Is Bioware to EA the same as Blizzard to Activision?

  • 58 results
  • 1
  • 2
#2 Posted by VisariLoyalist (2991 posts) -

So you like to talk alot about nothing eh? Me to! Let me tell you all of my trumped up opinions about things I barely understand!

#3 Posted by Irvandus (2877 posts) -

I see where you're coming from, but I think it might just be because they work on the same genre of games now with rts being added to Biowares roster.

#4 Posted by Marz (5648 posts) -

no, because Blizzard is still pretty much in control of their development process.

#5 Posted by Vorbis (2750 posts) -

I think Bioware is fast becoming default for "inhouse EA developer" these days. At least Blizzard isn't being forced to make Spider Man games.

#6 Posted by JeanLuc (3579 posts) -

I don't think EA is trying to position C&C: Generals 2 as a "Star Craft killer".

#7 Posted by pw2566ch (480 posts) -

I don't think it's EA trying to be like Activision. I think it's more EA trying new things. The last Command & Conquer pretty much failed. So they need a company that everyone knows to work on the next one and of course I can't think of anyone better than Bioware. For example, Need for Speed hit rock bottom when they brought out Undercover and they tried Need for Speed Shift, but it just wasn't good enough since you had Forza 3 and Gran Turismo 5 out at the same time. So they brought in Criterion to work on Need for Speed Hot Pursuit and that game was a success.

#8 Posted by kingofpeanuts (479 posts) -

@Anwar: No because bioware is owned by EA. Activision and blizzard merged in the Vivendi deal. Vivendi is still the largest shareholder in activision/blizzard. So no, they two different things.

#9 Posted by pw2566ch (480 posts) -

@Vorbis said:

I think Bioware is fast becoming default for "inhouse EA developer" these days. At least Blizzard isn't being forced to make Spider Man games.

Wait. The next Spider-Man is being made by Bioware? I feel bad for them now.

#10 Edited by Vorbis (2750 posts) -

@pw2566ch said:

@Vorbis said:

I think Bioware is fast becoming default for "inhouse EA developer" these days. At least Blizzard isn't being forced to make Spider Man games.

Wait. The next Spider-Man is being made by Bioware? I feel bad for them now.

I meant that Activision is leaving Blizzard alone and not forcing them to expand into genres they have no clue about. EA on the other hand seem to be putting Bioware onto every IP they have.

#11 Posted by Patman99 (1579 posts) -

@pw2566ch said:

@Vorbis said:

I think Bioware is fast becoming default for "inhouse EA developer" these days. At least Blizzard isn't being forced to make Spider Man games.

Wait. The next Spider-Man is being made by Bioware? I feel bad for them now.

No, I think Vorbis meant that the new spiderman game is published by Activision but they are not forcing Blizzard to develop it. In EA's case, they are making Bioware develop a new C&C game (I know that it is a new division of Bioware)

#12 Posted by GunslingerPanda (4710 posts) -

Nah, Activision haven't raped Blizzard into a shell of it's former self yet. Let's try not to forget that it's not Bioware proper working on this game, just some studio that EA slapped the Bioware label on.

#13 Posted by pw2566ch (480 posts) -

@Patman99 said:

@pw2566ch said:

@Vorbis said:

I think Bioware is fast becoming default for "inhouse EA developer" these days. At least Blizzard isn't being forced to make Spider Man games.

Wait. The next Spider-Man is being made by Bioware? I feel bad for them now.

No, I think Vorbis meant that the new spiderman game is published by Activision but they are not forcing Blizzard to develop it. In EA's case, they are making Bioware develop a new C&C game (I know that it is a new division of Bioware)

Oops. That's completely my fault. I knew Spider-Man was published by Activision. I was just not thinking then.

#14 Posted by mordukai (7150 posts) -

@Vorbis said:

@pw2566ch said:

@Vorbis said:

I think Bioware is fast becoming default for "inhouse EA developer" these days. At least Blizzard isn't being forced to make Spider Man games.

Wait. The next Spider-Man is being made by Bioware? I feel bad for them now.

I meant that Activision is leaving Blizzard alone and not forcing them to expand into genres they have no clue about. EA on the other hand seem to be putting Bioware onto every IP they have.

