-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
EA Should Lose The Star Wars License (The Jimquisition)
- Thread starter oni-link
- Start date
EA haven't made the most of having the IP.
It seems I was mistaken. You're saying the license should be given to another publisher. I thought you meant the unfinished game should have been given to another EA owned developer.
7 pages in, I'm yet to see a single post defending EA.
I've seen some people - including myself - call for a focus on facts va hysteria. While admitting that EA has definitely mismanaged the opportunity to use the license.
The question is why they "failed" which can be gleaned by examining the annual reports of both companies and their respective business models.
Yeah keep mocking us how are those Battlefield 5 sales btw ?
https://www.pcgamesn.com/battlefield-5/battlefield-5-sales
You guys at EA need a PR person who is not CEO Andrew Wilson pretty damn quickly
Disney shouldn't have locked it up with any company. EA saw the potential of their Wilson boxes and star wars brand but that shit has backfired so hard they're lost. It's a shame for everyone. Had this deal not been made we might have seen that finished but unreleased rogue squadron game get enhanced and brought to switch.
There is some dangerously broad statements being made in this thread about finances, publisher/developer intent, and overall workmanship in the EA Star Wars games.
I will absolutely agree that the enthusiast and many core consumers would be frustrated by EA's handling of the license. That being said, it's only been about 5 years. The entire landscape of AAA development has completely changed since HD titles became a thing. The days are long-gone of small to midsize teams tackling gigantic projects. Games of this scale are assembly-line productions now, with staggering quantities of labor just to get code up and running with placeholders everywhere.
Lucasarts was a private company and George himself encouraged a lot of experimentation, particularly near the end. George sanctioned spending millions on ridiculous quantities of proprietary technology for things like the Force Unleashed. He was in an entirely unique position to act in this capacity. He had complete control over the brand, a 300 million dollar complex housing the entirety of his workforce and a near-bottomless bankroll to make any idea come to life.
Publicly traded companies simply cannot do things like this. It's too wildly irresponsible and could leave countless investors and employees screwed over. So when EA cancels a project, I don't get upset about how a toy I like will never see the light of day. Instead, I sympathize with how damage control has to be performed so the least number of people possible lose their livelihood.
Oh and for the record, I really enjoyed Battlefront 2015 and what I played of Battlefront 2. By all means, criticize the quantity of the content, but I HIGHLY disagree with all the knocks on the quality of it. To this day, I have yet to play two games more devoted to portraying an authentic Star Wars experience. Running around in those fully realized landscapes is pure bliss for people who grew up on the high-budget low-fi aesthetics of the original trilogy. Battlefront 1 also had solid map design and gunplay. It's certainly better on average than about half the other Star Wars games I bought growing up.
One last note too, there are some actual EA developers (including a fucking artist who makes their living bringing this shit to life for your pleasure) in this thread. I am not asking you to back away from having an opinion, but please at least be respectful to them. As someone who works in retail and gets shit on a daily basis, despite actually trying to work hard to make customers happy, this behavior is decidedly unfair and soul-crushing. On top of that, we are scaring off the few qualified people who can lend critical context to a lot of the conversations we regularly delight over in this forum.
God, it just makes me imagine Stinkles leaving the next time Era has a meltdown thread about how Halo 6 has to remove sprinting.
I will absolutely agree that the enthusiast and many core consumers would be frustrated by EA's handling of the license. That being said, it's only been about 5 years. The entire landscape of AAA development has completely changed since HD titles became a thing. The days are long-gone of small to midsize teams tackling gigantic projects. Games of this scale are assembly-line productions now, with staggering quantities of labor just to get code up and running with placeholders everywhere.
Lucasarts was a private company and George himself encouraged a lot of experimentation, particularly near the end. George sanctioned spending millions on ridiculous quantities of proprietary technology for things like the Force Unleashed. He was in an entirely unique position to act in this capacity. He had complete control over the brand, a 300 million dollar complex housing the entirety of his workforce and a near-bottomless bankroll to make any idea come to life.
Publicly traded companies simply cannot do things like this. It's too wildly irresponsible and could leave countless investors and employees screwed over. So when EA cancels a project, I don't get upset about how a toy I like will never see the light of day. Instead, I sympathize with how damage control has to be performed so the least number of people possible lose their livelihood.
