Penny Arcade - Comic - Nominator

DogDog Registered User, Administrator, Vanilla Staff admin
edited February 12 in The Penny Arcade Hub

imagePenny Arcade - Comic - Nominator

Videogaming-related online strip by Mike Krahulik and Jerry Holkins. Includes news and commentary.

Read the full story here


Unknown User on
NightslyrCambiataAndy JoeMoridin889H3KnucklesKoopahTroopah

Posts

  • ZealousShadZealousShad Registered User regular
    Is it supposed to be 'You played it AT the time' ?

  • dennisdennis Registered User regular
    edited February 12
    Is it supposed to be 'You played it AT the time' ?

    You played it "at" the time wouldn't make as much sense for the joke. Tycho is saying that Gabe played it a lot, hence "all the time". If he just wanted to say Gabe had played it, "You've played it." would probably have been what they'd write.

    dennis on
    H3Knuckles
  • GrendusGrendus Registered User regular
    Anthem is like a pile of wood that EA was trying to use to start a fire. There's a lot of potential, but something is missing. Maybe the wood is still too wet, maybe there isn't enough kindling, maybe it's just missing the spark.

    I actually have high hopes for the rework, as I think it *could* be good. There's a lot to like, it's just not enough to be engaging.

    H3KnucklescB557
  • QuidQuid I don't... what... hnnng Registered User regular
    The teeth in the last panel haunt me.

    RingoKoopahTroopahjoshofalltrades
  • HevachHevach Registered User regular
    Grendus wrote: »
    Anthem is like a pile of wood that EA was trying to use to start a fire. There's a lot of potential, but something is missing. Maybe the wood is still too wet, maybe there isn't enough kindling, maybe it's just missing the spark.

    I actually have high hopes for the rework, as I think it *could* be good. There's a lot to like, it's just not enough to be engaging.

    Oops, turns out the wood is actually asbestos.

  • KredKred Registered User regular
    Hevach wrote: »
    Oops, turns out the wood is actually asbestos.

    Doesn't help that periodically the EA execs wander by and piss on it.

    H3Knuckles
  • dennisdennis Registered User regular
    Quid wrote: »
    The teeth in the last panel haunt me.

    That was an incisive comment.

    H3KnucklesKoopahTroopahjungleroomxBobble
  • Steel AngelSteel Angel Registered User regular
    dennis wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    The teeth in the last panel haunt me.

    That was an incisive comment.

    That pun bites.

    Big Dookie wrote: »
    I found that tilting it doesn't work very well, and once I started jerking it, I got much better results.

    Steam Profile
    3DS: 3454-0268-5595 Battle.net: SteelAngel#1772
    RingodennisKoopahTroopahjungleroomx
  • GrendusGrendus Registered User regular
    Actually, ironically the EA execs were behind the only good part of Anthem. Flight was something they waffled on, but when they gave an exec one of their alpha builds with flight in he basically came back and said "flight will be in the final game".

    EA's execs suck, but they actually take a hands off approach to management in most cases. What they are is demanding - games must make a certain amount of money, they need some form of post-launch monetization usually, etc. Anthem struggled because they had the idea of doing a live service game to cover the post-launch part, but didn't really have a good concept in place for how to do it, and refused to look at case studies from existing MMO's and live service games to see what does and doesn't work. So you wind up with a live service level of core game content, but without the necessary grinding-based milestone content and commitment to core gameplay to handle post launch - the worst of both worlds

    mRahmani
  • RatherDashing89RatherDashing89 Registered User regular
    I mean, EA execs are responsible for the fact that Anthem exists, which is mistake number one. At no point in the game's promotion did I get any indication that anyone was thinking, "here's a game idea I'd really love to make". From day one it has seemed like a mandate to make Destiny (and Destiny money) and if there was a labor of love underneath it all, it certainly didn't come through in the marketing.

    H3Knuckles
  • cB557cB557 voOOP Registered User regular
    Grendus wrote: »
    Anthem is like a pile of wood that EA was trying to use to start a fire. There's a lot of potential, but something is missing. Maybe the wood is still too wet, maybe there isn't enough kindling, maybe it's just missing the spark.

    I actually have high hopes for the rework, as I think it *could* be good. There's a lot to like, it's just not enough to be engaging.
    I probably would've gotten it if I wasn't done with games-as-service shlooters, because playing that Beta, yeah there were some pretty big problems with bugs and encounter design, but the moment I got control of that suit and just hit sprint, it felt better to just move in that game than it feels to have a gunfight in other games. I'm willing to put up with a lot of jank if a game is doing something uniquely well.

