EA Really Doesn't Want to be The Worst Company In America

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT
 

I'll just copy and paste from what I've said previously...

What I will say is that I admire Peter Moore owning up and saying basically "We fucked up". I also admire the bit when he says EA won't cave to homophobes. While it doesn't affect me, I'm sure a lot of LGBT gamers will appreciate that stance.

And one thing I will say is that I personally don't believe EA is the worst company in America.

However, personally, what I don't like is the "Our success is the reason we're being picked". While he admits fault with a few things EA have done, saying "We're only hated because we're successful" is just arrogant, and for the most part wrong. There are companies that manage to be successful and widely popular. To use an example in gaming, Valve. While they aren't widely loved by all, and aren't perfect, they have managed to be hugely successful and are also popular.

So I suppose I'm "half-and-half" on this statement. Half of me wants to shake hands and agree with the guy. The other half wants to slap him silly.

I'm not throwing money at the screen I'm giving it two middles fingers, why is this not working?!

Oh i thought always online requirement was drm. Well he sure showed me i was wrong by saying that it wasn't multiple times.

I think EA needs to fire more people, and figure out the problems with the ones you have.

There are two groups I can namely think that's been hurting them - Its their fact-finders and the PR team. Whoever gathers their facts simply does not go deep enough, and whoever comes up with whatever ideas like Sin to Win or that commercial with the moms is hurting EA way more than anything else. I'd go as far as firing all but two PR members, and then make their ideas require approval from the actual public; it's going to be hard to pass ideas this way, but what it does is give them a constant dose of reality when making these decisions. EA also needs to watch out for yes-men in their ranks; it's not going to help if they've got people who are too afraid or cannot defend themselves to say no to anything. Find these yes-men, find the cause of their inability to logically decide, and deal with that cause. If that cause is somebody who's kept things at an even keel, EA should still get rid of them - They've resorted to fear and supremacy so they can maintain that order.

Office morale is no doubt another cause. After EA_Spouse's letter, there is a dark clouds hanging over all of EA's developer offices. Nobody wants to feel like a prisoner to their work, and poorly-treated and poorly-recognized developers only result in overall bad performance and poor morale. This poor recognition, performance, and morale is considerably part of the reason why EA's recent games have essentially crashed and burned with bursts of player negativity emanating from them - Who wants to do their best on a game they won't be recognized for, or worse lambasted by the public over, for a game that requires teams of several hundred people?

Finally, here's something EA really needs to revalue. It's something that is basically driving everyone mad, be it the remaining players of their games or their development houses. It's EA's time constraints; they should just stop such ludicrously short lengths, and TAKE. THEIR. TIME. We're happy to be patient, hell probably even happier if the game development scene would slow down a little so we can actually have time to play all the new releases! Longer timelines for games, despite their the costs, means refinement and more experimentation with mechanics. Refinement and experimentation means better gameplay and re-engineering certain game mechanics that would be poorly defined or need expansion. Expanded and improved mechanics and better gameplay means happier people. Happier people is what EA is trying to aim for, and all it took was more time! In fact, if EA would banish the annual release model, I'd expect company morale to immediately rise.

So tl;dr, EA needs to: Fire almost all of their fact-finders and PR team, get rid of the yes-men (or their overly authoritative superiors), deal with the morale/team size problem, and take their time with promising games.

Or they could get their stockholders to care. How many of those stockholders really care of the quality of the game, and how many just want profits at the expense of everything else?

The Artificially Prolonged:

So your sticking with it's an MMO thing then huh? Funny cause I though MMOs generally supported a bit more than 16 concurrent players. I can keep calling a banana a female aardvark, but it doesn't make anymore true. SimCity's always online requirement is DRM, no amount of weaseling will change that.

we should just call them all a bunch of smeee heeee...'s and be done with it

Dexter111:
-super-awesome-ultra-snip-zorg

Beautifully put, I agree absolutely 100%

Yet again another EA press release dressed up as an offering of peace and statement of care, that is nothing more than veiled insults and political rhetoric that takes blame for nothing, stokes their own egos and disregards the criticisms, playing the victim and blaming the customer. Take your apology and shove it up your aspen.

DVS BSTrD:
The tallest trees catch the most wind, and you are definitely blowing the most wind right now Peter Moore.

Can I be the first to gleefully shout TIMBER!

Kargathia:

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:
and having one hell of a good public relations team

I'm not entirely sure why this is crossed out, as it's pretty much spot on: Valve makes good games, but where they truly shine is salesmanship. The way they've made their customers love them for the chance to buy their stuff is a PR/sales masterclass in and of itself.

