Fuck off EA you absolute shower of gobshites
Why? Would do you think EA should do? Release a bad or mediocre game? Release a game which loses money?
When you see a company shutdown a studio, they are not shutting it down because the studio is producing great games customers want. They are shutting it down because the studio's current project is so bad that they think they will save money by shutting it down. Think about that. That means the following statements are true:
1) EA's senior leadership thinks it's better to close down a studio and transfer the project to another studio. This is a very expensive thing to do and it indicates that Visceral's game wasn't fun and wasn't that good. It also means EA's senior leadership doesn't think Visceral could fix its problems.
2) EA basically canceled the current game and asked another studio to salvage what it could and create a new game. That will cost more money then just finishing the game Visceral was working on. Why would EA want to spend more money? The answer is easy. EA's senior leadership thinks the current game would sell poorly and that they would make more money if they made a better game which had better sales.
3) EA has released a lot of games Neogaf has hated. For example, they released Mass Effect: Andromeda and Neogaf savaged that game. I think a lot of the criticism was unfair but still, a lot of people were very angry at EA for releasing it. If EA was willing to release ME: A, what does it say about the quality of the game they canceled? My guess is Neogaf would have savaged it if it had been released because it would have been a mediocre or bad game.
4) I have worked in failed organizations and on bad teams. There are two sides to this story and my guess is a lot of people at Visceral weren't the best. This includes senior managers, middle management, leads and individual contributors. When you have a failed organization, usually the organization failed because the staff failed. Visceral's employees almost certainly bear a lot of the responsibility for the studio closure and solely blaming EA's senior leadership because the team failed is probably unfair.
I think people get scared when they see mass layoffs, closures and firings. I get that because losing a job is painful (its happened to me). The problem is we cannot have it both ways. If companies don't cancel bad games, they get released and then some of us end up wasting our money on them. If good money is thrown after bad, we end up spending more money on bad games and there is less money available for good games.
A good example of this is Duke Nukem Forever. A friend bought it and it sucked. The game development team had over a decade, plenty of money and the game still stunk. It's was so bad a lot of people are mad at Randy Pitchford for releasing it. It would have been better for everyone if the game had been canceled after it had spent 5 years in development.