EA No Longer Relevant to NASDAQ Top 100

 Pages PREV 1 2
 

doggie015:

SNCommand:
...people should have no issue really with a video game publisher unless they lie to the consumers...

*clears throat*
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-AvltBmqjF2c/T2ImMYftPYI/AAAAAAAAAmg/WhcUZvs3uUg/s1600/original.png

Well Casey Hudson isn't part of EA's marketing group, he's a a former technical artist and current executive producer at Bioware, that complaint shouldn't be relayed towards EA, besides, if people should hate a publisher whenever the executive producer hypes his own game people would have burned Microsoft at the fire whenever Peter Molyneux opened his mouth

SNCommand:

doggie015:

SNCommand:
...people should have no issue really with a video game publisher unless they lie to the consumers...

*clears throat*
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-AvltBmqjF2c/T2ImMYftPYI/AAAAAAAAAmg/WhcUZvs3uUg/s1600/original.png

Well Casey Hudson isn't part of EA's marketing group, he's a a former technical artist and current executive producer at Bioware, that complaint shouldn't be relayed towards EA, besides, if people should hate a publisher whenever the executive producer hypes his own game people would have burned Microsoft at the fire whenever Peter Molyneux opened his mouth

It wasn't bioware that was responsible for the unreasonable deadline for game shipping. It wasn't bioware that demanded the game meet the launch date without delays

Reap what you sow.. that's pretty much what EA is doing right now, and I couldn't be happier for them ;)

doggie015:

SNCommand:

doggie015:
*clears throat*
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-AvltBmqjF2c/T2ImMYftPYI/AAAAAAAAAmg/WhcUZvs3uUg/s1600/original.png

Well Casey Hudson isn't part of EA's marketing group, he's a a former technical artist and current executive producer at Bioware, that complaint shouldn't be relayed towards EA, besides, if people should hate a publisher whenever the executive producer hypes his own game people would have burned Microsoft at the fire whenever Peter Molyneux opened his mouth

It wasn't bioware that was responsible for the unreasonable deadline for game shipping. It wasn't bioware that demanded the game meet the launch date without delays

Bioware never stated they had problems with meeting launch date so I doubt that was an issue

Besides, all things must meet a deadline, even the freaking Sistine chapel had one, you can't blame EA for setting a two year production date and expecting a developer to deliver in that time six months give or take, every game works that way, if not you end up with games such as Duke Nukem Forever of all things

Karathos:
Here we go again. OMG I HATE EA THEY'RE WORSE THAN HITLER D:. Same hyperbole in every single thread or facebook comment section; the same completely retarded hopes for EA crashing, because a huge part of the gaming industry going under is apparently good for the industry. Yeah, nothing like thousands upon thousands of people losing their jobs to spruce up the business world amirite? Because that's how the business world works, and that's why the massive amounts of people getting fired from their jobs every day is COMPLETELY FIXING the worldwide economic crisis we're currently suffering through.

While I don't like seeing anyone losing their job, generally large industry collapsing (assuming its not as monolithic as international banks) is a good thing.

Think of a forest fire, its horrible and lots of things die, but it is crucial to the healthy ecosystem and biodiversity.

Just because they have a lot of employees doesn't mean they should be thought of as important or crucial, they are neither. They are merely an employer with a lot of money and employees.

As for your comments about the worldwide economic crises, those two things are not related. The major financial problems crippling most countries are political and not economic, certainly is true for the US, perhaps less so for places like Greece.

Just about every major layoff to hit the papers in the US in the last couple years has been political in one fashion or another. Same with the fiscal cliff, etc, etc.

Again though, just because a business hires a lot of people doesn't mean they are a good business or good for the industry they act in. There is a level of naivety in that sort of mindset that is almost staggering.

SNCommand:
[quote="doggie015" post="7.396336.16134989"]Well Casey Hudson isn't part of EA's marketing group, he's a a former technical artist and current executive producer at Bioware, that complaint shouldn't be relayed towards EA, besides, if people should hate a publisher whenever the executive producer hypes his own game people would have burned Microsoft at the fire whenever Peter Molyneux opened his mouth

I thought this was the case?

