish, but WoW without the gear grind, the terrible playerbase or the godawful combat actually is fine by me, so I'm not really sure its a bad thing.


"Dragon WoW II"
What exactly about it was WoW like? And I'm not sure why you single out 2, my understanding was that 1 was blog standard D&D game combat with "every cliche ever" storyline.

"Star Wars: The WoW Republic"
Ok, you win this one.

"CoD Space III"
Nope. Other than like 3 fights with humans, all of which are over extremely quick, and a cover mechanic so unneeded and under promoted I beat the game once on normal and once on hard without knowing it exists, DS3 was largely the same as DS2 at its core, with some new bells and whistles to keep it from being a rehash. And even if it had been turned into some horrible generic shell, it would still be closer to Gears than CoD.

"BattleCoD 3"
Close, but still no. If we are looking only at single player then you have a point, as both feature absolutely terrible campaigns, but once you get the the Muli-Player (the reason 99% of the playerbase actually buys either game) the comparison falls apart, as both play quite different.

"Medal of CoD"
Ok you win this one, although I will say the absolute worst thing about MoH wasn't that it tried to be CoD, its that it failed to rip off any of the good parts, while taking every negative wholesale.

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

We've had Mass CoD Effect... CoD Space III...

Hey, hey hey, enough of this baseless slander.

Gears of Mass Effect and Dead Space of War 3 totally rip off another game than CoD.

... unless CoD has recently become a cover based 3PS, in which case I retract this objection.

This is just a matter of perspective! (DYSWIDT?)

The Prosecution's objection was overruled the very moment Shepard (or supporting cast) opened his/her mouth and used the terms "LZ", "coming in hot", "extraction point", "check your six", "see you on the other side" or my personal pet-hate (though calling it hate is too mild for the sheer volume of anger and loathing I bear this phrase), "stay frosty". Also, the obligatory turret sequences. The Defence rests.

Also, the Defence gets bonus marks for his, quite frankly brilliant double entendre. "Perspective". Bloody fantastic.

 

[bug_of_war]

With EA at the helm (even if Ricitello has left their helm) and the BW co-founders leaving the company, I don't think so. I don't know how much of the pre-EA BW still exists within the organisation and I think it's the pre-EA BW that's needed if their name will ever be what it once was.

I was a BW fanboy since BGII. Played every game, bought everything they made, multiple times in most cases. Just the name BW on a box was enough for me to part with money. I was into NWN in a big way, and their continued support of the game for years, and the community and ethos behind it were incredible and set the benchmark for what a developer could be. I've never been part of a game community like the NWN community was. Now, the name means "betrayal", "making mass-market appeal games", sequels that failed after their predecessors successes, losing the plot. I doubt we'll ever see another BW game again that includes a toolset and support for the community.

The best thing EA could do, IMO, is leave them the hell alone. If enough of the original BW still exists, give them a project and let them make it without exec interference. Seriously, corporate interference wasn't needed with old BioWare because they were the KINGS of the RPG genre. It's like editing Tolkein or Shakespeare...seriously, it's just not done! They know what they're about, they know (knew?) how to make GREAT games; let them make it without EA involvement, then EA publish and sell it. You'll be onto a critical and commercial success. Include a toolset and support the community and you'll have a legendary game and a reputation to be proud of.

Won't happen tho. EA want to emulate CoD and WoW and thus every game they make will play like one of those two. We've had Mass CoD Effect, Cry-CoD, Kingdoms of AmaWoW, Dragon WoW II, Star Wars: The WoW Republic (in fairness, I actually think it's a very good MMO), CoD Space III, BattleCoD 3 and soon, 4, Medal of CoD, etc, etc.

