Here's an equation I've found over the years related to gaming and its quality:
The more creative, innovative and legendary games are those that didn't have much of a budget OR graphics - Grandia, Secret of Mana, Wild ARMs, Final Fantasy, Chrono Trigger, Earthbound. Notice these are all RPGs - these are the ones I've played countless times and are the ones that have more depth, more soul and more meaning to me as a gamer. Your list will most definitely vary from mine.
Now, look at what we have today. The graphics are sharper; things look more life-like and detailed than ever before; but the cost to produce games now has skyrocketted from before. And there's not as much depth and soul to games anymore than compared to when games first started out. There's infinitely more focus on the money end than there is the creativity and innovation.
Doesn't anyone else find it mildly ironic that the closer most games get to being life-like, the shittier they've turned out to be?
Neither EA nor Notch is what's wrong - the main issue is the fact that business aspect has taken more relevance and become overwhelmingly more dominant than the creative, or artistic, aspect of gaming. Greed has consumed this industry and has left it stagnating.
Case in point - in Earthbound, the final boss is a fetus inside a uterus. I'd like to see ANY developer try that in this day and age - there'd be an unending PR shitstorm, especially here in the states. If something like this was to be attempted today, publishers and vocal minorities would have forced it to be cancelled. Yet, the game was one of the best I have ever played, hands down, and I'd recommend it to other people.
iblis666: indie games have to be released by the developer of the game
once it is picked up by a publisher or the developer becomes a publisher it is no longer indie
See, this very precisely illustrates one of the fundamental flaws in this whole conversation: the definition of "indie." I like yours, but I see a flaw. Notch specifically singled out Vlambeer as indie. Vlambeer, as you may know, made Serious Sam: The Random Encounter, which was published by Devolver Digital.
Unless you want to argue that Vlambeer is indie but its games are not - and boy, I don't want to go down that road - I think you can see the problem.
Devoneaux: The same way nobody put a gun to Bioware's head over the ME3 ending.
What is that even supposed to mean?
I just find it kindof odd that much of the escapist staff was getting all bent out of shape over ME3 Fans wanting a new ending to the game, and how game journalists in general seemed content to write them off as entitled brats for having the sheer audacity to disagree vocally with a product they were given, but when people start buying into things like this "indie bundle" and setting possibly harmful trends, I have yet to see anyone even bat an eye, say a single word in regards to things like, say, the dlc for final fantasy, where they purposely and knowingly left it at a cliff hanger so that they could sell you the ending later in DLC.
They sold you a knowingly incomplete product that you'd have to pay even more for complete access without ever even mentioning "hey, you'll need to pay more to see the rest at some point." Never mind how this is taking advantage of a consumers trust in you to provide a proper product, in fact, the only responses we get to things like this are responses similar to the ME3 fiasco. "Yeah well you bought it so deal with it! Stop being so entitled you crybaby!"
Look, this rant got away from me just a tad, but what I am trying to get across is that excusing and enabling bad business practices isn't cool. Yes, we could definitely stand to be more responsible as consumers, but at the same time, publishers and developers could also stand to not try and screw us just because they can.
WyndWalker02: "Journalists" (and I use the term lightly): Twitter isn't a source for news. Stop treating it like it is.
Of course it is, and it's silly to suggest otherwise. Notch isn't just some anonymous indie dev anymore, and he's not just talking to a few friends online when he says things on Twitter. His opinion, for good or ill, carries weight, and people pay attention. It's up to him whether or not he wants to take that into consideration when he speaks, but it's ridiculous to suggest that what he says only "counts" under certain circumstances.
What Notch says doesn't really count under ANY circumstances. If you happen to like Notch, OK, go ahead and listen to him, I choose to, in point of fact, but just because someone gets heard by a lot of people doesn't make what they say important or newsworthy. Compare him to a Kardashian: the only reason what they say is news or they're even treated as a celebrity is because the media chooses to treat them as such, not because the person actually has a reason for being given so much attention.
Notch's statement only had the impact it did, and this thread and ones like it only exist, because journalists chose to take what he said and turn it into news articles. That doesn't actually make it news. If people didn't report on what Notch tweets as if he were a state head saying something of import, then a huge percentage of the people who currently know about the tweet would never have heard of it in the first place. And no one on this planet would be any worse off for the difference.
If Obama was having intercourse on the White House lawn and screaming racial epithets at a state dinner, that would be news. If North Korea suddenly invaded Japan and started announcing planned nuclear strikes on Finland and Botswana, that would be news. "Reporting" on a tongue-in-cheek remark made on twitter, is a slow news day, and the result of trying to make an inflammatory story out of drivel.
