Oh boy, that was a silly mistake on my part lol.Father Time said:
Well, EA is pretty darn good at milking too so the joke shall stay.
EA Now Owns Star Wars Games. Get the Torches.
- Thread starter Azaraxzealot
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Well, EA is pretty darn good at milking too so the joke shall stay.
Hey!!
You guys wanted battlefront 3, KoToR 3 and several other Star Was games, and now your your gonna get em ;p
I, shall be acquiring popcorn, cause this gonna be amusing as hell
You guys wanted battlefront 3, KoToR 3 and several other Star Was games, and now your your gonna get em ;p
I, shall be acquiring popcorn, cause this gonna be amusing as hell
Star Wars has nowhere to go but up.
I'd rather Battlefront be turned into yearly release, always online, dudebro, micro-transaction ridden, medium corrupting shooter (as long as it still includes Jedi, space combat and cps) than never be touched again like Lucasarts intended.
I'd rather Battlefront be turned into yearly release, always online, dudebro, micro-transaction ridden, medium corrupting shooter (as long as it still includes Jedi, space combat and cps) than never be touched again like Lucasarts intended.
Dice will do Battlefront, X-wing, and probably Dark Forces, OK might be good.
Bioware will do KOTOR or Jedi Academy, God I hope they don't screw them up.
Anyone else think Visceral will be handling 1313.
Bioware will do KOTOR or Jedi Academy, God I hope they don't screw them up.
Anyone else think Visceral will be handling 1313.
I actually LIKED SWTOR's concept and setting but it was too ambitious of a project crippled by a terrible "pick and choose" strategy of competing with WoW.
It wanted to be WoW without having the better WoW like qualities... like moddable UI, dungeon finders, functional quests, macos for ease of use. Many of those things were design decisions made with the reasoning of "We do not want this to be World of Starwars". They didn't want to take the positive aspects of WoW and incorporate them into their game because it would run the risk of making the game "too like WoW" when they were attempting to directly compete with WoW.
I like the idea of using the Battlefield engine to power Battlefront games. I like how well EA can make third person shooters which Star Wars is well suited to. A game with the Dragon Age type combat and party system developed by Bioware could be exactly the type of RPG Star Wars needs.
This union can have promise.
It wanted to be WoW without having the better WoW like qualities... like moddable UI, dungeon finders, functional quests, macos for ease of use. Many of those things were design decisions made with the reasoning of "We do not want this to be World of Starwars". They didn't want to take the positive aspects of WoW and incorporate them into their game because it would run the risk of making the game "too like WoW" when they were attempting to directly compete with WoW.
I like the idea of using the Battlefield engine to power Battlefront games. I like how well EA can make third person shooters which Star Wars is well suited to. A game with the Dragon Age type combat and party system developed by Bioware could be exactly the type of RPG Star Wars needs.
This union can have promise.
Well with EA, chances are it's going to be a bunch of mediocre games with inexplicably high mainstream reviews. Overpriced to hell with a ton of carved out DLC held to ransom.The Wykydtron said:
But I think people are mostly peeved at the fact that EA is almost never going to green-light something a little more risky than "pew pew 1st person space shooters".
Yeah, like those Marvel movies that are completely tanking and everyone hates.KeyMaster45 said:
Huh? Marvel is currently kicking butt both financially and critically? People are loving the movies? That can't be right, Disney ruins everything...
I think you mean "may the Force be with us."I Stomp on Kittens said:
Now, EA, give me something like Rogue Squadron 2, and I will love you forever.
Honestly, I was put more in mind of the Emperor's theme [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLJzZtL3EnQ].AgentLampshade said:
Have we? huh. I don't remember.chozo_hybrid said:I'll admit, we've been at odds in a discussion before, but I'm more then capable of agreeing with anyone when they make sense to meResonanceSD said:
Read as "it's not like it can realistically get any worse".BanicRhys said:
That's assuming you liked Battlefield 3, which I didn't. I didn't bother touching the SP after watching a friend play it and seeing that horrendous ending. As for the MP, it was far better than MW3 but that's not saying much. It's destruction system had far too many indestructible buildings and walls compared to BC2, which was one of the few things I loved about BC2. As with BC2, it also focused far too much on the Rush gamemode and the Conquest mode feels lacking on most maps. The gunplay also felt very lackluster, with the guns feeling like they're shooting BBs and the whole "progressively increase spread the longer you fire" mechanic is something I've always despised. There's also the balancing issues with the classes, with Engineer being the go-to class again. It also mimicked CoD way too much in my opinion, with most maps becoming smaller and far too corridor-based. In all honesty, I prefer the tiny BF1943 over both BC2 and BF3, as it's maps were far more open and each class had a solid purpose, with no class being capable of everything yet also never being completely defenseless in any scenario (Medics or Snipers against a tank in BF3 had no way of fighting back at all). That's not even getting into the issues of the DLCs that sold new weapons of all things (another practice I despise) and constantly wrecked the balance of the game in favor of making more money as well as turning the series into a biyearly franchise (something that bothers me about CoD as well - giving a game a development cycle of less than two years with the first 6 months being devoted to DLC for the previous game doesn't leave enough time for innovation).Tom_green_day said:
So yeah, I am not happy at all that EA now decides the fate of games like Battlefront 3. Granted, LucasArts was doing fuckall that was worthwhile with the Star Wars IP, but EA's tendency for oversaturation and half-assed CoD-wannabes isn't really an improvement in my book. A Battlefront 3 without spacefights or open maps, with 9 different assault rifles with little differences between each other, with aiming down the sights that kills the players mobility, and that tries to sell me new weapons via DLC is a Battlefront I would rather not exist (let alone having a new one every two years).
*Sigh* I'm not really sure if I want to have this argument for the eleventy billionth time, but could someone finally explain to me what was so horrible about DS3? I played it, and while I would say it just barely beats DS1 as the worst of the 3 I still found it to be an enjoyable game, and I fail to see how three brief shootouts with human enemies and a doge roll/ cover system that you will never ever use apparently somehow amounts it being Call of Dead Space.Azaraxzealot said:
OT:
AAAHHHH EA IS EVIL AND CANT DO ANYTHING GOOD WARGLE BARGALE GURGLE RAGE RANT /sarcasm
I actually highly doubt that EA could do any worse than Lucasarts at this point, so I'll judge any Starwars games they make when they actually come out, not before they are even announced.
Considering that people have been begging and pleading for a new X-wing game for years with no success I highly doubt you were ever going to see one anyway. Lucasarts wasn't exactly listening to the fans these past few years.Wuvlycuddles said:
but that would imply we're going to see a happy ending where EA is destroyed and we all get to have a tree party with tribal care bearsNowhere Man said:
I may have to respectfully disagree with you. They do have a very-ahem-misguided PR team, but EA DO in fact make bad games. Often for no other reason than dis-respect for their own game developers.R.Nevermore said:
Anyone else expecting "STAR WARS '13" this year followed by, "STAR WARS 2014 HEAD COACH" next year?