EA make a bid to buy Take-Two

Surely there is some kind of monopoly commision that can stop EA swallowing the industry and dragging into oblivion?

Can't wait until we get 4 GTA games a year, GTA 2009 & GTA 2009: Party time, anybody?

:(
 
i've herd a rumour that with the aquisition of take two e.a will be pouring it's resources into the development of better gaming AI code names Skynet!




no i'm not serious
 
snowdog said:
Doesn't matter, ea forced them to release a game not finished by far, all games mentioned were just rushed coz of EA's influence.
If ea didnt influence *** sims I dare to bed there'd be at least 4 times less expansions and a single expansion would include a lot more content.

I mean renember all the problems BF2 has @ launch.
C&C3 too.
I renember C&C 3 had like 4 patches the week after it was released.
Click to expand...

Because EA really rushed the 2 years delayed Crysis. :rolleyes:
BF2 at launch had it's share of issues, no more than any other game; it was quite impressive for a 64player online game.

Some people have issues with EA without actually having much/any knowledge at all. It's a trend to hate EA.
 
snowdog said:
Rubbish, I've played sins V1 for ages: Fine.
Vice, gta 3, SA, etc all V1 for ages: fine.
Same for Cod4 wich I initally finsihed fine on V1.0
HL2 too.
Company of heroes.
Civ4.
etc...

all didn't have major bugs like EA's games, wich were sometimes unplayable as V1.0.
Sure they had small bugs, but they don't really bother me.

San andreas v1.0 is still fine on pc, it's even essential if you want to go on samp or mtasa.
Click to expand...

Couple of those you names ARE Published by EA though. So you're contradicting yourself.
 
Bit more info,

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS (FAQ)

Why does EA want to acquire Take-Two?
We have enormous respect for the creative teams at Take-Two. We think we can provide those teams with a stable creative environment, a strong publishing partner with a global and more comprehensive publishing platform that includes packaged goods, online and wireless, capital to invest in the growth of existing and new game franchises, and a team of executives that know the game industry well. Most of all, we can offer them the creative freedom to do what they do best – make great games.

Why now?
We’ve waited to ensure that our proposal did not disrupt development on GTA IV. The game is scheduled to launch in about two months, which means the core development should be essentially complete.

At the same time, the reorganization of the EA Labels is basically done and our newest studios – BioWare and Pandemic – are settling in. Under the reorganization, creative teams at EA have a new sense of freedom and responsibility. There are more brand-new titles in development today than at any time in our history.

Finally, this is a good time to align our publishing strengths to Take-Two’s game roster. A timely integration would give a big boost to Take-Two’s games that are scheduled for release later this year and for their entire catalog leading into the holidays.

How long has EA been planning to bid on Take-Two?
We have been looking at Take-Two for some time and have been in communication with them on-and-off for about a year. We opened a dialogue to discuss our intention to acquire Take-Two with the company’s management in December and followed up with a formal proposal on February 6th. We made a second proposal on February 19th.

Is this a hostile proposal?
Our proposal is friendly to Take-Two shareholders, developers, partners, and customers. We continue to seek a friendly, negotiated transaction.

Would Take-Two retain its organizational identity?
Take-Two is an organization made up of several extraordinary creative teams at R*, Visual Concepts, Irrational, Firaxis, etc. We’d expect each studio to retain its own unique identity.

Would the R* team be happy at EA?
We think so. We have great respect for the R* leadership team and some of our executives have worked with R* leaders while in previous positions with other companies. We believe EA’s decentralized label organization will be attractive to Take-Two’s creative talent.

With an even larger organization, how will you ensure the quality of the games or implement the improvements that you’ve discussed recently?
We have a very strong team and the human and financial resources to get the job done. Last year, we implemented a decentralized label organization that allows game development teams a lot of creative freedom and responsibility.

Will this interfere with the integration of BioWare and Pandemic?
No. The BioWare and Pandemic teams are working well within EA. It’s still too early to call the transition complete but these creative leaders enjoy a great deal of respect and freedom within the EA system.

Where would Take-Two roll up within EA’s new label structure?
It’s too early to discuss plans for managing and integrating the Take-Two team. What we can say is that EA’s new decentralized structure and Label-based model can give these teams the freedom and responsibility they need to continue making great games.

Do you expect to terminate any Take-Two employees?
We’re not going to begin managing a company until our proposal is accepted and the deal is done. However we have enormous respect for the creative teams at Take-Two and consider their talent to be one of the most attractive elements of this company. We really want to work with these teams.