Devoneaux: I just find it kindof odd that much of the escapist staff was getting all bent out of shape over ME3 Fans wanting a new ending to the game, and how game journalists in general seemed content to write them off as entitled brats for having the sheer audacity to disagree vocally with a product they were given, but when people start buying into things like this "indie bundle" and setting possibly harmful trends, I have yet to see anyone even bat an eye, say a single word in regards to things like, say, the dlc for final fantasy, where they purposely and knowingly left it at a cliff hanger so that they could sell you the ending later in DLC.
They sold you a knowingly incomplete product that you'd have to pay even more for complete access without ever even mentioning "hey, you'll need to pay more to see the rest at some point." Never mind how this is taking advantage of a consumers trust in you to provide a proper product, in fact, the only responses we get to things like this are responses similar to the ME3 fiasco. "Yeah well you bought it so deal with it! Stop being so entitled you crybaby!"
Look, this rant got away from me just a tad, but what I am trying to get across is that excusing and enabling bad business practices isn't cool. Yes, we could definitely stand to be more responsible as consumers, but at the same time, publishers and developers could also stand to not try and screw us just because they can.
As long as all that matters is the money, you won't see any change to this industry. At all. The same goes for every other industry. Publishers won't change willingly; they'll stick to the formula that gets them the most money and to hell with all other issues. As one George Carlin said, "People need to question things."
Devoneaux: I just find it kindof odd that much of the escapist staff was getting all bent out of shape over ME3 Fans wanting a new ending to the game, and how game journalists in general seemed content to write them off as entitled brats for having the sheer audacity to disagree vocally with a product they were given, but when people start buying into things like this "indie bundle" and setting possibly harmful trends, I have yet to see anyone even bat an eye, say a single word in regards to things like, say, the dlc for final fantasy, where they purposely and knowingly left it at a cliff hanger so that they could sell you the ending later in DLC.
They sold you a knowingly incomplete product that you'd have to pay even more for complete access without ever even mentioning "hey, you'll need to pay more to see the rest at some point." Never mind how this is taking advantage of a consumers trust in you to provide a proper product, in fact, the only responses we get to things like this are responses similar to the ME3 fiasco. "Yeah well you bought it so deal with it! Stop being so entitled you crybaby!"
Look, this rant got away from me just a tad, but what I am trying to get across is that excusing and enabling bad business practices isn't cool. Yes, we could definitely stand to be more responsible as consumers, but at the same time, publishers and developers could also stand to not try and screw us just because they can.
As long as all that matters is the money, you won't see any change to this industry. At all. The same goes for every other industry. Publishers won't change willingly; they'll stick to the formula that gets them the most money and to hell with all other issues. As one George Carlin said, "People need to question things."
And I am in no way arguing against this, I agree. But saying something is somehow okay because nothing is being done about it is just a wrong to me. It smells of making excuses and enabling shoddy behavior.
WyndWalker02: If Obama was having intercourse on the White House lawn and screaming racial epithets at a state dinner, that would be news. If North Korea suddenly invaded Japan and started announcing planned nuclear strikes on Finland and Botswana, that would be news. "Reporting" on a tongue-in-cheek remark made on twitter, is a slow news day, and the result of trying to make an inflammatory story out of drivel.
It was an inflammatory remark, a very direct and pointed accusation leveled at EA by one of the most popular figures in the industry. By your measure, nothing said by anyone in the industry counts as news, because hey, it's just some guy saying some stuff.
Devoneaux: I just find it kindof odd that much of the escapist staff was getting all bent out of shape over ME3 Fans wanting a new ending to the game, and how game journalists in general seemed content to write them off as entitled brats for having the sheer audacity to disagree vocally with a product they were given, but when people start buying into things like this "indie bundle" and setting possibly harmful trends, I have yet to see anyone even bat an eye, say a single word in regards to things like, say, the dlc for final fantasy, where they purposely and knowingly left it at a cliff hanger so that they could sell you the ending later in DLC.
They sold you a knowingly incomplete product that you'd have to pay even more for complete access without ever even mentioning "hey, you'll need to pay more to see the rest at some point." Never mind how this is taking advantage of a consumers trust in you to provide a proper product, in fact, the only responses we get to things like this are responses similar to the ME3 fiasco. "Yeah well you bought it so deal with it! Stop being so entitled you crybaby!"
Look, this rant got away from me just a tad, but what I am trying to get across is that excusing and enabling bad business practices isn't cool. Yes, we could definitely stand to be more responsible as consumers, but at the same time, publishers and developers could also stand to not try and screw us just because they can.
