EA Shuts Down Visceral

[SolidSnakeUS]

EA just shut down Visceral. Wow, f*** you EA. You really do f***ing kill everything you touch. Bioware next?

Absolutely loved Dead Space 1 and 2.

https://kotaku.com/ea-shuts-down-visceral-games-1819623990?IR=T


So basically, they take all their work and assets to the other studio and then shutdown Visceral, essentially taking any credit away from the workers.

Click to read more...

 

[SpookyTsuki]

Uhhhhhhh. Ok? This is why people hate EA

 

[SniperHF]

Funny thing is I think last thread we were just talking about how not outright terrible EA has been lately

 

[SeidoN]

 

[Bjorn Le]

And apparently Hennig's status with the company is up in the air. EA is completely changing the direction of the Star Wars game they were making, from a linear, single player focused experience to something that sounds like an open world with what sounds significant multiplayer components. Now what I wonder was if this was a decision from EA because they didn't like the direction of from Disney who didn't like the direction.

 

[SpookyTsuki]

Yep. Down goes another potential single player Star Wars game it seems

EA has killed a company every year except one these past 5 years I believe

 

[DrFeelgood]

Been with Visceral for 10 years, today was a rough day.

 

[SniperHF]

And apparently Hennig's status with the company is up in the air. EA is completely changing the direction of the Star Wars game they were making, from a linear, single player focused experience to something that sounds like an open world with what sounds significant multiplayer components.

There was this report floating around a week ago or so:
https://www.techpowerup.com/237892/...ice-microtransactions-tripled-industrys-value
http://info.digitalriver.com/SuperData-Research-Defend-Your-Kingdom.html?utm_source=PR

I'm skeptical of some of the conclusions, for example look up achievement completion rates for achievements even 15% into a game and see how far the amount of players still playing drops through the floor. So I find it hard to believe that dominating percentage of players actually prefer on the whole, games with additional content added over time when they hardly ever play the initial content either.

But there's no doubt the continuous content model is the flavor of the last few and probably next few years. I just think it's to the detriment of most gamers who aren't interested in that stuff.
But the money that can be made from a smaller but still large group of players is real so they are going to exhaust that supply. So it doesn't matter what a majority of players want if a smaller group has the money to push the industry in another direction.

 

[Bjorn Le]

There was this report floating around a week ago or so:
https://www.techpowerup.com/237892/...ice-microtransactions-tripled-industrys-value
http://info.digitalriver.com/SuperData-Research-Defend-Your-Kingdom.html?utm_source=PR

I'm skeptical of some of the conclusions, for example look up achievement completion rates for achievements even 15% into a game and see how far the amount of players still playing drops through the floor. So I find it hard to believe that dominating percentage of players actually prefer on the whole, games with additional content added over time when they hardly ever play the initial content either.

But there's no doubt the continuous content model is the flavor of the last few and probably next few years. I just think it's to the detriment of most gamers who aren't interested in that stuff.
But the money that can be made from a smaller but still large group of players is real so they are going to exhaust that supply. So it doesn't matter what a majority of players want if a smaller group has the money to push the industry in another direction.

For some companies it work. Paradox for instance. But I do agree that the model in general is unsustainable. A lot of the games that seem to be built on this model deliver a poor entry experience, and additional content isn't going to change that. For games like Call of Duty and Battlefield, it doesn't matter right now but one day it will.

I don't agree with their characterization of the PC market either. The PC market is far more digital which means it's a lot easier to compete and offer lower prices. It's no different from any other market where a good is readily accessible with bountiful suppliers. This hurts companies who don't really understand that market and price their products above others. This is a trend that could bite publishers, especially if they transition to a model similar to mobile games.

 

[XX]

And apparently Hennig's status with the company is up in the air. EA is completely changing the direction of the Star Wars game they were making, from a linear, single player focused experience to something that sounds like an open world with what sounds significant multiplayer components. Now what I wonder was if this was a decision from EA because they didn't like the direction of from Disney who didn't like the direction.

This shit is going to be a battle royal game now isn't it? I f***ing hate Disney.

 

[Brownbeard]

I liked Visceral's output better than BioWare's. This sucks.

 

[Commander Clueless]

Son of a....

I was really looking forward to a linear single player Star Wars adventure. EA scrapped it because "not open world enough yo"?

This industry sometimes...

Been with Visceral for 10 years, today was a rough day.

Sorry to hear that man. Best of luck.

Funny thing is I think last thread we were just talking about how not outright terrible EA has been lately

EA is back baby! Woooooougggghhh

 

[Brownbeard]

Been with Visceral for 10 years, today was a rough day.

Didn't see this before. Sorry to hear.

Thanks for Dead Space 1 and 2. (I liked the third one as well, but I seem to be in the minority. I didn't like it as much though.)

 

[syz]

Had a feeling the Star Wars game was going to be the make-or-break moment, but I thought they'd at least manage to get it out the door. Been a long time since Dead Space 2.

