Notch Dumps on EA "Indie Bundle"

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT
 

Buretsu:

Beryl77:
Since when does a tweet warrant a news?

It's news, in the same way that things a president whispers to someone else when they don't think the mic is on is news.

So, no real news?

Is it really necessary to compile everything Notch says on Twitter into an article? Could I, perhaps, have some actual gaming news?

Grey Day for Elcia:

Revolutionaryloser:

Grey Day for Elcia:
I was more referring to the "indie" genre of games on Steam, developed by other groups and sold on Steam. Isn't this the same thing? Some people made a game with their own money and another group is also selling along side them.

No. That is a completely different thing. Steam is an on-line shop.

OK. If we hypothetically suggested that a game could be funded independantly and was later distributed by a publisher/distributor, we would still refer to that game as indie. The only defining feature of an indie game is that it was funded independantly.

But isn't that what they are--independently funded games that were created by an unaffiliated group, that EA is now promoting? I mean, regardless of any nit-picking, the games were (I think) utterly unrelated to EA until now, when the latter has chosen to promote and distribute them to a larger audience.

The whole thing seems like a non-issue. If this wasn't EA, no one would care, and not because EA is a large company, but because it's currently "in" to flame EA every time they take a step in any direction. I would bet a kidney that if Valve were to advertise or distribute some indie games (outside of Steam) everyone would say how awesome it is. Really gets on my nerves, this kind of community behavior.

I know Shank 1 and 2 was financed by EA and I'm pretty sure Deathspank was not financed by them.

Fasckira:

Mr.Pandah:
Oh q fucking q. It's so dumb to say something like that about a company. They're out to make money. If this "indie" bundle sells and makes money, and it's because they called it indie, they don't care. They'd call it dogshit bundle if it would sell. Notch needs to calm his nipples. No need to get twisted over this.

But how can Notch play the part of the internet white knight if he hasn't got a company to rip on?!

Agreed though. Sure, the action of EA releasing an "indie" bundle is a bit ... silly, I guess is the best word, but its not exactly as rage-worthy as Notch is making out. EA have taken the genre of indie and stretched its meaning to the point of breaking the definition but they have by no means "destroyed gaming".

Maybe my judgement is clouded as I tend to like a majority of the games EA publish. I really dont get why people get so fricking upset over EA though, its a company thats making money. Its not like EA are going round to people's houses and roughing them up for lunch money. Dont like an EA game? Dont buy it, move on.

It's because of their "business practices." and because people get upset that they charge for shit and they don't want to pay for it but still want it.

I want a new car but I can't afford one that's all tricked out but I don't bitch about it. Logic doesn't translate over though.

boag:

Andy Chalk:

boag:
At the same time, they are alienating those same masses with the most horrible business practices, they keep reaching for new markets, while continuously making their customers feel dissatisfied and sometimes even sick of gaming.

I would disagree. The vocal, "alienated" gamers who make noise on forums represent a minority of EA's consumer base, probably a fairly small minority. Which isn't to say that I don't think people should make their opinions known in public forums (ideally in a constructive, non-abusive manner) but to suggest that we represent some kind of angry majority is a stretch.

youre right, saying that I represent some super majority is incredibly lame, at the same time we cant be certain about how big the amount of people are upset about this is, because internet polls can be rigged, and the forum dissatisfaction can be fabricated.

its obviously just a small bunch of entitled whiny homophobic brats, that have taken their time to not only create an uproar everywhere, but also to artificially drive down EAs stock price.

Okay, for the purposes of clarification before I respond, are you actually agreeing with me or are you sarcastically suggesting that I'm dismissing complainers out of hand? I can't tell.

Beryl77:
It's not really a surprise that EA would do this.

That EA would do what?

Oh right, the indie bundle thing. In all the confusion, I completely forgot about that.

Buretsu:

boag:
like I said, its just a small bunch of whiny entitled homophobic brats, anyone that disliked any of EAs games, is a whiny entitled homophobic brats, thats what EA said, thats what Bioware said, thats what 75 PERFECT SCORES said.

EA and Bioware never said that, people who hate EA and Bioware said that they said that.

And, somehow, all of the 10/10 scores from people who liked and enjoyed a game have SO much less integrity than 0/10 scores from people who hated it...

Citation needed, but hey who needs links, and articles when we can play this nice little jerk around game of He said, she said right?