As far as I am aware I'm quite certain that EA's involvement in Bioware's games is just. They bought the company (which was not doing financially well, even though the crowd they aimed at were very pleased with their work) and they want to make sure that the company is making them money, which is fair enough seeing as how they pay them. Also, so far I am only aware of EA making 2 demands from Bioware, and that was to release Dragon Age 2 early and to add multiplayer to Mass Effect 3 (which to be fair was not detrimental seeing as how they gave Bioware (roughly) 6 months extra time to work it in and complete the game), so I have yet to see EA completely override the very essence of Bioware, in fact I'd say Bioware has changed by itself with little help from EA. It's what happens when new workers come into a company and the older ones move out.

And right now I'd say Bioware's PR has taken a major hit from it's fans, and only it's fans. Most people whom just buy a game that they're interested in and don't actually follow a company's work tend to (in my experience) say 3 things about a Bioware game. 1) It wasn't that great and just didn't interest me. 2) I liked it but I didn't love it. 3) I don't hate it, I don't like it, it's average. It isn't until you start to ask the major fans that you begin to hear bad rep, and even then most of them either blame EA (which is unfair, but not always) or they simply hammer on about ME3's ending. So yeah, I think Biowares PR isn't so bad, it's not great, but it aint bad.

 

[Splitzi]

I don't understand why OP thinks that we cannot trust BioWare. I don't know if anyone saw the BioWare reflections video about the ME franchise, but what I saw was a very dedicated team who are so heavily invested in that world, it's like it's their baby. No one wants to do anything to hurt their baby. That's passion. They are more invested in what they make because they are the biggest fans of all.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0wM24K1dgU (BioWare Video)

An engine is not genre restricted. The engine looks great, and that's got me really excited for DA3. Anywho, I don't get the hate over ME3 being somehow over marketing or PR. If anything, the bad PR is coming from the uber-fans among us who wouldn't be satisfied with anything they did.

The Prosecution's objection was overruled the very moment Shepard (or supporting cast) opened his/her mouth and used the terms "LZ", "coming in hot", "extraction point", "check your six", "see you on the other side" or my personal pet-hate (though calling it hate is too mild for the sheer volume of anger and loathing I bear this phrase), "stay frosty". Also, the obligatory turret sequences. The Defence rests.

Also, the Defence gets bonus marks for his, quite frankly brilliant double entendre. "Perspective". Bloody fantastic.

I'm sorry that you apparently seem to hate phrases perfectly applicable to any combat situation, even future ones. I think they're used for a reason. But hey, gotta give it up for the snark factor, I could really envision the courtroom ya know, Sheppard huddled behind the stand, being grilled over vocabulary. I still don't see how a third person shooter with energy and tech attacks with a cover mechanic is comparable to COD.

 

[KaZuYa]

I have no idea why you brought up Battlefield 4 when discussing Bioware's terrible PR and marketing or even Mass Effect 3's ending which they did actually address to some point. What destroyed Bioware's reputation in many true gamers eye's wasn't Mass Effect 3 which had some brilliant story arcs though some aspects including "That Ending" felt phoned in and rushed, it was the total betrayal and utter ruining of one of best games and potential franchise they made.

Dragon Age Origins was probably one of the best games I've ever played, the story drew me in and the tragedy of Morrigan's story really gripping and sad. When you finished the game you had a warden that was you and not some Commander Shepard that you play through, you made enemies and friends and even with the expansion and DLC it gave it even more depth you also caught wind of an underlying plot involving Flemeth. When Dragon Age 2 was announced I was giddy with expectation only to be given game which was utter awful.

Dragon Age 2 gave you a fixed hero to play aka Mass Effect, they removed all the tactical combat, they set the whole game in one city so they could reuse the same areas over and over and the whole plot was irrelevant to what was hinted at in DA:O with Flemeth making a pointless cameo appearance. I think the only explanation is that since DA:O wasn't optimised at all well for consoles and due to it's huge success on the PC they didn't want to make a second game for consoles which players would be missing all the background story and plot arc, but that's like painting a masterpiece then throwing it away in favour of a child's crayon drawing because more people can relate to it.

Dragon Age Origins was Bioware's greatest triumph and Dragon Age 2 was their greatest betrayal, one I won't forgive.