 

[XX]

Had a feeling the Star Wars game was going to be the make-or-break moment, but I thought they'd at least manage to get it out the door. Been a long time since Dead Space 2.

Dead Space 2 was a commercial flop, as was 3. Hardline wasn't critically acclaimed but I bet it did okay. The studio isn't blameless, but it is pretty odd for a publisher to kick out their legs and cancel a game like this. Perhaps it wasn't shaping up as they'd imagined?

 

[syz]

Dead Space 2 was a commercial flop, as was 3. Hardline wasn't critically acclaimed but I bet it did okay. The studio isn't blameless, but it is pretty odd for a publisher to kick out their legs and cancel a game like this. Perhaps it wasn't shaping up as they'd imagined?

Probably won't know for a while, but a constant lack of information about a game is usually a red flag. I wasn't paying super close attention to it but literally the only knowledge I have about it is that Amy Hennig was working on it.

 

[KingBran]

Been with Visceral for 10 years, today was a rough day.

Been with a few different game companies that have shut down myself.

The gaming industry is just rough all around. It's so hard to get into because everyone wants to be in it. Then once you are in, you bounce around a lot or your company doesn't last... etc. Games are made, and then new ones are made and people with different talents are hired. Of course there are exceptions here too but it's typically C-level employees that have TONS more security. Anyways, always hate hearing these things.

I finally got out of the industry. As fun as it was, it's just too unpredictable for someone who wanted to settle down.

 

[Osprey]

I hated Dead Space, so I probably wouldn't have liked their Star Wars game, either, but I respect the fact that they were making a single player game and don't like hearing that EA wasn't happy with it being such. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if EA wants the kind of game that they can introduce microtransactions into, like the new Middle-Earth game has, and Visceral wasn't giving them that, so they're changing direction.

 

[SolidSnakeUS]

Been with Visceral for 10 years, today was a rough day.

I'm really sorry to hear that man. Hope you find another good place, and honestly, I hope it's away from EA and Activision (just because, in my opinion, f*** them).

Jason Schreier provided an update:

 

[Bjorn Le]

Been with a few different game companies that have shut down myself.

The gaming industry is just rough all around. It's so hard to get into because everyone wants to be in it. Then once you are in, you bounce around a lot or your company doesn't last... etc. Games are made, and then new ones are made and people with different talents are hired. Of course there are exceptions here too but it's typically C-level employees that have TONS more security. Anyways, always hate hearing these things.

I finally got out of the industry. As fun as it was, it's just too unpredictable for someone who wanted to settle down.

It seems to me that developers who are very close to their publisher (in effect, they are their publisher) are far more stable. I'm thinking of Bethesda, Rockstar, Blizzard, Paradox etc. Of course, not everyone can work for them and I'm sure turnover is not non-existent, but it doesn't necessarily have to be unstable.

I'm really sorry to hear that man. Hope you find another good place, and honestly, I hope it's away from EA and Activision (just because, in my opinion, **** them).

Jason Schreier provided an update:

Doesn't mean it wasn't a part of the discussion however. It didn't sound like this project had any multiplayer component. And if it did, it was not very big. I'm sure EA would use different words to refer to this as well, words that might sound awfully like the statement that was released.

 

[SolidSnakeUS]

Even with the newer news, I still do think EA canned it (or one of the reasons) because of the lack of a MP, or a full MP that is.

 

[DrFeelgood]

I can't really get too specific for NDA reasons but EA has, for a long time, been looking for the kind of game that once released, is played by a core group of people for many years (think the way GTAV currently is). Looking around at the portfolio and looking at how certain things are shoehorned into certain games, it's pretty clear that's what they've been searching for. The only thing to come close to it is Battlefield. While there is demand out there for linear single player games, does that sound like the kind of game EA is looking for, especially from one of, if not the most expensive studio in the company?

With that in mind, this is a very interesting video to watch

 

[XX]

I can't really get too specific for NDA reasons but EA has, for a long time, been looking for the kind of game that once released, is played by a core group of people for many years (think the way GTAV currently is).

Microtransactions. All about that continual revenue stream.

EA games are born to die because they support them for a short period but ultimately ensure that communities cannot form around them by avoiding things user created content + dumping another sequel on that community ASAP. Battlefront is a great example of a game born to die. These games are generally created on a compressed schedule that ensures they aren't quite feature rich enough to live on their own.

Battlefield 4 only came close to this ideal because BF1 wasn't another modern followup + their extensive efforts to fix the game after realizing they had radically damaged the brand.

Titanfall 2 should go F2P and just be a living service game IMO, there has to be zero appetite for another full priced title in that franchise. There isn't much to improve upon either.

 

[SpookyTsuki]

EA isn’t getting a GTA V. They put no heart into their games. And when they do (their studios) they remove it.

 

[MetalheadPenguinsFan]

f*** EA