EA loses some money and hits hard times: ENTIRE FORUM BECOMES SELF-RIGHTEOUS AND FEELS JUSTIFIED IN EA HATE!
Add one more to the list of evidence to support claims that the letters 'EA' activates rage triggers in Escapist users' brains.

Doesn't seem like a huge thing yet. I'm not going to morn EA until something actually looks like its happening instead of might happen.

shintakie10:

Mimsofthedawg:

synobal:

Lets be Honest they put a lot of capital into developing SWTOR and it flopped big time. On top of that their move to free to play also appears to be a flop as well. I'm really a bit confused by EA's actions lately. They seem determined to drive any franchise into the ground.

Origin adoption has been terrible, and they don't seem capable of improving it the way their roadmap indicated. I'm honestly not sure what is going on at EA but they don't seem to be making operational decision based on the gaming industry and reality. They just seem to be sitting down and saying "how can we make more money" and then doing it with out ever considering if that will actually work or if it will hurt them in the long run.

Yea. I mean there are other things too, such as EA's belief that "By 2015 all games will be free to play"... first of all, that's just a couple years away... how does the ENTIRE MARKET of one of the world's largest (if not THE largest) entertainment industries change that fast? Second, why is EA seemingly the ONLY one that believes this?

They also did stupid things with their mobile/casual game department. A couple of years ago they believed it was the way of the future, and then the bubble popped.

But there's two things: A. EA still makes very high quality games, whether you're talking about Mass Effect, Battlefield, The Sims (which is in a way niche and in a way not... a LOT of people play it), etc. It seems like no one EVER talks about their successes.

B. Their investors seriously hate EA. I know that we can talk about abysmal failures like MOH and TOR, but Battlefield did very well, all things considered, yet I remember reading something about stocks dropping because it didn't meet expectations of some investors. What expectations? That it would beat COD. WHO THE HELL THOUGHT IT WOULD SELL MORE THAN COD?! That's what I mean, EA just can't catch a freaking break.

EA thought Battlefield would beat CoD. EA hyped that train to oblivion talkin about how it would be the next CoD, how CoD was crap compared to Battlefield, how their shit was better than Activisions shit by a mile.

The super obnoxious thing is that it was the publisher boastin super fuckin loudly to anyone who would hear, includin investors, all while DICE was tryin their hardest to bring those expectations back to reality town. Investors don't like reality though, they like the train to crazy rich town. When those expectations that EA all but said aloud didn't actually get met investors obviously got pissed.

EA wants to beat Activision. They want it so bad that they were willin to bet their stock on it and sold the highest possible expectations to their investors that it would happen. They don't care about reality. They don't care about facts and figures. They care that what they say makes investors happy in the short term while ignorin the most logical outcome and it bites them in the ass.

EA projected themselves obtaining about 30% of the market share.. which is what they accomplished with BF3. So.... that sort of throws a big handful of monkey poo into your lil theory there

EA can be redeemed, but it's going to take a near industrial sized bootstrapping effort. If they wish to cut costs, ditch the executives like Richitello et al. These idiots have been making bad decision after bad - mostly because they have no understanding or passion behind what it is they are trying to sell which isn't toys as they seem to think it is, but object d'art.

Secondly, they really need to listen to their patrons - or customers if you're more business minded. Gamers abhor being ripped off by the inclusion of online passes on top of the price it takes to buy new. Patrons are paying double for multiplayer which they already purchased via X-box Live Gold. (Now that I think of it, why did they do this for Kingdoms of Amalur when it's a single player game?)

Thirdly, less controversial marketing. by all means advertise, but less "Your mum will hate it" and "Sin to Win" type of advertising.

Finally: make DLC worth it's asking price.

We're all feeling the pinch of recession, but ripping people off is not going to help one iota.

As much as I want the monster to die, I know they'll make the poor developers suffer the most first, and the executives will always float away on their "golden-parachute".

But maybe in the long run it's better if EA dies or is broken down to the point where it reforms, that to continue going on it's current path.

PS: ME3's terrible ending was an isolated incident where the developers are good, but the publisher

synobal:
I still find the Star Wars the Old Republic Free to Play option amazing. It is like EA doesn't understand the goal of a Free To Play game. Your goal is to get people to actually play the game and then spend money on optional gear. Most of it cosmetic some of it that helps them game play wise. But not a single person is going to want to download your free to play game when they can't hardly do anything.

I've never seen a free to play option that was more crippled. I'm surprised they don't have free to play characters restricted to wheel chairs, and only able to move if a subscription player goes being them and starts pushing or they spend 10 dollars on a fuel cell that will pwoer the chair for an hour.

EA spin: "Oh no, we just invented a new genre: install 4 free but you gotta pay to play"

So yeah, they just dick you around with a massive download and install then not let you even get a proper demo without paying.

Gunner 51:
EA can be redeemed, but it's going to take a near industrial sized bootstrapping effort. If they wish to cut costs, ditch the executives like Richitello et al.

They'll sell all their offices and every last piece of stationary before the Executives take any kind of hit.

Because not only are the executives the ones making the decisions, they are making decisions for THEIR OWN BENEFIT. It doesn't benefit them to cut their bonuses, they will cut EVERYWHERE ELSE, to secure or increase how much money they take home. See, they are not in the business of making games - primarily - they are in the business of making themselves rich, and if they can become richer making less or worse games, they'll do it. Preferably with the lowest tax-rate.

Ahh, the low-low rate of capital gains tax. What's utter bullshit is tax-lobbyist sold the idea that capital-gains should have a lower tax-rate than income tax as it was a "tax on industry". But it's not. Capital gains is when you take money OUT OF A BUSINESS! It's when you cash in your stock to your personal bank account, not when you re-invest it!!!

A higher capital gains tax if anything would give greater incentive to keep money IN BUSINESS, invest more so more comes out. Not sell out to cash in stocks ASAP as why the the hell not? It's a low tax-rate and it's money now, could be less later.

Now I'm not a crazy person for "tax them to death". I'm against high inheritance tax rates as that inevitably leads to the forced selling of beloved family homes. I mean if granny dies and leaves her diamond wedding ring to her granddaughter, the government wants 20% of that? They can't have 20% of a ring, that means the ring must be sold and 20% given to the government.

But corporations, and executives who can afford their own private luxury jets? Different matter entirely.

Karathos:
because a huge part of the gaming industry going under is apparently good for the industry. Yeah, nothing like thousands upon thousands of people losing their jobs to spruce up the business world amirite?

If EA and Activision would collapse under their weight it would actually be very good for the "gaming industry" in the long term. Possibly a few other companies could maybe learn something from their downfall.

Treblaine:

They'll sell all their offices and every last piece of stationary before the Executives take any kind of hit.

Because not only are the executives the ones making the decisions, they are making decisions for THEIR OWN BENEFIT. It doesn't benefit them to cut their bonuses, they will cut EVERYWHERE ELSE, to secure or increase how much money they take home. See, they are not in the business of making games - primarily - they are in the business of making themselves rich, and if they can become richer making less or worse games, they'll do it. Preferably with the lowest tax-rate.

Ahh, the low-low rate of capital gains tax. What's utter bullshit is tax-lobbyist sold the idea that capital-gains should have a lower tax-rate than income tax as it was a "tax on industry". But it's not. Capital gains is when you take money OUT OF A BUSINESS! It's when you cash in your stock to your personal bank account, not when you re-invest it!!!

A higher capital gains tax if anything would give greater incentive to keep money IN BUSINESS, invest more so more comes out. Not sell out to cash in stocks ASAP as why the the hell not? It's a low tax-rate and it's money now, could be less later.