HA! I would love to be there when that ass hole Kotick walks into the Bioware officies and tells them that their next game is Call of Duty related. Activision can just fucking dream of telling Blizzard what to do.

#15 Posted by avidwriter (667 posts) -

Activision and EA are two of the biggest money makers. (Last I heard/read) So it makes sense that EA wants more of Activisions pie. They want to find their "WoW" and the franchises that Activions has.

#16 Posted by SlightConfuse (3963 posts) -

Bioware is a name EA slaps on its studios. Blizzard. Has remanied indipendant

#17 Posted by benjaebe (2783 posts) -

Bioware is just shorthand for any number of EA studios at the moment.

And I wasn't aware that once there was already a successful game in a certain genre no one was able to make games in that genre again.

#18 Posted by pw2566ch (480 posts) -

@Mordukai said:

@Vorbis said:

@pw2566ch said:

@Vorbis said:

I think Bioware is fast becoming default for "inhouse EA developer" these days. At least Blizzard isn't being forced to make Spider Man games.

Wait. The next Spider-Man is being made by Bioware? I feel bad for them now.

I meant that Activision is leaving Blizzard alone and not forcing them to expand into genres they have no clue about. EA on the other hand seem to be putting Bioware onto every IP they have.

HA! I would love to be there when that ass hole Kotick walks into the Bioware officies and tells them that their next game is Call of Duty related. Activision can just fucking dream of telling Blizzard what to do.

I still feel like Activision does have some pull on Blizzard. The main reason being online required for Diablo III. I just can't have that since my internet is not always perfect.

#19 Posted by Jayzilla (2560 posts) -

@slightconfuse said:

Bioware is a name EA slaps on its studios. Blizzard. Has remanied indipendant

Wrong. Ray Muzicka is now one of the top dogs at EA. He co-founded BioWare. BioWare does what it wants. EA doesn't control their creative process. A top dog from BioWare now helps run EA.

#20 Edited by mordukai (7150 posts) -

@pw2566ch said:

@Mordukai said:

@Vorbis said:

@pw2566ch said:

@Vorbis said:

I think Bioware is fast becoming default for "inhouse EA developer" these days. At least Blizzard isn't being forced to make Spider Man games.

Wait. The next Spider-Man is being made by Bioware? I feel bad for them now.

I meant that Activision is leaving Blizzard alone and not forcing them to expand into genres they have no clue about. EA on the other hand seem to be putting Bioware onto every IP they have.

HA! I would love to be there when that ass hole Kotick walks into the Bioware officies and tells them that their next game is Call of Duty related. Activision can just fucking dream of telling Blizzard what to do.

I still feel like Activision does have some pull on Blizzard. The main reason being online required for Diablo III. I just can't have that since my internet is not always perfect.

Wait...Wait...Wait... Diablo III requires you to always be online even for it's SP component? Why don't they just out a big neon sign that says "Please Pirate our Games". Do they really expect everyone to have an ideal connection. It'll start getting real fun when there will be a glitch and people who use internet providers who force a cap on their costumers will start getting downgraded because of that dumb idea.

Ohh well. I am planning on building a PC this winter and the main reason behind it was Diablo 3 but I guess now Activision/Blizzard can just go fuck themselves.

#21 Posted by Dragon_Fire (368 posts) -

Starts reading, looks at what forum I am reading, does a double take then says -

Holy Shit Generals FUCKING 2!

The first game was the shit!

....Now back to the topic...

#22 Posted by ArbitraryWater (11626 posts) -

It's just a renamed Victory Studios, headed by the guy who was behind all of the New World Computing Might and Magic games. Thus, you can be assured that I am probably interested despite the fact that I never had the impression that C&C generals was interesting enough to warrant a sequel.

#23 Posted by Jimbo (9800 posts) -

No not really, not in terms of business relationship or success (Blizz being orders of magnitude more successful than Bioware). I'm sure EA would like them to be, but there's only one Blizzard out there. All EA have managed so far is to tarnish the Bioware brand by having them rush out shit like Dragon Age 2. Blizzard wouldn't (or perhaps even couldn't) have been forced into releasing that game.

#24 Posted by Starfishhunter9 (369 posts) -

@Dragon_Fire said:

Starts reading, looks at what forum I am reading, does a double take then says -

Holy Shit Generals FUCKING 2!

