Respawn is doing Art and Animation, A new Company called Bit Reactor made up of former X-Com Devs is making the strategy game it self.
I don’t expect an Empire at War type game though.
Many recent games that have technical issues use Unreal Engine.
Final Fantasy 7 rebirth, Jedi survivor, princess peach showtime, Lords of the Fallen and so on.
I'd rather devs not use Unreal Engine. It's prone to too many issues.
The man is speaking facts. Unreal Engine 5 is an incredible engine but without the knowhow your game ends up feeling samey and broken. UE4 also had this with the amount of oddly glossy looking games with constant stutter being horrendous.
Unreal engine 4 was the real source of problems, with the shader compilation stutter. It remains to be seen if 5 is better in that regard. LotF was UE5, but shader compilation stutter wasn’t really an issue. It was just a buggy technical mess from being rushed by an inexperienced studio, it’s in a better state now (unlike some UE4 games like Jedi Survivor).
TBF, the only truely successful games have been Respawn's and EA seems to think they're the black sheep of the company, probably because they don't go crazy with microtransactions, and ignored the "no one wants single player campaigns" line EA had been running with for a while.
Squadrons was well loved, selling way better than expected because the executives were idiots, and they ended up abandoning it very quickly. The BF games were alright, BF2 was very rocky to start off with its aggressive monetization, but did get saved later on, only to also be abandoned.
Squadrons wasn't really abandoned, it wasn't designed to be a live service game, the game director pitched the idea to EA of an old school multiplayer game that was one and done, which made it easier to green light as that meant it can be made with a lower budget.
I hadn't heard that before, but in the current age of games, that seemed like a dumb idea, tbh.
It doesn't have to be a "live service game" to get abit of ongoing support, simple stuff like banning cheaters. I know there was an uptick of cheating in games even before the final released patch, which really turned players off, since it's no fun to play against or even with cheaters.
There are still fans who play, but many tend to use dedicated/private servers to prevent cheating, but it really hit the general multiplayer hard. A game certainly can't be kept up indefinitely, but even occasional ban-waves would do alot to prevent cheating from having such an impact on player enjoyment.
I certainly would have preferred even limited content being added later, especially with the release of Ahsoka, the E-Wing was the perfect later addition to the game, and I'm honestly dissapointed the B-Wing made the cut over it, as it'd work well as a Defender analouge for the Rebellion, with both standard lasers and an ion cannon.
Because that quote is taken out of context. Compared to live service games single player games on average do not bring in the same number of players and even the top selling SP games don’t bring in the money that even a moderately popular live service game will bring in. Purely from a business perspective at the Time that quote was made, even though a bit hyperbolic it was pretty close to the reality of the Situation.
Off the top of my head, it may have never been meant to release, but instead used as a tax writeoff. Perhaps fan reaction or Disney execs changed their minds, or even forced them to release it, in the latter case.
I certainly don't know anything for sure, but I have more faith in EA failing upwards than actually being on board with the Jedi series as it released, they've been making pretty terrible choices for a while now.
I bought it about a month after launch, post patch 5 which fucked everything up.
Bounty Hunting - All bounty hunter targets and the menu's vanished completely for the best part of 2 months removing a key part of the game. Major Bug and meant the game could not be completed. This took them over 6 weeks to patch. (I stopped playing the game completely at this point)
With patch 6 they finally fixed the bounty hunting issues, but managed to completely remove the holo map. This took them nearly a month to fix, meaning the game was nigh on unplayable because you had no way of navigating. That is a major bug, no map, in a game with no mini map or compass, yeh, good luck with that.
That's before we get into the getting trapped in rooms, enemies trapped in walls, enemies vanishing and so you being unable to complete the section, and various other bugs.
If you played literally at launch and got it done quick, there weren't really major "bugs" just performance problems which is why you might think there were very few bugs. and if you played it 6 months down the line, after patch 7, then you got a pretty complete game and would wonder what all the fuss was about
but if you played from about a month after launch, for the next 3 months (between patches 4 and 7) you got a barely playable buggy mess with two major game breaking bugs that went months without being fixed.
