EA does give a sh-t about System Shock 3, says PC Gamer UK
by Christopher Grant 
{ Aug 7th 2006 at 9:45AM }
On one shore, PC Gamer magazine interviewed Irrational Games' Ken Levine who said, "One of the reasons I wasn't interested [in System Shock 3] is EA just didn't give a sh-t about that game." O RLY? Well, as part of their newfound desire to not make us hate them so much, Electronic Arts is returning to the critically (if not financially) successful franchise without Irrational (who're busy working on System Shock's spiritual successor Bioshock for their new corporate overlords at Take 2).
At least that is according to PC Gamer's UK variant, who suggest in their September issue that the title will be developed by the team responsible for The Godfather. It's not a really bold guess (EA renewed their trademark earlier this year), but the addition of a developer lends some credence to the claim. Our thoughts:
- Uh, YAY! System Shock is a classic series that never got the attention it deserves.
- Let's hope The Godfather team can manage to get this one completed before the next console generation.
- We're going to get TWO new additions (as it were) to System Shock 2? Very yes.
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Joe @ Aug 7th 2006 10:00AM
Oh, God. I hope that they don't screw this up, but then again, this IS EA.
Giant Food Monster @ Aug 7th 2006 10:08AM
So basically EA is going to bastardize system shock while its creaters are making the real successor in bioshock
MosquitoControl @ Aug 7th 2006 10:15AM
What the hell does that elevator meeting tidbit supposed to tell us?
It's pure page 6 BS, referring to things that no one could possibly know in an attempt to get people talking. Things that may or may not be made up.
Obviously it shows the spy doesn't approve of the decision, and I doubt many people will, but it's still a pointless way of expressing himself.
inlogic @ Aug 7th 2006 10:24AM
"So basically EA is going to bastardize system shock while its creaters are making the real successor in bioshock"
Basically what they did with Medal of Honor after 2025 key members left and founded Infinity Ward and created Call of Duty, in your words, the real successor of the highly wowed Medal of Honor: Allied Assault.
I wonder why most developers don't like EA..
flamer's grill @ Aug 7th 2006 10:33AM
One has to wonder why EA is even bothering. All ten people who played System Shock 2 are already waiting in line to buy BioShock, and will most likely (thanks to news like this) avoid System Shock 3 like the plague.
So, that means the niche audience who loved SS2 will not buy SS3 (or only rent instead of buy) unless SS3 turns out, somehow, to be a great game. Since that chances of that happening are slim, just who is going to buy SS3? SS2 fans will buy bioshock and be happy. No one else even knows this franchise exists.
So creating a bad game from a good franchise will alienate old fans. Casual gamers will see reviews stay away. Sales will be terrible and EA execs will wonder why that time and money wasn't spent on Need for Honor 7 or Medal of Speed 16 and that will be the final rasping wheeze of good gaming at EA.
Markster @ Aug 7th 2006 10:40AM
"Irrational Games' Ken Levine who said, [EA games doesn't care about SS3]. O RLY?"
YA RLY.
If you recall, more specifically Levine's complaints, it's not that EA was not interested in making the game, It's that EA was not interested in devoting the resources necessary to make a *quality* game.
i.e.
System Shock 2 meta score: 92
http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/systemshock2?q=system%20shock
The Godfather meta score: 75
http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ps2/godfather?q=godfather
EA will be perfectly content to make some money on the System Shock name, so long as they can do it cheap.
MosquitoControl @ Aug 7th 2006 10:47AM
"So basically EA is going to bastardize system shock while its creaters are making the real successor in bioshock"
So, when EA does this, you guys condemn it.
Meanwhile everyone seems desperate for Diablo 3 even though its creators are making the real successor in Hellgate: London (which actually looks kind of bad.)
Is it that you guys hate EA, or that you only realize there's a difference in creative forces when the name changes?
Tomas @ Aug 7th 2006 11:39AM
What does that article say about Ultima?
Comtar @ Aug 7th 2006 11:48AM
I'd give a star to MosquitoControl... That's the kind of thing I've been saying about games like Perfect Dark Zero, Final Fantasy X-2, Diablo 3, Devil May Cry 2, Goldeneye: Rogue Agent, and now System Shock 3.
Just cause it's done by the same company who released it before, or it's a sequel to a break through game, doesn't mean it will be as good. Alot of the time it's about having the same programming team, the same people who made it before, making it again.
The only time I've ever seen a great game get a trashy stupid sequel that is crap compared to the original is Deus Ex 2.
decoy @ Aug 7th 2006 12:41PM
I dont think you could pick a worse developer to make the sequal to a hardcore PC game than a crappy console developer. I dont want to even think about what it will be like.
calthaer @ Aug 7th 2006 1:03PM
Sell the license to Irrational - I guarantee it will be a better deal than the bath they're going to take on a sequel.
All the fans of the original(s) certainly realize by now that EA only serves up crap-on-a-stick.
gexecuter @ Aug 7th 2006 1:49PM
Christopher Grant for shame,you must be smoking crack if you think system shock 3 will be any good developed by the godfather team,the system shock series was always good because the original developers put hard work and love trying to push the genre,but EA only wants to make money by riding the Bioshock buzztrain,god i hope this story is false......
dethtoll @ Aug 7th 2006 1:50PM
THERE IS NO GOD
*commits ritual self immolation*
and this after the TRAVESTY that was deus ex: invisible war.
AcceptableRisk @ Aug 7th 2006 2:53PM
Watch this turn out like Theif: Deadly Shadows or Deus Ex: Invisible War, a sodomized and reconstituted property thrown together and pandered to the lowest common denominator. And after the target market hates it because it's clearly just a cash-grab opportunity in the guise of one of our favorite franchises, they'll misinterpret the poor sales as lack of interest and just toss the property aside, a gibbering empty husk of its former self.
Sickening, really.
C. Grant @ Aug 7th 2006 4:12PM
gexecuter: I resist accusing everything EA produces of being crap. Take a case like Spore. Who knows? The GF team could be a bunch of great developers who loved SS1 and 2 and are eager to do right. I'll reserve my final judgement for a later date, until then, the possibility of having two System Shock sequels is appetizing. If EA screws it up, we can judge them accordingly and (hopefully) their low quality product will sell accordingly.
Azerael @ Aug 8th 2006 7:30AM
L-look at you EA... A pathetic creature of meat and bone... panting and sweating as you chug out worthless sequels.
Saxon @ Aug 8th 2006 11:14AM
Spore barely counts towards EA's good nature. Will Wright is a proven cash cow, so why would they go cheap on his projects?
Thanatos @ Aug 8th 2006 1:07PM
This will most likely turn out bad but I'm still hoping for a surprise. Whatever happens, it won't ruin my memories of the first two system shocks, Thief 1 and 2 are still fondly remembered despite the horrible deadly shadows. Ion Storm sucks hard (Daikatana anyone?).
Etheo @ Aug 15th 2006 3:12AM
Here's hoping for two good sequels, but honestly I'm just looking at BioShock. It's good news to me to hear that an actual SS3 might be in production, but if it turns out to be crap I'd condemn EA for all eternity.
aside @ AcceptableRisk: What's wrong with Thief III? Even though I've only played Thief II I gotta say Thief III is better in its gameplay mechanics... then again I guess the Asylum level had my soul already.
GodzillaX8 @ Sep 2nd 2006 10:04PM
I'd still buy it just in the hopes that there will potentially be another game even half as good as System Shock 2