Andy Chalk:

boag:

Andy Chalk:

I would disagree. The vocal, "alienated" gamers who make noise on forums represent a minority of EA's consumer base, probably a fairly small minority. Which isn't to say that I don't think people should make their opinions known in public forums (ideally in a constructive, non-abusive manner) but to suggest that we represent some kind of angry majority is a stretch.

youre right, saying that I represent some super majority is incredibly lame, at the same time we cant be certain about how big the amount of people are upset about this is, because internet polls can be rigged, and the forum dissatisfaction can be fabricated.

its obviously just a small bunch of entitled whiny homophobic brats, that have taken their time to not only create an uproar everywhere, but also to artificially drive down EAs stock price.

Okay, for the purposes of clarification before I respond, are you actually agreeing with me or are you sarcastically suggesting that I'm dismissing complainers out of hand? I can't tell.

dont worry, the Clarification DLC will come out soonish and will provide all the clarity you need.

boag:
dont worry, the Clarification DLC will come out soonish and will provide all the clarity you need.

Okay, so obviously you have nothing to contribute. Glad we got that cleared up.

Grey Day for Elcia:

matrix3509:
Yes because "Its business" is the catch-all excuse for people defending publisher extortion of developers and milking of consumers. Try again, this time with more logic and less Laissez-faire fallacy.

Milking the consumer? You mean offering video games for purchase? No one forced people to buy EA games and it was us, the consumers, who chose to purchase their games in record amounts.

Get of your pedestal. Stop thinking you know what the market should and shouldn't be like and let people buy whatever the fuck they want. They aren't bad people for liking EA. EA isn't bad for selling games a lot of people like. Indie games are doing better than ever. The sky isn't falling.

People, for the love of god, wake up and listen to yourselves. EA is offering a product. That's it. If people wanna buy them, that's their choice. You aren't special and you don't get to suddenly tell us the games and franchisees we like are now the devil.

"Boo-hoo. EA is selling video games I don't like." This just in: Lots of people do like them and that's perfectly fine. Get over yourself.

Nice to see you are still missing the point. More likely you are just looking past my argument and seeing whatever you wish to see. Its obvious from the way you are inventing your own arguments to argue against. I have no problem with people selling a product. You can fucking be mecha space Jesus and if you still chew up and spit out developers and monetize consumers with sleazy day-one DLC (among other things) I'm still going to call you out.

Also, I was just waiting for you to bring out the word entitled, the trademarked catchphrase of industry apologists. I knew it would come out eventually. At least now I have an excuse (not like I needed one) to write off everything you say from now on.

Andy Chalk:

boag:
dont worry, the Clarification DLC will come out soonish and will provide all the clarity you need.

Okay, so obviously you have nothing to contribute. Glad we got that cleared up.

of course I dont, i mean posting links, making observations, offering a differing POV, thats obviously not a contribution, just the ramblings of an entitled, whiny, homophobic, brat.

Sonic Doctor:

Darkmantle:

Andy Chalk:

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?

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.

""What Andy said wasn't in defense of EA. A person calling people out on something""
funny the "something" was talking shit about EA.

"Fire and brimstone stuff" was a bit of hyperbole, I'll grant that, but most people on this site talked in direct contempt for retake mass effect, Andy here included. Bob is just the most hilarious example. And I'm allowed to express my views too, and my view is that bobs views were hilariously misinformed.

and while he may have had a point about people still buying EA games, success is still not an accurate measure of who's right.

example (fictional scenario): if EA makes a game, calls in indie even though it was developed in house, and people call them out on calling the game "indie", an appropriate defence is not "well people still bought it". Great so people were either tricked or don;t care. Doesn;t make it right though.

matrix3509:

Grey Day for Elcia:

matrix3509:
Yes because "Its business" is the catch-all excuse for people defending publisher extortion of developers and milking of consumers. Try again, this time with more logic and less Laissez-faire fallacy.

Milking the consumer? You mean offering video games for purchase? No one forced people to buy EA games and it was us, the consumers, who chose to purchase their games in record amounts.

Get of your pedestal. Stop thinking you know what the market should and shouldn't be like and let people buy whatever the fuck they want. They aren't bad people for liking EA. EA isn't bad for selling games a lot of people like. Indie games are doing better than ever. The sky isn't falling.

People, for the love of god, wake up and listen to yourselves. EA is offering a product. That's it. If people wanna buy them, that's their choice. You aren't special and you don't get to suddenly tell us the games and franchisees we like are now the devil.

"Boo-hoo. EA is selling video games I don't like." This just in: Lots of people do like them and that's perfectly fine. Get over yourself.

Nice to see you are still missing the point. More likely you are just looking past my argument and seeing whatever you wish to see. Its obvious from the way you are inventing your own arguments to argue against. I have no problem with people selling a product. You can fucking be mecha space Jesus and if you still chew up and spit out developers and monetize consumers with sleazy day-one DLC (among other things) I'm still going to call you out.

