So IGN decided to ask "why do people hate EA"

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT
 

So IGN thought that they would try and tackle the issue of people's hate of
EA being at an all time high.

I was just wondering what are your thoughts on IGN's article

EDIT-CEPTION:
Here's the link for people that can't download the image

http://au.ign.com/articles/2012/06/14/why-do-people-hate-ea

and here's the image for people who don't want to give traffic to IGN/Murdoch

image

I really don't like IGN, I mean, they are owned by the same people that owns FOX.

This article also reminded me a lot of something that I would hear on FOX news...
EDIT: It'd also be nice to know if the entire article is a quote from the guy, or if it is author speculation...
If it's a quote, then we're right, EA is owned by dicks
If it's author speculation, then he is terrible at his job.

Don't link to nerdbait. It's precisely what they want and need to generate extra ad revenue

Owned by Murdoch so that means they don't count as a valid news site. Next topic.

Elaborating on why I hate them, i hate them because they are sitting on the Warhamemr Fantasy game rights & refuse to do anything with them. Wrath of heroes? Its a shit game using the shit MMO combat, using the shit engine from the shit Warhammer MMO. If they would get off it already someone would have salvaged Climaxes MMO and made it into an RPG by now. But NOOOOO. EA is sitting on the rights & making it so one of my favorite settings wont get any other games.

I'm having trouble reading this with a straight face past the point where they referred to "biggest" and "high Metacritic score" as some sort of valuable qualities, and to EA itself as "profitable, but not outrageously so", as if the company's welfare is what offends people, and not its practices.

Also searching for the words "Origin Systems", "Westwood", "Bullfrog", "Mythic" and "Pandemic" returns 0 results (though Peter Moore did refer to some developers as roadkill at the end, so I'm guessing that was it). And it's amusing how all the specific examples of EA fucking up, are juxtapositioned with generalities like "EA has done some very smart things with Origin". I myself can't recall any such things.

So in my mind I can safely conclude the person who wrote this is an idiot, a shill or both. Instead of telling the readers why people hate EA, he tells them why they should put up with EA.

Here's the whole thing in image form so as to not give him any article hits:

Well, they bring up some good points that I kept iterating over too, like for instance when this came up back in the day: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.369872-Why-EA-Just-why#14335463

I just don't agree with the conclusion.
I don't think that companies should be there and inherently exist to "just make more money", I don't think that's a healthy way of conducting business and there should be company values, business ethics and morals to uphold.
And I don't think having those would drive them bankrupt or anything of the likes, just have to look at other companies like Valve and CDProjekt and they've seemed to manage fine so far without employing business practices that piss of a large part of consumers and without gouging either, not to talk about smaller development studios or indies.

In the end, I'm happy that EA seems to be going down the crapper and their share prices are ever so often reaching new all-time lows:

image

And I welcome the new power of KickStarter and similar to self-fund games I (and other people) want to play. I believe the gaming world would be better off without Activision and EA, maybe not bigger or more profitable, but certainly better off in the long-term.

If they wanted to "better themselves" and be more attractive to consumers and get some good PR for once, they could always trim down all the fat to keep development costs lower and maybe save some money from those $100 million marketing campaigns to give them on to their customers.
They somewhat tried some of that in ~2007-08 by introducing a lot of new IP and trying to cut down on the gouging, but rather soon turned around to more of it.
Whenever they are somewhat getting into monetary trouble they aren't looking for a fault in their business models but with the customer, surely by charging more, gouging with microtransactions and offer more cut out DLC to buy at Launch, as well as producing ever more sequels and shortening the development cycle to a year or two tops they're going to fix that right up.

I find it funny how he states that EA was voted the worst company in America because of nerd rage over the Mass Effect 3 ending, while in fact EA was voted the worst company in America BEFORE Mass Effect 3 was released.