Do you intend to kill or restrict any of the R* franchises?
We strongly believe that behind all the controversy is a core of great intellectual property and development talent. These titles don’t sell millions because they’re controversial; they sell because they’re great games. We have no plans to change that.

Would you kill 2K Sports?
Any integration starts with our respect for the teams and people that make great games. Beyond that, it’s too early to discuss plans for managing Take-Two.

Would you close Take-Two publishing?
Again, it’s too early to discuss plans for managing Take-Two.

Would you keep Take-Two’s New York headquarters?
R* is based in New York and we have no plans to change that.

What is EA going to do next?
EA has gone through a lot of dynamic change in the past year. The company is full of talented people with plans for making great games. We’re incredibly proud of our creative teams and many blockbuster franchises from EA SPORTS to EA Games, The Sims and EA Casual Entertainment. We’re excited about the recent release of Burnout Paradise and looking forward to the upcoming launch of Army of Two, Warhammer Online, Mercenaries2, Dead Space, Boom Blox, Spore and many more.

* * *
Click to expand...

http://www.eatake2.com/faq.htm

EA to give Microsoft there 50 million back and to release extra DLC content on both platforms :D With a Wii, DS and PSP version of GTA4 to follow in the Autumn.;)
 
Last edited:
snowdog said:
But then again, I sohuldn't comment on this being a pc gamer, I'm just afraid the PC version of GTA IV will never come or will be bugged to hell and poorly coded, like a lot of the EA games usually are, but the Rockstar games really weren't.
Click to expand...

It will be no poorer than the last 3 iterations it got.
EA have nothing to do with the coding either (unless they develop it in-house, primarily their sports series). But of course... let's just blame EA anyway :rolleyes:.
 
NokkonWud said:
Because EA really rushed the 2 years delayed Crysis. :rolleyes:
BF2 at launch had it's share of issues, no more than any other game; it was quite impressive for a 64player online game.

Some people have issues with EA without actually having much/any knowledge at all. It's a trend to hate EA.
Click to expand...

They ruin games imo, eg the decision that the new sim city game shouldn't be made by Maxis was made by a man with some mental disorder imo.

They should never have touched company's like westwood and such.
I have no objection to BF2 being a bad game, but GTA is the better game, and it never needed a patch. EA will ruin the GTA games if they start to have some influence to it.

Crysis could still be released even later, atm the hardware is still too poor for it, and it's just boring.

All I want is that my favourite series, GTA and Civilization, will continue to exist on pc and will be good games.
EA meddling into the affairs of take2 will probably ruin the series.


NokkonWud said:
It will be no poorer than the last 3 iterations it got.
EA have nothing to do with the coding either (unless they develop it in-house, primarily their sports series). But of course... let's just blame EA anyway :rolleyes:.
Click to expand...
How do you know?
Imo SA is the best GTA game of them all, Vice was better than 3, 3 was better than 2, etc...
If ea takes over the stuff, I'm pretty sure IV will be poorer as SA.
Yes they do, they point the finger @ who will code it, in the case of sim city, they've picked the wrong company.
 
Last edited:
If they ruin the new Bioshock - I will go over there myself and slaughter them all :)

I personally dislike EA simply because they drag anything out to scrape up every last penny. Take the Sims expansions for example

EDIT: That really annoys me, its just total greed - the company are huge already... makes me sick tbh
 
Last edited:
What the hell! They made a site. That's just cheeky. Take Two have rejected the offer which I am pleased but now they should take a dump on EAs doorstep.
 
RoachycaL said:
If they ruin the new Bioshock - I will go over there myself and slaughter them all :)
Click to expand...

You get a slap for that, who published System Shock 2? one of the greatest FPS/RPGs ever and 100 times the game that Bioshock turned out to be? Oh right it was EA. God I hate it when it becomes popular to hate a particular company or game, its pitiful.
 
Shamikebab said:
100 times the game that Bioshock turned out to be? Oh right it was EA.
Click to expand...

Dude that isn't fact, its opinion - some people love the game, some hate it. I love it and don't want to see it get ruined.

Its not because its popular - its because it makes me feel sick to think how they just absorb all these smaller companies into their mass of greed.
 
RoachycaL said:
Dude that isn't fact, its opinion - some people love the game, some hate it. I love it and don't want to see it get ruined.

Its not because its popular - its because it makes me feel sick to think how they just absorb all these smaller companies into their mass of crap.
Click to expand...