I guess I've always felt that a lot of the goodwill Valve earns is through, as you say, slick salesmanship more than anything, but I didn't want to get flamed for it. If you remember the Orange Box launch, that was every bit the shitty fiasco that SimCity was, made worse by the fact that it was pretty unprecedented at the time. Personally I'm not a huge fan of the way gamers give Valve a free pass for stuff that would earn eternal condemnation if pulled by EA, but I can still recognise that the philosophies of the companies are fundamentally different.

EA, on the other hand, is an equally perfect example in how to do it wrong. Quite entertaining, but wrong.
Now this doesn't put them quite in the same league as companies that have ruined countless people's lives, but as has been pointed out already: "not the absolute worst" still is pretty fucking terrible.

I guess that for me's the fundamental difference. Valve and EA seem to pull a lot of the same shit, but Valve know how to dress it up better. At least, in my honest opinion.

thethird0611:
EA is starting to cave in that some of its business practices are bad, but wont accept that micro-transactions and always online are a bad thing.....

KEEP VOTING THEM THE WORST.

Give it two more years and it may be gone.

Hell, I usually stand up for EA for not being the worst, but hell, if its getting progress, lets do it.

The idea that I originally found most pleasing was that EA would get on these Consumerist tournaments for multiple years in a row, but not getting in "first place". I mean, EA has its own vileness, but it seems like Ticketmaster is not only close to a monopoly while EA has its handful of titles each year, and has even worse customer service than EA does. Few years of EA having to be on their toes could do a lot of good

BUT!

Peter Moore's open letter is so bad that its points can easily be refuted by more than half the damn people on these forums, and it just shows that EA management hasn't learned one damn bit. Riccitiello might have stepped down, but it's same ol' bullshit.

GAunderrated:
I can't be the only one who read his bullet points going "bullshit....more bullshit....padded numbers.....and more bullshit"

EA has got to stop trying to justify themselves because they can't. I am sorry the decisions they are making are not justifiable so please stop it. We arn't going to buy your crap opinions on the matter.

I laughed so hard I farted when he said that SimCity has no DRM and then said you are wrong if you disagree :p.

Felt good.

I appreciated it.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

Kargathia:

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:
and having one hell of a good public relations team

I'm not entirely sure why this is crossed out, as it's pretty much spot on: Valve makes good games, but where they truly shine is salesmanship. The way they've made their customers love them for the chance to buy their stuff is a PR/sales masterclass in and of itself.

I guess I've always felt that a lot of the goodwill Valve earns is through, as you say, slick salesmanship more than anything, but I didn't want to get flamed for it. If you remember the Orange Box launch, that was every bit the shitty fiasco that SimCity was, made worse by the fact that it was pretty unprecedented at the time. Personally I'm not a huge fan of the way gamers give Valve a free pass for stuff that would earn eternal condemnation if pulled by EA, but I can still recognise that the philosophies of the companies are fundamentally different.

EA, on the other hand, is an equally perfect example in how to do it wrong. Quite entertaining, but wrong.
Now this doesn't put them quite in the same league as companies that have ruined countless people's lives, but as has been pointed out already: "not the absolute worst" still is pretty fucking terrible.

I guess that for me's the fundamental difference. Valve and EA seem to pull a lot of the same shit, but Valve know how to dress it up better. At least, in my honest opinion.

Now that isn't completely true. The difference between Valve and EA is how they combo their games. When you purchase a Valve combo meal you get everything at once, or it's a F2P outright. EA likes to sell it's 60 dollar "value" meal without just the bear bones, then they sell you the cheese for 5 more dollars, lettuce and tomato for ten, and etc. Not only that, but the way they handle the game community is drastically different. Valve supports modders to the very end. Black Mesa wouldn't have existed if EA owned the ip rights. In EA's eyes the consumer is the villain, which is why they're so frustratingly stupid.

Let me play Devil's Advocate for a moment, especially regarding SimCity...

Where is YOUR proof? We have EA saying it's not an online DRM thing, and we have Maxis, the people that actually MADE the game, saying it is not a DRM thing. Given that Maxis made a lot of other Sims games and games that 'encourage' multiplayer playing, like say DarkSpore? A game where you have to be online to play all the time... But nowhere near the same shitstorm... Also published by EA...