The first game was the shit!

....Now back to the topic...

#25 Posted by Funkydupe (3311 posts) -

BioWare doing an RTS now too? They're a popular developer, maybe they can gain valuable experience from this endeavor. I would have preferred a new C&C as opposed to a sequel, or perhaps something from the ME universe, still... I'm intrigued.

#26 Posted by Simplexity (1382 posts) -

EA should just rename the entire company Bioware, 90% of the game studios EA own has a Bioware title anyways

#27 Posted by Capum15 (4876 posts) -
@Dragon_Fire said:

Starts reading, looks at what forum I am reading, does a double take then says -

Holy Shit Generals FUCKING 2!

The first game was the shit!

....Now back to the topic...

I agree with all of this.

I loved Generals and Zero Hour so damned much, and I still play them once in a while.
#28 Edited by Ghostin (369 posts) -

ROMANCEABLE TANKS!!

#29 Posted by 2HeadedNinja (1599 posts) -
@rebgav said:

@Anwar said:

After trying to defeat MW3 with MoH, BF3, the upcoming TOR(a direct attack against WoW), and now they try to get into the RTS genre. EA is going crazy with their rivarly with Activision. How about trying something new and/or original or just not giving their developers those incredibly hard goals? I'm not trying to dismiss any of EA's and Bioware's games I'm just saying these direct comparisons aren't really helping them.

C&C Generals 2 is being developed by Victory Games, the same guys who have been making it for the past ten months. Being part of EA, Victory Games find themselves rebranded as Bioware Victory but that doesn't mean that anyone from Bioware is involved in the day-to-day development of that game beyond the administrative level. Will it really be a surprise if Bioware Visceral announces Dead Space 3 at E3? Eh, the PC releases will probably be exclusive to Bioware Origin anyway. Bioware Group, part of the EA family.

Ok, this makes MUCH more sense now ... seeing that trailer and the Bioware name attached to is made me go: O_o ... 
#30 Posted by Lucien21 (108 posts) -

Westwood Studios who more or less invented the RTS Genre have been an EA company since 1998.

Command & Conquer has been passed between EA studios ever since. They have now just been re branded as Bioware. Emperor has got new clothes style.

C&C has been fighting with Blizzard since the early 90's in this genre. First with Warcraft and then StarCraft, this is nothing new.

#31 Edited by BabyChooChoo (4395 posts) -

EA: Hey guys, Bioware is cool right? Let's slap that name on everything then everyone will buy it because we know what's hip!

Activision: none of the above

random: I feel like lately, EA is to Activision what AMD was to Intel. They seem to be trying to play catch up most of the time and while they can talk up their achievements all they want, their competition is still outclassing them by a mile.

#32 Edited by Sooty (8082 posts) -

I don't think EA will try and claim C&C:G2 as a StarCraft killer. Why? Because they will look like total fools and it will backfire horrendously.

Nothing is going to take StarCraft down, might as well save some dignity and just release this game quietly without taking silly stabs at the competitor. (unlike what EA did with BF3's advertising)

#33 Posted by AyKay_47 (293 posts) -

@Jayzilla said:

@slightconfuse said:

Bioware is a name EA slaps on its studios. Blizzard. Has remanied indipendant

Wrong. Ray Muzicka is now one of the top dogs at EA. He co-founded BioWare. BioWare does what it wants. EA doesn't control their creative process. A top dog from BioWare now helps run EA.

If you're telling me that it was Muzyka's or Zeschuk's idea to make a goddamn mmo instead of kotor 3 then...well...more like money hungry mutt than top dog.

#34 Posted by TaliciaDragonsong (8698 posts) -

When I think of Blizzard I think fucking amazing games.
When I think Bioware I can only think of how some of my favorite games ever (Mass Effect 1 and Dragon Age 1) turned to a streamlined 'meh, it'll do' experience so fast.
 
Bioware might surprise me again with ME3 or a new Dragon Age, they have impressed me with SWTOR so far but my heart still weeps for the old rpg's they used to make, they were the best.
But hey, I was never a C&C fan, I only liked the Red Alert games, so I'll skip this.
 
Bets on guest units ala Shepard or the Normandy?

#35 Posted by pw2566ch (480 posts) -

@Mordukai said:

@pw2566ch said:

@Mordukai said:

@Vorbis said:

@pw2566ch said:

@Vorbis said:

I think Bioware is fast becoming default for "inhouse EA developer" these days. At least Blizzard isn't being forced to make Spider Man games.

Wait. The next Spider-Man is being made by Bioware? I feel bad for them now.

I meant that Activision is leaving Blizzard alone and not forcing them to expand into genres they have no clue about. EA on the other hand seem to be putting Bioware onto every IP they have.

HA! I would love to be there when that ass hole Kotick walks into the Bioware officies and tells them that their next game is Call of Duty related. Activision can just fucking dream of telling Blizzard what to do.

I still feel like Activision does have some pull on Blizzard. The main reason being online required for Diablo III. I just can't have that since my internet is not always perfect.

Wait...Wait...Wait... Diablo III requires you to always be online even for it's SP component? Why don't they just out a big neon sign that says "Please Pirate our Games". Do they really expect everyone to have an ideal connection. It'll start getting real fun when there will be a glitch and people who use internet providers who force a cap on their costumers will start getting downgraded because of that dumb idea.

Ohh well. I am planning on building a PC this winter and the main reason behind it was Diablo 3 but I guess now Activision/Blizzard can just go fuck themselves.

Yep. Unfortunately it's is true. What's even worse is that one of the creators even said that if you can't connect to Battle.net, then go play another game. Now, I know Diablo III is a great game, but like I said before, my internet connection is never perfect. Maybe twice a day my wireless router will cut off and come back on the next minute. I've tried replacing the router, I've tried replacing the wireless card in my PC, and I even tried having Time Warner's tech come to look at what's wrong and still no fix. I'm just an unlucky guy along with all kinds of other people that can't even get an internet connection in their area.

#36 Posted by AhmadMetallic (18955 posts) -
@slightconfuse said:
Bioware is a name EA slaps on its studios. 
@benjaebe said:

Bioware is just shorthand for any number of EA studios at the moment.

Welp.
#37 Posted by Seppli (10251 posts) -

I'd say EA slaps Bioware on studios being managed by 'the Bioware Doctors'. I don't fault them for that. Also - C&C Generals was the dicktits. Can't see how a C&C Generals 2 is anything but awesome. Especially with Frostbite 2 and the expected levels of destruction and simulation.

#38 Posted by AlexW00d (6236 posts) -

@Anwar said:

and now they try to get into the RTS genre. E

lol

Online
#39 Posted by mordukai (7150 posts) -

@pw2566ch said:

@Mordukai said:

@pw2566ch said:

@Mordukai said:

@Vorbis said:

@pw2566ch said:

@Vorbis said:

I think Bioware is fast becoming default for "inhouse EA developer" these days. At least Blizzard isn't being forced to make Spider Man games.

Wait. The next Spider-Man is being made by Bioware? I feel bad for them now.

I meant that Activision is leaving Blizzard alone and not forcing them to expand into genres they have no clue about. EA on the other hand seem to be putting Bioware onto every IP they have.

HA! I would love to be there when that ass hole Kotick walks into the Bioware officies and tells them that their next game is Call of Duty related. Activision can just fucking dream of telling Blizzard what to do.

I still feel like Activision does have some pull on Blizzard. The main reason being online required for Diablo III. I just can't have that since my internet is not always perfect.

Wait...Wait...Wait... Diablo III requires you to always be online even for it's SP component? Why don't they just out a big neon sign that says "Please Pirate our Games". Do they really expect everyone to have an ideal connection. It'll start getting real fun when there will be a glitch and people who use internet providers who force a cap on their costumers will start getting downgraded because of that dumb idea.

Ohh well. I am planning on building a PC this winter and the main reason behind it was Diablo 3 but I guess now Activision/Blizzard can just go fuck themselves.

Yep. Unfortunately it's is true. What's even worse is that one of the creators even said that if you can't connect to Battle.net, then go play another game. Now, I know Diablo III is a great game, but like I said before, my internet connection is never perfect. Maybe twice a day my wireless router will cut off and come back on the next minute. I've tried replacing the router, I've tried replacing the wireless card in my PC, and I even tried having Time Warner's tech come to look at what's wrong and still no fix. I'm just an unlucky guy along with all kinds of other people that can't even get an internet connection in their area.

Do you have a link to that quote? I just refuse to believe that a respected developer would openly tell gamers without internet connection to go fuck themselves? I mean it's been a while since I played a Bllizard game but isn't Battle.net is only for the MP aspact of the game or do you also need to be connected to it in order to play the SP part.

#40 Posted by Brodehouse (9876 posts) -

I really wish the supposed BioWare fans who do nothing but talk shit about them (for YEARS now) would just go the fuck away.

BioWare means its a studio under the Dr.s Ray and Greg. It doesn't mean it's Casey Hudson's new project.

I guess we have to mature as an industry more before people start learning the names of the project managers and directors, and basing their excitement on that. Right now it's the equivalent of "oh man Universal is making a new movie! Better than Touchstone!"

#41 Edited by mac_n_nina (272 posts) -

@Jayzilla said:

@slightconfuse said:

Bioware is a name EA slaps on its studios. Blizzard. Has remanied indipendant

Wrong. Ray Muzicka is now one of the top dogs at EA. He co-founded BioWare. BioWare does what it wants. EA doesn't control their creative process. A top dog from BioWare now helps run EA.

Ya right. I'm sure it was BioWare's decision without the influence of EA that turned Dragon Age 2 into a hack n slash and tried to make Hawke the next Shepard. I'm sure it was also BioWare's decision with the influence of EA to add multiplayer into Mass Effect 3 and make it and ME2 more shooter oriented. I'm also sure BioWare was dying to make an MMO. My ass. BioWare makes rpgs thats what they're specialty is not hack n slash, not TPS, not online shooters, and not MMOs. EA is trying to take everything that BioWare have done and dumb it down and mainstream it so it can be another generic cash cow. EA finally bought a well received developer and they are anally raping them Jerry Sandusky style.

#42 Posted by Brodehouse (9876 posts) -
@mac_n_nina

@Jayzilla said:

@slightconfuse said:

Bioware is a name EA slaps on its studios. Blizzard. Has remanied indipendant

Wrong. Ray Muzicka is now one of the top dogs at EA. He co-founded BioWare. BioWare does what it wants. EA doesn't control their creative process. A top dog from BioWare now helps run EA.

Ya right. I'm sure it was BioWare's decision without the influence of EA that turned Dragon Age 2 into a hack n slash and tried to make Hawke the next Shepard. I'm sure it was also BioWare's decision with the influence of EA to add multiplayer into Mass Effect 3 and make it and ME2 more shooter oriented. I'm also sure BioWare was dying to make an MMO. My ass. BioWare makes rpgs thats what they're specialty is not hack n slash, not TPS, not online shooters, and not MMOs. EA is trying to take everything that BioWare have done and dumb it down and mainstream it so it can be another generic cash cow. EA finally bought a well received developer and they are anally raping them Jerry Sandusky style.

Developers at BioWare have said in the past that they are not 'about' any specific genre, they just make games that allow them to tell the stories they want to tell. They've come right out and said that they started making RPGs because that was the only genre that let them tell their kind of stories. They have no affinity for D&D; 2.5, just storytelling. You are inventing your own version of reality that conflicts with the people you are ascribing it to.

Also, they looked at putting multiplayer in Mass Effect 1. They already had the idea, they just didn't have the resources to do it.
#43 Posted by mac_n_nina (272 posts) -

@Brodehouse said:

@mac_n_nina

@Jayzilla said:

@slightconfuse said:

Bioware is a name EA slaps on its studios. Blizzard. Has remanied indipendant

Wrong. Ray Muzicka is now one of the top dogs at EA. He co-founded BioWare. BioWare does what it wants. EA doesn't control their creative process. A top dog from BioWare now helps run EA.

Ya right. I'm sure it was BioWare's decision without the influence of EA that turned Dragon Age 2 into a hack n slash and tried to make Hawke the next Shepard. I'm sure it was also BioWare's decision with the influence of EA to add multiplayer into Mass Effect 3 and make it and ME2 more shooter oriented. I'm also sure BioWare was dying to make an MMO. My ass. BioWare makes rpgs thats what they're specialty is not hack n slash, not TPS, not online shooters, and not MMOs. EA is trying to take everything that BioWare have done and dumb it down and mainstream it so it can be another generic cash cow. EA finally bought a well received developer and they are anally raping them Jerry Sandusky style.