DRM, bad customer service, releasing games that turn out to be unworkable, absorbing of good game developers just to hog their properties while picking bought dev companies to pieces, immature marketing that gives video gaming a bad public image, and Sim City Societies.

Oh IGN you worthless piece of shit, much like yourself EA deserves every bit of poo flung at them because neither you or them have any restrain when it comes to abusing peoples good will, then coming around and claiming you are doing nothing wrong.

So since you haven't been potty trained properly we have an obligation to smack you in the gob till you become a useful part of society or you go shit on someone else's carpet.

Dirty Hipsters:
I find it funny how he states that EA was voted the worst company in America because of nerd rage over the Mass Effect 3 ending, while in fact EA was voted the worst company in America BEFORE Mass Effect 3 was released.

Because there was no nerdrage going on over ME3 before ME3 was released...

they sold me a product which didn't work, at all forcing me to pirate the game.
constantly berating other companies despite being no better.
and of course origin, i hate it.

My issue isn't really against EA specifically, it's just that I dislike publishers in general.

I think the 'if you don't like it, don't buy it' ideal stills holds up in the above scenario because, as I've pointed out several times, all of the games mentioned in the example are sequels; if you like the series then you already have a previous installment in your collection.

It's like when people rage over a company changing the format of a game like Dead Space 3 (without even having played it): if you don't like the new direction the developer is taking, then you still have two perfectly good games that you clearly already like to play; let the rest of us who aren't so close-minded try something new and also, if it really is the wrong direction, let the sales dictate that.

Of course we all know that will never happen because, despite their constant bleating about boycotts on forums, fanboys will always buy every installment of their beloved franchise without fail.

TheKasp:

Dirty Hipsters:
I find it funny how he states that EA was voted the worst company in America because of nerd rage over the Mass Effect 3 ending, while in fact EA was voted the worst company in America BEFORE Mass Effect 3 was released.

Because there was no nerdrage going on over ME3 before ME3 was released...

The nerdrage was only about crap like Diana Allers dressing slutty and having a face deep in the uncanny valley, and James Vega looking like he's from Jersey Shore. You know, stuff that most of us don't care about but find it fun to make fun of.

TheKasp:

Dirty Hipsters:
I find it funny how he states that EA was voted the worst company in America because of nerd rage over the Mass Effect 3 ending, while in fact EA was voted the worst company in America BEFORE Mass Effect 3 was released.

Because there was no nerdrage going on over ME3 before ME3 was released...

There's nerd rage over ANY game (especially any sequel) before that game is released, but you don't suddenly see Bungie or Rockstar being called the worst company in America. The nerd rage that occurred before Mass Effect 3's release had absolutely nothing to do with it. In fact, on the scale of pre-release nerd rage it barely even registered.

There's no point in trying to argue. They'll always being some pseudo-intellectual bullshit to berate the gamers who complain.

Sexy Devil:
snip

The nerdrage was about the storyleaks, it was about the DLC, it was about the multiplayer. And from my perception it wasn't pretty before release. Here were probably at least as much long threads whining about this shit as post release.

Dirty Hipsters:
snip

Okay, first: I did a little check and I can't find anything about this vote being pre ME3 release. The last voting ended in April 3rd, close to one month AFTER ME3 release.

Second: Which of those developers released a game with this much controversy one during such a vote / one month before the vote?

Third: Really? Have you lived under a rock to disregard all this rage about the ME3 story spoiler or the leaked final scenes? The shitstorm before release was not small.

A combination of some bad business moves and mob mentality among vocal gamers (and the internet on a whole, even).

Interesting article I liked the bit where he makes a few presumptive leaps to compare companies to dogs just to make some pointless analogy and then saying working at EA is better than working in a diamond mine, Id bloody well hope so jeez.

It seems they are still in denial though thinking the haters are few and actually a lot of people like them, well lets see how that belief works out for them.

TheKasp:
Third: Really? Have you lived under a rock to disregard all this rage about the ME3 story spoiler or the leaked final scenes? The shitstorm before release was not small.

