Yeah, I read that when it was posted and I did think to that conversation. I didn't realize they rated so low in the pecking order and I thought that given how much they paid for them as an RPG studio that they'd be higher than that. I think part of the struggles they've had have been more or less related to Frostbite and the fact that EA have made their studios use the engine across all their titles, which kind of made fitting a round peg into a square hole, and I was shocked at how much of their practice was relegated to last-minute finalizing, and like the article, I can't help but wonder how long that could be sustainable for, especially in light of the issues and overhead surrounding Frostbite. And regarding Anthem, now I wonder if that wasn't EA saying, "You know what, fuck it, just make a shooter with Frostbite rather than your costly RPGs that have never worked well with it." And suddenly you have an RPG studio releasing a shooter. It would certainly explain a lot. If Bioware were left to their own devices using what they know and use whatever engine they've wanted, I wonder if they'd still be in this situation. And at the risk of opening another can of worms, I think this is where a union would really come in handy, and from what I've seen over the last year, the sentiment of unionizing has been growing, and maybe they'd help with the support situation. You would think that a studio coming in from a different direction and working on different types of games than the rest of their studios struggling with getting Frostbite to work for them, would need more help not less. The logic behind that decision is baffling. So, a studio well-versed in Frostbite making EA a lot of money would get more support for the engine, meanwhile a studio struggling with it gets left to fend for themselves. Sounds legit.