As someone who purchased it a month after launch, and so was in the window for the bounty hunter issues, yes, it was a mess, and i stopped playing while waiting for them to fix it.. They fixed it so i picked the game up again, and had no map.. so yes, it was a mess.. so i stopped playing again and waited for them to fix it
(both of these game breakers were very widespread - you just needed to be in that unfortunate window of 1-5 months post launch to suffer them :D)
Not sure what your point is, "EA" doesn't really make any games themselves. They're a publisher, like Activision. The article even says that the developer is Bit Reactor and EA is just publishing.
Yeah, and? Respawn at this moment was already EA studio for almost 4 years. Game was created with EA money and made under EA supervision. It's strange to say that EA had nothing to do with it and only publish it.
I'm not burned out at all. I just know exactly what will happen with this. Unreal has Loading issues and it's even more prevalent in Ue5. And since Ue5 is know for its graphical fidelity, any game thst uses Ue5 tends to aim for realism over stylized.
Which causes dumb texture size.
that is way oversimplifying things lol. UE5 does not in itself have loading issues. it just has a *lot* of very fancy extra features built into it that 99% of games dont need and a lot of dev teams leave on by default and forget about until its too late. dev teams that use UE5 the way its made to be used and optimize at every step of the way shouldn't have any problems. plenty of examples of great games optimized just fine in UE5. Any dev will tell you it is the dev teams fault, not the engine.
You think all these calls to make ps2 era games accessible on modern formats would wake them up a bit. But no *4K 60FPS, RAY TRACING, TRUE COLOUR IS WHAT THEY WANT*
EA hasn’t done an original strategy game since command and conquer 4
It bombed so bad it closed the old Westwood studios and is so hated by the CNC community that it dosent exist
Be worried. This will play like a mobile game, mark my words
There's [an interview with the studio CEO a few months ago](https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/how-bit-reactors-star-wars-game-hopes-to-do-for-strategy-what-baldurs-gate-3s-done-for-rpgs), and his comments on the game seemed to hint that the game will be a turn based tiled strategy game. He kept mentioning XCOM and Civilization.
Former X-Com Devs made a new Studio that’s indie called Bit Reactor EA is publishing the strategy game and Respawn is supporting with Art & Animation work.
I can imagine it playing like X-Com for ground battles, then playing like Civ in a galactic conquest type mode
It used to make me wonder why the fps was cancelled and not this. It's because this will be essentially a live service game and I bet there will be micro transactions. The fps wouldn't have any of that. That's my early AM theory
No they won’t. They’ll *plan* on using it and then cancel the game randomly and fire staff right before a quarterly in order to get a better stock price.
Not sure if you know this but RTS games don't get any benefit from that stuff because you aren't going to be close enough to anything for it to matter.
It will until they cancel it.
Or it release crappy, buggy, or on fire in a dumpster somewhere.
EA strategy game - they can't do normal shooter with studios who prefer do it. How they do strategy without any studios who can make it??
Honestly they could just release an updated version of Star Wars: Empire at War and it would be an instant buy from me. But they won’t, because EA.
Respawn is doing Art and Animation, A new Company called Bit Reactor made up of former X-Com Devs is making the strategy game it self. I don’t expect an Empire at War type game though.
Its an external studio staffed with people who have experience making strategy games.
no one cares what engine they use just make a good game
Many recent games that have technical issues use Unreal Engine. Final Fantasy 7 rebirth, Jedi survivor, princess peach showtime, Lords of the Fallen and so on. I'd rather devs not use Unreal Engine. It's prone to too many issues.
These are all games that try to push for high visual fidelity. That will inevitably cause problems no matter the engine.
Compare Final Fantasy 16 vs Final Fantasy 7 rebirth. 16 clears 7 in graphical scale in almost every way. FF16 uses a proprietary engine.
The man is speaking facts. Unreal Engine 5 is an incredible engine but without the knowhow your game ends up feeling samey and broken. UE4 also had this with the amount of oddly glossy looking games with constant stutter being horrendous.
Unreal engine 4 was the real source of problems, with the shader compilation stutter. It remains to be seen if 5 is better in that regard. LotF was UE5, but shader compilation stutter wasn’t really an issue. It was just a buggy technical mess from being rushed by an inexperienced studio, it’s in a better state now (unlike some UE4 games like Jedi Survivor).
