Battlefield Tri-hard

My bad I mostly meant the IW guys. A lot of those goals and things come up in any project when it is being worked on. Its like, when you do something important, you think of it as defeating something that is currently ahead of you.

I totally see what you mean though. Making your goals public and talking big about what your up to is a good way to draw a lot of criticism and end up at the back end of things. It will make the COD fans hate your game and plenty of other people mistrusting of your plans.

Not too worried. I feel that EA has learned to leave their big names alone when it comes to development. Take BioWare, for instance. I don't believe EA had anything to do with how shoddy DA2 was, I think that was all BioWare's doing; I suspect DA is a side project to Mass Effect right now. Likewise, I think they know DICE will do its best without nagging.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warsaw

Not too worried. I feel that EA has learned to leave their big names alone when it comes to development. Take BioWare, for instance. I don't believe EA had anything to do with how shoddy DA2 was, I think that was all BioWare's doing; I suspect DA is a side project to Mass Effect right now. Likewise, I think they know DICE will do its best without nagging.

---

I think EA understands that the studios understand: If they make a bad game they lose profits.

Care to explain why both Bioware and Crytek made the same silly mistakes then warsaw?
Both incorporated secuROM and wouldn't admit to it.

SecuROM has nothing to do with a game itself. I have their (BioWare's) games on the 360 at any rate, so it doesn't effect me.

Crytek is a snobby company that thought people would gobble up its game just because it looked pretty. Crysis 1 actually pushed hardware, but was only an average game. Crysis 2 is an average game that doesn't even measure up to the technological benchmark provided by its predecessor. Crytek over-hyped and under-delivered. They screwed up, not EA. I also wouldn't count Crytek as one of EA's heavy hitters, at any rate. EA's heavy hitters are DICE, BioWare, and EA Sports (in their respective genres). Apart from FarCry and Crysis, Crytek hasn't done anything. To add, FarCry was published by Ubisoft.

Last I remember, it was the publishers choice which DRM was used when games are publishers.
EA is cryteks publisher.
EA was also apparently ordered to announce when a game will be using secuROM.
What I want to know is how Crysis 2 got like it is even after several months of extra polishing and why the PC version used console grade bitmaps when the leaked dev copy had full size textures.

1.) I'm still confused as to why we are talking about SecuROM when I thought this was about the quality of the finished game.

2.) Crytek sold out to consoles. That's really all there is to it. Their plan backfired as most people pirated the beta and decided that the game is not worth $60. I also suspect everyone yelling at them for demos took some time away from polishing.

3.) Crytek was responsible for their own over-hyping. EA had nothing to do with the game not delivering.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warsaw

1.) I'm still confused as to why we are talking about SecuROM when I thought this was about the quality of the finished game.

2.) Crytek sold out to consoles. That's really all there is to it. Their plan backfired as most people pirated the beta and decided that the game is not worth $60. I also suspect everyone yelling at them for demos took some time away from polishing.

3.) Crytek was responsible for their own over-hyping. EA had nothing to do with the game not delivering.

---

How do we know that the EA PR guys didn't overshoot? Maybe Crytek employees said thought that they may be able to bring certain things to the game and EA PR pushes it as "THESE THINGS ARE IN THE GAME." The public takes it and goes "OMG THESE THINGS ARE INGAME RIGHT NOW!"

I think EA has some fault, but not all.

See, they didn't tell us ANYTHING about what they were going to put in the game. All Crytek said was essentially "OMG THIS GAME IS GOING TO BE THE BEST SHOOTER EVER" without giving details. They also said that they hadn't forgotten about the PC audience.

Golly gee, look at the game now. Granted I'm no insider, but I thought EA had stopped being a slave-driver (Activision) publisher over a year ago (around the time they acquired BioWare).

You know, I'm pretty sure EA were the ones who handled the PR for the most part.
See:
http://www.ea.com/crysis-2
Notice there are more marketing things there than say:
http://crytek.com/games/crysis2/overview