Well then similarly you don't take on a massive MMO project without the funds to see it through locked-in.

We cry about studios closing, jobs being lost, but so often the root of the problem in games is bad, bad management.

Yuck! I'm glad I hardly "own" anything on Steam.

Studio 38 may have some financial problems, but they just announced a new MMO to be released in June 2013, Project Copernicus

http://kotaku.com/5911594/a-first-look-at-the-kingdoms-of-amalur-studios-new-mmo

Edit: Homepage

I'm pretty sure defaulting on their state loan probably had something to do with it... It simply looks like bad management at the studio level.
Nvm, it seems we agree.

I don't get how Dragon Age 2 is anything like Kindgom of Amalur from what I played of the demo of the latter. In Dragon age 2, the combat is still very much still pause and play, the central focus of the game is obviously the character interaction and story with the focus on a single city and reusing the same dungoens. Just htat Dragon Age 2 writing wasn't quite good enough for that type of game focus and the city itself was bland and the dungeons were way too repetitive.From what I played of the Kingdom of Alamur, the story was very boring (seemed to be very litle focus on actual choices to me or caring about the characters) and the emphasis was on the real time combat and the rather large MMO like world.

Like it or not, Dragon Age 2 was trying for something very different. It failed but it was I found to be an interesting failure nevertheless.

I played Dragon Age 2 on the console and while there is still pause and play the game feels like it plays better without it imo, what I believed is that bioware tried to turn Dragon Age from a tactical PC RPG like Baldur's Gate to an Action Console RPG like Diablo and if dragon age 3 remains in the latter then I will be upset since we already catered to other games like TorchLight

Calling DA:O tactical is a bit of a laugh, all that meant is that you could pause and queue up a heal spell. Most companions worked fine with their default set ups, the game could be soloed in Nightmare mode (yes, really) by Mages. Pausing so you can place the fireball just where you want is a far cry from tactics...

I played both Dragon Age games on consoles. What difficutly did you play it on? I found hard on Dragon Age 2 to be just as tactical as normal on Draogn Age one.(I put dragon dage 2 on hard cause I heard it was the easier game) If anything Dragon AGe 2's controls were superior than Dragon Age one for moving my characters around and making them stay where I want. In the orignal dragon age I rememer having a difficutl time having my characters stay put verus dragon age 2 and having just an easier time putting them in positions. Dragon Age 2 did depend too much on having enemies appear out of nowhere and not having them all be on the map at the same time though.

But I guess the normal on dragon age 2 can be seen to be trying to be something like Kingdom of Almamur with the normal being able to be played as a simple action rpg. But I'm not sure the same could be said on the harder difficulties about Dragon Age 2. From what I heard Kingdom of Alamur is simple and asy hack and slash even on harder difficutllies. (I relay have no interest in Kindom of Alamur game. It seems like an easy RPG like the fable games but without the humor and good writing of the Fable games)

If anything the combat was like everything else in Dragon age 2 trying to be different but at the same time failing to some degree.

EDIT also like how Orcish gamer said I'm not sure how tacticial the first Dragon Age even was.
Also, I think the manual evne said that normal was meant to be played like an action rpg just focusing on a single character. While the harder difficulties were meant to be more tactical and to using pause more and focusing on pause more.

......OK I will just ask: have any of you ever played dragon age origins on PC since it was the lead SKU platform and the console version was a port?
(note: I played DA:O on console first, but then I played on PC and immediatly saw how better it was on PC and I am not talking in graphics) another note yes I played on normal

only played dragon age on xbox myself and I did hear they made it easier due to the gameplay changes.

have you beaten Golems of Amgarakk and the Darkspawn Chronicles?

Yes, both on Nightmare. The only hard part of Chronicles is Sten.

You probably played on console because, at least with the PC version, at higher difficulty leaving the companions on their own was a very sure way to get killed really fast (Often even before the enemies reach you). And in Nightmare fireball and other area effect spell were useless most of the time.

You can say a lot of thing about DAO (like that a lot of spells/skills were useless while others were way too "useful") but you definitely can't say that at least positioning correctly your characters and having some sort of crowd control wasn't needed. (once again at least for the PC version)

That explains it than why people complained about the combat in DA:O since they were playiing the console version
this

I'm sorry, I played on console and PC both, I saw no tactical difference whatsoever save the ability to zoom out. If anything the shitty view in the console version made it harder, not easier. The PC version was laughably easy. Yes, they had random difficulty spikes, but all that meant was breaking out some injury kits.
Dammit NO! I've played both versions and I'm here to tell you there was almost no difference.

DA:O was stupidly easy and had the barest minimum of tactics or strategy present in it.