As long as all that matters is the money, you won't see any change to this industry. At all. The same goes for every other industry. Publishers won't change willingly; they'll stick to the formula that gets them the most money and to hell with all other issues. As one George Carlin said, "People need to question things."
And I am in no way arguing against this, I agree. But saying something is somehow okay because nothing is being done about it is just a wrong to me. It smells of making excuses and enabling shoddy behavior.
It's not OK. It's been said elsewhere, I'm sure, but the one thing I remember in regards to this is Alucard from Castlevania: Symphony of the Night saying, "You must always remember, that the only way for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing." This holds true for all aspects of life, gaming industry included. However, in order to combat this kind of power, people of all walks in the gaming community need the wisdom to know what is wrong and how to correct it...and the courage to actually go and do it; and while I see some possessing the wisdom, I don't see many having the courage to go and do it.
Devoneaux: And I am in no way arguing against this, I agree. But saying something is somehow okay because nothing is being done about it is just a wrong to me. It smells of making excuses and enabling shoddy behavior.
But you (and I'm using the royal "you" here) don't want to do anything about it. You want someone else to do something about it for you.
And I still don't understand how you're trying to tie this into ME3, or anything else. I think the call for a new ending to ME3 is silly. I think the accusation that EA is destroying gaming is silly. I don't think EA has anything to do with Final Fantasy but as far as that goes, if you feel like you got bent over by the game, express your displeasure to the company (email, official forum post, whatever, be firm but civil and respectful) and then never by another FF game until you're sure that it's "complete" and satisfactory and all that.
I get that you're not a fan of EA, but there's a big gap between "I don't like EA" and "OMG EA IS RUINING EVERYTHING"
This probably has happened before- but for me.. this is the first time I ever saw a publisher forwardly call out another publisher with a direct insult, if not calling them a name. Ether Notch is brave or he just doesn't care what people make of him after this. Still, really surprised. Most publishers come off with detailed criticism and professional feedback but.. this? Haha it's like a Comedy Central act but real.
OT: EA is doing a horrible job. Even if you don't agree with Notch about EA destroying gaming.. you have to admit EA has a reputation for doing really bad business that tends to tick off customers every time. What's worse is that if their business methods fail, they resort to thinking "We just didn't try hard enough. We'll pull it off with a bigger push next time." Ugh.
But you know, Notch isn't all that perfect ether. No publisher is, and there are things I don't agree with Notch on nor some of the actions he has committed back then (lying, leaving Minecraft behind with nothing to say nor a real reason to- ect.) Still, good to see even some gaming companies themselves dislike EA. After all, EA did win the worst company award of America.
Andy Chalk: I think the accusation that EA is destroying gaming is silly. I don't think EA has anything to do with Final Fantasy but as far as that goes, if you feel like you got bent over by the game, express your displeasure to the company (email, official forum post, whatever, be firm but civil and respectful) and then never by another FF game until you're sure that it's "complete" and satisfactory and all that.
I get that you're not a fan of EA, but there's a big gap between "I don't like EA" and "OMG EA IS RUINING EVERYTHING"
As far as the email/forum/whatever goes - it's meaningless. Corporations that obtain enough money from their products will, at best, notice trends about certain issues in and about the gaming industry, but only to the extent of where it will direct the next best "marketing decision" for profit earning. Expressing displeasure via these means has about enough relevance as voting does in the US - virtually none. Unless you hit them where the money lies, THEN something might happen; however, I've paid enough attention to the social critics of my time (Bill Hicks and George Carlin, to name two) to know that even change brought about in this manner will still likely mean that power will do what it wants in order to stay in power.
And to your point, no - EA is not ruining everything. But something is...and I can betcha that money is a very close tie-in to it. Ever notice that once greed settles in...disaster follows? History can be a powerful tool in learning trends. Or one helluva brick wall to run into when its lessons are ignored.
CrazyCapnMorgan: As long as all that matters is the money, you won't see any change to this industry. At all. The same goes for every other industry. Publishers won't change willingly; they'll stick to the formula that gets them the most money and to hell with all other issues. As one George Carlin said, "People need to question things."
And I am in no way arguing against this, I agree. But saying something is somehow okay because nothing is being done about it is just a wrong to me. It smells of making excuses and enabling shoddy behavior.
It's not OK. It's been said elsewhere, I'm sure, but the one thing I remember in regards to this is Alucard from Castlevania: Symphony of the Night saying, "You must always remember, that the only way for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing." This holds true for all aspects of life, gaming industry included. However, in order to combat this kind of power, people of all walks in the gaming community need the wisdom to know what is wrong and how to correct it...and the courage to actually go and do it; and while I see some possessing the wisdom, I don't see many having the courage to go and do it.
