Anthem: Bioware's next Mass Effect-like IP

[Edge-]

I disagree... You need to shore up your internal affairs before talking with the press.

Normally, you're 100% right. But there are certain instances where it's wiser not to follow the traditional wisdom and try something outside of the box. IMO this is very much one of those times, especially since the "DO NOT TALK TO PRESS" emails got predictably leaked and ended up making them look even worse.

Because realistically, the overwhelming majority of staff won't be talking to press anyways, so only a fraction of the studio would likely be talking. And it would signal that BW is putting their developers and staff first and that the article was the kind of public kick in the rear that they needed to shape up their practices. There would need to be a chat with developers beforehand - a quick all-hands meeting or an email saying that folks can talk to press only about topics related to the article as long as they're not going into other areas. But this is an instance where "radical transparency" can absolutely be of some value.

[Baconeggcheese]

But this is an instance where "radical transparency" can absolutely be of some value.

I think that's especially true in their case with Anthem because they've been touting themselves as being incredibly transparent for quite a while now. To clam up like they have been recently would imo be a huge mistake.

A big part of why I decided to stay on board was the transparency, so if they go the other route that's a big hit to my faith.

[RuneDK]

I was referencing this part:



- - - Updated - - -



People are too hungry for this + they aren't charging for DLC + there's nothing on the market that directly replaces Anthem's gameplay.

They can easily turn this around if they can manage to clean up the product. Imagine its going to be the same story for the next dragon age, people want it too bad so they'll deal with nonsense to some degree. Though hopefully they get their act together for the most part so they don't have to.

My major concern with the non-paid dlc is that BFV is using the same model...game has been out nearly six months...it's gotten one new map and firestorm...The new map is excellent...firestorm is a disaster..Anthem can't wait six months for barely more content if they want people to return to it. They need to get the new content out every other month at worst, and sadly im not sure i have the confidence they can get that done.

[dope_danny]

My major concern with the non-paid dlc is that BFV is using the same model...game has been out nearly six months...it's gotten one new map and firestorm...The new map is excellent...firestorm is a disaster..Anthem can't wait six months for barely more content if they want people to return to it. They need to get the new content out every other month at worst, and sadly im not sure i have the confidence they can get that done.

Free DLC is the new "Its just a beta!" marketing bonanza for AAA devs. You can't complain about buggy stuff 'because its beta', you can't complain amount free dlc "because we never said how much, god how entitled!".

[RuneDK]

Free DLC is the new "Its just a beta!" marketing bonanza for AAA devs. You can't complain about buggy stuff 'because its beta', you can't complain amount free dlc "because we never said how much, god how entitled!".

with BFV I would gladly pay $50 for premium to get more maps out by now. I loved the game despite it's issues. But it's gotten exceptionally stale to me now because there hasn't been a new map since December.

I honestly feel like EA is purposely doing this shit to try to reintroduce season passes/premium for the next game.

[Edge-]

My major concern with the non-paid dlc is that BFV is using the same model...game has been out nearly six months...it's gotten one new map and firestorm...The new map is excellent...firestorm is a disaster..Anthem can't wait six months for barely more content if they want people to return to it. They need to get the new content out every other month at worst, and sadly im not sure i have the confidence they can get that done.

Battlefront 2 uses it as well. And nearly a year and half after launch it's still getting free updates, most recently a brand new mode that added in AI combatants. I can't see EA abandoning the game this early, they've invested too much to cut the cord yet and they've already seen what happens when they do that with WAR.

Free DLC is the new "Its just a beta!" marketing bonanza for AAA devs. You can't complain about buggy stuff 'because its beta', you can't complain amount free dlc "because we never said how much, god how entitled!".

This is total nonsense, not it's not in the slightest. You can absolutely complain about shit even with free DLC if it's garbage, nobody has said otherwise.

Good lord, we live in a world where people even find ways to complain about the idea of getting content for free rather than pay for it as has been tradition.

[yasiru]

You're the one claiming it was Morally Abhorrent for earning money on Reiterating and adding commentary on an Article and Claimed he was spreading Misinformation.


I wasn't.



So what Misinformation has he spread in his reviews?



So he got some things wrong on "leaks"?



You're the one making it sound like Angry Joe is/was an Morally Abhorrent youtuber and was the cause of

"death threats and vitriol the devs, content creators, and subreddit moderators have received! /s"

Uhh, i didn't say joe was responsible for death threats and such. I was talking about how easily the masses jump on the newest bandwagon idea that comes about and that joe just uses the mindless following of his followers to earn revenue for just regurgitating whatever is the "hot" topic, which is often just spreading negativity for views. But considering you're basically only responding in this thread to disagree or argue with someone it probably doesn't even matter what I meant, but that i gave you an angle to play off of......well done.

[szechuan]

Uhh, i didn't say joe was responsible for death threats and such.

Yet you were mentioning him in quote talking about Death Threats.

I was talking about how easily the masses jump on the newest bandwagon idea that comes about and that joe just uses the mindless following of his followers to earn revenue for just regurgitating whatever is the "hot" topic, which is often just spreading negativity for views.

Criticism does not always mean negativity.
There's also nothing wrong with Constructive Criticism.

But considering you're basically only responding in this thread to disagree or argue with someone it probably doesn't even matter what I meant, but that i gave you an angle to play off of......well done.

How dare people have different Opinions.

[rhorle]

Normally, you're 100% right. But there are certain instances where it's wiser not to follow the traditional wisdom and try something outside of the box. IMO this is very much one of those times, especially since the "DO NOT TALK TO PRESS" emails got predictably leaked and ended up making them look even worse.

It is an internal matter though so it people shouldn't be talking to the press. Most jobs will say not to talk to the press when something leaks about the company. The problem to is that any leaks could lead to potential lawsuits and how Bioware/EA responds can hurt or help. Only those looking for a scapegoat think it is worse that a company says not to talk to the press. Most times it is actually good advice if they have it in the contracts on how employees can interact with the press.

There is a reason why the article was anonymous in its sources. Except for the ex-employees that don't care anymore. Radical transparency has no value here. Because most people are not interested in that. They go from trash talking all devs to now upper management. Next it will be trashing Bioware Austin when they don't do something they like with the game.

Transparency won't change anything with the game.

[Charge me Doctor]

Reddit is totally schizophrenic, too. Half the users want the Bioware Devs to unionize and demand better working conditions and less working hours for them, the other half wants fixes, loot 2.0 and new content NOW or they'll leave the game. And i think there is quite a big overlap of those two groups...

It's crazy idea, but reddit isn't an entity itself to be schizophrenic. It's not united, it's not.. anything but bunch of people expressing their opinions

[stellvia]

A big part of why I decided to stay on board was the transparency, so if they go the other route that's a big hit to my faith.

So transparent they pushed a completely fabricated "gameplay trailer" at E3 2017 when they hadn't even begun production on the game? So transparent a mere 4-5mos before release they were touting a revolutionary RP/choice system when they were so strapped for time and money they couldn't even go back and redo perfcap when the story changed, leaving stuff out of order, not even part of the story anymore, etc? So transparent they laid out a roadmap they have no way of meeting bc they're still frantically trying to get launch systems finished?

The expose by Kotaku was everything I expected and more. About the only thing left unanswered IMHO is whether Battlefront2 caused their initial MTX systems to be scrapped, but I doubt we'll ever know bc the game apparently wasn't in a functional state to even consider MTX systems yet at that point.

That said, I really feel for the regular developers for them. As Angry Joe mentioned in his video: How terrible must it be to work there, potentially for years, and continue to have your hard work scrapped or torn up repeatedly? Largely working the entire time without any actual vision or guidance on what the big picture was supposed to be.

[szechuan]

So transparent they pushed a completely fabricated "gameplay trailer" at E3 2017 when they hadn't even begun production on the game? So transparent a mere 4-5mos before release they were touting a revolutionary RP/choice system when they were so strapped for time and money they couldn't even go back and redo perfcap when the story changed, leaving stuff out of order, not even part of the story anymore, etc? So transparent they laid out a roadmap they have no way of meeting bc they're still frantically trying to get launch systems finished?

They're so transparent they sold a $60 Early Access game and tried to pawn off the rest of the unfinished Content as "Free" DLC.

[Katchii]

So transparent they pushed a completely fabricated "gameplay trailer" at E3 2017 when they hadn't even begun production on the game? So transparent a mere 4-5mos before release they were touting a revolutionary RP/choice system when they were so strapped for time and money they couldn't even go back and redo perfcap when the story changed, leaving stuff out of order, not even part of the story anymore, etc? So transparent they laid out a roadmap they have no way of meeting bc they're still frantically trying to get launch systems finished?

The expose by Kotaku was everything I expected and more. About the only thing left unanswered IMHO is whether Battlefront2 caused their initial MTX systems to be scrapped, but I doubt we'll ever know bc the game apparently wasn't in a functional state to even consider MTX systems yet at that point.

That said, I really feel for the regular developers for them. As Angry Joe mentioned in his video: How terrible must it be to work there, potentially for years, and continue to have your hard work scrapped or torn up repeatedly? Largely working the entire time without any actual vision or guidance on what the big picture was supposed to be.

