We’ve covered this in the past that EA really doesn’t know how to treat it’s Star Wars license. Whether this was represented by the failure of Battlefront 2 or the cancellation of Visceral’s Star Wars game, it didn’t matter.
A recent statement from Amy Henning shed some more light on the work that had gone behind the canceled Star Wars game. Specifically, its development process had gotten further than EA had us believe when the game got canned.
Here’s what she had to say in an interview with US Gamer:
But what that meant is we obviously had to take the Frostbite Engine, because there was the internal initiative to make sure that everybody was on the same technology. It was an engine that was made to do first-person shooters not third-person traversal cinematic games. So building all of that third-person platforming and climbing and cover taking and all that stuff into an engine that wasn’t made to do that. We did a lot of foundational work that I think the teams are still benefiting from because it’s a shared engine. But it’s tough when you spend a lot of time doing foundational stuff but then don’t get to go ta-da!
The last part is a bit painful to read. The feeling of putting your hard work into a project, only for not being able to show it when the time’s right.
The main struggle with Visceral’s Star Wars game was adjusting to the Frostbite engine. We’re all familiar with that engine, it’s what EA used in Battlefront 2 as well as the Battlefield titles. Clearly FPS focused, the way the engine was meant to be used.
When it came to a more platforming third-person style of gameplay, of course, it was harder to incorporate something inherently meant for an FPS game like all the others.
The real tragedy was the chance we missed out on with the adventure game getting canned. EA still refuses to acknowledge or learn the importance of single-player games with compelling stories. What’s even worse is that Disney won’t lift a finger to stop it.
Source: US Gamer