Because, quite frankly, it all sounds pretty damn stupid. "Oh, they're all about the money." Well, gee, it's a business, and business are about making money. The only reason why video games still exist is because they make money.
I honestly don't know what people expect from the gaming industry... I understand the need for reforms, but what sort of a revolution are people hoping to see? Game companies to be willing to lose money on games that only reach niche audiences?
It's like everybody's a hipster, lamenting the days of gaming when it was still underground, and the public perception of video gamers were fat losers, living in their parents' basements, subsiding on a steady diet of Cheetos and Mountain Dew. Because apparently it's better than making a mediocre game that makes a ton of money which is then used to finance other, smaller, niche-appeal games.
Devoneaux: And I am in no way arguing against this, I agree. But saying something is somehow okay because nothing is being done about it is just a wrong to me. It smells of making excuses and enabling shoddy behavior.
But you (and I'm using the royal "you" here) don't want to do anything about it. You want someone else to do something about it for you.
And I still don't understand how you're trying to tie this into ME3, or anything else. I think the call for a new ending to ME3 is silly. I think the accusation that EA is destroying gaming is silly. I don't think EA has anything to do with Final Fantasy but as far as that goes, if you feel like you got bent over by the game, express your displeasure to the company (email, official forum post, whatever, be firm but civil and respectful) and then never by another FF game until you're sure that it's "complete" and satisfactory and all that.
I get that you're not a fan of EA, but there's a big gap between "I don't like EA" and "OMG EA IS RUINING EVERYTHING"
EA had nothing to do with Final fantasy, nor did ME3 have all that much to do with my above point, they were just examples used to highlight what I find to be wrong with our gamer community as well as the archaic and growing-to-be-unnecessary publisher system. while the likes of EA are certainly not destroying us, I still say they are ultimately detrimental to the industry, and we would most certainly be better off without them when the day comes that they are no longer needed to produce "Triple A titles". For the time being, I don't mind their existence so long as they are kept in line. Yet the way certain individuals, not just here, but all over the net act in responce to things like ME3's outrage makes me think that journalists are potentially holding that back. You can argue if ME3 fans should have gotten what they asked for. But as consumers, they had every right to request it. And the borderline demonizing that they had to deal with comes off to me as enfeebling the strength of the consumer. Can we really argue against unfair business practices when there are people with websites and talk shows willing to condemn us, belittle us, and call the legitimacy of our various gripes, concerns and grievances into question?
And I am in no way arguing against this, I agree. But saying something is somehow okay because nothing is being done about it is just a wrong to me. It smells of making excuses and enabling shoddy behavior.
It's not OK. It's been said elsewhere, I'm sure, but the one thing I remember in regards to this is Alucard from Castlevania: Symphony of the Night saying, "You must always remember, that the only way for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing." This holds true for all aspects of life, gaming industry included. However, in order to combat this kind of power, people of all walks in the gaming community need the wisdom to know what is wrong and how to correct it...and the courage to actually go and do it; and while I see some possessing the wisdom, I don't see many having the courage to go and do it.
Because, quite frankly, it all sounds pretty damn stupid. "Oh, they're all about the money." Well, gee, it's a business, and business are about making money. The only reason why video games still exist is because they make money.
I honestly don't know what people expect from the gaming industry... I understand the need for reforms, but what sort of a revolution are people hoping to see? Game companies to be willing to lose money on games that only reach niche audiences?
It's like everybody's a hipster, lamenting the days of gaming when it was still underground, and the public perception of video gamers were fat losers, living in their parents' basements, subsiding on a steady diet of Cheetos and Mountain Dew. Because apparently it's better than making a mediocre game that makes a ton of money which is then used to finance other, smaller, niche-appeal games.
What i'm saying is that having a media willing to excuse, enable, and outright defend bad business practices combined with an apathetic and complacent consumer base will bring nothing but trouble.
Buretsu: Because, quite frankly, it all sounds pretty damn stupid. "Oh, they're all about the money." Well, gee, it's a business, and business are about making money. The only reason why video games still exist is because they make money.
I honestly don't know what people expect from the gaming industry... I understand the need for reforms, but what sort of a revolution are people hoping to see? Game companies to be willing to lose money on games that only reach niche audiences?
It's like everybody's a hipster, lamenting the days of gaming when it was still underground, and the public perception of video gamers were fat losers, living in their parents' basements, subsiding on a steady diet of Cheetos and Mountain Dew. Because apparently it's better than making a mediocre game that makes a ton of money which is then used to finance other, smaller, niche-appeal games.
I don't mind people making money - that's the way the system that we've created works. When games were made back in the day, creativity was more prevalent than the business aspect - and the games reflected that (see my first post to this effect). Now the balance is shifted in the other direction...and the games made reflect that, too. What I'd like to see is games, in general, have more depth, creativity and innovation in their content rather than carbon copying the latest cookie-cutter brown FPS. Games could explore topics and ideas that other mediums can't even hope to touch, and I'd like to see that rather than "Hey, kill this, then go here" droning. Basically, there's more potential to gaming than just competition or a bland, generic story - games before this generation proved that beyond a shadow of a doubt. Greed, however, will not let that happen; thus, a change in the way things are done is required.
Andy Chalk: Nobody's forcing anyone to buy EA's products, or to pay for their "nickel and dime" DLC, or use Origin, or anything else. EA makes a product and offers that product under certain conditions; consumers then choose whether or not they want to lay out their money for it. And millions upon millions of people say "Yes, please."
If anyone in that equation is "destroying" the industry - which, for the record, is absolute nonsense - it's not EA, it's the purchasing public. It's you.
EA doesn't have a gun to anybody's head, and it's the height of ridiculousness to suggest otherwise.
As for Notch's comments, they're beyond disingenuous. "EA is methodically destroying gaming" is not a statement that needs clarification.
Come now, Andy, don't you know by now that if you don't conform to the viciously vocal minority then you're just one of those "mindless sheep" who are "helping EA destroy the industry" and subsequently that's "why we can't have nice things!"
OT: I don't care for EA's business practices any more than most of the other people on this website, but seriously getting angry because they're giving small, low-budget indie games more promotion? That's just pathetic. And holding that opinion simply because Notch said so first is even worse. What reason is there to be angry at EA for this? Because the proceeds aren't going to a charity? Oh no, whatever shall we do! Because it "devalues" the term "indie"? Get off your high horse, that's just a genre now, it has no literal meaning anymore. Braid shouldn't be considered an "indie" game by any rights, what with how much money Mr. Blow sunk into its development.
And I always thought that people wanted more indie developers to be supported by publishers throwing their money at them to make more games. Oh, wait, I guess that only applies if it's not Activision or EA, right?
Devoneaux: The same way nobody put a gun to Bioware's head over the ME3 ending.
What is that even supposed to mean?
I believe he's taking a shot over all of this website's journalists shitting on the "re-take mass effect" thing.
you know, throwing a hissy fit because people were "demanding" bioware change the ending, getting all mad and calling gamers names, saying we were setting the industry back and destroying artistic integrity etc etc. You know, fire and brimstone stuff.
well no one had a gun to bioware's head, so I guess you guys should have just cooled it right? I mean, we weren't invading the offices and taking hostages, there wasn't a GUN to anyone's head.
Maybe practice what you preach?
ah well, still defending EA, at least it's logically consistent eh?
Devoneaux: The same way nobody put a gun to Bioware's head over the ME3 ending.
What is that even supposed to mean?
I believe he's taking a shot over all of this website's journalists shitting on the "re-take mass effect" thing.
you know, throwing a hissy fit because people were "demanding" bioware change the ending, getting all mad and calling gamers names, saying we were setting the industry back and destroying artistic integrity etc etc. You know, fire and brimstone stuff.
It is pretty fucking childish. Like if I demanded that Rosebud shouldn't have been the name of his sled because it didn't logically fit in with what the movie characters were thinking it meant.
well no one had a gun to bioware's head, so I guess you guys should have just cooled it right? I mean, we weren't invading the offices and taking hostages, there wasn't a GUN to anyone's head.
No, there was just a complaint to the FCC. And people trying to donate to charity to buy a new ending.
ah well, still defending EA, at least it's logically consistent eh?
Ah well, still demonizing EA.. At least it's generally coherent..
Mygaffer: Notch is totally right, how horrible that EA is trying to sell an "indie" bundle as EA is the least "indie" publisher out there!
Well, until they are bought by Nexon they 'are' an independant publisher <_<... >_>..
Actually EA is a publicly traded company, so.... But anyway, the indie moniker means a small developer who fiances their own game. Like an "indie" movie. Indie stands for independent, as in independent from the major studio system or the large publishers like Activision/Blizzard, EA, Ubisoft, etc.
IMO: 'indie bundle' strongly overlaps with 'humble indie bundle' which gives the false implication that EA is actually donating the profits to charity. Of which the very notion is ridiculous.
Johnson McGee: IMO: 'indie bundle' strongly overlaps with 'humble indie bundle' which gives the false implication that EA is actually donating the profits to charity. Of which the very notion is ridiculous.
Yeah, it would have been so much better if EA had BUNDLED a bunch of INDIE games into an "independent clump" to avoid that...
Andy Chalk: Nobody's forcing anyone to buy EA's products, or to pay for their "nickel and dime" DLC, or use Origin, or anything else. EA makes a product and offers that product under certain conditions; consumers then choose whether or not they want to lay out their money for it. And millions upon millions of people say "Yes, please."
If anyone in that equation is "destroying" the industry - which, for the record, is absolute nonsense - it's not EA, it's the purchasing public. It's you.
EA doesn't have a gun to anybody's head, and it's the height of ridiculousness to suggest otherwise.
As for Notch's comments, they're beyond disingenuous. "EA is methodically destroying gaming" is not a statement that needs clarification.
The sad thing is that there are too few people that get what you are saying.
In the past couple of years I've seen the mentality grow leaps and bounds, the mentality of the customer is always right.....also that the customer has absolutely no responsibility for what they buy.
1.)People don't realize/remember that "the customer is always right" isn't a company rule/law, that it was a phrase made and used by companies as a deceiving tactic to keep customers buying. It means that sellers should create an illusion that the customers are right; the customers are happy thinking they are right, even though the sellers got everything they wanted and didn't have to compromise themselves(lose profit). It has been abandoned by most companies these days, because with the way things are, they lose profit in the long run.
2.) Some people that bought Mass Effect 2 complained about all the DLC it had, as well as about points they didn't like about the story and changes in gameplay. The same people bought Dragon Age 2 and went ape shit over things they had problems with in the story and gameplay. The same people complained about things they had problems with in Mass Effect 3, from leaks, before it was released. The same people bought Mass Effect 3 and complained about those "problems" that they saw in the leaks and are still in the game. They went even more ape shit and started petitions, etc, etc, everybody knows the situation by now. These people also go along with Notch, and spout out how EA is destroying the industry.
At what point will these people realize they are also to blame as well? They keep buying and turning around to complain. At what point will they realize that this is what EA has done for years, and it is idiotic for these people to keep buying the stuff and continue to rant?
The sad truth is never, because an idea has slowly taken hold of people, and those people seem to have become a majority voice. That idea is that companies that are looking to make profit are evil and that the only thing companies should look out for is the customers.
Fewer and fewer people understand that the reason people start businesses and make companies is to make profit.
EA is a company, that while having vasts amounts of backlash against them, they are still making huge profits. If they can still make large profits by hardly changing anything, if at all, when people complain, there is no motivation to make the complainers happy. It could get them more profits, but they are already making steady profits so there is no need to change(because change costs money, usually more than the gain in return).
The complainers don't seem to understand the concepts of: "If you don't like what a company does with their products, go buy from someone else." -and- "If you keep buying from a company and keep continuing to complain, the company is going to do nothing because they keep getting your money." They see it as forfeiting your right to complain. And they are right, because you can go buy from someone else.
Edit: People need more education on how companies work, and how the mentality I discussed is wrong.
VonKlaw: With the only problem being that EA are "bringing games to the masses" by draining developers of smaller games until they're no good to them anymore, and then ditching their lifeless husk like some form of money vampire.
They did it with Bullfrog, they did it with WESTWOOD, and they're doing it with Bioware.
It's amazing how much buttrage Notch can create. I had no idea he was this infamous. Goon on him. If only more people gave the triple A industry the kick in the balls it deserved.
VonKlaw: With the only problem being that EA are "bringing games to the masses" by draining developers of smaller games until they're no good to them anymore, and then ditching their lifeless husk like some form of money vampire.
They did it with Bullfrog, they did it with WESTWOOD, and they're doing it with Bioware.
Fixed Anyway, getting bought by EA is a bad sign
Yes, it generally indicates that you're doing poorly and will probably die soon despite efforts from EA to the contrary.
Johnson McGee: IMO: 'indie bundle' strongly overlaps with 'humble indie bundle' which gives the false implication that EA is actually donating the profits to charity. Of which the very notion is ridiculous.
Yeah, it would have been so much better if EA had BUNDLED a bunch of INDIE games into an "independent clump" to avoid that...
Captain, our sarcasm readings are off the charts!
Yes, there are plenty of ways that EA could have presented their PACK or GROUP or SET or BUNCH etc.
besides, if Mojang can get sued for using the word 'Scrolls'...
EA, lawyers, bullying, DRM, Origin, unethical, yadda yadda yadda, it's late and I don't feel like arguing.
EA as the biggest corporate gaming company in the world is not indie, the games were indie until EA bought them. Its like describing movies with low budgets financed by studios like fox indie. Its factually wrong.