So I can buy the 'not a DRM thing', Maxis are trying to get to a fanbase that are always online. While they are currently rumours about the new Xbox Console, with the Creative Director stating that "always is on" is okay, it does imply that this is the attitude that the CONSUMERS are giving the Developers?

How about how popular the multiplayer aspects of games are? Halo, Call of Duty, Battlefield, StarCraft 2, All of the MMOs, Gears of War, God of War, Counter-Strike, DOTA, LOL, and dozens of others...

Can you blame them for trying to get in on this action? People buy these games to play in a social setting, because we are too lazy to set up LANs... Like it or not, and most of you won't, we are forcing the trend of video games to go this way... Look at the titles coming up, and how many of them have an online multiplayer component?

We asked for this, so just stop complaining about it, until you can PROVE that EA forced Maxis to do this...

And if/when you do rant at me, without any plausible evidence, my answer will be, 'Here's your paddle and the Nile is that way'.

Grey Carter:

Xdeser2:

Still though, I'm glad Grey posted this without much opinion on it all, leave it a bit ambiguous lol

You have no idea how hard that was. Still, more material for Critical Miss I guess.

Yeah; Critical Miss should be able to run with this for weeks quite easily.

PunkRex:
- Many continue to claim the Always-On function in SimCity is a DRM scheme. It's not. People still want to argue about it. We can't be any clearer - it's not. Period.

Didn't some hacker already prove you wrong on Youtube, like actually PROVE you wrong?

- Some claim there's no room for Origin as a competitor to Steam. 45 million registered users are proving that wrong.

Don't some of your games REQUIRE Origin to work? I think Steam do this to, I suppose thats just how things are.

- Some people think that free-to-play games and micro-transactions are a pox on gaming. Tens of millions more are playing and loving those games.

As long as its done with class EA... class!

- We've seen mailing lists that direct people to vote for EA because they disagree with the choice of the cover athlete on Madden NFL. Yes, really...

Okay, this is petty as fuck, UNLESS were talking about that Michael Vick bullshit. That cunt should have been out of the running on day 1!

- In the past year, we have received thousands of emails and postcards protesting against EA for allowing players to create LGBT characters in our games. This week, we're seeing posts on conservative web sites urging people to protest our LGBT policy by voting EA the Worst Company in America.

Okay, good on you for at least taking a stance unlike some other companies, I'll gladly give you this one.

There are some truly disgusting companies based in America but as he said, EA has alot of online followers due to the nature of their buisness. It sucks for EA that users don't take the poll a little more seriously but thats asking people on the internet to act like adults... and well...

Fully agreed with everything said here. EA needs to learn that applying bull manure to existing bull manure just makes more bull manure!

Aiddon:
if you have voted that EA is worse than the Bank of America despite being up to date on current events, I'm gonna say this right now: YOU'RE A FUCKING MORON. And if you're just ignorant of the BoA's actions, then get yourself familiar.

Are they the bank that got away with protecting money of Drug Cartels?

gigastar:
Im sure that Activision is a taller tree than EA, yet theyve done nothing to piss off this many people over the last 2 years.

I found it strange that he'd say that. The whole reason some plants and animals grow massive is they kill off the competition. I'm not too keen on supporting a company that slaughters its competition instead of working in symbiosis with them. I know a lot of people love that whole cutthroat capitalism but to me its shitty and inhuman.

VoidWanderer:
How about how popular the multiplayer aspects of games are? Halo, Call of Duty, Battlefield, StarCraft 2, All of the MMOs, Gears of War, God of War, Counter-Strike, DOTA, LOL, and dozens of others...

Halo, Call of Duty, Battlefield, Starcraft 2, Gears of War, and God of War all have offline modes and offline options. Starcraft 2 requires you be 100% updated but I played it entirely offline just fine.

Comparing MMOs which >literally require online to exist< to Sim City is disingenuous and makes you sound like a child. Which fits in with your last line I guess.

LOL and DOTA I can't speak on, though they have AI modes so they could run offline just fine if they don't already. I don't play either because their communities are toxic to me :/.

Sim City can be played entirely offline by editing two lines of code. You probably already know this. The only thing that requires online is their cloud saves system. But everyone knows how to do cloud saves without always online. Over half my steam library has both cloud saving and runs offline.

If you play Sim City next to someone you will not see what they are doing. The game isn't even updated live, it sends updates periodically to reduce stress on the server. If you happen to know two people who own it have them play side by side, their experiences are entirely not synchronized. The only thing that seems to be real time is chat.

