Slashdot Mirror


EA/BioWare Deal Finalized, Nets EA Ten Franchises

Gamasutra notes that the announced deal, where Electronic Arts was to purchase BioWare/Pandemic, has now been formalized. This arrangement will fold ten new franchises into the EA family, from the just-released Mass Effect all the way back to BioWare's classic titles. "EA Games president Frank Gibeau will oversee both studios within his organization, and BioWare's Ray Muzyka and Greg Zeschuk have each been named as vice presidents of EA and co-general managers of BioWare. Similarly, Pandemic's Andrew Goldman and Josh Resnick have each been named vice presidents of EA and co-general managers of Pandemic, while Greg Borrud has been named vice president of EA and chief production officer of Pandemic Studios. "

24 of 79 comments (clear)

  1. A New 'Mass Effect' Every Year Until You Die! by eldavojohn · · Score: 4, Funny

    Following this announcement, all BioWare and Pandemic developers were ordered to repor t to headquarters for a 10 digit tattoo on their arms and re-EAification. Prepare to learn how to saturate the market with your titles differing by only one digit!

    Christ, for a moment there I thought EA's Battlefield, Medal of Honor & Crysis games were going to have to step it up a notch to compete with these new ... oh wait, nevermind, competition's been purchased. Whew! That was close. Ok, everybody resume average game ideas, and above all nothing risky or extraordinary! Remember, your ideas have to be approved through like seventy levels of command so don't even start with any out of the ordinary stuff we aren't sure will be an instant mediocre game netting us an average profit.

    WoW, I can't wait for Mass Effect 2 through 5 and Mass Effect 2010, 2011, 2012 & 2013. Just imagine the rosters!

    --
    My work here is dung.
  2. I felt a disturbance... by Boogaroo · · Score: 3, Funny

    It was as if millions of gamers cried out and were silenced.

    1. Re:I felt a disturbance... by nick_davison · · Score: 2, Funny

      It was as if millions of gamers cried out and were silenced. You're new to this internet thing, aren't you.
  3. The Collapse Of Microsoft's First Party Support by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Bungie - Was so unhappy working with Microsoft they forced them to let the company become independent and work on any platform they want
    Bizarre - Ended their exclusive Xbox development when they went off to Activision
    Bioware - Ended their exclusive Xbox development when they went off to EA

    That pretty much just leaves Lionhead and Rare as Microsoft's first party Xbox developers. Rare has been a disaster for the money Microsoft paid to acquire the developer. Lionhead has been 'meh'. A decent developer that talks too much about grand plans that continually disappoint in their actual product.

    With these rumors of Microsoft looking to license the Xbox to third party manufacturers you have to wonder if Microsoft is ready to turn their focus away from console hardware and back to Windows gaming.

    1. Re:The Collapse Of Microsoft's First Party Support by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It's even worse than just those three. Mistwalker has turned out to be a disaster with the failures of Blue Dragon and Lost Oddessey. And Epic has sounded very, very pissed off at Microsoft and their online service forcing them to spend six months to a year rewriting UT. Rockstar has tried to hide their frustration and anger at being forced to fit their giant city sized game onto the 360's tiny and smaller than last gen's 7.1GB DVD disks and no standard harddrive.

      With the sudden and rapid death of HD-DVD this week and the almost complete lack of mention of the 360 at CES by Microsoft and the almost complete silence on their 2008 and beyond plans that their enthusiasm for the console market is running out. After six to seven years in the console market and billions in cash to spend if Microsoft was still serious about being competitive they would have never let Bioware go off to EA.

    2. Re:The Collapse Of Microsoft's First Party Support by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Right. I forgot this was Slashdot. I forgot that Microsoft was a total failure of a company. Has cheated to get where it is today, and has been dying for 10 years now, with each new product having fatal flaws that will kill the company.

      Face it. So far Microsoft is in a solid second place, and thanks to the high attach rate and traditional style, probably number one as far as most 3rd party game companies are concerned.

      Can Sony pull it together and do better? sure, it's possible, maybe even likely. Maybe Nintendo will start getting some serious 3rd party development and not the shovelware it seems to be getting.

