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.