Not saying you're wrong about any of what you said, but the Kotaku expose' also showcased that things changed a LOT in development. They WERE transparent with the ideas and plan they had at the time and all that shit changed.

Transparency doesn't necessarily things are going to be super clear, well directed and have a vision. Obviously.

I'm just not understanding how you can try to blast them for not being transparent, when they seemingly WERE transparent, and then acknowledge that you have sympathy for the actual developers because the game changed so much over time because things were getting overhauled.

As to the leaked e-mail about employees not talking to the press, that's pretty much standard in EVERY industry, is usually part of your employee handbook and agreement and is very often reiterated when your company is in the news. It's not a negative thing, per se, it's a risk management thing. It's an attempt to prevent people who don't have all the information from giving bad/wrong/misleading information, and a way for the company to maintain whatever integrity it has. As an employee of a company you typically sign or agree by default by accepting the job, that you will do everything in your power to NOT cause harm to your company. Talking to the press and saying something that could be used to negatively impact your company can have HUGE ramifications, for both you and the company. It's better to try and make sure only the people who are prepared to actually communicate with the media to do the communicating with the media.

[szechuan]

I'm just not understanding how you can try to blast them for not being transparent, when they seemingly WERE transparent, and then acknowledge that you have sympathy for the actual developers because the game changed so much over time because things were getting overhauled.

You mean Bioware trying to Rush out an unfinished game as a finished product is still Considered being Transparent?

They WERE transparent with the ideas and plan they had at the time and all that shit changed.

Until they weren't and sold us a fully priced Early Access game and gave us a False impression of what the Final Product was going to be?

Transparency doesn't necessarily things are going to be super clear, well directed and have a vision. Obviously.

Transparency means providing us with a rushed Concept trailer and selling it as ALMOST done?

It's an attempt to prevent people who don't have all the information from giving bad/wrong/misleading information, and a way for the company to maintain whatever integrity it has.

Are you suggesting the Article gave bad/wrong/misleading information?

It's better to try and make sure only the people who are prepared to actually communicate with the media to do the communicating with the media.

So Bioware/EA can give us more Lying/Misleading Corporate Speak before the Scathing Article came out?

[Katchii]

You mean Bioware trying to Rush out an unfinished game as a finished product is still Considered being Transparent?

Not sure what rushing a game has to do with transparency.

Until they weren't and sold us a fully priced Early Access game and gave us a False impression of what the Final Product was going to be?

They priced the game they were showing us at full price. Aside from some graphical differences, I'm not sure what would be considered a false impression.

Transparency means providing us with a rushed Concept trailer and selling it as ALMOST done?

I don't remember them ever saying "almost done," they showed us what they were working on and gave us a release date.

Are you suggesting the Article gave bad/wrong/misleading information?

How do you twist what I said into THAT? That's not at all what I said.

So Bioware/EA can give us more Lying/Misleading Corporate Speak before the Scathing Article came out?

No, it's so people who aren't equipped to answer the questions (ie have no idea what's going on as far as business decisions and direction) don't accidentally cause more harm than good. You can't pretend that the media won't twist or interpret whatever IS said in whatever way they want, and based on how things are going now, wouldn't try their best to show this game and studio in a negative light. You think putting someone who has no experience in crafting responses to the media
in front of the media who will twist every word that is or ISN'T said would be a good idea?

Regardless, my main point is that pretty much every company has this same policy. I'd wager that this "leak" isn't some new policy, just them reiterating their current policy. From a business perspective, this is a very safe policy. Agree or disagree with the policy, it's there to try and protect the company from the media and the damage that could be caused by a disgruntled employee spouting off.

[szechuan]

Not sure what rushing a game has to do with transparency.

While ignoring that they were trying to Rush out an Unfinished Product?

They priced the game they were showing us at full price. Aside from some graphical differences, I'm not sure what would be considered a false impression.

EA didn't even know what kind of game Anthem was going to be when showing us this.

I guess completely Misleading Gameplay Animations with completely fake Enemy AI (compared to what we got) is just "Some" Graphical difference now?

I don't remember them ever saying "almost done," they showed us what they were working on and gave us a release date.

And they gave people the impression they were working on the game for years and knew what they were doing.

How do you twist what I said into THAT? That's not at all what I said.

Because you said

It's an attempt to prevent people who don't have all the information from giving bad/wrong/misleading information, and a way for the company to maintain whatever integrity it has.

Are you suggesting they shouldn't have leaked information on how bad things are going at Bioware? If not then Clarify.

No, it's so people who aren't equipped to answer the questions (ie have no idea what's going on as far as business decisions and direction) don't accidentally cause more harm than good.

Are you saying the people in the Kotaku article aren't equipped to tell us what is Really happening?

You can't pretend that the media won't twist or interpret whatever IS said in whatever way they want, and based on how things are going now, wouldn't try their best to show this game and studio in a negative light. You think putting someone who has no experience in crafting responses to the media
in front of the media who will twist every word that is or ISN'T said would be a good idea?

As opposed to giving us lying/misleading Corporate Speak we usually get from Companies like EA and Bioware?

Regardless, my main point is that pretty much every company has this same policy. I'd wager that this "leak" isn't some new policy, just them reiterating their current policy. From a business perspective, this is a very safe policy. Agree or disagree with the policy, it's there to try and protect the company from the media and the damage that could be caused by a disgruntled employee spouting off.

Yet we have plenty of Companies that hate Whistle blowers and leakers but want to be treated like they are a Transparent Company.

[stellvia]

I'm just not understanding how you can try to blast them for not being transparent, when they seemingly WERE transparent, and then acknowledge that you have sympathy for the actual developers because the game changed so much over time because things were getting overhauled.

A game changing over time refers to what happens in production not throwing ideas around in pre-production. Everything changed bc they never had a concrete idea of what they wanted to make, and during pre-production they continually discovered the engine wasn't capable of doing the things they brainstormed. You seem to patently misunderstand what being transparent means. At no point during the pre-release portion of Anthem were they transparent. The E3 2017 trailer was presented as a working game when it was merely a video: And once again, they were selling ideas their engine couldn't cash, which they should have known would be the case by that point with all the difficulties they already had.

TLDR: Management had no concrete vision and gave no direction causing employees to flail around for 5+ years. All they showed were typical PR videos presented at times they knew they weren't representative of the game (E3 2017) or were even systems being worked on (dynamic RP choices PV video) mere months before release. Once again: Transparency is about telling people the good and the bad. They never once came forward beyond the Green Curtain, they hid behind the smoke and mirrors.

[Katchii]

While ignoring that they were trying to Rush out an Unfinished Product?

Are you expecting them to outright say that it's a rushed out and unfinished product?

EA didn't even know what kind of game Anthem was going to be when showing us this.

I guess completely Misleading Gameplay Animations with completely fake Enemy AI is just "Some" Graphical difference now?

I'm honestly not really seeing much of a game play difference between that video and the game play we currently have. Please note, I said game play, I'm not saying there's no differences. Things changed, that's what happens when a game is in development. The article does say things changed a LOT. But I'm not yet convinced that what they showed us is some deliberate misdirection or lies.

And they gave people the impression they were working on the game for years and knew what they were doing.

They were working on the game for years. Apparently the development process and direction of the game was all kinds of fucked up...but are you, again, seriously expecting them to outright say "we have no idea what's going on?"

Because you said

Are you suggesting they shouldn't have leaked information on how bad things are going at Bioware? If not then Clarify.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. This media storm brewing as a result of that article is exactly why those policies exist. I'm not saying it wasn't justified or that it's false, I'm saying BioWare and EA have the right to try and protect themselves. The media blowing this up isn't really doing anyone any favors. I don't think I need to highlight just what kinds of effects this kind of media coverage has on a company.

Are you saying the people in the Kotaku article aren't equipped to tell us what is Really happening?

I'm saying the risk of getting a regular employee trying to answer questions way above their pay grade (ie they only know so much, not the whole picture or overall direction and plan so, therefore, have incomplete information regarding the company as a whole) is incredibly high. Whether intentionally or not, a lower level employee can cause irreparable harm to a company.

Policies like this are generally in place to try and protect a company from the damage these kinds of stories cause.

As opposed to giving us lying/misleading Corporate Speak we usually get from Companies like EA and Bioware?

Companies should have the right to protect themselves from this kind of thing. I'm not sure how much information was actually shared in the interview, but the article will obviously only end up publishing what information it wants to to push whatever agenda it's trying to push in the article. That's not to say the information in the article is false, just that it's likely incomplete and full of bias.

A game changing over time refers to what happens in production not throwing ideas around in pre-production. Everything changed bc they never had a concrete idea of what they wanted to make, and during pre-production they continually discovered the engine wasn't capable of doing the things they brainstormed. You seem to patently misunderstand what being transparent means. At no point during the pre-release portion of Anthem were they transparent. The E3 2017 trailer was presented as a working game when it was merely a video: And once again, they were selling ideas their engine couldn't cash, which they should have known would be the case by that point with all the difficulties they already had.