Actually, I only even heard about that well after I'd played the game. Then again, I don't exactly go out of my way to follow up spoilers on something I don't want spoiled.

rob_simple:
Of course we all know that will never happen because, despite their constant bleating about boycotts on forums, fanboys will always buy every installment of their beloved franchise without fail.

I can understand why they would despite their reservations. Take Dead Space 3, for instance. Many people aren't happy with it and the direction it seems to be going on, and not buying, yes, does seem like a perfectly reasonable tactic to teach EA a lesson about alienating your fanbase. On the other hand, if DS3 doesn't live up to their own unrealistcally high expectations, they'll just ignore the actual complaints on people, focus on the sales numbers alone, and announce that there's decreased interest in the franchise, which will mean that the franchise will be lost. It's a kind of a no-win scenario. Damned if you do (buy the game just to support the franchise, but EA only pays attention to sales, continues in this "broaden audience appeal" mentality), damned if you don't (don't buy, EA gets disappointed, kills Dead Space).

EA hate exists because

-EA makes terrible business decisions a la Origin(after taking a look I estimate more then 50% of the origin forums are people asking for help because their purchases don't work or origin bugged out. take a look there, it's really quite depressing)

-EA has horrible PR. (If one of your people is trying to make a system to have the player pay for bullets, you try to avoid that guy's idea from ever leaving the meeting room, not post it online)

-EA has horrible PR cont. (Their reaction on the Mass Effect 3 ending controversy was to call their customer base entitled whiners. Which brings us to-)

-EA ruins the developpers it publishes (Possibly not entirely EA's fault, I don't know enough about the subject. I do know that I enjoyed Dragon Age Origins a lot more then Dragon Age 2.)

I could go on, talking about Day 1 DLC, DRM shenanigans, dumbing their games down almost insultingly and more Origin bargage. But I wont

Avalanche91:
EA hate exists because

-EA makes terrible business decisions a la Origin(after taking a look I estimate more then 50% of the origin forums are people asking for help because their purchases don't work or origin bugged out. take a look there, it's really quite depressing)

-EA has horrible PR. (If one of your people is trying to make a system to have the player pay for bullets, you try to avoid that guy's idea from ever leaving the meeting room, not post it online)

-EA has horrible PR cont. (Their reaction on the Mass Effect 3 ending controversy was to call their customer base entitled whiners. Which brings us to-)

-EA ruins the developpers it publishes (Possibly not entirely EA's fault, I don't know enough about the subject. I do know that I enjoyed Dragon Age Origins a lot more then Dragon Age 2.)

I could go on, talking about Day 1 DLC, DRM shenanigans, dumbing their games down almost insultingly and more Origin bargage. But I wont

Thanks for saving me the effort of posting

What he said

I will say, though, the ME3 ending fiasco is a fucking misleading issue if ever there was one. The real issue should be, why was ME3 a shite game from start to finish. The ending was just the kick in the nuts after the savage beating.

According to me, this part is the key:

As companies go, EA is not as cuddly and nice as, say Valve. But then, Valve isn't publicly traded. Valve isn't owned by banks.

That's the problem right there. EA isn't owned by people who are passionate about the medium of videogames. The people who keep that business afloat probably haven't touched a videogame in their life. And for a business that's engaged in a creative industry that is dangerous.

Of course I understand that thanks to those unaffiliated people we get increased budgets. But that doesn't change the problem that the people who ultimately rule over EA just don't get the industry and it's customers.

Dexter111:

I don't think that companies should be there and inherently exist to "just make more money", I don't think that's a healthy way of conducting business and there should be company values, business ethics and morals to uphold.

And I don't think having those would drive them bankrupt or anything of the likes, just have to look at other companies like Valve and CDProjekt and they've seemed to manage fine so far without employing business practices that piss of a large part of consumers and without gouging either, not to talk about smaller development studios or indies.