I believe he's taking a shot over all of this website's journalists shitting on the "re-take mass effect" thing.
you know, throwing a hissy fit because people were "demanding" bioware change the ending, getting all mad and calling gamers names, saying we were setting the industry back and destroying artistic integrity etc etc. You know, fire and brimstone stuff.
well no one had a gun to bioware's head, so I guess you guys should have just cooled it right? I mean, we weren't invading the offices and taking hostages, there wasn't a GUN to anyone's head.
Maybe practice what you preach?
ah well, still defending EA, at least it's logically consistent eh?
What Andy said wasn't in defense of EA. A person calling people out on something doesn't mean that that person is on the side of the thing that the other people are against.
It seems to be that the majority of the people complaining about EA, are people that keep buying from EA and complain about them with every purchase.
What Andy was getting at is that at this point, it is the fault of the consumer, because they keep buying EA's games. Yes EA in the distant past did things that these people liked, but since they are now, then they should just move on to another company.
I use to like Sierra Mist, 7UP, and Canada Dry Ginger Ale, but ever since they went "all natural", I think they taste like crap. So, I don't buy or drink them anymore.
What I'm getting at is that these people that continually buy EA games and complain every time, are like if I kept buying those drinks and drinking them even though I think they taste like crap. I moved on and found other drinks I liked. They need to move on and find other games they might like from different companies.
Moving on, I will add that what you said about this site's journalists is wrong. The only person I've seen that fits the picture of what you said, "fire and brimstone stuff", is Movie Bob.
Guess what, he isn't a journalist. He is a critic/commentator. What he does for this site is make things that might entertain people, and also he expresses his views.
Heads up, guys--EA is successful because they are doing something right. Get up on your little stool and shout all you like about the integrity of gaming, but you're just more a fool for it. EA snatches up good talent and gives people want they want. The reason they highest selling video games ever under their belt is because people like them. You can call them shit, you can critique their business practices all you want, but nothing will change the fact they are the most successful force in gaming because of us.
Indie development is fine. There are hundreds of thousands of indie games available, many of them for free or insanely cheap, all over the web. It's never been easier to make games and more and more people are giving us more and more creative and original ideas. If you can't see them, you aren't looking.
Comapnies always do what they think they can get away with. Since EA knows they cna get away with by using word "indie" in a place where indie never existed to increase sales, they will, and they did.
Heads up, guys--EA is successful because they are doing something right. Get up on your little stool and shout all you like about the integrity of gaming, but you're just more a fool for it. EA snatches up good talent and gives people want they want. The reason they highest selling video games ever under their belt is because people like them. You can call them shit, you can critique their business practices all you want, but nothing will change the fact they are the most successful force in gaming because of us.
Indie development is fine. There are hundreds of thousands of indie games available, many of them for free or insanely cheap, all over the web. It's never been easier to make games and more and more people are giving us more and more creative and original ideas. If you can't see them, you aren't looking.
Gaming is fine. EA is fine. Get over it.
Just so you know. I hate EA, I don't buy their games and an oligopolized market is harmful to everyone (this is like really basic economics). Even if capitalism is the best system we've come up with so far, it doesn't mean powerful people can't take advantage of that system.
EA has a lot of tools smaller fish don't have: advertising, lawyers, massive production budgets and in general obscene amounts of money they can use to do whatever they want and we are pretty aware that 99% of the time nobody can stop them.
As we have to just live with the fact that EA are immortal scum that will just cause more destruction the more we try to kill them, the least we can do is choose what it will or won't kill. Indie games represent everything EA is against, so the moment that they start usurping that position it is perfectly understandable that people who don't like EA will be pissed off and they have every right to let it be known that they are pissed off.
I'm not feeding EA. There are tons of people who aren't feeding EA. There are a lot more people who basically must choose between feeding EA or giving up their hobby. None of us need to be preached about the irony of our actions and more importantly, EA doesn't need anybody defending their actions.
Heads up, guys--EA is successful because they are doing something right. Get up on your little stool and shout all you like about the integrity of gaming, but you're just more a fool for it. EA snatches up good talent and gives people want they want. The reason they highest selling video games ever under their belt is because people like them. You can call them shit, you can critique their business practices all you want, but nothing will change the fact they are the most successful force in gaming because of us.
Indie development is fine. There are hundreds of thousands of indie games available, many of them for free or insanely cheap, all over the web. It's never been easier to make games and more and more people are giving us more and more creative and original ideas. If you can't see them, you aren't looking.
Gaming is fine. EA is fine. Get over it.
Just so you know. I hate EA, I don't buy their games and an oligopolized market is harmful to everyone (this is like really basic economics). Even if capitalism is the best system we've come up with so far, it doesn't mean powerful people can't take advantage of that system.