Also, I was just waiting for you to bring out the word entitled, the trademarked catchphrase of industry apologists. I knew it would come out eventually. At least now I have an excuse (not like I needed one) to write off everything you say from now on.

Hate to break your self-righteous justification, but not once did he used the word 'entitled'. In fact, the only ones to use that word in this tread have used it to complain about being called entitled, and not actually call someone else entitled...

Varya:

The.Bard:

Varya:
When did he claim he was an arbiter? He just tweeted. Everyone and his grandma has talked about the EA indie-bundle today and called them out for it. The Escapist did it earlier today. Why does him tweeting bother you. Notch didn't make a statement, he didn't write a blogpost or article, he gave his opinion in a tweet. How is that different from you giving your opinion in a comment? He don't put his tweets on the front page of the Escapist, the Escapist did that. I just don't get why this guys opinion always gets blown out of proportion.

That's exactly my problem. He tweeted under the false pretense of "Oh, I had noooooo ideaaaaa". This isn't the first time Notch's tweets have been brought up as news; he doesn't get to play the naive card and use "I just tweeted" as a defense. He should assume by now that anything he tweets IS an article. Whereas if my comments on this forum made cnn.com, I could be rightfully shocked that someone thought my stupid opinion was newsworthy.

Case in point, check out nfl.com. They are running twitter reactions to Junior Seau's death from other nfl players. Seriously. Because news about someone passing is no longer enough. Now we need to cull the masses and get their twitter reactions.

So yea, Notch knew someone would pick this up. If he didn't, then he has a serious intelligence issue to sort out. But first he needs to pull the giant stick out of his butt. The one that says "Starving indie developers feed orphans, and organized properly funded companies who employ thousands murder grandmothers."

That's bull. Yes, he probably knew that his tweets would get attention, but he doesn't have a responsibility to keep his mouth shut. He's a right to his oppinion and every right to speak it. Maybe you're right and he is in fact no-one important in the world of gaming, then it is media who should stop listening to him, not he who should stop using social media.
Personaly, I enjoy that we have one guy in the gamers industry who spekas his mind without going to the PR machine even if I don't agree with him all the time

Well, for starters, let's make sure we're on the same page. I'm NOT trying to say he's a nobody in gaming. Minecraft made a metric ton of cash. Dude has some serious clout.

My problem isn't with his opinions (other than I usually disagree). He has every right to air them; I'm not trying to imply he needs to shut his mouth or that this being picked up by the media is his fault. (But yes, I certainly wish he would shut his trap.)

My problem is only that he's playing dumb to it and treating us like we're stupid. He's acting like he didn't KNOW this would happen. Malarky! Granted, I don't like Minecraft, and yes, I think "indies will save gaming" is quite possibly the most idiotic thing I've heard this week. But at the end of the day, I still think he has a right to voice his thoughts, no matter how stupid it seems to me.

Like I said, my only legit complaint here is him playing stupid to the fact. If Notch wants to THINK he's smarter than us, fine, but I will NOT abide him treating us like we're stupid. THAT is the only bull around here.

image

... OR IS IT?!?!?!

Buretsu:

Hate to break your self-righteous justification, but not once did he used the word 'entitled'. In fact, the only ones to use that word in this tread have used it to complain about being called entitled, and not actually call someone else entitled...

Grey Day for Elcia:
The level of self-entitlement and superiority complexes in this thread is just mind boggling.

No he didn't use it in direct response to me. He still used it as a perjorative toward the rest of the thread that doesn't agree with him. Again its the catchphrase of the industry apologists ("Hay guys it makes money so if you don't like it you are entitled. LOLZ."). Its starting to become the Godwin's Law of videogame discussion.

Now that you've learned how to read, come back when you have an actual argument.

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 C&C, and they're doing it with Bioware.

Im not going to dredge up anything more, but I think all problems people are having with Bioware right now can be attributed to EA in some fashion.

Yet, Im gonna be honest. While I see EA as the curropting force, Im still not quite sure if its strictly EA's fault.

matrix3509:

Buretsu:

Hate to break your self-righteous justification, but not once did he used the word 'entitled'. In fact, the only ones to use that word in this tread have used it to complain about being called entitled, and not actually call someone else entitled...

Grey Day for Elcia:
The level of self-entitlement and superiority complexes in this thread is just mind boggling.

No he didn't use it in direct response to me. He still used it as a perjorative toward the rest of the thread that doesn't agree with him. Again its the catchphrase of the industry apologists ("Hay guys it makes money so if you don't like it you are entitled. LOLZ."). Its starting to become the Godwin's Law of videogame discussion.

Now that you've learned how to read, come back when you have an actual argument.

Oh, sorry. I only went back about 4 or 5 pages of you continuing to discuss things with him before I noticed he used the word that you used to end the discussion for no reason other than being pig-headed.

Any excuse to feel persecuted, I guess.

lapan:

Sonic Doctor:

2.) Some people

I didn't buy either Mass Effect 3 nor Dragon Age 2 after hearing about the changes and problems those games brought to their series. I figure i'm not the only one.

If nobody complains the company will just assume everything is alright, though EA and Bioware have an history of plugging their ears and eyes to even the most friendly critiques anyways. Or do I have to get a job as video game journalist or game developer/publisher before i get to have an opinion?

Key word in bold. I wasn't saying all people that complained. At this point we know they won't listen because some people while still complaining, are still buying there games. At that point the complaining means nothing to the company, because why change when the majority of people complaining are still buying.

Lastly, I never said you had to do anything. You just happened to read what I said and thought I must be talking about you, though what puzzles me is that by what you said, you don't meet the criteria of the people I was talking about.

Darkmantle:
Snip

Swing and a miss.

The people Andy was calling out were the people that continuously buy from EA and keep complaining.

The point is, at this time it is their fault for keeping on buying from EA. It makes no sense for people to keep buying from a company that they know isn't going to meet their standards.

My philosophy is give a company one extra chance, then if the very next time I buy from them and I don't like the product, I move on. Basically, buy once, complain, buy the second time, move on if it is bad.

I bought Dragon Age: Origins because my friends really liked it, I found out I didn't because I thought it was a broken and outdated game. I gave them a second chance with Dragon Age 2, and I loved it, I think it is worlds better than DA:O because they fixed all the things I had problems with. I also love ME1 and ME2, and I like ME3(only mildly disappointed by the ending, far from enough to complain or give up on EA/BioWare.)

When it comes to gaming, I haven't gotten to a point were I move on from a company because of bad things done. The reason is that they have to really do something insanely abysmal for me to move on. Everything EA/BioWare has done since DA:O has been mild annoyances, not enough to warrant extreme complaint or not buying from them again.

Even if I felt the same way as the people continuing to complain about EA while still buying from them, I would have moved on and thought they were crazy for not moving on as well.

Lastly, I didn't say you couldn't express your views about Movie Bob, just don't lump him together with the journalists at the Escapist, because it isn't true or a correct comparison.

Buretsu:

Oh, sorry. I only went back about 4 or 5 pages of you continuing to discuss things with him before I noticed he used the word that you used to end the discussion for no reason other than being pig-headed.

Any excuse to feel persecuted, I guess.

Despite my hostile tone, I don't actually feel persecuted. I get pissed when apathetic people with no argument use the word as a catch all for people who are angry at what gamer apathy has allowed this industry to become: A hulking behemoth that worships the almighty dollar and more than willing to pull the heart out of studios I love on a sacrificial altar to satisfy their lust for more money.

Those that don't learn history are doomed to repeat it, the bigger they are, the harder they yadda, yadda, yadda, more metaphors.

matrix3509:

Buretsu:

Oh, sorry. I only went back about 4 or 5 pages of you continuing to discuss things with him before I noticed he used the word that you used to end the discussion for no reason other than being pig-headed.

Any excuse to feel persecuted, I guess.

Despite my hostile tone, I don't actually feel persecuted. I get pissed when apathetic people with no argument use the word as a catch all for people who are angry at what gamer apathy has allowed this industry to become: A hulking behemoth that worships the almighty dollar and more than willing to pull the heart out of studios I love on a sacrificial altar to satisfy their lust for more money.

Those that don't learn history are doomed to repeat it, the bigger they are, the harder they yadda, yadda, yadda, more metaphors.

You say you don't feel persecuted, but then you try to meta-invoke Godwin's Law, like you're comparing being called entitled to being compared to Hitler...

And maybe you should consider that perhaps the studios you loved died not because EA bought them out, but that EA bought them out because they were dying...

Buretsu:

matrix3509:

Buretsu:

Oh, sorry. I only went back about 4 or 5 pages of you continuing to discuss things with him before I noticed he used the word that you used to end the discussion for no reason other than being pig-headed.

Any excuse to feel persecuted, I guess.