    3. Re:The Collapse Of Microsoft's First Party Support by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Your arguement boils down to "Xbox is bigger than PS3 now by a large margin overall, but not in countries other than US, UK and Australia". US, UK and Australia make up the bulk of sales for American games anyway. So when Microsoft no longer has those American developers under their tight control, it still doesn't matter because the console has the biggest install base overall right now and will continue to have the biggest install base in the countries where their games will sell most for a long while to come. They're playing a different game now. They have settled in to a good position and now are adjusting to take advantage of that position.

      Also, 5 years down the line we will have a new Xbox because it will be 7 years old by then. We will also probably see a new Nintendo console. The PS3 may stick around for a while, but if you really think developers are waiting for 5 years for the PS3 to catch on and everybody with a PS2 to hop on board, you are sadly mistaken. The PS3 will be weak in comparison to the hardware in the successor to the Xbox 360. The game resets every 5 - 7 years with consoles and everybody starts at zero.

    4. Re:The Collapse Of Microsoft's First Party Support by JebusIsLord · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I dunno... having bought all these game companies in order to build up the 360's installed base, and having succeeded, doesn't it make sense now to sell them off and recoup their costs? They'll still make games for the 360... 3rd parties go to where the gamers are. The PS3 is barely a threat at this juncture, and Wii isn't raking it in for 3rd parties either.

      MS way very agressive early on in aquiring these companies, and it has paid off. Sony would do well to follow their example.

      --
      Jeremy
  4. In related news... by Darth · · Score: 2, Funny

    Bioware announced their next game, expected to be released in early 2010, Madden Effect 2k10.

    --
    Darth --
    Nil Mortifi, Sine Lucre
    1. Re:In related news... by Hitman+Hart · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, it would be Madden Effect 2010. 2K studios uses the "2KX" formula.

  5. Re:I see one plus to this deal by LighterShadeOfBlack · · Score: 5, Funny

    Come on EA, dip into that huge bank account you have and fully fund Baldur's Gate III! You mean Baldur's Gate 2009 (to be released Autumn 2008). Or as it's known internally 'BG2 with facial expressions'. And I've heard rumours of plans for a followup, known only by it's secret codename 'BG2 with facial expressions and realistic grass effects'

    And of course there'll be no more text feedback to read in battles, it'll all be provided by commentary from Andy Gray and Martin Tyler (Americans can insert whoever commentates on whatever games EA whores over there).
    --
    Spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, and stupid comments are intentional.
  6. Re:I see dead player lives by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 2, Funny

    You mean Baldur's Gate 2009 (to be released Autumn 2008). Or as it's known internally 'BG2 with facial expressions'. And I've heard rumours of plans for a followup, known only by it's secret codename 'BG2 with facial expressions and realistic grass effects'

    Is that the one with the Mohawk class of Night Elves?

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  7. Re:I see one plus to this deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    John Madden.

    Or, how I would envision it...

    Madden: You see, Minsc just helped his party out by not being hit and by hitting his enemy. If he can continue doing that, then his party will win the fight.

  8. Re:Like Bioware wasn't already stuck in that rut? by rhombic · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Did you play KOTOR? And KOTOR 2? And you can say with a straight face that Obsidian is "the Honda to their GM"?? Jeezus, KOTOR was a terribly fun game, and ran pretty well on the Xbox. KOTOR 2 ran horribly, had major, game ending bugs, apparently used five year olds as the level designers, and left more plot lines dangling than a daytime soap, and made the Sopranos look like a well-thought out, complete ending. To top it all off, they left all the voice acting to a fantastic, unimplemented ending in the final product, rubbing it in for us. Bioware's not the best ever, but if Bioware is GM, I'd suggest Obsidian is Zastava (maker of the famous Yugo).

    --
    1984 was supposed to be a warning, not an instruction manual.
  9. What a sad day for gaming by 40ozFreak · · Score: 4, Insightful
    And baby Jesus wept.