They had to turn off nearly every online feature just to make it work. So everyone enjoying the game already has proven that those features that made the game unplayable in the beginning aren't even necessary for the quality of the game.

If it weren't DRM they would have let people play offline and playing online would let the online features work. Like >everyone else<.

Even Diablo 3 is going off the online only for the console edition.

Anywho, I just wasted a lot of time :p. If you did so little research that you had to snark out like that you don't actually want people to tell you anything. You just want to feel smug.

That's cool. Hope this helps warm your cockles or whatever.

I actually don't think Sim City is a bad game, but there is no evidence to suggest that this system is not specifically for DRM. The only thing stopping it from being offline is having it save to your hard drive instead of the cloud, since they can't work that out I guess.

It's a shame but its hardly their biggest problem :). The pathing is otherworldly bad. But I think that gets forgotten when the game has become unplayable quite a few times (even after launch) because the server all your cities are saved on go down.

Which is cool I guess, if you really like doing their forced tutorial that basically calls you an idiot. I've never had a tutorial treat me like I'd drown in a bathtub with more than an inch of water, but that one certainly did.

So that's my 2 cents. If I beat someone with a pipe then adamantly say that I didn't beat them with a pipe and tell anyone who says I did that they are wrong. That doesn't mean I didn't beat them with a pipe. It probably means I don't want to get in trouble for beating them with a pipe.

I don't know >why< the chose their decision, there is some kind of odd fear of piracy as if it has any appreciable impact on sales. But if it weren't for me visiting a friend who works there I would have never bought it (their games are 10 dollars on site, 10 bucks for SimCity and getting Dead Space 3 for free makes it like I paid 5 for each, that is more than fair for either title. I'd say Sim City is probably worth about 15, a solid mindless experience. I liken it to a facebook game, problem is the box says its a deep sim.)

edit: for lulz...

http://www.uproxx.com/gammasquad/2013/03/ea-and-maxis-could-make-simcity-playable-offline-by-removing-a-single-line-of-code/

http://boingboing.net/2013/03/08/simcity-drm-disaster-continues.html - Cheetah is coming back this week, maybe, its only 2X instead of 3X speed. Because their servers can't take 3X. You know what could take 3X? >.>...my computer.

http://www.shacknews.com/article/78236/simcity-update-to-fix-pathing-issues - Pathing issues I mentioned. They were actually pretty funny. Even now if you put 2 sewage processors next to one another all sewage goes to the first and not the second. Everything nearly does closest target. Darn shame.

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/03/12/simcity-server-not-necessary/ - This has since been proven to be true because you can run the game after turning off your internet. You can run it indefinitely with those lines of code above.

As far as I know, you can replugin your internet after a while and it'll update your saves too once the connection is redone. I've never tried this in particular though.

Aiddon:
if you have voted that EA is worse than the Bank of America despite being up to date on current events, I'm gonna say this right now: YOU'RE A FUCKING MORON. And if you're just ignorant of the BoA's actions, then get yourself familiar.

Well this poll is about the worst company for "consumers". If it was meant to decide on the company with the worst business practices then you'd have a point. As it is, you're simply ill informed on the nature of the reward.

Dexter111:
I'd post this as a response on there, but unfortunately they have a rather low character limit on comments. xD

First let me address your points regarding EA being voted "The Worst Company in America".

The site this Poll takes place on is called "The Consumerist", and the Poll is dedicated to companies that screw over consumers, not committing atrocities against mankind, because you are right EA wouldn't be among the final contestants in that case. BP won't win awards for its clean business and the Bank of America is an American bank that did horrible things to the people indebted to them, but ultimately the peak of most people coming into contact with consumer practices in regards to BP is usually when they are upset because the gas prices went up again. And the Bank of America is the Bank of "America", while The Consumerist Poll is open to people Worldwide.

Another key difference is also that they offer replaceable goods. If someone doesn't like BP they can go fill their gas tank at a Shell or Exxon petrol station or at various other competitors of their choosing and their car will still work just fine.
If people don't like a bank they can always switch, in most cases even transfer debt if there's evidence of being able to pay it off.
If people want to play games published by EA though, which are unique as products, they can't get them from anywhere else, and they're forced to suffer from EAs overall practices against its consumers. If you like games, or want games by certain developers like BioWare, Maxis or Visceral you are forced to put up with those or go without.

For instance in the case of Sim City, there could have been near to a million ticked off consumers that weren't able to play the game for the first week or two and were directly affected by these practices. Amazon.com has over 3000 1-star user reviews alone, a lot of them by "Amazon Verified Purchasers" so you know these are YOUR consumers complaining about YOU. Those are people that actively took the time of day and wrote entire paragraphs (and initiated in dialogue) over how bad the game and especially your practices in regards to it are.

At the end of the day, what do you think would have happened if BP or Bank of America would've won another award for how badly they are operating their business? They wouldn't even have released any kind of statement to acknowledge their win and there likely wouldn't have been any kind of reaction at all. People are at least hoping to get a reaction and admittance out of EA, and maybe, possibly change some of the things it does.

________________________________________________

That Sim City's Always Online Requirement isn't "DRM" is a blatant lie and you know that, many of your consumers (especially on the PC side of things) are rather proficient with technical skills and work in IT or as programmers themselves, you should know that you can't pull the wool over their eyes.

The features and the requirements of a game deign if it should carry the "MMO" genre brand and not marketing buzzwords or type of DRM employed.

Sim City was always decidedly Single Player and the new one isn't much different, it's just a new breed of single player game that has a built in DRM limiting its use-cases and deigning it to a designed obsolescence as soon as the sequel comes out. It's a bad precedent and has to be stopped lest more and more decidedly Single Player games do the same thing and then possibly "disappear" forever at some point when server upkeep doesn't prove profitable anymore or out of whatever other reason, while people can still play Sim City 2000 from 20 years ago without a problem.

Let's examine the meaning of the word "MMO" as it pertains to Sim City...

MASSIVE(LY) -> Usually means more than 128 people (often much more) and with a persistent world, Battlefield for instance had 64×64 player maps and soldier persistency mechanics for a long while and it's still "only" considered a Multiplayer game (and also always had its Single Player part in being able to play against Bots or the campaign). In the case of Sim City there are regions that people can play in either alone, or share cities with a rather (low) number of other people, usually 2-6 other people, but only 4 seem to be able to interconnect properly at one time.

MULTIPLAYER -> Should be a little more than a few values you could unmarshal/marshal from/into a simple file. You can play alone in Sim City, there isn't even a "Co-Op Mode" for two player city building or anything like that, which would require Multiplayer. All new features could be developed as an (optional) Multiplayer mode and everyone would have been happy.

Regions and sharing/trading resources aren't a new thing, Sim City 4 from 2003 already had those with its Regional Gameplay.

As far as I know there were even people playing it in "Multiplayer" like the new Sim City that way by simply synching a few of the State/Save-files amongst each other using DropBox, for instance there are people on SimTropolis doing this.

There is also a big difference between "Synchronous Multiplayer Games" (what MMOs are using where people run around with each other, form groups or raids and appear with hundreds of other people in a common town or area and states are updated instantaneously to transmit the new positional data based on ping latency from clients to server) and "Asynchronous Multiplayer Games" like Sim City where you can play all by your lonesome, building your city not much minding what other people do, even if they are Offline at the moment and then they get to see what you did when they log in next and get to do the same.

The only mechanism required for this is a asynchronous way to push/pull and merge that data at given intervals depending on how the players want to, e.g. every hour/day/week or whatever may be deemed appropriate. Instead EA/Maxis made it all just worse, by requiring an Always-Online connection even if you are playing alone (which most people are likely doing).

ONLINE -> Yep, forced "Always-Online DRM".

Sim City, even with its new design is still a decidedly Single Player game (that could make use of an OPTIONAL Multiplayer Mode which would only need to synch State files with a master server every time in a period of X hours/minutes or even multiple days if the player chooses so, no need to be Always Online for it), your own engineers have said so themselves.

You keep repeating that the game is an "MMO", trying to get people to buy that. This whole thing would have been half as bad if you just admitted to the DRM instead of outright lying and trying to deflect from the issues, but that isn't EAs usual policy.

_________________________________________

Your company has been going around devouring developers and draining them of all their creativity for around two decades now, about as many years as you have treated your customers as walking, talking wallets and not much else. You have been at the forefront of DLC and Day-1 DLC as a money-gouging practice, Microtransactions, using viral marketing to change public perception, trying to influence the press, trying to prevent used sales with Online Passes, various kinds of consumer-scorning DRM methods, lately even Always-Online DRM.
You refer to Microtransactions as a "consumer choice", yet your previous CEO referred to them as consumer exploitation at points in time when players "aren't price sensitive":

Your sports games only sell the way they do because you have acquired and are basically hoarding the exclusive rights to about any existing league out there, from the NFL, NBA, FIFA, UEFA to the NHL and more. Principal thing being to have no competition as you know that a quasi-monopolistic position in the market is the best position to be in and games aren't considered "serious business" just yet anyway, despite making more money than movies and music do in large parts of the world.
These practices are considered and methodical unlike oil spills or the financial crisis (which I am sure even BP and big banks didn't WANT to happen, but came to be from negligence).

