SiggghhhhhhhEA execs seem to reckon Dragon Age: The Veilguard might have been better off keeping its once-planned live-service nonsense, because of course they doWhisper 'We'll bang, ok?' if you feel like you're in danger of being alien-shagging Fortnite, next Mass Effect game.Image credit: EA/BioWare News by Mark Warren Senior Staff Writer Published on Feb. 5, 2025 Yep, it was always going to happen. Dragon Age: The Veilguard, a game that didn't manage to hit EA's targets for it (neither did this year's EA FC, lest we forget), and came from a studio that's since had its staffing slashed is now being suggested as something that might have benefitted from some live-service bollocks by EA's execs.That would indeed likely be something similar to the kinds of live-servicey bits that Veilguard was reportedly once slated to be getting at one point in its lengthy and tumultuous development cycle, before reverting back to single player at least in part because the likes of the studio's whole Anthem debacle proved that just going live-service multiplayer with everything might not be a lisence to print endless cash without incurring any risk.To see this content please enable targeting cookies. "In order to break out beyond the core audience, games need to directly connect to the evolving demand of players who increasingly seek shared world features and deeper engagement alongside high-quality narratives in this beloved category," EA CEO Andrew Wilson said in EA's latest earnings call."Dragon Age had a high-quality launch and was well reviewed by critics and those who played," he continued, just in case you were wondering which game he was likely alluding to with that last comment, "However, it did not resonate with a broad enough audience in this highly competitive market."So, "shared world features", which is definitely a phrase, and "deeper engagement" are the stuff Wilson appears to be suggesting might have helped Veilguard perform better sales-wise here, though that's obviously reading betweeen the lines of what he's said.EA CFO Stuart Canfield's comments during the same call would seem to back that this is a major lesson the publisher's taking from not being able to crow to its money people about a game that might have fared a little better if it'd not had to be rebooted a couple of times mid-development due to leadership flip-flopping on whether to make it a multiplayer thing."Historically, blockbuster storytelling has been the primary way our industry bought beloved IP to players, the CFO 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."So, that's the reasoning being given for those recent BioWare cuts, and it doesn't exactly sound brilliant if you're one of the many Mass Effect fans probably hoping that the next game in that series that's now in the works doesn't come with some live-servicey bits.There's still time though, so we could well see things change, especially given that as of October last year, Wilson sounded pretty behind the whole 'we should play to BioWare's single player storytelling strengths' philosophy which was regularly cited in reference to Veilguard once it flipped back to being single player.