    That EA is allowed to buy out all their competition rather than be forced to produce top notch titles in an effort to battle over the market is a farce to me. They did it with Madden as well by scooping up the NFL license just as Visual Concepts' ESPN NFL 2k series was starting to show signs of seriously competing with Madden. They can't be allowed to continue doing this. Why would BioWare want this for themselves? Doesn't anyone inside gaming feel that EA needs less help than anyone? Stay independent! Fight the urge to conglomerate!

    1. Re:What a sad day for gaming by blahplusplus · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "That EA is allowed to buy out all their competition rather than be forced to produce top notch titles in an effort to battle over the market is a farce to me"

      I wish people would stop bashing EA, the fact is many of their games are pretty good, even with some bumpy patches here and there (battlefield), The sims series, simcity, Need for speed (almost every god damn one has been and fairly well made). There's other crap for sure, but the fact is you don't get to be top dog if you totally blow. Fact is, EA knows how to play the capitalist game very well, and make lots of money doing it. They know what games sell and produce them.

    2. Re:What a sad day for gaming by Endo13 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      EA is good at marketing, yes. But then so is McDonalds. And despite their insane popularity, there's very few restaurants out there that don't serve better food than McDonalds.

      Out of the dozens of "games" EA has released in the last 5 years, I can count on one hand the ones that were both fun to play and not complete bug-ridden crap. The same cannot be said about the number of stellar franchises they've purchased and subsequently trashed in the same time period. There's reasons people bash EA. Lots of reasons. And they far outnumber the reasons to like them.

      Despite all that, I'm still willing to give them another round to prove they can in fact release something other than turds. Guess we'll just have to wait and see how Warhammer Online and the next BioWare releases turn out. Sadly though, I'm afraid we'll be disappointed.

      --
      There is no -1 Disagree mod. Slashdot.org/faq defines mod options. USE IT.
    3. Re:What a sad day for gaming by LrdDimwit · · Score: 2, Informative

      Perhaps because EA's new CEO used to be involved with these guys who were already running Bioware? He pretty much went EA top manager -> Elevation Partners (owning Bioware) -> running EA.

      So I dunno if I'd call that smart, but that could certainly be one reason. Bioware knows firsthand the guy now running EA. Does that mean EA will magically turn awesome? I think EA's problems will continue as long as they think they'll get good work out of slavedriven employees. But it also means Bioware has personal experience that I don't -- so maybe they know something I don't.

    4. Re:What a sad day for gaming by pokerdad · · Score: 2, Informative

      Why would BioWare want this for themselves?

      The short answer - $

      The long answer - Bioware was founded by three doctors who wanted to develop medical software. Along the way their priorities got shifted and it became a gaming company; this move probably cause some strife as one of the original partners left back in 1997.

      Anyways, for all the success they've had BioWare has always been a pretty small studio, and I can't help but wonder if the thought that they could be much bigger and even that much more successful is what led to them "joining forces" with a private equity fund in 2005.

      In the end Bioware wasn't sold to EA by anyone who cares about video games; it was sold by VG Holding Corp, a branch of the investors Elevation Partners. They undoubtedly looked at the deal only in terms of the cash in hand vs potential earnings by holding on to the company.

      Considering everything that EA gains from this, it was probably much more valuable to them than to the former owners, and as such EA's offer was likely very sweet from the perspective of the sellers.

  10. Obligatory PA post on the subject by ErikTheRed · · Score: 4, Funny
    --

    Help save the critically endangered Blue Iguana
  11. Re:Attach rate counting what? by Tim+C · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Alternatively Wii games, by their nature, may have a higher replay value and greater longevity, leading to fewer sales because why buy more when you're still playing the ones you have?

    From what I've seen of the Wii (= the games my ex has for hers) they're mostly about team/party play and replayable games, with games with a definite beginning, middle and end being in the minority - puzzle games, mini games like Wii Sports, etc.

  12. EA ruins another developer. by syn1kk · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Example 1 - Dungeon Keeper series by Bullfrog:
    "Bullfrog had decided not to do any other RTS of any kind. This decision was in effect the end of Bullfrog as a brand; the company had already been owned by EA for several years, and EA laid off some employees and put the remainder onto other projects such as the Harry Potter line."