Developers at BioWare have said in the past that they are not 'about' any specific genre, they just make games that allow them to tell the stories they want to tell. They've come right out and said that they started making RPGs because that was the only genre that let them tell their kind of stories. They have no affinity for D&D; 2.5, just storytelling. You are inventing your own version of reality that conflicts with the people you are ascribing it to. Also, they looked at putting multiplayer in Mass Effect 1. They already had the idea, they just didn't have the resources to do it.

They said all of that after they were bought out by EA because everyone knew what was going to happen and sure enough it's happening. Trying reading between the lines.

#44 Posted by fenixREVOLUTION (735 posts) -

EA seems to lead Bioware around now, which hasn't been too great for Bioware. Blizzard howere seems to get left alone, because Activision knows those games are going to sell, even if they come out on Blizzard time.

#45 Posted by Brodehouse (9876 posts) -
@mac_n_nina Oh my God, you're not worth talking to.
#46 Posted by Subjugation (4720 posts) -

Why am I getting the distinct impression that I'm one of the only people that enjoyed Generals?

#47 Posted by raiz265 (2238 posts) -

@Subjugation said:

Why am I getting the distinct impression that I'm one of the only people that enjoyed Generals?

Huh?

It was quite popular, I don't get what you're talking about.

#48 Posted by pw2566ch (480 posts) -

@Mordukai said:

@pw2566ch said:

@Mordukai said:

@pw2566ch said:

@Mordukai said:

@Vorbis said:

@pw2566ch said:

@Vorbis said:

I think Bioware is fast becoming default for "inhouse EA developer" these days. At least Blizzard isn't being forced to make Spider Man games.

Wait. The next Spider-Man is being made by Bioware? I feel bad for them now.

I meant that Activision is leaving Blizzard alone and not forcing them to expand into genres they have no clue about. EA on the other hand seem to be putting Bioware onto every IP they have.

HA! I would love to be there when that ass hole Kotick walks into the Bioware officies and tells them that their next game is Call of Duty related. Activision can just fucking dream of telling Blizzard what to do.

I still feel like Activision does have some pull on Blizzard. The main reason being online required for Diablo III. I just can't have that since my internet is not always perfect.

Wait...Wait...Wait... Diablo III requires you to always be online even for it's SP component? Why don't they just out a big neon sign that says "Please Pirate our Games". Do they really expect everyone to have an ideal connection. It'll start getting real fun when there will be a glitch and people who use internet providers who force a cap on their costumers will start getting downgraded because of that dumb idea.

Ohh well. I am planning on building a PC this winter and the main reason behind it was Diablo 3 but I guess now Activision/Blizzard can just go fuck themselves.

Yep. Unfortunately it's is true. What's even worse is that one of the creators even said that if you can't connect to Battle.net, then go play another game. Now, I know Diablo III is a great game, but like I said before, my internet connection is never perfect. Maybe twice a day my wireless router will cut off and come back on the next minute. I've tried replacing the router, I've tried replacing the wireless card in my PC, and I even tried having Time Warner's tech come to look at what's wrong and still no fix. I'm just an unlucky guy along with all kinds of other people that can't even get an internet connection in their area.

Do you have a link to that quote? I just refuse to believe that a respected developer would openly tell gamers without internet connection to go fuck themselves? I mean it's been a while since I played a Bllizard game but isn't Battle.net is only for the MP aspact of the game or do you also need to be connected to it in order to play the SP part.

http://techcrunch.com/2011/08/01/diablo-3-drm-requires-constant-internet-connection-until-you-crack-it-of-course/

The reason why they're doing this is because they don't want any mods or any cheating at all.

#49 Edited by lmenzol (271 posts) -

@VisariLoyalist: @VisariLoyalist said:

So you like to talk alot about nothing eh? Me to! Let me tell you all of my trumped up opinions about things I barely understand!

Me Too!

#50 Posted by lmenzol (271 posts) -

@Vorbis: activision doesn't own blizzard retard theyre joint companies. blizzard does what blizzards wants

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.