Despite my hostile tone, I don't actually feel persecuted. I get pissed when apathetic people with no argument use the word as a catch all for people who are angry at what gamer apathy has allowed this industry to become: A hulking behemoth that worships the almighty dollar and more than willing to pull the heart out of studios I love on a sacrificial altar to satisfy their lust for more money.

Those that don't learn history are doomed to repeat it, the bigger they are, the harder they yadda, yadda, yadda, more metaphors.

You say you don't feel persecuted, but then you try to meta-invoke Godwin's Law, like you're comparing being called entitled to being compared to Hitler...

And maybe you should consider that perhaps the studios you loved died not because EA bought them out, but that EA bought them out because they were dying...

They died for neither of those reasons. They died because publishers like EA squeeze every bit of life out of a studio that they can. Taking advantage of developers passion to make a quick buck, then leading them to the slaughterhouse to slit their throats. One need only read about Free Radical Design, to see what publisher are. How about how Maxis is now a zombie, reanimated solely for the purpose of cashing in on Sim City nostalgia, it'll be put down like a rabid dog as soon as the game is on shelves.

I wish you'd stop trying to pretend I said things I didn't say. I said Godwin's Law because every gaming discussion on this forum, given enough time, defaults to the apathetics calling everyone else entitled. It got old a long time ago.

Andy Chalk:
You can try to tell the masses that gaming "could be better." But if the masses tell you to fuck off because they're having fun, who's right?

Wall-of-text follows.

Honestly, I think there's two sets of issues. One, I as a consumer can do very little about; the other, as a consumer I can do almost nothing about. Neither is good for the industry, the medium, or the consumers. Both to some degree can be laid at EA's feet, though you'd be right to set some of the blame on the consumer as well, whether their response is one of ignorance or apathy.

EA's behavior of late doesn't so much smack of stockpiling money as of control. Origin. Origin's EULA. Project Ten Dollar. Online Passes. The consumption of smaller studios. The "re-envisioning" of older franchises, sometimes to the cries of distress of their original fanbases. And... the co-option of the "indie" descriptor.

All of this smacks of a desire for control: control of the brands, control of exactly how the audience uses their product, control of the distribution. Facebook? Got to have a tie-in game. Flash? Got to have a tie-in game. Independent scene? Got to have our brand out there. Keeping plates spinning, staying on the cutting edge, having a finger in every pie.

From a MBA standard, this makes sense. In many industries, it might well make sense. In this one, it's riding a wave and hoping it doesn't break over your head before you reach the shore. You're building an audience, but you're alienating the older one almost as quickly. And the momentum on which you're riding- and continuing to exist- is absolutely dependent on your not making a significant mis-step on your major properties. The "control" EA is exerting comes at a significant cost to its goodwill, and means that if, for example, a eight-figure-budget game like Modern Warfare fails, you're going to have to eat it. A resentful fanbase isn't going to offer second chances.

I am going to be very, very interested to see how Bioware's take on C&C:Generals comes out. Many Bioware loyalists seem angry with Bioware over Dragon Age 2 or Mass Effect 3, and I think almost no one was very happy with C&C 4. Bioware is going to be going in with two strikes already marked, and if they can't pull this off... Especially if Star Wars: The Old Republic subscriptions taper off... I'm thinking you might not see so much of the Bioware logo anymore.

Personally, I've stopped buying EA games, and told them why. For what it's worth. I don't hate EA; I would genuinely be pleased if they could get their head out of their ass and do the right thing by their customers. They've made some great games, and they still do. But what they're doing now is going to destroy them, and possibly cause collateral damage in the process, not to mention all the little producers they've eaten who will vanish.

But that brings us to the second set of problems, the ones that throwing my tiny "no!" vote won't do diddly about.

EA isn't dependent on Facebook games, or Flash games, or independent games. EA lives and dies on the big-ass AAA franchise games. And on that score, I think it's probably closer to being THQ than anyone realizes.

Along with giants like Activision, it has created a model where "tentpole games" are where it's at. MBA thinking again: you don't take risks where your bread and butter is concerned. You look for the sure bet, preferably one with a big payoff. If it can't become a franchise, don't bother.

This thinking is about to cause them to self-destruct.

If it's hard to see a big game fail now, despite the anti-piracy and anti-lawsuit provisions of Origin, despite all the DLC, despite the Online Passes to head off big bad Used Games, despite hedging every bet there was to stick a shrub on, it's going to be mortal to see a big game fail when the next console generation comes about.

Filling a Blu-Ray disk with 1080P, possibly 3D-enabled content created with a painfully new toolset that has to satisfy the people who have just clunked down several hundred dollars for their shiny new consoles is going to be an expensive process. It's probably going to require a price-hike at the store, a new wave of "Project Ten Dollar"-like initiatives, or both.