EA has a lot of tools smaller fish don't have: advertising, lawyers, massive production budgets and in general obscene amounts of money they can use to do whatever they want and we are pretty aware that 99% of the time nobody can stop them.
As we have to just live with the fact that EA are immortal scum that will just cause more destruction the more we try to kill them, the least we can do is choose what it will or won't kill. Indie games represent everything EA is against, so the moment that they start usurping that position it is perfectly understandable that people who don't like EA will be pissed off and they have every right to let it be known that they are pissed off.
I'm not feeding EA. There are tons of people who aren't feeding EA. There are a lot more people who basically must choose between feeding EA or giving up their hobby. None of us need to be preached about the irony of our actions and more importantly, EA doesn't need anybody defending their actions.
Indie games are fine. There are more indie titles now than ever before in the history of the art. It's easier and cheaper than ever before to make your own game and with the massive popularity of social networking, it's simpler than ever to advertise.
I'm not certain, but I can fairly comfortably say every single game I've played for the past month has been independently made and published, bar one. Just because there's a big fish in the pond doesn't mean there aren't smaller fish in it, or indeed entirely different pods to choose from.
I'm sure some people (like you, it seems) have reasons for disliking EA and believe said reasons are valid and justifiable. I have no problem with that. I do, however, get sick and tired of everyone and their dog jumping on the 'we hate EA' wagon just because they didn't like ME3, or some other bullshit. $10 says that at least three quarters of the people here railing on EA and going on about how shit destructive to the industry they think EA is, do nothing at all to follow through with their supposed beliefs and, not only that, but continue to buy EA games. last time I checked my 'games I have purchased but have yet to play' list, there's no Electronic Arts games there and a whole load of indie projects.
I'm not some hipster or something, in to 'indie' because it's underground and I don't believe big AAA titles are shit. I just feel that I've played everything the big guys have to offer right now and so I've dug into the lesser known stuff. It's their own fault if others can't seem to see beyond the EA forest.
Grey Day for Elcia: Indie games are fine. There are more indie titles now than ever before in the history of the art. It's easier and cheaper than ever before to make your own game and with the massive popularity of social networking, it's simpler than ever to advertise.
I'm not certain, but I can fairly comfortably say every single game I've played for the past month has been independently made and published, bar one. Just because there's a big fish in the pond doesn't mean there aren't smaller fish in it, or indeed entirely different pods to choose from.
I'm sure some people (like you, it seems) have reasons for disliking EA and believe said reasons are valid and justifiable. I have no problem with that. I do, however, get sick and tired of everyone and their dog jumping on the 'we hate EA' wagon just because they didn't like ME3, or some other bullshit. $10 says that at least three quarters of the people here railing on EA and going on about how shit destructive to the industry they think EA is, do nothing at all to follow through with their supposed beliefs and, not only that, but continue to buy EA games. last time I checked my 'games I have purchased but have yet to play' list, there's no Electronic Arts games there and a whole load of indie projects.
I'm not some hipster or something, in to 'indie' because it's underground and I don't believe big AAA titles are shit. I just feel that I've played everything the big guys have to offer right now and so I've dug into the lesser known stuff. It's their own fault if others can't seem to see beyond the EA forest.
I'm just pissed that they're using false advertising. It's one of those things you're allowed to do once you're disgustingly rich enough, apparently.
Here's an equation I've found over the years related to gaming and its quality:
The more creative, innovative and legendary games are those that didn't have much of a budget OR graphics - Grandia, Secret of Mana, Wild ARMs, Final Fantasy, Chrono Trigger, Earthbound. Notice these are all RPGs - these are the ones I've played countless times and are the ones that have more depth, more soul and more meaning to me as a gamer. Your list will most definitely vary from mine.
Now, look at what we have today. The graphics are sharper; things look more life-like and detailed than ever before; but the cost to produce games now has skyrocketted from before. And there's not as much depth and soul to games anymore than compared to when games first started out. There's infinitely more focus on the money end than there is the creativity and innovation.
Doesn't anyone else find it mildly ironic that the closer most games get to being life-like, the shittier they've turned out to be?
Neither EA nor Notch is what's wrong - the main issue is the fact that business aspect has taken more relevance and become overwhelmingly more dominant than the creative, or artistic, aspect of gaming. Greed has consumed this industry and has left it stagnating.
Case in point - in Earthbound, the final boss is a fetus inside a uterus. I'd like to see ANY developer try that in this day and age - there'd be an unending PR shitstorm, especially here in the states. If something like this was to be attempted today, publishers and vocal minorities would have forced it to be cancelled. Yet, the game was one of the best I have ever played, hands down, and I'd recommend it to other people.