EA’s
CEO
Andrew
Wilson
has
today
attempted
to
explain
the
low
sales
of

Dragon
Age:
The
Veilguard
in
a
frankly
baffling
statement
that
some
outlets
are
reporting
pins
the
blame
on
the
game
not
being
live-service.
Having
read
Wilson’s
comments,
I
don’t
have
a
clue
what
he
was
attempting
to
say.

Speaking
in
an
investor-focused
financial
call,
Wilson
spouted
a
pre-prepared
message
addressing
Dragon
Age:
The
Veilguard
sales.

According
to
EA,
the
game
“engaged”
just
1.5
million
players,
a
full
50%
less
than
they
expected.

Here’s
what
Wilson
had
to
say
about
it:
“In
order
to
break
out
beyond
the
core
audience,
games
need
to
directly
connect
to
the
evolving
demands
of
players
who
increasingly
seek
shared-world
features
and
deeper
engagement
alongside
high-quality
narratives
in
this
beloved
category,”

“Dragon
Age
had
a
high-quality
launch
and
was
well-reviewed
by
critics
and
those
who
played.
However,
it
did
not
resonate
with
a
broad
enough
audience
in
this
highly
competitive
market.”

Reading
the
statement
is
frankly
headache-inducing
as
it’s
a
bunch
of
PR
drivln
that
ultimately
means
very
little.
However,
some
have
reported
that
reading
between
the
lines
seems
to
suggest
that
Wilson
is
blaming
the
game’s
failure
on
it
not
being
a
live-service
title.
I
can
see
where
people
are
getting
this
sentiment,
although
Wilson’s
comments
are
so
vague
that
I
cannot
100%
say
that’s
what
he
was
saying.

If
this
is
indeed
what
Wilson
was
attempting
to
communicate
then
the
situation
becomes
rather
laughable.
You
may
recall
that
it
was
EA
themselves
that
reportedly
backed
the
switch
in
development
which
saw
Dragon
Age:
The
Veilguard
flip
from
a
live-service
RPG
to
a
classic
single-player
experience.
That
was
just
one
of
the
game’s
many
reported
issues
across
a
lengthy
and
seemingly
pot-hole
ridden
development.

However,
it’s
easy
to
understand
why
EA
is
so
live-service
focused
when
you
realise
that
74%
of
their
profits
come
directly
from
live-service
titles.

That
said,
Wilson’s
comments
are
also
rather
idiotic
as
they
ignore
the
massive
success
traditional
singleplayer
RPGs
have
found.
Baldur’s
Gate
3,
The
Witcher
3,
Cyberpunk
2077
and
heaps
more
of
sold
millions
upon
millions
of
copies.
This
has
led
to
commentators
on
various
websites
saying
that
Wilson
is
drawing
the
wrong
conclusions
from
Dragon
Age’s
failure.

As
for
the
game’s
developer
BioWare,

the
company
has
allegedly
been
cut
down
from
200
staff
to
around
100,
with
some
being
moved
to
other
EA
studios
and
others
being
laid
of.
It’s
not
unusual
for
studios
to
get
rid
of
people
after
publishing
a
big
game
(usually
because
for
the
first
stages
of
a
new
production
there’s
nothing
for
certain
employees
to
do)
but
a
50%
drop
in
staff
indicates
bigger
problems.

EA’s
chief
financial
officer
was
asked
directly
about
about
the
reports
of
lay-offs
and
gave
a
typically
vague
reply
that
does
seem
to
confirm
that
at
least
some
people
have
been
shifted
away
from
BioWare.

“Historically,
blockbuster
storytelling
has
been
the
primary
way
our
industry
bought
beloved
IP
to
players,”
Canfield
said.
“The
game’s
financial
performance
highlights
the
evolving
industry
landscape
and
reinforces
the
importance
of
our
actions
to
reallocate
resources
towards
our
most
significant
and
highest
potential
opportunities.”

Personally,
I
played
Dragon
Age:
The
Veilguard
for
around
20
hours
and
it
was…fine.
The
gameplay
was
okay
and
the
overarching
story
was
cool,
but
the
game
suffered
from
weak
dialogue
and
character
writing,
awkward
attempts
at
tackling
deeper
issues,
weird
uses
of
modern
language
and
a
problem
with
pacing
that
destroyed
any
sense
of
urgency.
I
gave
up
after
20
hours,
hence
not
reviewing
it,
but
if
I
had
then
it
would
have
been
a
3
out
of
5
situation,
I
think.
Maybe
even
a
2.5,
depending
on
how
long
the
game
overstayed
its
welcome.
Compared
to
the
wealth
of
terrific
RPGs
on
the
market,
though,
The
Veilguard
has
little
to
offer.