I'd also like to remind you of the "EA Spouse" incident, that described how EA deals with some of its valued employees, there's talk of 7-day work weeks and 85-90 hours of work in those, of deteriorating families and other nasty things, and if a game slightly underperforms you don't seem as considerate about their livelihoods and cut their jobs to "maximize profits".

You also aren't above cutting peoples jobs and re-hiring them in their desperation just as a bonus was due, benefits would kick in or because you want your quarterly figures to look good, or at least weren't above it in the past.

Your EULA forbids people to sue you if they have disagreements, you take the rights to collect personal data of your consumers for yourself and use it whatever way you want and having the right to terminate any purchase agreement and taking away products out of any reason whatsoever, just because they want to play some games.

In other industries, trying to talk customers into believing that they don't actually "own" the products they buy with their money or trying to completely prevent used sales would be considered ludicrous, yet when your company does it, it seems to be fine since it's "only about video games", you are also shifting the lion share of your profits to marketing-based "Pre-Order" hype more and more, since actually knowing if a game is good or bad before buying it might be bad for business after all...

It is also telling, that yet again you are using the LBTGQ community as nothing but a shield to hide behind whenever you make mistakes, you have done so already for Dragon Age 2, you have done it in various occasions for Star Wars: The Old Republic, you have done it against the criticism levied against Mass Effect 3 in the beginning days till the mountain grew too big (which wasn't only about the ending, but also about employing Origin as DRM, important plot-based Day-1 DLC and many other things), you have done it with Sim City recently and more importantly you have already done it the last time around you were voted the "Worst Company in America" and were even called out on it by publications like Forbes. People aren't really buying it anymore.

It constitutes a really low PR tactic and people appreciate it less and less the more you make use of it. We know that EA has even dabbled in hiring fake religious protesters to promote their games (Dante's Inferno) and that the company isn't above this.

Enough is enough and there is also another tree-related proverb that I'd like to bring up: "The bigger they are, the harder they fall."

This sums up my views very nicely. Well said as always Dexter, it was a pleasure to read your post!

Aiddon:
if you have voted that EA is worse than the Bank of America despite being up to date on current events, I'm gonna say this right now: YOU'RE A FUCKING MORON. And if you're just ignorant of the BoA's actions, then get yourself familiar.

I am up to date on current events, Bank of AMerica hasnt really fucked over their CONSUMERS badly, over and over, like EA has. and this is a CONSUMERIST poll.

Worst? No. Most hated? Probably.

What EA needs to stop doing is trying to make all their games cater to the 'wider audiences'. By trying to do too much with a game, you're making what it could do very well suffer as a result. Dead Space is an example, by the third one the franchise had devolved into an action game rather than a survival-horror. By giving the developers they own more freedom to make the games they'd like to, better games will be made and the fanbases involved would be a lot less vitriolic towards EA.

The biggest trees catch the most wind.

Or, as I prefer to say, the biggest shits make the most smell.

This just goes to show that the EA execs aren't familiar with reality but very familiar with spin. Fingers crossed they win that award!

synobal:

Some claim there's no room for Origin as a competitor to Steam. 45 million registered users are proving that wrong.

I don't care that you want to compete with Steam normally I'd even say ya it's a good thing but you've done shit all with origin. No good sales, no real feature improvements. Remember that roadmap you published when you launched Origin and it was basically just a reskined EADM with a friends list? Ya it's still just a reskinned Ea download manager with a friends list you've not put any effort into improving it. If you're gonna make us abandon steam to play your games don't tell us how awesome it's going to be and then not deliver.

Dude they had a massive sale on hundreds of games like three weeks ago. What are you talking about?

Yes, the "Tallest trees catch the most wind", it's a cute saying.
But no cute saying can magic away your history, EA.

EA shouldn't even be in contention as far as I'm concerned, but just because I don't think they're the worst in America doesn't mean I am fooled into thinking they're just a big misunderstood pillar of the gaming community.

And given your recent fuckups, you shouldn't be proud EA.

