Fact check: EA is once again learning the wrong lesson from their failures, claiming that the issue with Dragon Age the Viel guard was that it lacked live service components.

1. Summary of the results

EA CEO Andrew Wilson has indeed attributed Dragon Age: The Veilguard's performance issues to a lack of live-service elements, specifically stating that the game needed "shared-world features and deeper engagement" to resonate with a broader audience ^[1]. This stance is particularly significant given that live services represent 74% of EA's business ^[2]. The game was originally planned to include live-service components before being redirected to a single-player experience ^[2].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

Several important contextual elements are worth noting:

• The Veilguard is considered a "solid game" that demonstrates the continuing viability of single-player experiences ^[3]
• There's a broader industry trend actually moving away from live-service models ^[3]
• EA has a documented history of making controversial changes to game mechanics and monetization strategies ^[4]
• The company has shown patterns of misunderstanding innovation and forcing inappropriate changes to game design ^[5]

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original statement presents a simplified view of a complex situation. Here's what needs to be considered:

• Financial Motivations: EA has a clear financial incentive to push for live-service elements, as they represent three-quarters of their business model ^[2]. This suggests their stance might be driven more by business strategy than game design philosophy.
• Historical Context: While the statement suggests EA is "once again" learning the wrong lesson, it's worth noting that this fits into a larger pattern of EA's approach to game development and monetization ^{[4] [5]}.
• Industry Trends: The statement doesn't acknowledge that while EA is pushing for more live-service elements, the broader gaming industry is actually moving in the opposite direction ^[3], creating an interesting tension between EA's strategy and industry trends.

The situation appears to be less about "learning the wrong lesson" and more about EA pursuing a business strategy that aligns with their revenue model, even if it may conflict with current industry trends and player preferences.