Sooner or later- probably sooner- a "tentpole game" is going to fail to meet the exaggeratedly high expectations that come with higher prices, "next gen" tech, and a "blockbuster" publisher. And that may well be crippling.

A smaller company that wasn't dependent on these tactics might weather the storm. Even a bigger company that allowed its subsidiaries more independence and wasn't trying to mine every new offering for franchise potential might have a chance. All evidence points to EA being neither of these things right now, nor becoming that in the future.

So, EA. Abusing its customers for control (quite possibly an illusion of control) at the cost of goodwill it will need to buffer itself from future failures. Cannibalizing smaller studios for their past good work, yet often failing to recognize the specifics of what made that work successful. Relying on franchises in a world where that model is threatening to become a dinosaur, even as "Angry Birds" and the like are increasingly begging the question of whether our enjoyment/cost model is skewed.

You can be very successful, and still sow the seeds of your annihilation even at the height of your success. If you limit your perceptions of what constitutes "success", you all but insure that you will do just that.

For every Batman, a Batman and Robin.

For every Model T, an Edsel.

$100 says every single one of these "EA is shit" wagon hoppers shops at a large grocery chain--the kind that buys out small business and tries its best to ensure they retain competitive edge on the market. $100 also says the clothes they wear and the shoes they walk in were made and then imported from China in workshop conditions.

Yes, please do complain and tell us how bad EA is. You're not a hypocrite lacking perspective at all.

The.Bard:

Varya:

The.Bard:

That's exactly my problem. He tweeted under the false pretense of "Oh, I had noooooo ideaaaaa". This isn't the first time Notch's tweets have been brought up as news; he doesn't get to play the naive card and use "I just tweeted" as a defense. He should assume by now that anything he tweets IS an article. Whereas if my comments on this forum made cnn.com, I could be rightfully shocked that someone thought my stupid opinion was newsworthy.

Case in point, check out nfl.com. They are running twitter reactions to Junior Seau's death from other nfl players. Seriously. Because news about someone passing is no longer enough. Now we need to cull the masses and get their twitter reactions.

So yea, Notch knew someone would pick this up. If he didn't, then he has a serious intelligence issue to sort out. But first he needs to pull the giant stick out of his butt. The one that says "Starving indie developers feed orphans, and organized properly funded companies who employ thousands murder grandmothers."

That's bull. Yes, he probably knew that his tweets would get attention, but he doesn't have a responsibility to keep his mouth shut. He's a right to his oppinion and every right to speak it. Maybe you're right and he is in fact no-one important in the world of gaming, then it is media who should stop listening to him, not he who should stop using social media.
Personaly, I enjoy that we have one guy in the gamers industry who spekas his mind without going to the PR machine even if I don't agree with him all the time

Well, for starters, let's make sure we're on the same page. I'm NOT trying to say he's a nobody in gaming. Minecraft made a metric ton of cash. Dude has some serious clout.

My problem isn't with his opinions (other than I usually disagree). He has every right to air them; I'm not trying to imply he needs to shut his mouth or that this being picked up by the media is his fault. (But yes, I certainly wish he would shut his trap.)

My problem is only that he's playing dumb to it and treating us like we're stupid. He's acting like he didn't KNOW this would happen. Malarky! Granted, I don't like Minecraft, and yes, I think "indies will save gaming" is quite possibly the most idiotic thing I've heard this week. But at the end of the day, I still think he has a right to voice his thoughts, no matter how stupid it seems to me.

Like I said, my only legit complaint here is him playing stupid to the fact. If Notch wants to THINK he's smarter than us, fine, but I will NOT abide him treating us like we're stupid. THAT is the only bull around here.

image

... OR IS IT?!?!?!

Fair enogh, I misunderstood what you ment. I still can't see what you meen though. Playing dumb? Acting like we're stupid? I just don't get that from his tweets.

He said ea is bad. So what is his argument?

First facebook comment:
"This is so true."

Hating EA is . . . true?

Callate:
OMGWOT

My short response to your huge message: EA destroying itself, which I can accept as a valid and credible perspective, does not equal EA destroying gaming, which is nonsense.

Your remark about "control" is interesting, but it's hardly exclusive to EA. Call of Duty Elite is probably the most obvious example of an even more egregious system of control and from the PC perspective, Ubi's always-on DRM is up there too. But EA is the whipping boy because it's cool to hate on EA. Notch does, after all.