Oh and for the record, I really enjoyed Battlefront 2015 and what I played of Battlefront 2. By all means, criticize the quantity of the content, but I HIGHLY disagree with all the knocks on the quality of it. To this day, I have yet to play two games more devoted to portraying an authentic Star Wars experience. Running around in those fully realized landscapes is pure bliss for people who grew up on the high-budget low-fi aesthetics of the original trilogy. Battlefront 1 also had solid map design and gunplay. It's certainly better on average than about half the other Star Wars games I bought growing up.
One last note too, there are some actual EA developers (including a fucking artist who makes their living bringing this shit to life for your pleasure) in this thread. I am not asking you to back away from having an opinion, but please at least be respectful to them. As someone who works in retail and gets shit on a daily basis, despite actually trying to work hard to make customers happy, this behavior is decidedly unfair and soul-crushing. On top of that, we are scaring off the few qualified people who can lend critical context to a lot of the conversations we regularly delight over in this forum.
God, it just makes me imagine Stinkles leaving the next time Era has a meltdown thread about how Halo 6 has to remove sprinting.
Depends on what you mean by messing up. Disney got their money for licensing it, they don't care. EA probably cares but considering they bought this expensive license and I'm guessing part of the revenue of each Star Wars game goes to Disney, EA is probably heavily incentived to make as much money as they can from each game they put out. Making a smallerish game they makes a decent profit would be a tremendous waste to a company like EA since they could've put those resources into making a huge game that makes tons of money. To EA it's a matter of opportunity cost. You could say they've failed because they haven't put out much but they don't need to. They only need to release a few games and make those huge money makers.
Wasn't The Old Republic released in december 2011, rendering the first graph invalid?
Coincidentially, ongoing support for Old Republic is pretty much the only really good thing coming out of EA having the Star Wars license, the game, at least the class storylines, really show the game was released in a time when Bioware still had some seriously good storywriting talent (releasing in between Mass Effect 2 and 3).
At the very least EA should loose their exclusive hold over the SW license. That's what sucks the most. Ragtag's or 1313's cancellations wouldn't have hurt nearly as much if that was the case.
Which brings us to the conclusion that EA don't deserve the license.
Disney is pumping out Star wars movies left and right, they thought the biggest gaming publisher would do the same.....
Indeed it was. December 20th, 2011. I will always remember that day (my first game launch in the industry <3)
This account is like a parody of a Gaf/Era Nintendo fan, right?
You need to not take things so seriously, and also spend half a second to understand the context, where nobody was mocking you in any way, just we can't speak about too many things as we know too much about things as we are part of the industry. It's not rocket science.
How the fuck you get from a tweet where the context is I cannot participate in this discussion for X reason to being mocked is beyond me.
But, lesson learned, I'll try to stay away from stuff. :)
Last edited:
You were, but after reading my post back I can see why you misread it, I could have worded it better!
"Deserve" is not exactly a term I would use considering we're talking about a business. It assumes there is some other mythical "worthy" holder of the license, worth in this case being judged by "gamers" who want more SW games in a specific genre. "Deserve" has nothing to do with it, it's all a matter of whether EA believes that the deal is favorable to them and can result in significant revenue and whether Disney believes that EA is a stable enough partner to continue to pay their likeliy high licensing fees in addition to generating favorable returns resulting in profitable royalty fees.
Ok maybe not deserve. But by far the general consensus is that they haven't handled it well. I'm assuming EA did think the deal was favourable to them, and that it would result in significant revenue, otherwise they wouldn't have paid out for it.
I think what's ticking people off is that 'stable' seems to be about all that EA is currently providing. Again, they're not the only company making huge games, Ubisoft exists, Activision-Blizzard exists, Take Two exists, and simply going with EA for stability nullifies the possible success they could be seeing. We definitely aren't seeing all the variables, and I understand your trepidation. But these relationships aren't just about the immediate money, they're about the brand. And for EA to have mixed in Battlefront with the majority of loot box backlash surely did them no favors in Disney's eyes.
I don't necessarily think that Disney wants more Star Wars games, but EA's output has certainly not warranted repeated business from a financial/PR standpoint.
Not you personally just feel like EA the company as a whole has been flipping us off and are sending you guys to deal with any criticism where in the hell is Andrew Wilson any statement from him or any PR representative would be nice, because a lot of people are wondering what in the fuck is going on.
Note I understand your predicament as well given you are under contract and can't say too much.
Sony/Insomniac have exclusive rights to standalone Spider-Man games, he can appear in stuff like Square's Avengers and Nintendo's Ultimate Alliance (a different Spidey obviously), but neither can do a standalone Spidey game, that likely extends to all the Spidey Verse.
I also agree it's likely a big factor and Star Wars is much harder to split up than Marvel is.