  • mRahmanimRahmani DetroitRegistered User regular
    edited February 14
    Kotaku or somebody did a pretty thorough post mortem on what went wrong with Anthem, and as bad as EA can be, it didn't really seem to be their fault. Bioware was given years of time and resources and basically squandered it, until EA finally had to step in and force them to ship something. Most of the blame goes squarely to the Bioware leadership team.

    mRahmani on
    TamerBillcB557Lucascraftfurlion
  • T-DangerT-Danger Registered User regular
    I just saw the first footage of Square-Enix's Outriders, and between that, Anthem and Destiny, I'm starting to think these live service games need to come up with a different setting. The 'Space settlers get stuck on a planet full of hostile enemies and then gain cool powers to fight them off' is already starting to look a bit worn.

    DjiemcB557
  • cB557cB557 voOOP Registered User regular
    T-Danger wrote: »
    I just saw the first footage of Square-Enix's Outriders, and between that, Anthem and Destiny, I'm starting to think these live service games need to come up with a different setting. The 'Space settlers get stuck on a planet full of hostile enemies and then gain cool powers to fight them off' is already starting to look a bit worn.
    I think it's a consequence of trying to make a sci-fi setting where you can be heroic adventurers. For heroic adventurers to be a thing, and specifically heroic ones, not mercenaries or outlaws or other people at the edges of society, you need to have society not be super developed. Otherwise you usually either don't have the sort of unexplored, untamed areas that's you might need adventurers to adventure out into, or you at least have a more formal, structured kind of force better able to handle such a thing. And if you're a sci-fi setting, that implies that your society has had time to develop, or else how did it get this high technology? So the go-to solution for that is to set things after some sort of catastrophe, like an apocalypse or a crashed colony ship or whatever. The civilization develops and gets you that technology, and then the catastrophe happens and leaves the technology but not the civilization. There are other ways one might solve this problem, but something like that is probably the most straightforward one, so we see a lot of it.

    H3KnucklesMoridin889Tofystedeth
  • H3KnucklesH3Knuckles Jack of all interests... ...master of noneRegistered User regular
    edited February 15
    mRahmani wrote: »
    Kotaku or somebody did a pretty thorough post mortem on what went wrong with Anthem, and as bad as EA can be, it didn't really seem to be their fault. Bioware was given years of time and resources and basically squandered it, until EA finally had to step in and force them to ship something. Most of the blame goes squarely to the Bioware leadership team.

    I've said it before, and I'll say it again, after Mass Effect 3 (and maybe Dragon Age: Inquisition, but probably DA2), the Bioware we knew ceased to exist. They've had not just major turnover, but specifically of the upper echelon staff that define the company and its projects, and in such a short time that the new people never really got integrated into the studio's culture (contrast Blizzard, who from Warcraft 3 until around WoW Legion's launch saw a lot of turnover but spread out enough that they maintained a pretty consistent identity). The new fully-integrated EA Bioware may be a good company, but we need to set expectations based on their own successes and failures, not what a very different set of teams did over 5 years ago.

    H3Knuckles on
    If you're curious about my icon; it's an update of the early Lego Castle theme's "Black Falcons" faction.
    camo_sig2-400.png
    TamerBillmRahmaniSorce
  • dennisdennis Registered User regular
    cB557 wrote: »
    And if you're a sci-fi setting, that implies that your society has had time to develop, or else how did it get this high technology?

    e690tbg4ezbb.png

  • SorceSorce Registered User regular
    mRahmani wrote: »
    Kotaku or somebody did a pretty thorough post mortem on what went wrong with Anthem, and as bad as EA can be, it didn't really seem to be their fault. Bioware was given years of time and resources and basically squandered it, until EA finally had to step in and force them to ship something. Most of the blame goes squarely to the Bioware leadership team.
    You also could replace 'Anthem' with 'Andromeda' and still be correct, I think.

    steam_sig.png
    Backloggery. It's totally updated again, I swear!
  • HevachHevach Registered User regular
    mRahmani wrote: »
    Kotaku or somebody did a pretty thorough post mortem on what went wrong with Anthem, and as bad as EA can be, it didn't really seem to be their fault. Bioware was given years of time and resources and basically squandered it, until EA finally had to step in and force them to ship something. Most of the blame goes squarely to the Bioware leadership team.

    Everything I've read also had the flip side: Everything you say is true, but EA was far from blameless. While the project was funded through the roof, nobody from EA was actually clear on what the game was supposed to be until years into development. It changed back and forth between third person and first person more than once, changed from a single player focus to pure multiplayer days before an E3 demo after over four years in development as something different, and then changed to a loot shooter later. Flight was waffled on, causing it to be re-developed from scratch at one point, and Bioware was forced to use the Frostbite engine but didn't get promised new features for the engine so had to work around its limitations in-house (while they had an engine available that actually had those features).

    Bioware's leadership certainly doesn't have clean hands, but EA was chasing trends as they shifted in the winds so that the development process ends up being the game equivalent of embryology recapitulates phylogeny.

Sign In or Register to comment.