EA in a Nutshell

drunkenmaster said:
Realistically best thing to do these days is, new IP, and jump ship before the cash in sequel. It's all well and good hoping and praying the follow up is great but 9/10 games, the follow up is pathetic and the company being lazy and stupid. One good idea, one game, then out of idea's they do stupid things, write a **** story, put no effort in and see a quick buck taking advantage of the games reputation.
Click to expand...

I think Batman Arkham Asylum and Arkham City would be the leading exception there. Developed by Eidos (a British company) one of the last few that still has standards and values when it comes to the games they make.
 
Tyron said:
I wouldn't have thought Valve was the size of a truck tbh.
Click to expand...

It's in terms of advertising. Can you imagine Valve spending as much on advertising as has been spent on Black Ops 2 if Valve were releasing a game as bad as that will be?
 
norm said:
You're missing the point entirely. EA could have quite easily included BTK in the release of BF3, but they purposely withheld it from the game to use as part of a promotion. (Same way they offered early Beta access to BF3 if you bought Medal Of Honor (they never told you at the time it was only 2 days early access, making a completely pointless offer but generated them a lot of sales).

It's this kind of conceited opportunistic behaviour I dislike about EA. They are out to milk the gamer whereever possible. There's no soul or heart in the business any more.

That's the message this video is trying to convey.



No it won't change EAs policies in the short term one bit, but it aims to enlighten people's perception of them, which will hopefully result in less sales for EA, which I assure you will lead to them changing their ways in the long term.
Click to expand...

I think the point is though, EA are all about the money. Nothing new there, they're a company so that is why they exist. The problem is when people continue to buy the rushed, poorly conceived games and all associated DLC, then moan about it. What do people expect EA to do if the cash continues to roll in?
I'm not being cynical - I'd love companies to care about the quality of their product rather than the balance sheet, but that's not how it works (always). The great thing about this is that all you need to do to change the situation is to not buy rubbish. The bad part is that lots of people buy it anyway, either because they can't help themselves because it's the next big thing, or because they don't care as long as they have something to play.
 
I actually just watched the video - don't really agree with the Origin / Steam bit (that's known as competition), but the rest of it seemed fairly spot on!
 
norm said:
No it won't change EAs policies in the short term one bit, but it aims to enlighten people's perception of them, which will hopefully result in less sales for EA, which I assure you will lead to them changing their ways in the long term.
Click to expand...

Of course less sales lead to a change in policies. Thing is though, no one is willing to actually not buy the games from EA, which seems to me to be everyone telling them they don't have a problem with their policies.

Anyway, what I was saying that this video consists of hyperbole. If it had more than a sliver of fact in it then maybe it could be used for productive discussion. You don't get anywhere with lies and you don't use lies to help people make informed purchase decisions, which is what we want. Advertising consists of lies and since when has advertising led to people making informed purchases?

desires said:
It's in terms of advertising. Can you imagine Valve spending as much on advertising as has been spent on Black Ops 2 if Valve were releasing a game as bad as that will be?
Click to expand...

Origin isn't advertising though. It's confusing because Origin isn't advertising and neither is Steam. It's simply competition. It's just an unnecessary dig at Origin which all the Valve fanbois seem to hate.

panyan said:
Exactly!

EA seems to have bought all the competition so that they dont have to innovate! :mad:
Click to expand...

They have bought (and perhaps then wrecked) a bunch of game studios but they haven't bought the competition. Activision, THQ, Ubisoft... they haven't gone anywhere.

R.P.L said:
I actually just watched the video - don't really agree with the Origin / Steam bit (that's known as competition), but the rest of it seemed fairly spot on!
Click to expand...

Exactly. Origin is competition to Steam and I'm not entirely sure why people think that Steam is the best thing ever and should own all of the market. This is why Fanboism is stupid. Do you really want one company controlling everything, just because you made an arbitrary decision that "you like them more"?

[rant]
Prime example close to our hearts on this forum would be AMD. Everyone who buys an Intel processor needs to validate their decision and everyone was so incredibly happy when Bulldozer was a massive flop. AMD is obviously not keeping up with the competition and there would be no good reason to buy one of their processors, but I still don't get why people actively wanted a product to fail like that. Don't people want things like that to get better?
[/rant]

Basically what I'm saying is this is a video made in a Valve game about a Valve competitor and comes across as a pile of hyperbole and fanboi **** without addressing any of the genuine issues in the gaming industry and helping people to make informed purchase decisions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom