AltogetherAndrews
Member
Respawn was in trouble after Titanfall 2's sales failure and almost killed off by EA.
Respawn wasn't even owned by EA at the time, but by all means, keep the BS flowing.
Respawn was in trouble after Titanfall 2's sales failure and almost killed off by EA.
Fair enough, I thought they were acquired before 2017, but apparently not. EA is known for acquiring studios and shutting them down soon after.Respawn wasn't even owned by EA at the time, but by all means, keep the BS flowing.
Umm no MP means no reason to buy at launch for me.
“Survived Order 66”
If that’s not a direct jab at EA I don’t know what is.
Damn I thought EA was done with SP stuff.
Now I'm actually excited for the reveal
I hope so though I feel like this game could do with the RPG treatment and coming from Respawn I can't imagine that being the case. No MP means the SP has to have legs but right now they're more known for flash in the pan SP spectacles. They're good, but can they hold up a game with no MP?Respawn can do it. They’re gonna deliver, I can FEEL IT
No MP means the SP has to have legs but right now they're more known for flash in the pan SP spectacles.
Well, I guess so. Still, I wouldn't mind more.Sounds like it will fit right in with Star Wars then. These ARE simple action movies, after all.
It's ridiculous but whenever I see TF2 I immediately think of Team Fortress 2 not Titanfall 2. I wonder is Titanfall 2 did well with lifetime sales, It has such good word of mouth it must be still selling. It had one of the best campaigns for a FPS this gen, I'm having a hard time thinking of a better one; maybe DOOM or Prey. Certainly not COD, battlefield, Wolfenstein, or Destiny IMO.TF2s campaign was excellent. It was short, but excellent. I played through it 3x happily. Very fun game.
A Respawn game without multiplayer? Well damm, they're certainly branching out.
You don’t like story games?
I hope so though I feel like this game could do with the RPG treatment and coming from Respawn I can't imagine that being the case. No MP means the SP has to have legs but right now they're more known for flash in the pan SP spectacles. They're good, but can they hold up a game with no MP?
No I do but I wait out SP only games to go down on prices which feels reasonable to me....like I finally got spiderman on ps4. If a game has a MP component then it drives me to get it at launch so I can level up.
If I can get the game cheaper from those cdkey sites...then I will get it at launch.
I do this too. Kind of feel bad about it, but I do it.
Don't critically acclaimed single player only games hold their value?
Fair enough, I thought they were acquired before 2017, but apparently not. EA is known for acquiring studios and shutting them down soon after.
I think Respawn must have almost total autonomy. This wouldn't be possible any other way. We saw that EA basically vetoed this type of game when it was up to them with Amy Hennig leading it.Is it really EA who is publishing this? Or maybe they wanna do an Activision and pick up some cred points ala Sekiro after all the PR-disasters they´ve been involved in as of late.
This sounds very un-EA. I wonder if Disney kicked their arses after the Battlefront 2 negativity.
I think Respawn must have almost total autonomy. This wouldn't be possible any other way. We saw that EA basically vetoed this type of game when it was up to them with Amy Hennig leading it.
Respawn also fully dictated all aspects of how to release and market Apex Legends.
Well I guess that's one good thing to come from Apex: the freedom to make a singleplayer game free of bullshit.
But I can't help but laugh at the fact that EA canceled a singleplayer Star Wars game from one of the best writers in the gaming industry, only to greenlight a singleplayer Star Wars game from one of the writers and director of the worst God of War game. I hope for the best but then I remember how bad the story was in God of War 3 and just shake my head.
Bungie and Respawn are pretty much seen as the most valuable independent studios, and I think they got a ton of leeway when they got purchased to do almost everything they want. It's unheard of that Bungie is leaving Activision now with Destiny under their ownership. Respawn probably got some similar perks."total autonomy" What? No....unlikely. EA owns the team and the game and they are not oking this unless it makes sense for EA, which means as much as someone might want that, I see literally zero evidence that is the case with this. EA owns the license, owns the team and is publishing. Clearly something they wanted is in this seeing how the own everything involved. You might simply be seeing something EA wanted is what ReSpawn wanted as when DICE got the ok for Star Wars, EA had no issue having those in the team work in Battlefield and those who wanted to work on Star Wars.....well work on Star Wars. So I don't think DICE wanted to do some RPG, I think they clearly wanted to do a FPS MP focused title as to what they do best, EA might have simply be paring the IP with a team that is making a genre that they also support. SO they don't NEED to tell DICE to make it MP focused, taht is just something the team does well.