I didn't like Dragon Age: Origins. Haven't bought another Dragon Age game. I loved (loved!) the Mass Effect series, not a huge fan of the ending, nor did I care for the shift from "Commander Shepard" to "Commander Whoever the hell you want to be because we have no actual commitment to the character" in the third game, and assuming there are future games in the franchise EA will really have to sell them to me. Waiting for Syndicate to come down in price before I make a move on that one.

Call me crazy but I find that basing my purchases on what I think of actual games, rather than some silly, arbitrary assessment of whether or not a company is "evil," is a very effective way to ensure that I end up with the games I like, and avoid the ones I don't.

Dylan Rushing:

Hornet0404:
Hang on a minute.

Wasn't this exactly what Extra Credits said EA should do? Make an Indie arm to take care of "innovative" and "new" games while EA proper makes AAA games?

And in that case what would you rather have?

That EA dies or EA may begin to make interesting games?

I'd rather EA dies.

Near every game series I loved, particularly Command and Conquer, was bought by them and ruined. I want to see EA bankrupt so their intellectual properties and copy right can fall into hands that won't abuse them and actually care for them.

So you want to see EA bankrupt because of a personal vendetta?

Fair enough.

Although it should be said that Westwood was the cause of Westwoods fall. Not EA. Westwood had made not only one but three monumental failures before EA pulled the plug on them. And C&C 4 (I didn't like it either) was made the way it was (no base-building and no resource collection) because fans and critics always complained that each C&C was too much like the previous (gameplay-wise there was little difference between the original C&C, the C&C Red Alert and C&C 3).

Also it should be said one of the most popular C&C games wasn't made by Westwood proper but by other EA subsidiaries (I'm talking about Red Alert 2 which was made by Westwood Pacific which was an entirely different studio, and then there was C&C Generals which was made by EA-LA).

Also I actually liked C&C 3 and Red Alert 3. Gameplay wise they were excellent and design-wise they were great. Sure the story of C&C 3 wasn't top notch but Red Alert had so much "Narm Charm" that you just had to love it.

Andy Chalk:
I don't see how major publishers like EA are doing anything more than bringing gaming to the masses.

So I guess all those terrible business practices don't count, then? Notch is right about one thing: EA is methodically destroying gaming.

And your later post suggesting that it's customers who are ruining things is beyond insane. People aren't saying yes please, they're just trying to lube up their assholes as much as possible so that it hurts less when EA rapes them again.

Hornet0404:
Hang on a minute.

Wasn't this exactly what Extra Credits said EA should do? Make an Indie arm to take care of "innovative" and "new" games while EA proper makes AAA games?

And in that case what would you rather have?

That EA dies or EA may begin to make interesting games?

EA dies, please. Plus, since when did people think that listening to anything Extra Credits says is a good idea? They can't even tell the difference between a first person and third person shooter. They don't know jack about gaming. Stop listening to them.

mjc0961:

Andy Chalk:
I don't see how major publishers like EA are doing anything more than bringing gaming to the masses.

So I guess all those terrible business practices don't count, then? Notch is right about one thing: EA is methodically destroying gaming.

And your later post suggesting that it's customers who are ruining things is beyond insane. People aren't saying yes please, they're just trying to lube up their assholes as much as possible so that it hurts less when EA rapes them again.

Hornet0404:
Hang on a minute.

Wasn't this exactly what Extra Credits said EA should do? Make an Indie arm to take care of "innovative" and "new" games while EA proper makes AAA games?

And in that case what would you rather have?

That EA dies or EA may begin to make interesting games?

EA dies, please. Plus, since when did people think that listening to anything Extra Credits says is a good idea? They can't even tell the difference between a first person and third person shooter. They don't know jack about gaming. Stop listening to them.

They are as informative as the Jimquisition. Maybe a bit more so. So I guess people have been listening to them since they started? More so when they came onto escapist.

Andy Chalk:
My short response to your huge message: EA destroying itself, which I can accept as a valid and credible perspective, does not equal EA destroying gaming, which is nonsense.

I don't think it's nonsense, though I agree it's an exaggeration. With the amount of competition and cross-pollenization that occurs between the big players at present, the AAA market seems viable, if still overly prone to the stagnation and the related franchise/"safe bet" trap. If THQ doesn't pull out of its nose-dive, Sega continues its present course, and EA self-destructs, I don't think we have a stable system any longer.

There will still be games. Independent games, cell phone games, tablet games. But I think it likely there will be another gap of 5+ years, much like after the era of Atari, when no one thinks consoles are fertile ground for cultivation.

And anyone who latches their hopes for market success onto EA's coat tails, "mainstream" or "independent", may have cause to regret it.