Another definition of "deserve" is 'to qualify for', and considering their abysmally received releases of the two games with the IP, both in the same genre and both controversial in their shortcomings, the term fits. Fans of every other genre are left waiting in the wind, with more news of cancellations releasing than any information of what will come.
Call a duck a duck. They are not qualified to hold the exclusive rights to the IP, but I would argue no single publisher would be, and it should be licensed to those with more diverse experience and solid pitches. With 100% of EA's meager output related to this deal causing controversy, it is quite literally accurate to say EA does not deserve nor has ever deserved their decade long deal of exclusivity.
Edit - But also fuck Disney for killing Lucas Arts so they could make this pact with an undeserving EA.
Yes. Saying that Jim's videos are poorly researched and don't show the full picture is not defending EA. You can make a good video about the situation but Jim just does his usual shtick. You'd think someone whose entire job it is to talk about this industry would know a few things by now but i don't blame him for doing them. the outrage videos are popular and are easy to make.
I've said this before, Star Wars fans are way too 'woke' when it comes to EA's usual business shenanigans compared to say FIFA or Madden fans. They already showed it with the backlash from Battlefront 2. These uppity fans actually want a real, meaty, quality game from their beloved IP instead of a digital platform for gambling and/or micro-transactions. Its 2019, you stupid nerds! You either accept EA's GaaS games or you will not get anything! EA have exclusivity to your beloved IP. Why don't you just fall in line like soccer and football fans?
*andrewwilsonlaugh*
*andrewwilsonlaugh*
I feel like most of Jims content gains traction because people are outraged that he makes videos
His threads are always full of people who thrive on disliking Jim
He's either repeating himself or he's too mean to companies.
Even this is apparently a controversial topic for some reason, despite people unanimously agreeing EA haven't made the most of the IP. The video is apparently wrong, misleading or shows a lack of understanding of the industry or something
I find it amusing that those who bring up outrage culture tend to always be the most outraged
Last edited:
He's a somehow revered YouTuber who goes after the low hanging fruit of the video game industry with blustery, childish videos with, yes, a lack of deep understanding of the industry. What's not to love?
Yeah, lots of Star Wars projects cancelled and lots of nickel and diming on the ones that happened.
I want a Star Wars game made by Platinum! Do eeeeeet!
I want a Star Wars game made by Platinum! Do eeeeeet!
Oh there is nothing wrong with disliking him or his content, I dislike a ton of people who make gaming videos or content, I just don't go into their threads week after week to say the same things over and over about how I dislike them
Not that I'm saying you do that, but a lot of people do and it just seems counter productive to me
I mean, what was he specifically wrong about in this video? It seems like the majority broadly agree with the premise of the video
Maybe. Who knows? Disney may get a better deal with someone else.
I'm even ok with it going to Ubisoft at this point, bring in the tower open world if you must. Hell, imagine something at the Odyssey scale but with SW?
You know, this doesn't really make you or your company look good at all.
I'm pretty sure the implication here is they'd be fired if they said too much. Can't say that makes them look bad imo.
Yeah, I read it as they'd accidentally leak something they aren't allowed to talk about. We know how secretive these publishers are. Pretty reasonable worry really.
Well, maybe it just rubbed me the wrong way because of past discussions with them.
All those devs have long history of making successful single player games, in many cases, with an IP with a history of single player success.
EA does not have that. Did you even read any of my posts? Please, name at least 5 single player only games EA has released in the past 10-20 years outside of Bioware (and its last good single player game was almost 10 years ago).
People really gotta stop with the "I gotcha" stuff and discuss the topic and hand...yeah I totally said that all single player games are bombing...lol...over half the list you posted are from devs that ONLY make single player games.
(Far Cry & DOOM are not single player only games btw)
Well if anything that's just more reason EA should lose the IP
Star Wars fans love the series for it's lore, narrative and world building
Of course a developer who struggles to make solid SP games is going to struggle with it, and of course the Star Wars IP won't reach it's potential being used to sell MXT in an online MP GaaS title
Let EA try and make another Battlefront if they want, but at the same time other developers should be allowed to make SP Star Wars games
The odds of a AAA 85-95 rated SP Star Wars game flopping must be extremely low
That said it probably wouldn't make as much money as a GaaS treadmill, and that's probably a good part of the reason why EA keep deciding SP Star Wars games are "not viable"
Yea, I was always skeptical of EA getting the exclusive license (why does EA keep doing that anyway) but here we are. EA is trash and they need to stay away from this as much as possible. All they had to do is let the many talented groups under their belt do what they do, and that is make games. But corporate greedy greedos all intervene in something they don't understand in an effort to maximize profits.