Now I'm not a crazy person for "tax them to death". I'm against high inheritance tax rates as that inevitably leads to the forced selling of beloved family homes. I mean if granny dies and leaves her diamond wedding ring to her granddaughter, the government wants 20% of that? They can't have 20% of a ring, that means the ring must be sold and 20% given to the government.

But corporations, and executives who can afford their own private luxury jets? Different matter entirely.

I'll be the first to admit most of my ideas are little more than optimistic pipe dreams. But you are very right that the CEOs and executives will be last people on the earth to take a financial hit for those who work below them.

Most of the shady goings on are entirely the publisher's fault - not just because their executives are greedy. But because they don't have any financial responsibility. The CEOs couldn't care less about the developers they left without a job or even the gamers - especially when they still have mansions and private jets waiting for them. Perhaps it's time for the state to get involved with business. As loathsomely Communist as it all sounds, I am beginning to think that the State should start regulating rogue businesses like Activision and EA because they're acting like fools with gamer's money.

Gunner 51:

Treblaine:

They'll sell all their offices and every last piece of stationary before the Executives take any kind of hit.

Because not only are the executives the ones making the decisions, they are making decisions for THEIR OWN BENEFIT. It doesn't benefit them to cut their bonuses, they will cut EVERYWHERE ELSE, to secure or increase how much money they take home. See, they are not in the business of making games - primarily - they are in the business of making themselves rich, and if they can become richer making less or worse games, they'll do it. Preferably with the lowest tax-rate.

Ahh, the low-low rate of capital gains tax. What's utter bullshit is tax-lobbyist sold the idea that capital-gains should have a lower tax-rate than income tax as it was a "tax on industry". But it's not. Capital gains is when you take money OUT OF A BUSINESS! It's when you cash in your stock to your personal bank account, not when you re-invest it!!!

A higher capital gains tax if anything would give greater incentive to keep money IN BUSINESS, invest more so more comes out. Not sell out to cash in stocks ASAP as why the the hell not? It's a low tax-rate and it's money now, could be less later.

Now I'm not a crazy person for "tax them to death". I'm against high inheritance tax rates as that inevitably leads to the forced selling of beloved family homes. I mean if granny dies and leaves her diamond wedding ring to her granddaughter, the government wants 20% of that? They can't have 20% of a ring, that means the ring must be sold and 20% given to the government.

But corporations, and executives who can afford their own private luxury jets? Different matter entirely.

I'll be the first to admit most of my ideas are little more than optimistic pipe dreams. But you are very right that the CEOs and executives will be last people on the earth to take a financial hit for those who work below them.

Most of the shady goings on are entirely the publisher's fault - not just because their executives are greedy. But because they don't have any financial responsibility. The CEOs couldn't care less about the developers they left without a job or even the gamers - especially when they still have mansions and private jets waiting for them. Perhaps it's time for the state to get involved with business. As loathsomely Communist as it all sounds, I am beginning to think that the State should start regulating rogue businesses like Activision and EA because they're acting like fools with gamer's money.

I can't really fault them for greed, everyone has a desire for money, that's why it's called money.

It's the blatant conflict of interest I can't stand. That's when the greed becomes at problem.

The conflict being between profiteering and creation. Gabe Newall is a multi-billionaire from his Valve company, but he got there by being passionate for gaming, particularly PC gaming, and his riches naturally came from the good work he did there. He actually has a vested interest not to syphon as much money into his personal bank account that he an have so much money that they live a long life of luxury - as other executives do. But to grow his company and the success of his company is part of his goal.

The only problem with government involvement is you replace one soulless monster who doesn't care about art and only cares about money with another soulless-monster-who-doesn't-care-about-art-and-only-cares-about-money. Even very democratic governments have been utterly dismissive of video gaming as something irrelevant at best or dangerous at worst, the only positive attention they'll ever give to it is how much money they can make off of it. And now we are back to square one of maximising output and not caring if it all implodes as long as they get their cash out.