Your remark about "control" is interesting, but it's hardly exclusive to EA. Call of Duty Elite is probably the most obvious example of an even more egregious system of control and from the PC perspective, Ubi's always-on DRM is up there too. But EA is the whipping boy because it's cool to hate on EA. Notch does, after all.

They're certainly not the only ones, but they're regrettably big enough that they can make the case that anything they do is "industry standard" because they're doing it with a straight face. I joked once that I try not to make any statements about EA or Activision being the greater evil because the other always seems to take it as a challenge.

But EA didn't get to where they are, antagonism-wise, just because "cool" people say they're evil, or some Internet survey declared them the worst company in the world (which is certainly nonsense, I'll agree.) To a very real extent, they brought this on themselves.

Call me crazy but I find that basing my purchases on what I think of actual games, rather than some silly, arbitrary assessment of whether or not a company is "evil," is a very effective way to ensure that I end up with the games I like, and avoid the ones I don't.

EA has put me in a position where buying any of their games amounts to a tacit agreement with a large number of decisions and positions that I find genuinely reprehensible. I wish I could simply buy one of their games because I appreciate the emphasis on story and character, or because the new user interface sounds like something more games should be doing. But if I do, I'm also saying, "Yes, I agree that I'm no longer "buying" a "game" but merely gratefully giving my money for access to something remote that can be withdrawn at any time without refund. That no matter how woefully you mismanage crucial aspects of that access, I will have no recourse, but humbly accept your decisions. That any attempts to foster a sense of 'community' around a game may be living on borrowed time, as it may be decided that said community is making improper use of IP assets or derivative code and violating terms of use."

...And yes, I'm aware that some of these kinds of terms have been in use for some time, but EA is the one that seems to be saying not "Sorry, guys, y'know, our lawyers made us put that in," but "Oh, look what we can do. Dance!" As stupid as, say, Ubisoft's "constant network check-in" DRM may have been, I at least believed they thought they were doing it to combat piracy. EA has said, "Oh, and while we've brought you in here under the pretext of fighting piracy, also don't sue us, don't talk about cheats, don't break a nebulous set of rules that may be interpreted differently by different forum admins..."

For games I like, well, there are still companies with less-bad ways of treating their customers, and Kickstarter is showing some progress. My decision regarding EA may seem silly or arbitrary to you. I'm aware that it's probably not going to push back the flood. But I assure you, it wasn't some knee-jerk reaction to a statement from Notch.

There is something I have to disagree with Notch on.

Your budget has nothing to do with weather or not you can call yourself "indie". It's the legal professionalism and probably the size, to some extent. Heck, even ID Software was considered "indie".

Just because you're making a grand profit, doesn't mean you aren't indie. Nothing has changed. Weather you have $1 to spend, or $1,000,000, that's only going to count for how far you'll be able to take something. It has nothing to do with what you are.

If a billionaire decided to make his own videogames by himself in his living room, would this make him non-indie? Of course not. Notch is totally indie. No amount of large budgeting can change that. There are entirely different aspects that will judge this, and cash flow isn't one of them.

Brainst0rm:
Something which was also said by Notch:

"Twitter quotes are NOT NEWS. You're better than that, and you make me feel dirty."

Expressing your views via an online social media site that is intentionally designed to be as open and public as possible is something that shouldn't be quoted?

Notch apparently still has no clue about how the rest of the world works. If he doesn't want people quoting his twitter, he needs to stop putting things on there. You'd think he would have learned after that fiasco over the Yogscast and Minecon, but apparently he still thinks his twitter is off the record.

Hey, I'm fine with EA making games and selling them to appeal to a wider audience - so long as they keep their hands out of pre-established franchises, and don't "Streamline" them for a wider audience. Something they can't help themselves from doing as the IP name sells it to the fans, and the whole "Streamlining" thing sells it to the masses.
EA IS methodically destroying gaming, 1 IP and company at a time.

draythefingerless:

wait, so because steam puts the indie bundle on its shop, its no longer indie?

Yes. Yes it is. That's exactly what I said. Well, I mean, aside from the part you seem to have pulled from your arse.

Cryo84R:
Publishers like EA are in fact, destroying the industry. Wildly inflated game budgets and overworked staff will eventually lead us to the point where we need to make a choice about where we want this industry. Do we want it creative, or do we want it formulaic?

Mark my words, if the next generation of game systems is not digital only, we will see an early 80's style collapse of the wider industry.

I'm starting to dread the same thing - we WILL have another game crash sooner or later if EA isn't sued out of business for their jurassic business model and stubborn persistence to buy out and ruin their competition.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here