Was Skate a mass of crap? how about Crysis? or Fifa 08? or Burnout Paradise? or Command and Conquer 3? All these games are high rated by both reviewers and gamers, obviously they have their critics but what game doesn't. EA have produced some damn good games over the last couple of years and will continue to do so in the future, Spore being one example for you.
 
snowdog said:
How do you know?
Imo SA is the best GTA game of them all, Vice was better than 3, 3 was better than 2, etc...
If ea takes over the stuff, I'm pretty sure IV will be poorer as SA.
Yes they do, they point the finger @ who will code it, in the case of sim city, they've picked the wrong company.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying the GAME won't be worse, it could be. My point is, the PC releases for the last 3 versions haven't been great.
 
NokkonWud said:
I'm not saying the GAME won't be worse, it could be. My point is, the PC releases for the last 3 versions haven't been great.
Click to expand...

Got to disagree with you there, apart from a minor issue with GTA3 (which was fixed with the first patch) I haven't had a problem with any of them. The PC versions are easily the superior ones.
 
Shamikebab said:
Was Skate a mass of crap? how about Crysis? or Fifa 08? or Burnout Paradise? or Command and Conquer 3? All these games are high rated by both reviewers and gamers, obviously they have their critics but what game doesn't. EA have produced some damn good games over the last couple of years and will continue to do so in the future, Spore being one example for you.
Click to expand...

I agree those games are good but EA manipulate and change things which should have been left well alone (sims expansions). What I should have said was when companies get "absorbed" they become slaves allmost, forced to do certain things and to bring stuff out as quickly as possible. Look at all these endless NFL games, they just seem to keep appearing from nowhere then dissipate again once a nice gamerscore has been earned.

I can almost gaurentee that if EA were to buy Take-Two, the second Bioshock game would be crap in comparison to the first because EA will force them to bring it out earlier so they can scrape in all those precious precious pennies
 
RoachycaL said:
I agree those games are good but EA manipulate and change things which should have been left well alone (sims expansions). What I should have said was when companies get "absorbed" they become slaves allmost, forced to do certain things and to bring stuff out as quickly as possible. Look at all these endless NFL games, they just seem to keep appearing from nowhere then dissipate again once a nice gamerscore has been earned.

I can almost gaurentee that if EA were to buy Take-Two, the second Bioshock game would be crap in comparison to the first because EA will force them to bring it out earlier so they can scrape in all those precious precious pennies
Click to expand...

What evidence do you have? all the EA sports games are developed in house, and Sims is only given a billion expansions because all the idiots buy it. Games like Spore and Crysis have been delayed for very long periods of time, clearly showing that EA aren't forcing them to 'bring stuff out as quickly as possible'. There is no reason to believe that this takeover would have a negative impact on any new Bioshock games. In fact if you compare System Shock 2 (published by EA) to Bioshock (not published by EA) you could say its a good thing. On this point, EA still own the System Shock license I believe, so its possible we might se a proper sequel to System Shock 2 maybe?
 
Shamikebab said:
What evidence do you have? all the EA sports games are developed in house, and Sims is only given a billion expansions because all the idiots buy it. Games like Spore and Crysis have been delayed for very long periods of time, clearly showing that EA aren't forcing them to 'bring stuff out as quickly as possible'. There is no reason to believe that this takeover would have a negative impact on any new Bioshock games. In fact if you compare System Shock 2 (published by EA) to Bioshock (not published by EA) you could say its a good thing. On this point, EA still own the System Shock license I believe, so its possible we might se a proper sequel to System Shock 2 maybe?
Click to expand...

Why do you insist on bumming this large money bag of a company? I cba to argue anymore but obviously some people have a lot more time on their hands... As other people have said, it would be bad if they bought Take Two - end of. Why pick on my post when you have lots of others to moan about I wonder?
 
NokkonWud said:
I'm not saying the GAME won't be worse, it could be. My point is, the PC releases for the last 3 versions haven't been great.
Click to expand...

For me they have been perfect.
Always no problems, far superior than the console counterparts due to nice mp too.
The ages I've spent messing around in self made destruction derby maps in MTA :SA or roof jumping with mates on VCMP or the catch the president games in SAMP.

I can't see what's wrong with the pc versions, they are stable, perform fine ( no lag, unlike console counterparts, pretty much instant loading times between the islands of vice), never gave me any trouble, look prettier, have MP, are moddable and still have a big community.
The only downside is that they come 6 months later than console version.
On these forums I've heard a lot about GTA 3 not working, but It worked fine for me from the moment I got it, on whatever geforce 2 or 4 card I had back then.

Aside from gta 3, I can't even understand why you say they haven't been great.
They have been the perfect game as far as I'm concerned.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom