Approvals 12/3 ▼
ArchangelMike (3) - 1927d ago Cancel
spaceb0y (3) - 1927d ago Cancel
jinymos (3) - 1927d ago Cancel
Blove (3) - 1927d ago Cancel
300°

If Bioware's Anthem fails to deliver, is it time to split-up with EA?

As a big Bioware fan, Rossco looks at what happens if Bioware's Anthem fails to deliver and what it needs to work. Plus, the question if EA and Bioware are actually best for each other now.

Read Full Story >>
mygameslounge.com
Create Report !X

Add Report

Reports

+ Updates (1)- Updates (1)

Updates

Changed from Pending to Approved
Community1927d ago
ArchangelMike1927d ago

Best quote from the article - "With EA having their own take on what gamers want going forward. I do wonder if what makes Bioware historically so good, is exactly what EA don’t want anymore... When Bioware hear EA walk around saying things like “gamers don’t like single-player, story-driven games anymore” and other such quotes (as the imperial march music plays in the background), they must be shuddering."

It's so true. Bioware and EA are just not good bedfellows anymore. I'm not hopeful for the future of Bioware if they stay with EA.

For the love of God EA, why haven't you let Bioware develop a proper story driven singleplayer Star Wars game? Have you forgotten that they made the best sci-fi game franchise in history - Mass Effect? It should have been the perfect storm. But oh no... rinse repeat loot/grind mtx shooter ftw /s

Eonjay1927d ago

"With EA having their own take on what gamers want going forward."

The problem with this sentence is that EA doesn't care what gamers want at all. 'What we want' is automatically superseded by 'what makes EA the most money'.

RememberThe3571927d ago

This couldn't be more wrong. EA wants to make games that every single human on the planet love and want to spend money on endlessly. They're completely delusional.

The problem is that the company is run by investment bankers and they wouldn't know a good game if it slapped them in the face. They're completely incompetent. They think some market research gives them all the answers to questions they don't know how to ask with zero context as to why consumers do what they do or who these consumers even are.

That's why they said gamers don't want single player games, they had market research that they didn't know how to read. They made stupid decisions, then blamed their workers for it. Fk them.

Double_O_Revan1927d ago

"why haven't you let Bioware develop a proper story driven singleplayer Star Wars game? Have you forgotten that they made the best sci-fi game franchise in history - Mass Effect"

Not to mention they already did make easily one of the best Star Wars games, Knights of the Old Republic. It should've been a no brainer for EA once they originally got that Star Wars license.

InTheZoneAC1927d ago

Bioware shares the same mentality as EA, even if separated there will be issues with either company.

TheOtherMoon1927d ago

God, what you said it beautiful! What Bioware does and what EA want are two different operations.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1927d ago
Relientk771927d ago

It would be great if Bioware could separate from EA but I don't know if that's going to happen. Would like to see what they could do if they weren't tied to EA.

annoyedgamer1927d ago

Bioware is just a shell with a face that EA wears.

Hardiman1927d ago (Edited 1927d ago )

You would think the studio that delivered Knights of the Old Republic and Mass Effect would be the go to for a new story driven Star Wars game. It boggles my mind with how out of touch EA is!

They are a cancer but it's not just them. I can think if s few who would probably fumble just as bad!

Activemessiah1927d ago

Split up? you do know what EA does to their studios right?

Double_O_Revan1927d ago

Can't help but remember the Arnold quote from Commando.
"Remember when I promised to kill you last?"
"Yea John you did!!"
"I lied!"
http://www.quickmeme.com/im...

Show all comments (49)
220°

Take-Two CEO Doesn’t Think AI Will Reduce Employment or Dev Costs; “Stupidest Thing” He’s Heard

Take-Two CEO Strauss Zelnick doesn't think AI will reduce employment or lower development costs, and calls it "stupidest thing" he's ever heard.

Create Report !X

Add Report

Reports

+ Updates (1)- Updates (1)

Updates

Changed from Pending to Approved
Community11h ago
lodossrage12h ago(Edited 12h ago)

They already have AI trained to do coding.......