Fuck. Off.
Fuck. Off.
007(I prefer nightfire myself)
A Way Out
Command and Conquer(every one except red alert 3)
Crisis 1-2-3
Dead space 1-2
Fe
Medal of HONOR
Mirrors Edge
Sims 2, 3
EA had a great amount of single player games throughout the PS2-PS3 era. And this was you arbitrarily removing Dragom Age and Mass Effect because of "reasons".
And even if what you said was true: that EA does not have single player success, that's all the more reason why EA should never have gotten the Star Wars exclusivity they did. It would need to go to a publisher who actually can create a diverse lineup of Star Wars game. This is why they should not have the license now.
So let's get this straight though:
You said EA didn't make single player games because they don't do well. Of which I showed you is completely false. So then you said that EA can't make single player games because they aren't equipped well enough. Of which I showed you good EA single player experiences.
I agree EA is rotten to its core nowadays. However, that's all the more reason they should lose their contract with Disney.
(By the way, Doom and Far Cry do count, considering that the multiplayer is completely secondary to the single player. The campaigns are really where those games shine and it's where the most focus was. Having secondary online modes to great single player experiences isn't a bad thing at all, and just adds value. Whereas the inverse is having a terrible, buggy, tacked on single player campaign like Battlefront 2 just to say it has single player).
I'm completely nonplussed how you could come to this conclusion from that easy to understand tweet.
The problem is....who would take it on? I have my doubts any dev would be able to give it the AAA treatment it deserves without A. loading it up with microtransactions or B. making it console-exclusive (if it went to one of the big 3)
My best thought would be that Disney handles it similar to Marvel and makes it available for devs that want to smack down the cash. Have a big dev make the HD twins version, then maybe team with Nintendo to make a Switch-exclusive game...
...
My best thought would be that Disney handles it similar to Marvel and makes it available for devs that want to smack down the cash. Have a big dev make the HD twins version, then maybe team with Nintendo to make a Switch-exclusive game...
...
ROGUE SQUADRON IV PLEEEEEEEASE
Reality Check: We've had four SW films in the seven years since Disney acquired the IP.
Those releases by EA have been profitable for Disney, moreso than any other licensing deals, including Frozen.
those movies released also shared plenty of development problems, director changes, with two of the film having to do significant reshoots inflating the budget and disappointing box-office for solo. They are basically having to go back to the drawing board for the future of their films.
But are also damaging to the brand to such a MASSIVE degree that the WORLD is now putting an eye on governmental regulation of how games are monetized.
EA doesn't deserve the license.
In the last year yes but there was a 3 year period of great BO returns. Both Episode 7 and Rogue One over performed.
Also not every Star Wars.game needs an all or nothing approach. People just want to have something to play.
It's probably the least controversial topic open in ERA right now.
We got something like 2 or 3 games from EA, the most ambitious being a rather underwhelming MMO that is a subpar WoW clone and 2 boring shooters that people have been clamoring for years that they managed to make the focal point of "everything wrong with the gaming industry".
They've pigeonholed Star Wars in gaming to such a narrow extent that it was actually better when Lucasarts was ruining Star Wars with bad games.
as a Star Wars enthusiast, there's jacshit to buy right now, not even a goddamn mobile game!
Why is there not even a licensed game retelling the events of the movies or some shit?
Can't even have Lego games now!
We got something like 2 or 3 games from EA, the most ambitious being a rather underwhelming MMO that is a subpar WoW clone and 2 boring shooters that people have been clamoring for years that they managed to make the focal point of "everything wrong with the gaming industry".
They've pigeonholed Star Wars in gaming to such a narrow extent that it was actually better when Lucasarts was ruining Star Wars with bad games.
as a Star Wars enthusiast, there's jacshit to buy right now, not even a goddamn mobile game!
Why is there not even a licensed game retelling the events of the movies or some shit?
Can't even have Lego games now!
Nah, Disney did a fine job.
the movies are doing well, the theme park integration is great, the comics are well handled for what they are and the books are coming.
Literally the only part of the Star Wars saturation that is lacking is games.
Probably the best case scenario if the franchise was to go platform-exclusive. Star Wars is extremely story- and lore-driven, relies on effects and atmosphere heavily, and would most likely best fit the filmic style that Sony games tend to have. Nintendo would overemphasize core gameplay and fun factor, while Microsoft would just pay someone shitloads of money to come up with "something".