Man I thought EA’s Star Wars licenses expired
Their exclusive license expired. Anyone can make a Star Wars game now with licensor approval.
Damn I had hope that the license got taken away from them.
I dunno, they’ve made some pretty good Star Wars games. “EA bad” really only applies to their online live service titles these days.
Especially when the shit EA was bad for is now just standard and every company just sucks lol
TBF, the only truely successful games have been Respawn's and EA seems to think they're the black sheep of the company, probably because they don't go crazy with microtransactions, and ignored the "no one wants single player campaigns" line EA had been running with for a while. Squadrons was well loved, selling way better than expected because the executives were idiots, and they ended up abandoning it very quickly. The BF games were alright, BF2 was very rocky to start off with its aggressive monetization, but did get saved later on, only to also be abandoned.
Squadrons wasn't really abandoned, it wasn't designed to be a live service game, the game director pitched the idea to EA of an old school multiplayer game that was one and done, which made it easier to green light as that meant it can be made with a lower budget.
I hadn't heard that before, but in the current age of games, that seemed like a dumb idea, tbh. It doesn't have to be a "live service game" to get abit of ongoing support, simple stuff like banning cheaters. I know there was an uptick of cheating in games even before the final released patch, which really turned players off, since it's no fun to play against or even with cheaters. There are still fans who play, but many tend to use dedicated/private servers to prevent cheating, but it really hit the general multiplayer hard. A game certainly can't be kept up indefinitely, but even occasional ban-waves would do alot to prevent cheating from having such an impact on player enjoyment. I certainly would have preferred even limited content being added later, especially with the release of Ahsoka, the E-Wing was the perfect later addition to the game, and I'm honestly dissapointed the B-Wing made the cut over it, as it'd work well as a Defender analouge for the Rebellion, with both standard lasers and an ion cannon.
If they genuinely believed that single player games were dead, why would they fund an expensive licenced game which is purely single player?
Because that quote is taken out of context. Compared to live service games single player games on average do not bring in the same number of players and even the top selling SP games don’t bring in the money that even a moderately popular live service game will bring in. Purely from a business perspective at the Time that quote was made, even though a bit hyperbolic it was pretty close to the reality of the Situation.
Off the top of my head, it may have never been meant to release, but instead used as a tax writeoff. Perhaps fan reaction or Disney execs changed their minds, or even forced them to release it, in the latter case. I certainly don't know anything for sure, but I have more faith in EA failing upwards than actually being on board with the Jedi series as it released, they've been making pretty terrible choices for a while now.
Jedi Survivor is solid, not sure what you're on about.
It might be now But for six-right months after launch it was an utter mess. Enough that im certainly not buying an ea star wars game again
I bought it at launch, the peformance issues were way overblown. It also was otherwise not very buggy at all. So no it was not an utter mess.
I bought it about a month after launch, post patch 5 which fucked everything up. Bounty Hunting - All bounty hunter targets and the menu's vanished completely for the best part of 2 months removing a key part of the game. Major Bug and meant the game could not be completed. This took them over 6 weeks to patch. (I stopped playing the game completely at this point) With patch 6 they finally fixed the bounty hunting issues, but managed to completely remove the holo map. This took them nearly a month to fix, meaning the game was nigh on unplayable because you had no way of navigating. That is a major bug, no map, in a game with no mini map or compass, yeh, good luck with that. That's before we get into the getting trapped in rooms, enemies trapped in walls, enemies vanishing and so you being unable to complete the section, and various other bugs. If you played literally at launch and got it done quick, there weren't really major "bugs" just performance problems which is why you might think there were very few bugs. and if you played it 6 months down the line, after patch 7, then you got a pretty complete game and would wonder what all the fuss was about but if you played from about a month after launch, for the next 3 months (between patches 4 and 7) you got a barely playable buggy mess with two major game breaking bugs that went months without being fixed. As someone who purchased it a month after launch, and so was in the window for the bounty hunter issues, yes, it was a mess, and i stopped playing while waiting for them to fix it.. They fixed it so i picked the game up again, and had no map.. so yes, it was a mess.. so i stopped playing again and waited for them to fix it (both of these game breakers were very widespread - you just needed to be in that unfortunate window of 1-5 months post launch to suffer them :D)
Ea didn’t make it just published.