How he thinks it's stupid is beyond me, Especially since we see it happening in real time.

CS710h ago

Company A has 300 employees and lays of 200 to replace them with AI to release the same quality game.

Company B has 300 employees and keeps all 300 but instead uses AI to release a game with dramatically larger scale, scope, complexity, short dev cycle etc.

Company B would release a dramatically better product by using humans + AI and consumers would buy the better game.

I actually agree with this concept.

Huey_My_D_Long10h ago(Edited 10h ago)

This is key facet. Its how the AI is used. It's actually is impressive as is and really would make an amazing addition to alot of people in their jobs, not just tech. It also has the potential for businesses to use to lay off large amounts of people, as much as they could to save money on labor. I hope too many companies don't go with the latter. But since usually companies are worried about bottom line over people...we will see some try and hopefully fail. But yeah, if its to help workers like in your company B scenario I'm totally down...Just scared Company A may be too enticing to some ceos and businesses.

Darkegg9h ago

Value of AI and value of humans will both be increased with human-AI complex. Each, by themselves, will not be independently better than the other. Whether AI will ever be independent from humans is the fear question of humans, ironically because of our doing. At this stage, most of the doing is because of humans, not because of AI. AI is doing exactly that by our design, until we have failed ourselves with an AI development that went awry. The biggest take is that humans have only ourselves to blame when things become wrong, and we have to decide what is the ultimate goal with AI we want to accomplish. It would take a person with high morals and high ethics to make right of AI. I would not want businessman to decide what AI should do or what capabilities it can have. AI should be in the hands of people with high moral fiber, or those operating on love, kindness, and compassion.

BlackOni9h ago

AI is SUPPOSED to be used as a tool, not a replacement. It's designed to do two important things artists can take advantage of immediately.

- Make the ideation/reference imaging process much quicker and easier (basically using it as a google search)
- Make mundane and time consuming tasks faster and easier so more time is spent on creation.

Unfortunately, what many have done is used it as a way to replace rather than supplement.

Einhander19726h ago(Edited 6h ago)

CS7

In the ideal world yes.

In the real world where companies have shown little desire to innovate and spent every effort to maximize profits the end result will be the same quality games (if were lucky) made by less people and more AI.

Company Real World: Fires 200 people and makes the same game cheaper using AI and the executives get record bonuses.

Edit:

Lets look at history, specifically auto manufacturing.

In the 70's and 80's the auto unions tried to oppose automation of jobs (robots) stating that they would take peoples jobs. And the people in charge who wanted to make more money said the exact same types of things that are being said about AI. But we can look at history and see that countless types of jobs were in fact replaced by automation, that was of course even compounded upon by computers.

The net effect was that the rich got richer less jobs were needed so wages were forced down by competition for the jobs that were left.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 5h ago
Number1TailzFan10h ago

You can already make your own SFX with text prompts now as well, of course it will lower development cost and time

1Victor10h ago(Edited 10h ago)

WARNING WARNING ‼️ SARCASM AHEAD
Sure Strauss and robots didn’t take jobs from car factories.
Edit:Sad thing is he believes it and unfortunately he won’t be replaced for a long time by AI

senorfartcushion8h ago(Edited 8h ago)

He doesn't, he's just lying. These people lay people off so they can get bonuses. If AI takes jobs, their bonus goes bigger and the workforce goes smaller.

porkChop6h ago

Because he sees AI as a tool to aid development. He wants to use AI to help make bigger and better games in the same timeframe. Other CEOs want to replace devs with AI to cut costs and make lifeless games faster for a quick buck. Strauss has the right idea, this is how AI should be used. To extend and expand the capabilities of devs.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 5h ago
jambola12h ago

Ceo says stupid thing
Part 5837384

Zeref10h ago(Edited 10h ago)

I think maybe sometimes we give people in these positions too much credit when it comes to intelligence.

romulus2310h ago

As long as it doesn't effect his inflated executive salary or his ridiculous bonuses I'm sure he's fine with it.

RNTody10h ago

Hahaha yeah trust the CEO suit over the actual developers making the games. Good one.