I think the most powerful force is in the hands of the consumers with activism. Because they are the only group with vested interest in making the gaming industry richer in actual valuable worth, the financiers just want to make a bubble, cash out, then leave everyone in the smoking rubble while they disappear off the the Cayman islands with all your money.

The activism may not be so effective with the dreaded B-word (Boycotts) but we've shown how effective activism over Mass Effect 3 can be.

Gamers have something that the financiers don't have: Passion and influence. Though each is just a tiny voice, together it's far louder.

The lesson we need to learn from the failure of boycotts is not that it is impossible to boycott video games, but that the way we went about them before was wrong and they can work and be more effective if executed with more thoroughness.

For example, the PC boycott of MW2 should have been accompanied by a COD4 mod that emulated some of the features of MW2, released for free and people encouraged "Don't buy the same game again without dedi servers, get this free mod for your good old game". This requires organisation, but the latent power of gamer activism is only barely being tapped.

Treblaine:

I can't really fault them for greed, everyone has a desire for money, that's why it's called money.

It's the blatant conflict of interest I can't stand. That's when the greed becomes at problem.

The conflict being between profiteering and creation. Gabe Newall is a multi-billionaire from his Valve company, but he got there by being passionate for gaming, particularly PC gaming, and his riches naturally came from the good work he did there. He actually has a vested interest not to syphon as much money into his personal bank account that he an have so much money that they live a long life of luxury - as other executives do. But to grow his company and the success of his company is part of his goal.

The only problem with government involvement is you replace one soulless monster who doesn't care about art and only cares about money with another soulless-monster-who-doesn't-care-about-art-and-only-cares-about-money. Even very democratic governments have been utterly dismissive of video gaming as something irrelevant at best or dangerous at worst, the only positive attention they'll ever give to it is how much money they can make off of it. And now we are back to square one of maximising output and not caring if it all implodes as long as they get their cash out.

I think the most powerful force is in the hands of the consumers with activism. Because they are the only group with vested interest in making the gaming industry richer in actual valuable worth, the financiers just want to make a bubble, cash out, then leave everyone in the smoking rubble while they disappear off the the Cayman islands with all your money.

The activism may not be so effective with the dreaded B-word (Boycotts) but we've shown how effective activism over Mass Effect 3 can be.

Gamers have something that the financiers don't have: Passion and influence. Though each is just a tiny voice, together it's far louder.

The lesson we need to learn from the failure of boycotts is not that it is impossible to boycott video games, but that the way we went about them before was wrong and they can work and be more effective if executed with more thoroughness.

For example, the PC boycott of MW2 should have been accompanied by a COD4 mod that emulated some of the features of MW2, released for free and people encouraged "Don't buy the same game again without dedi servers, get this free mod for your good old game". This requires organisation, but the latent power of gamer activism is only barely being tapped.

Perhaps my idea about the politicians getting involved wasn't such a good idea. Though the main bulk of the idea was merely to oversee that the CEOs and big-wigs spend their money fairly. Though given the recent expenses scandal over here - it may not be such a good idea after all.

Activism has a lot of good points, but does leave the console crowds in the dust. But if console and PC crowds ever united - gamers the world over would have one hell of a powerful voice. With the bridge between console and PC shrinking, and Kickstarter not looking like it's going down the tubes any time soon, and corporate image at an all time low, there's never been a better time for good natured activism.

But I have one question about the activism side of things, how do console gamers get involved at this point? Because I'd love to try it. :)

EA never even learned from Ubisofts attempt at always on DRM.
the new simcity will not only be always on but you will only be allowed to use cloud saves as an extra attempt at always on drm.

i know alot of people who were planning to purchase simcity are now going to avoid it like the plague. myself included

Well, I enjoyed a little chuckle after reading this news. I can only hope this downturn in business for EA continues until they collapse under their own weight and everyone involved in its management spends their golden years filing papers in a shithole office for 10$ an hour.

 Pages PREV 1 2

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