VoidWanderer:

We asked for this, so just stop complaining about it, until you can PROVE that EA forced Maxis to do this...

And if/when you do rant at me, without any plausible evidence, my answer will be, 'Here's your paddle and the Nile is that way'.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/119449-EA-Turns-Its-Back-on-Single-Player-Games

"I have not green lit one game to be developed as a single player experience. Today, all of our games include online applications and digital services that make them live 24/7/365."

If they wanted to make a singleplayer Sim City, Too fuckin bad Frank Gibeau wouldnt green light it, it had to be multiplayer focused in order to get a greenlight at EA.

We never asked for this (/Human Revolution) atleast no one with a brain asked for this. And as for the proof that it didnt need to be always online: The only things that the online connection does is toss a few export variables to the server to let other regional cities know what your city is willing to export, save the game and...check to make sure you have internet connection.

You can easily modify the internet connection out so you can play the game as long as you want offline, that already shoots holes in their statment.
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/03/16/simcity-modder-tells-us-offline-regional-play-easily-done/

Desert Punk:

VoidWanderer:

We asked for this, so just stop complaining about it, until you can PROVE that EA forced Maxis to do this...

And if/when you do rant at me, without any plausible evidence, my answer will be, 'Here's your paddle and the Nile is that way'.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/119449-EA-Turns-Its-Back-on-Single-Player-Games

"I have not green lit one game to be developed as a single player experience. Today, all of our games include online applications and digital services that make them live 24/7/365."

If they wanted to make a singleplayer Sim City, Too fuckin bad Frank Gibeau wouldnt green light it, it had to be multiplayer focused in order to get a greenlight at EA.

We never asked for this (/Human Revolution) atleast no one with a brain asked for this. And as for the proof that it didnt need to be always online: The only things that the online connection does is toss a few export variables to the server to let other regional cities know what your city is willing to export, save the game and...check to make sure you have internet connection.

You can easily modify the internet connection out so you can play the game as long as you want offline, that already shoots holes in their statment.
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/03/16/simcity-modder-tells-us-offline-regional-play-easily-done/

Darn :(. I was just about to add that escapist link to my link replies to him :(.

You win!

*bows and walks out*

Edit: Yeah I don't think anyone wanted SimCity online >.>...

Like...nobody? Sure feels like it. I would love it if it were an option that I could dabble in, but 100% of my play has been private. You can't remove someone from your city if they quit which leaves you with a bum neighbor for eternity. Terrible planning on the game design.

i love the quote and how well it suits his picture here. i'm curious how he comfortably fits all those balls into one pair of pants.

i actually kind of like Peter Moore, hes always been pretty sensible from what i've seen of him and it was cool to see him lose his shit about the dead space being cancelled rumors, and now this.

he's one part of ea that definitely has my love

He's not wrong for the most part, but shoving arbitrary numbers at us won't make us start to respect you EA.

"We have 45 million registered users"

How many made an account and don't use it? (Probably for either security reasons, or because EA's prices suck).

How many made an account just for 1 or 2 exclusives? (I'd bet most)

How many made a SECOND account because the first one got BANNED? (I won't get into semantics here).

Go back to your LGBT defense for a while and garner some respect for doing the right thing. Or bring back Bullfrog and Westwood.

I do feel sorry for some of the flak EA gets because of "reasons", but then again I also feel sorry for bullies who simply can't make friends anymore.

theultimateend:

Desert Punk:

VoidWanderer:

We asked for this, so just stop complaining about it, until you can PROVE that EA forced Maxis to do this...

And if/when you do rant at me, without any plausible evidence, my answer will be, 'Here's your paddle and the Nile is that way'.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/119449-EA-Turns-Its-Back-on-Single-Player-Games

"I have not green lit one game to be developed as a single player experience. Today, all of our games include online applications and digital services that make them live 24/7/365."

If they wanted to make a singleplayer Sim City, Too fuckin bad Frank Gibeau wouldnt green light it, it had to be multiplayer focused in order to get a greenlight at EA.

We never asked for this (/Human Revolution) atleast no one with a brain asked for this. And as for the proof that it didnt need to be always online: The only things that the online connection does is toss a few export variables to the server to let other regional cities know what your city is willing to export, save the game and...check to make sure you have internet connection.

You can easily modify the internet connection out so you can play the game as long as you want offline, that already shoots holes in their statment.
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/03/16/simcity-modder-tells-us-offline-regional-play-easily-done/

Darn :(. I was just about to add that escapist link to my link replies to him :(.

