Yet the thing to me is that people go on and on about EA. BioWare was a privately owned company. Which means they had no share holders aka no external force on them to "sell". *edit* Nor was there any possible hostile takeover as a privately owned company does not have publicly traded shares... (like EA tried to do with Take 2 Interactive *I think it was Take 2* for around 2 billion .. about the same time they aquired BioWare).
Yet these guys who are obviously intellegent and knew what EA did.. decided to sell their privately owned company for oh with stock options it was a bit over 860 Million USD (you can google the EA aquisition of Bioware.. if you don't remember it when it happened).
From my point of view the "sellers" have to be as much the devil as anything EA did/does.
There was certainly the recent lesson of Mythic, so there could be no claim of confusion from the "real bioware" on EA's motives.
Lando: Lord Vader, what about Leia and the Wookiee?
Darth Vader: They must never again leave this city.
Lando: [outraged] That was never a condition of our agreement, nor was giving Han to this bounty hunter!
Darth Vader: Perhaps you think you're being treated unfairly?
Lando: [after a pause; nervous tone] No.
Darth Vader: Good. You know it would be unfortunate if I had to leave a garrison here.
Lando: [to himself] This deal is getting worse all the time!
later...
Darth Vader: Calrissian. Take the princess and the Wookie to my ship.
Lando: You said they'd be left at the city under my supervision!
Darth Vader: I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further.
No one is saying EA is the devil BECAUSE these guys are retiring. They are saying EA is the devil because they have a proven track record of moving in and forcing changes in the gaming that, although boosting sales,for the short run, often ruin franchises. This is in evidence with DA series and with ME series and with SW:TOR, just to name a few.
EA tends to break or ruin elements of the game so that it will appeal to 'Casual gamers', taking well thought out ideas and complex concepts and dumbing them down to idiotic levels. Sure the company makes money, but it is the equivalent of a rock band allowing their songs to be jinglized to do diaper commercials.
And it is very likely that they are leaving after 5 years precisely because they are sick and tired of all of the changes they were forced to greenlight on their company that they would never EVER have agreed to without EA pushing them through. That can really crush someone's soul. I don't blame them for wanting out after that. I do blame the Corporation that forced them to basically run the franchises into the ground in front of their eyes.
It isn't blind hate. It is very solidly seated in fact and past experience.
That's great and all, but what does that have to do with two old guys retiring?
Yet the thing to me is that people go on and on about EA. BioWare was a privately owned company. Which means they had no share holders aka no external force on them to "sell". *edit* Nor was there any possible hostile takeover as a privately owned company does not have publicly traded shares... (like EA tried to do with Take 2 Interactive *I think it was Take 2* for around 2 billion .. about the same time they aquired BioWare).
That's great and all, but what does that have to do with two old guys retiring?
Origin, Bullfrog, Westwood, now BioWare :|
http://www.destructoid.com/ea-admits-it-blew-it-with-bullfrog-origin-and-westwood-69491.phtml
Defunct
Original HQ in San Mateo, California, moved to Redwood City in 1998.
Origin Systems in Austin, Texas founded in 1983, acquired in 1992, closed in 2004.
Bullfrog Productions in Surrey, England, founded in 1987, acquired in 1995, merged with EA UK and effectively closed in 2001.
EA Baltimore in Baltimore, Maryland, established in 1996 as part of Origin, closed in 2000
EA Seattle in Seattle, Washington, founded in 1982 as Manley & Associates, acquired January 29, 1996, closed in 2002
Maxis in Walnut Creek, California, founded in 1987, acquired in June 1997, folded into Redwood Shores (now Visceral Games) in 2004
Westwood Studios in Las Vegas, Nevada, founded in 1987, acquired from Virgin Interactive Entertainment in August 1998, merged into EA Los Angeles in 2003.
EA Pacific (known for a time as Westwood Pacific) in Irvine, California, formerly part of Virgin Interactive, acquired with Westwood in 1998, closed in 2003
Kesmai (known also as GameStorm), founded in 1981, acquired in 1999, closed in 2001.
DICE Canada in London, Ontario, started in 1998, acquired DICE fully October 2, 2006; closed DICE Canada studio hours later.
EA Japan in Tokyo, Japan, closed due to consolidation; moved under EA Partners model
EA UK in Chertsey, United Kingdom, moved to EA UK in Guildford
EA Chicago in Hoffman Estates, Illinois, founded in 1990 as NuFX, acquired in 2004, closed November 6, 2007.
Pandemic Studios in Los Angeles, California and Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, founded in 1998, acquired October 2007 from Elevation Partners, closed November 17, 2009.
Bright Light, in Guildford, Surrey, formerly EA UK, closed in 2011.
A private company like BioWare 99% of the time has private investors. You don't have to be a publicly traded company to get funding from outsiders. That just means you can issue stock on publicly traded exchanges. So who knows how much stake in BioWare they retained when they got funding and how much pressure those investors put on them to sell to EA.
Well any debt that was held would be matter of public record/disclosure. Especially as it would be part of the aquistion and thus be listed (since EA had to disclose all details of the purchase due to being a publicly traded company).
I don't remember any reference to debt pressure on BioWare. What I do remember is some mention of how EA could help due to their infrastructure and the neon flash of the close to 1 Billion dollars in EA buyout money.
OSI, Mythic and likely Westwood Studios were all in bad financial positions when they went to the devil... BioWare never gave any indication of that. /shrug
I'd kind of recommend that you read the whole thread.
You're doing a horrible job selling your point. And why would people file for bankruptcy before they're in debt? How would they go to a bankruptcy court and work out a way to pay their creditors if they didn't have creditors? Maybe you don't know what bankruptcy is. Though the law in the US has two goals - to protect a debtor by giving him a clean slate, free from creditors claims, and to ensure equitable treatment to creditors who are competing for the debtors assets.
And I did read the thread, and I see a very loose connection. I agree, a lot of probable cause, but still a loose connection.
Well any debt that was held would be matter of public record/disclosure. Especially as it would be part of the aquistion and thus be listed (since EA had to disclose all details of the purchase due to being a publicly traded company).
I always hate it when they tack on multiplayer on every game. ME 3's MP causing the ending to change was a slap in the face to me. If you want to add on MP for the people who like it whatever, but don't require me to play it just to get a "good" ending.
ME3's multiplayer wasn't tacked on, and it was almost universally agreed to be very good to actually great.
Seeing as how you obviously never tried it you're qualified to say it's "tacked on."
That says "I am ready for something new" for sure. Nothing to see here.Dr. Muzyka: "believe strongly in the power of free enterprise to enable sustainable change, so my next 'chapter' will likely focus on an entirely new industry, something exciting, different and frankly downright scary – investing in and mentoring new entrepreneurs, and more specifically, the field of social/impact investing."
Greg Zeschuk: "After nearly twenty years working at BioWare I've decided it's time to move on and pursue something new. This decision isn't without significant pain and regret, but it's also something I know I need to do, for myself and my family. I've reached an unexpected point in my life where I no longer have the passion that I once did for the company, for the games , and for the challenge of creation."
For a single player game, the fact that you had to play MP in order to get certain outcomes at the ending, just plain sucked.
ME 3's MP causing the ending to change was a slap in the face to me. If you want to add on MP for the people who like it whatever, but don't require me to play it just to get a "good" ending.
I doubt EA cares. Look at what Molyneux did. He started how many companies just to sell them to EA and move to a new one?That says "I am ready for something new" for sure. Nothing to see here.
The last sentence could very well be a little jab. No passion anymore, not interested in games. I can only imagine the lifeblood of creativity flowing out in endless meetings with EA trying to justify this or that.
Small dev houses are not as efficient and streamlined and I can only imagine the amuount of meetings that are a part of that process.
I for one would not be surprised if after 2-4 years you see one or both back with some small to medium company. For right now EA is watching what they do and who knows what clause they have in their contracts about competing.
lol, people still believe that? I've never played an ME game and even I know that's incorrect.