TLDR: Management had no concrete vision and gave no direction causing employees to flail around for 5+ years. All they showed were typical PR videos presented at times they knew they weren't representative of the game (E3 2017) or were even systems being worked on (dynamic RP choices PV video) mere months before release. Once again: Transparency is about telling people the good and the bad. They never once came forward beyond the Green Curtain, they hid behind the smoke and mirrors.

Is the expectation that a company SHOULD come out and blatantly say "we have no idea what we're doing, how to do it, how we're going to get there and have absolutely no direction?"

I get the term transparent. But I really think the term and the expectation behind it are being overstated. Companies have NEVER been fully transparent to the levels you're asking for here, we've never been able to see every single thing that occurs in development. The only one I can think of where we can (sort of) is Star Citizen and that's because it's publicly funded. We've only ever been privy to whatever information the developer/publisher WANTS us to be privy to. No company would (or should, IMO, if they care about continuing to operate) ever air all of their dirty laundry while it's happening, that would be suicide.

I think the expectation that we should have been informed about every problem the team had and everything that happens behind the curtain is a completely unrealistic expectation, and the fact that people are trying to hold BioWare to this expectation when no company has ever done it is incredibly unfair.

[szechuan]

Are you expecting them to outright say that it's a rushed out and unfinished product?

You're the one claiming they were being Transparent.

I'm honestly not really seeing much of a game play difference between that video and the game play we currently have. Please not, I said game play, I'm not saying there's no differences. Things changed, that's what happens when a game is in development. The article does say things changed a LOT. But I'm not yet convinced that what they showed us is some deliberate misdirection or lies.

Ignoring different Gameplay Animations and Enemy AI again?

They were working on the game for years. Apparently the development process and direction of the game was all kinds of fucked up...but are you, again, seriously expecting them to outright say "we have no idea what's going on?"

You were the one Suggesting the Company was being Transparent.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. This media storm brewing as a result of that article is exactly why those policies exist. I'm not saying it wasn't justified or that it's false, I'm saying BioWare and EA have the right to try and protect themselves. The media blowing this up isn't really doing anyone any favors. I don't think I need to highlight just what kinds of effects this kind of media coverage has on a company.

So you would be okay if Bioware and EA sued the leakers?

I'm saying the risk of getting a regular employee trying to answer questions way above their pay grade (ie they only know so much, not the whole picture or overall direction and plan so, therefore, have incomplete information regarding the company as a whole) is incredibly high. Whether intentionally or not, a lower level employee can cause irreparable harm to a company.

Are you suggesting that is what those people in Kotaku article did?

Policies like this are generally in place to try and protect a company from the damage these kinds of stories cause.

Yeah, Truth hurts.

Companies should have the right to protect themselves from this kind of thing.

Protect them From what? The Employees or some Whistleblower or leaker trying telling the Truth?

I'm not sure how much information was actually shared in the interview, but the article will obviously only end up publishing what information it wants to to push whatever agenda it's trying to push in the article. That's not to say the information in the article is false, just that it's likely incomplete and full of bias.

So you do actually think the Kotaku article is bull.

Is the expectation that a company SHOULD come out and blatantly say "we have no idea what we're doing, how to do it, how we're going to get there and have absolutely no direction?"

They can always come clean and try and earn peoples trust back like what Square did with FFXIV.

I get the term transparent. But I really think the term and the expectation behind it are being overstated. Companies have NEVER been fully transparent to the levels you're asking for here, we've never been able to see every single thing that occurs in development. The only one I can think of where we can (sort of) is Star Citizen and that's because it's publicly funded. We've only ever been privy to whatever information the developer/publisher WANTS us to be privy to. No company would (or should, IMO, if they care about continuing to operate) ever air all of their dirty laundry while it's happening, that would be suicide.

I think the expectation that we should have been informed about every problem the team had and everything that happens behind the curtain is a completely unrealistic expectation, and the fact that people are trying to hold BioWare to this expectation when no company has ever done it is incredibly unfair.

Seems you think there is no Middle Ground and being Transparent is impossible for a company so they should Lie.

[stellvia]

You bandy about the term "transparent" like they were doing something different from the industry norm. In reality, it was the same smoke and mirrors PR that literally every other major company always does. They weren't transparent, that's all. They kept their mouth shut and pretended everything was great while selling a facade just like companies always do. The parallels between this and the No Man's Sky launch are ironically very similar.

PS: I really hate it when people try to turn things around with hyperbolic strawman counterarguments.
>Say company should let us know (some) bad along with the good.
>Claim that means I'm asking for a daily blog of every bad thing that happens.