Show all comments (24)
100°

Every PlayStation Studios game available now on Windows PC

Windows Central writes: "Many PlayStation Studios games that are ported to PC get dedicated PS5 DualSense support, which allows users to experience haptic feedback and adaptive trigger support without actually having to own a PS5.

According to Hermen Hulst, head of PlayStation Studios, it's still the company's intent to launch the bigger single-player games on PS5 first, before later bringing the games to PC. This might not be the case for multiplayer games however, which are considered okay to launch simultaneously on console and PC."

Read Full Story >>
windowscentral.com
Create Report !X

Add Report

Reports

+ Updates (1)- Updates (1)

Updates

Changed from Pending to Approved
Community1d 13h ago
ocelot071d 19h ago

My guess is after god of war. Probably last of us 2 that's a almost 4 year old game now and by the time it's released on pc it will be more than 4 years old or close to 5.

Elda1d 13h ago

Every old Playstation game that is now on PC.

shinoff21831d 3h ago

Right. I definitely see what a headlined from a website named windows central was trying to do though. It's cute little wordplay to help out the green box

Flewid6381d 2h ago

Are PlayStation games no longer good or worth playing once they are old?

Elda1d 1h ago

I'm guessing my comment went over your head.

XiNatsuDragnel1d 11h ago

Good at least they can sell hardware

220°

Former Activision studio Toys for Bob partners with Xbox to publish its first game as an indie

Former Activision studio Toys for Bob partners with Xbox to publish its first game as an indie. This is something of a homecoming, as Microsoft owns Activision.

Read Full Story >>
engadget.com
Create Report !X

Add Report

Reports

+ Updates (1)- Updates (1)

Updates

Changed from Pending to Approved
Community2d ago
Obscure_Observer2d ago

Very very early in development. Still, fantastic news!

Let´s GO!!!

Lightning772d ago

I guess.

How come they didnt either let them go or sell Tango and others to another publisher? Not saying Ubisoft, EA would be any better. (Capcome would of treated them right )

At least it wouldn't be MS of all ppl destroying them.

MS really should let go Tango go like they did TFB here.

darthv722d ago (Edited 2d ago )

one was under Bethesda (Tango) the other under Activision (TFB). Clearly each one handled the separations of their subordinates differently.

Obscure_Observer2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

"How come they didnt either let them go or sell Tango and others to another publisher? Not saying Ubisoft, EA would be any better. (Capcome would of treated them right )"

Perhaps because Zenimax and ABK handles such matters differently based on their own internal policies as "independent" publishers.

Whoever, chances are it´s simply because MS didn´t wanted Tango or Austin to be acquired by competitors and develop new bangers for them, giving MS a bad rep in a possible future. Which could also be the reason why they ensured an exclusive partnership with TFB and its new game, before anyone else.

Sad and disgusting. But it is what it is.

Lightning771d 23h ago (Edited 1d 23h ago )

"Whoever, chances are it´s simply because MS didn´t wanted Tango or Austin to be acquired by competitors and develop new bangers for them, giving MS a bad rep in a possible future."

MS has a bad rep now because those studios are no more. I rather them sell the studio continue to make multiplatform releases, while MS continues to focus on whatever they're doing. If they didn't want Tango around they should separated from them or sell them to, like they did TFB.

It's inexcusable, they have options on how to handle studios they don't want anymore with killing jobs. Not just MS but the rest of the industry also.

Sad and disgusting sure how many will get shut down next year or this year even?

I don't trust MS decisions and motivations at this point. You have to admit they make one dumb move after another.

Obscure_Observer1d 15h ago (Edited 1d 15h ago )

"MS has a bad rep now because those studios are no more. I rather them sell the studio continue to make multiplatform releases, while MS continues to focus on whatever they're doing. If they didn't want Tango around they should separated from them or sell them to, like they did TFB."

Imo, MS separated from TFB because they didn´t had a game associated with Xbox yet, unlike Tango.

"I don't trust MS decisions and motivations at this point. You have to admit they make one dumb move after another."

Fair enough. It was indeed an epic dumb move from them to close Tango.