    "2004 met the final end of Bullfrog when Electronic Arts combined their side studios into EA UK."

    Lord British - talking about how EA is a ONE TRICK PONY:
    "Richard Garriott: The short explanation was, as they say, fundamental creative differences. If you've seen any of the Ultimas, you know they contain very large virtual worlds, deep story lines and they took me each years to develop. But EA's core business is making sports games, and they've got a machine and a process that does that very, very successfully. Frankly, EA wasn't convinced that the MMOG business model was the way of the future and so that ultimately led to my retirement from EA. In fact, when I left in 2000, I fully anticipated that if EA wasn't interested in MMOGs, that Microsoft or some other big company would dive into this bold new world that we'd opened up and then dominate the market segment. After a year of retirement -- and with no one approaching us -- my brother Robert and I decided to put together a company to create MMOGs that we briefly called Destination Games. "

    1. Re:EA ruins another developer. by syn1kk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Example 3 - Origin Studios:
      "In 1997, they released one of the earliest and most successful graphical MMORPGs, Ultima Online. After this title, Electronic Arts decided that Origin would become an online-only company after the completion of Ultima IX in 1999. However, within a year's time, EA canceled all of Origin's new development projects, including Ultima Online 2, Privateer Online, and Harry Potter Online. Richard Garriott left Origin shortly after and founded Destination Games in 2000."

      Example 4 - Westwood studios:
      "In August 1998, Westwood was acquired by Electronic Arts (EA) for $122.5 million in cash, and at the time Westwood had 5% to 6% of the PC game market.[1]. In response to what was perceived as an unwillingness to maintain the Westwood brand and independence from EA, many long-time employees quit over the next few years. ... One of the last games released by Westwood, Command & Conquer: Renegade ... failed to meet consumer expectations and commercial goals Westwood and EA had set for it. In March of 2003, Westwood Studios (along with EA Pacific) was liquidated by EA and all willing staff were assimilated into EA Los Angeles."

  13. Re:I loved Far Cry, but can't buy Crysis by gameforge · · Score: 2, Informative

    So you toned all of the graphics settings down, for both your drivers and in the game, and with a 2.0GHz dual core and your other specs, you had FPS drops in the DEMO?

    Something else is wrong. Either the demo had some glitch when you tried it or your system is goofed, because I have the real game and ran it on an Athlon 3000+ w/ the same amount of RAM and a whopping Radeon 9800, and after toning the resolution and settings down, it played just fine. Didn't look bad either - I don't recall having to bottom out every setting or anything.

    You have plenty of hardware to play games and make them look pretty good... but the newest games will always try to support the latest hardware features if not a little more than that if you turn all the settings up. If you want gazillions of subdivisions in your curved meshes and a ton of custom shaders, all at 1600x1200 - you're going to need to buy the hardware that can do those things.

    What we don't want is for game makers to require such settings for it to be fun and playable (which was not the case with Crysis). For me, to this day, a handful of NES games are still worth playing occasionally; high performance graphics and fun are entirely independent axes of each other, for most anyway.

    I now have a 2.4GHz Core 2 Quad with 2GB of RAM and a GeForce 8600GTS, and IMO BioShock looked a lot more polished and creative than Crysis - I was very happy with the graphics/performance quality I got out of both games considering my hardware. Still - I'm guessing even with twin 8800 monsters, you're going to hit some slow spots if you turn every last setting as high as it goes.

    As for Crysis, the game... it was really well done, and a lot of fun to play until you get about 1/3 of the way through it, then a glitch shows up for which you end up on Google looking for a sloution - only to find out that you weren't 1/3 of the way through it, but rather that glitch that prevented you from blowing up the big guy was the very last thing to do in the game.

    It was just too short! And the bug at the end COMPLETELY ruined it since (last I checked) they weren't acknowledging it and hadn't made a patch, and the only workaround was to keep reloading and trying not to solve everything the same way until (seemingly at random) it would work.

    I still have no idea what the ending was - I was too pissed off to come back to it for a while, and by then I was into another game.