You win!

*bows and walks out*

Ahh but your post was far better than mine, I merely added icing onto your already impressive cake!

-bows back!-

You know, I just voted for EA being the worst company in America for the semi-finals, and nothing this guy said made be regret that. Saying about how you don't want to be hated is one thing, but it's just empty words until you actually DO something about it.

Aiddon:
if you have voted that EA is worse than the Bank of America despite being up to date on current events, I'm gonna say this right now: YOU'RE A FUCKING MORON. And if you're just ignorant of the BoA's actions, then get yourself familiar.

I have to say I'm going to be voting for EA in the final round and I would appreciate it if you didn't insult me for it.

Mr. Moore,

EA is not a tree. Consumer complaints are not wind. Trees grow without direction according to their genetic code. Wind is a force of nature that blows in accordance with geological principles. Thus, the tree has no strategy nor the wind merit. EA hopefully has a strategy and consumer complaints often enough have merit. Your company will not improve it's image until it admits the customer is right and you are a fucking lunatic in denial. Drawing upon straw man examples of criticism to undermine the valid concerns is fooling no one except, maybe, yourself.

Sincerely,
90's Gamer

Akalabeth:

synobal:

Some claim there's no room for Origin as a competitor to Steam. 45 million registered users are proving that wrong.

I don't care that you want to compete with Steam normally I'd even say ya it's a good thing but you've done shit all with origin. No good sales, no real feature improvements. Remember that roadmap you published when you launched Origin and it was basically just a reskined EADM with a friends list? Ya it's still just a reskinned Ea download manager with a friends list you've not put any effort into improving it. If you're gonna make us abandon steam to play your games don't tell us how awesome it's going to be and then not deliver.

Dude they had a massive sale on hundreds of games like three weeks ago. What are you talking about?

One of their few sales. Usually when I go to origin, there are no sales or like a 10% sale on some game that is four years old. Compare to say Valve that has sales all the time, and advertise them well. EA simply aren't going to do sales, they said a while ago they thing it devalues their IP. Despite the fact that they usually do the most damage to them.

Desert Punk:
Ahh but your post was far better than mine, I merely added icing onto your already impressive cake!

-bows back!-

The only real bummer for me is that this game is VERY charming.

Some small updates to the AI routines and pathing, offline mode, and perhaps being able to move buildings after you place them (because you can't rollback) would make it a genuinely nice game.

Like...you can SEE it. That's the bummer.

I think that's why folks get so bitchy, they see what could be a ball bustingly awesome game but its just marred by some very poor policies and design plans.

I didn't invest nearly enough money to be emotionally invested but I won't lie when I say that it has so much untapped potential and to me is the greatest shame. At least a game like Guilty Gears Dust Striker was a train wreck, the best thing you could do for that game is shoot it behind the shed. This game actually has promise and just needs love that it probably will never get.

They might be the worst company of America and I dislike some of the things they do, but that was one inspiring post. My only hope now is that they learn from their mistakes and begin the healing process so their games just get better.

Evil Smurf:
EA is'n't going to read this thread, why are you all posting as if it will? Furthermore they don't care anyway. Give up, don't buy there games and complain to them not the escapist.

most consumers dont realise the power they have to change things by voting with their wallet.
even waiting for a price drop instead or pre odering send a message

"Some claim there's no room for Origin as a competitor to Steam. 45 million registered users are proving that wrong."

As one of those 45 million registered consumers who were unwillingly transferred from the EA Downloader to your crappy Steam wannabe, I will NOT put that POS that you call a service on my PC.

GAunderrated:
I can't be the only one who read his bullet points going "bullshit....more bullshit....padded numbers.....and more bullshit"

I think it would be simpler to count those who didn't.

It seemed his only defense was how many people use EA's products and services. But guess what, Pete? The only reason I'm a registered user of Origin is because, after purchasing Heroes of Might and Magic 6 on Steam, you left me with a choice: sign up to Origin, or never play the game. The game I just bought. ON STEAM.

If your tree is so tall that it's sucking up all the groundwater, obscuring our view of other smaller, greener trees, and dropping it's bitter, worm-ridden fruit everywhere, being tall is not a defense.

I can do analogies, too.

Hey... EA do you want to stop being the most hated company in america, i will tellyou a secret.. STOP BEING A GREEDY ASS-HOLE or failing that STOP BEING SUCH A HIPOCRITICAL AND A LAIR. any of both options works

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 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
Registered for a free account here