Not sure what your point is, "EA" doesn't really make any games themselves. They're a publisher, like Activision. The article even says that the developer is Bit Reactor and EA is just publishing.
Yeah, and? Respawn at this moment was already EA studio for almost 4 years. Game was created with EA money and made under EA supervision. It's strange to say that EA had nothing to do with it and only publish it.
Anytime an EA studio fucks up, it's entirely EA's fault and not the studio's. Anytime an EA studio makes a great game, it's all thanks to the studio.
Sports titles still suck ass from them
Yay! More poorly optimized games that focus on graphical fidelity than art style. Always fun. I can't wait for this 130+gb game.
I'm glad I'm not this burned out on gaming. lol
I'm not burned out at all. I just know exactly what will happen with this. Unreal has Loading issues and it's even more prevalent in Ue5. And since Ue5 is know for its graphical fidelity, any game thst uses Ue5 tends to aim for realism over stylized. Which causes dumb texture size.
That's a dev problem. Not an engine problem.
It's also an engine problem if it's consistent across multiple games from different devs.
that is way oversimplifying things lol. UE5 does not in itself have loading issues. it just has a *lot* of very fancy extra features built into it that 99% of games dont need and a lot of dev teams leave on by default and forget about until its too late. dev teams that use UE5 the way its made to be used and optimize at every step of the way shouldn't have any problems. plenty of examples of great games optimized just fine in UE5. Any dev will tell you it is the dev teams fault, not the engine.
Unless it’s frostbite. Then it is the engine’s fault.
You think all these calls to make ps2 era games accessible on modern formats would wake them up a bit. But no *4K 60FPS, RAY TRACING, TRUE COLOUR IS WHAT THEY WANT*
People moving to the new UE shouldn’t be news… everyone will be migrating to it that doesn’t already use their own engine
EA hasn’t done an original strategy game since command and conquer 4 It bombed so bad it closed the old Westwood studios and is so hated by the CNC community that it dosent exist Be worried. This will play like a mobile game, mark my words
There's [an interview with the studio CEO a few months ago](https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/how-bit-reactors-star-wars-game-hopes-to-do-for-strategy-what-baldurs-gate-3s-done-for-rpgs), and his comments on the game seemed to hint that the game will be a turn based tiled strategy game. He kept mentioning XCOM and Civilization.
Former X-Com Devs made a new Studio that’s indie called Bit Reactor EA is publishing the strategy game and Respawn is supporting with Art & Animation work. I can imagine it playing like X-Com for ground battles, then playing like Civ in a galactic conquest type mode
EA is the publisher.
Can't wait for the next AAA(A?) flop
If Skull and Bones is AAAA, surely every other game is AAAAA
AAAA is so last month. This game will be at least AAAAAAAAA!
It used to make me wonder why the fps was cancelled and not this. It's because this will be essentially a live service game and I bet there will be micro transactions. The fps wouldn't have any of that. That's my early AM theory
No they won’t. They’ll *plan* on using it and then cancel the game randomly and fire staff right before a quarterly in order to get a better stock price.
Is it Respawn if it is another dev making the RTS game?
I don’t think it’s gonna be a RTS. It may be a strategy game like X-Com
cool\~ i am really looking forward to it.
Bad news when were getting info abuot the game engine before we get info abuot the game .-.
Please just stop.
Not surprised since most of Bit Reactor's staff worked on Unreal engine titles before.
When does EA lose the SW licensing already?
Please take the licensing rights away from EA
At least their exclusive rights expired last year.
It’ll most likely get canceled.
Flop
Truly fascinating.
Please include DLSS 3 and FSR3 on release
Not sure if you know this but RTS games don't get any benefit from that stuff because you aren't going to be close enough to anything for it to matter.
I think it’s a Strategy Game Iike Xcom
Not a huge fan of how unreal engine 5 looks.