ReSpawn might have just wanted to do a Star Wars SP and that want aligned with EA wanting one as well.
"EA basically vetoed this type of game when it was up to them with Amy" No.
You don't actually know that for a fact, please stop spreading this misinformation.
I've said this many, many times on here....issues with Visceral have MORE to do with that team internally, then "Star Wars Single player"
Why? Well EA already MAKES SINGLE PLAYER GAMES.
If such a thing was sooooo true, why does BFV have a single player mode? Why does Battlefront 2? Why announce Dragon Age 4?
Even more so....why have ReSpawn make a SINGLE PLAYER LINEAR STAR WARS GAME?
Or....or....maybe the issue with that team, was the issues WITH THAT TEAM and not single player games in general. As even if we say EA hates Single player, the existence of single player doesn't really support that, even if we say EA hates STAR WARS single player, Battlefront 2 and this game don't support that, heck even if we say they got rid of Visceral cause they don't want to have too many teams, why then BUY ReSpawn?
So....maybe Viceral had lots of issues and that is the reasoning behind that game getting canned and the team closing down.
So I highly disagree that the only way to see this is based on this "autonomy" as many have completely ignored that Visceral's game might have been canned because of the team it self and not anything to do with single player games in general.
This is total fantasy and really unlikely to boot. As much as I dislike a lot of what EA is doing, that doesn't mean they are complete morons who can't occasionally greenlight something worth playing. You have to accept that, while they've certainly mishandled multiple studios and mostly squandered the Star Wars license (cash cow mobile game aside), they've also done a few things right, and this game might just be one of them.I think Respawn must have almost total autonomy. This wouldn't be possible any other way. We saw that EA basically vetoed this type of game when it was up to them with Amy Hennig leading it.
Respawn also fully dictated all aspects of how to release and market Apex Legends.
Well like I said the first time, this isn't based on some hate for EA. It's based on what just happened with Amy Hennig's game. That was also a single player story focused Star Wars game. And reports coming out around it's cancellation stated that EA changed it to be more in line with their vision for continued monetization for games. And all the statements from Kotaku around Anthem and Dragon Age 4 also state that EA cancelled an early build of Dragon Age 4 to also make it fit this vision for continued monetization. Those are facts about how EA likes to run its studios. As far as why this one Respawn game is different, that's just me guessing.This is total fantasy and really unlikely to boot. As much as I dislike a lot of what EA is doing, that doesn't mean they are complete morons who can't occasionally greenlight something worth playing. You have to accept that, while they've certainly mishandled multiple studios and mostly squandered the Star Wars license (cash cow mobile game aside), they've also done a few things right, and this game might just be one of them.
Bungie and Respawn are pretty much seen as the most valuable independent studios, and I think they got a ton of leeway when they got purchased to do almost everything they want. It's unheard of that Bungie is leaving Activision now with Destiny under their ownership. Respawn probably got some similar perks.
This isn't misinformation. It's a fucking guess lol. Jesus Christ. This is a forum. The whole point is to discuss things.
Fair enough, and I agree that there's no denying EA has mismanaged its studios and properties.Well like I said the first time, this isn't based on some hate for EA. It's based on what just happened with Amy Hennig's game. That was also a single player story focused Star Wars game. And reports coming out around it's cancellation stated that EA changed it to be more in line with their vision for continued monetization for games. And all the statements from Kotaku around Anthem and Dragon Age 4 also state that EA cancelled an early build of Dragon Age 4 to also make it fit this vision for continued monetization. Those are facts about how EA likes to run its studios. As far as why this one Respawn game is different, that's just me guessing.
Also worth noting, Hennig's game was forced to be on Frostbite as well. And Respawn is using Unreal 4. Pretty weird!
The first two words in my post were "I think."No issue if you "think" that, simply this " This wouldn't be possible any other way " is just completely ignoring a whole lot and leading to some area that is very questionable. So if you can guess that, you can also leave that to a guess to vs "wouldn't be possible any other way"
The first two words in my post were "I think."
Jesus Christ.