They are getting continued tech support and it is perfectly possible that there is not much more Bioware could say. Its also distinctly possible that they cannot afford to risk people wildly misinterpreting their statements if more detail is supplied.
For more examples, see how you and GTAJJ are responding to my posts.
It is not advisable to refer to a call-out as ad hominem then follow up with a straw man that ignores all that is posted above right after you tried to silence the conversation with the conclusion that you wanted.
The loot issues certainly exist and the fabled loot AI has not manifested. Also they are behind on scheduled product releases. However you still get loot and you still get the other aspects that the game was marketed on and Bioware are still working on fixes.
These are prime conditions for publishers and executives to enforce mandatory crunch (or usually faux-madatory “everyone wants to be here (because they’ll feel guilty if they’re not)” crunch), which is the topic and strangely all these people who want to complain about Anthem are working really, really, really, really hard to ignore that and instead argue for their right to make demands in ignorance.
Indeed, humanity has known the way to assist a broken leg in healing for centuries now, and provided one survives the process it can be mended to an extent simply by surviving and resting it long enough to heal itself. Code left to rest will not repair itself, and will only degrade as systems around it are updated and start to render parts invalid.
Actually what was quite clear is this thread is for discussing crunch and how gamers contribute to crunch culture - Anthem has been used as an example and @GTAJJ has been making repeated off topic arguments in bad faith, so failing at reading comprehension is the kindest possible interpretation.
Of course it is, all evaluations of games are personal opinions - I covered that many posts ago. The difference here is when it comes to a change to kick Anthem, Bioware and EA various people want to insist there is an objective measure of simple details that satisfy whether a game is worth $60.00 US.
If it is reasonable to state that Anthem is not worth $60.00 (and a reminder that even the examples cited agree that it was worth at least $60.00) because of a never before used approach to a mechanic is not working as well as it would imply, it is reasonable to state that The Division was not worth $60.00 due to bland content and a lack of improvement against older products.
So you can have one or the other: Anthem was not worth $60.00 and neither are the majority of AAA games (which makes it a completely unrelated topic that should have it’s own thread/topic) or value is highly relative and outliers like Bloodlines show that sometimes people love even heavily bugged games that fail on multiple promises (in which case the topic of price tag should be dropped, in favour of discussing something on topic). They’re both solid options.
This doesn’t really make sense, but lots of people love playing lots of buggy games. There’s even this event called Games Done Quick these people called “speedrunners” often showcase how bugs can be exploited and the audience donates money to cancer research because they’re so entertained by what’s going on. Bugs are in fact, an inevitable aspect of complex development expected in AAA tier.
And we’re back to off topic strawman.
This is a topic that is about dev crunch and how gamers contribute to it. It’s pretty well established here but I’ll confirm for you:
Gamers/consumers are not responsible for:
- The overall value for money they receive in the end if they buy a game
- Any bugs or issues present within the game
- Creative and project management decisions that lead to the above
- Individual managers and executives enforcing crunch culture
- Internal interactions between those working on the game at different levels
Gamers/consumers are responsible for:
- Assessing whether they consider a game worth buying ahead of time, and weighing up the risks involved if they are buying it without any information (eg preorder)
- How they react to discovering disagreeable aspects such as bugs, failure to meet promises, or unstated expectations
- Their own expectations in regards to creative and technical content, including the likelihood of a thing working exactly like how they imagine or anything Peter Molyneux promises happening
- Their endorsement of and creation of the kind of behavior that allows crunch culture to continue to be a wide spread plague throughout the industry (such as say constantly derailing a thread about crunch culture to insist it has to be agreed by everyone that x game is bad)
- External interactions they make and endorse, such as endorsing a subreddit where it’s clear they celebrate outright insulting and abusing the dev team as the representatives of the entire market, making excuses for the toxic behavior while pretending to care about the developers well being, etc.
- Whether or not they maintain basic courtesy such as not tagging in to further derails, trying to shut down conversation because they just want to insult a publisher, etc.
So, I urge you - as I have urged GTAJJ to take some responsibility for yourself and consider the above before you post again.