Still, all to be forgotten, like always have. This is not the first time a big publisher shuts down a beloved and/or successful studio out of nowhere and certainly won´t be the last. Do you remember Lionhead? Do you remember Evolution Studios? Yeah... both were beloved studios and yet, those companies kill those studios in q blink of an eye and got away with it.

anast1d 13h ago (Edited 1d 13h ago )

The studio boss made some money from this transaction. Once the game releases, the studio will get chopped up.

-Foxtrot2d ago

Manages to buy their freedom especially after all the shit Microsoft has been doing with its studios lately

...

Goes right back to them as partners.

Okaaaaaay...

darthv722d ago

Id venture a guess that TFB working directly with MS was a better outcome than working through Activision to get to MS.

VersusDMC2d ago

From the article...

"Toys for Bob spun out as an indie back in February after Microsoft instituted sweeping layoffs that impacted 86 employees, which was more than half of the staff"

I doubt those 86 employees enjoyed the Microsoft experience over Activisions.

Inverno2d ago

MS shuts down studios because of lack of resources and then helps these guys by giving em resources. Also MS is what forced them to buy their freedom in the first place? What kind of logic 😂

Chevalier1d 21h ago

The best thing is that the company that is worth $3 trillion and owns the company instead of Xbox lacks resources. How the hell does a company worth $3 trillion making a measly $70 billion purchase they 'can't' support. Lol

BlindMango1d 4h ago

The reason they would need to "partner with Microsoft" is simply to make a game that's part of a franchise that Microsoft owns. Meaning they're probably going to make a new Spyro game - they're still an independent studio, but are making a game in a franchise that Microsoft owns. It's kind of like Remedy partnering with Rockstar to be able to make the Max Payne remakes.

shinoff21831d 3h ago

It was probably the deal to get released from Ms

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1d 3h ago
Sciurus_vulgaris2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

Xbox’s gaming division seems to still function as 3 semi-autonomous sub-divisions, Xbox Studios, Bethesda and ABK. The three main sub-divisions can seemingly shut down or build studios and set up partnerships independently. This would explain why Bethesda can recently shutdown studios, while ABK spins off one studio, while building a new one. Plus, Toys for Bob could be spun off by ABK, only to immediately re-partner with Microsoft.

Chevalier1d 21h ago

That's absolutely 💯 BS. Any sane 'autonomous' company would NOT put their games on Gamepass day 1 like COD will lose probably billions.

Also they're all under Xbox game studios so any autonomy is an illusion.

PhillyDonJawn1d 9h ago

No, I'm sure MS can and does step in when they want something done specifically but I'm also sure they let them also work independently

shinoff21831d 3h ago

I highly highly doubt this. Ms controls all. The guys aren't gonna be allowed to just shut something down like that without approval. No way

Elda1d 22h ago

Either a kiddie game or something uninteresting.

Obscure_Observer1d 15h ago

Don´t worry. You won´t be playing it anyway since their next game will possible be a next gen Xbox console game.

Elda1d 14h ago (Edited 1d 14h ago )

Don't worry about my comments.

PhillyDonJawn1d 9h ago

Right probably something like astrobot

romulus231d 9h ago

Nah he said "uninteresting", lots of people are interested in Astro Bot.

Elda1d 7h ago

Never Astro Bot. Astro Bot looks better than any exclusive released on XB this entire generation & believe there hasn't been much.

Asplundh1d 6h ago

Crash 4 was good, so I'm hopeful.

PhillyDonJawn1d 5h ago

Hey you said that about SOT and looks like many ppl on PS is playing it. You also found bugsnax interesting ffs your opinion hold no weight lol.

Elda1d 4h ago (Edited 1d 4h ago )

Bugsnax is BS, tried it & quickly deleted it. It's a game that fits right on Gamepass. PS5 owners that are probably playing the boring SOT you could count on one hand. LMAO!!...don't try to come for me.

PhillyDonJawn1d 2h ago

So you admit bugsnax interested you enough to try? 😂 someone gotta call you out on the foolishness.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1d 2h ago
Show all comments (35)