That's exactly why I hate shareholders. They just want to make more money. They have no other interest in the company. And they ultimately decide the course of business, because what are you going to do without investors when you're a public company?

I honestly I have no doubt that the majority of EA's actual employees are passionate about videogames. But they're not on top of the food chain, and that's an issue.

Poorly researched article, but

"banning accounts for no good reason", should be reason enough to understand why gamers hate EA.
Some of us are just social enough to realise bad things aren't bad only when they happen to ourselves.

Then there's the rest of the list:
- pioneering heavy DRM with Spore and ME
- shutting down multiplayer game servers
- buying and destroying favourite studios
- destroying popular franchises in the proces
- day-1 DLC on top of $60 games (this one did get a line in the article)

i generally don't think companies should exist just to make money. i know this is the main focus but i always thought providing the customer with something that makes their lives better and caring for the people you employ should be as important.
and i hate EA because they ruined my childhood when they killed Ultima. and now they dare call their shitty steam clone Origin.

fozzy360:

rob_simple:
Of course we all know that will never happen because, despite their constant bleating about boycotts on forums, fanboys will always buy every installment of their beloved franchise without fail.

I can understand why they would despite their reservations. Take Dead Space 3, for instance. Many people aren't happy with it and the direction it seems to be going on, and not buying, yes, does seem like a perfectly reasonable tactic to teach EA a lesson about alienating your fanbase. On the other hand, if DS3 doesn't live up to their own unrealistcally high expectations, they'll just ignore the actual complaints on people, focus on the sales numbers alone, and announce that there's decreased interest in the franchise, which will mean that the franchise will be lost. It's a kind of a no-win scenario. Damned if you do (buy the game just to support the franchise, but EA only pays attention to sales, continues in this "broaden audience appeal" mentality), damned if you don't (don't buy, EA gets disappointed, kills Dead Space).

I think you missed my point. I was saying that the fanboys will buy it anyway, not to support the franchise (because who is honestly willing to spunk forty quid/sixty dollars up the wall on something they will hate just to support a video game series?) but because their complaints are just impotent whining because things aren't going the way the want it to, yet they will still buy it anyway because a good game is a good game.

While alot of the complaints about ME3 seemed to be valid (I haven't played it, or any of the others), it's set a worrying precedent where now everyone thinks that if a game isn't being developed to their personal standards then they have the right to demand it be altered until such times as it aligns with their vision; even when that vision can be summed up as 'more of the same, forever, please' or what's commonly known as 'Nintendo'.

My approach to gaming is this: Buy a game if you want to play it; don't buy it if you don't. If a series I love suddenly goes in a horrible new direction I am sure will fail (Ratchet & Clank: All4One) I don't buy it, I play the games I already own from that series and I generally get on with my life.

Well, so I don't hate EA. I dislike some of their games and a part of their business strategy.

I want to start off with saying that I don't mind day 1 DLC. I buy all my games new (or for PC) and never sell them. It's not an issue for me, but I can see how it may be for some. I haven't heard one actual good reason why it's bad though. It's all comparisons to cars and saying that when you pay the full price you should get the full game.

Mass Effect 3 is a game I don't care about and I am not sure I would blame EA for screwing up that or Dragon Age 2, but bullshit around release and publishing is their choice. However with Mass Effect 3 they did the thing where they had day 1 DLC which was exclusive to those who bought the collector's edition which put the actual price tag to 70$ in USA (don't know, don't care what it cost here).

There's Origin which is only a small annoyance to me, but it has pushed me a little towards console gaming. I like Steam and I have a pretty big collection of games there. I don't want to run unnecessary programs in the background. I have Origin installed, but I don't really use it.

All in all, as long as EA continues the way they do I will scoff at their stupid choices and their announcements, but I wont care much beyond that. EA isn't any more evil than most companies. They're just fronting stupidity more. I guess I can understand the EA hate, but I'm not one of those who hate.

I hate EA because of what they did to Westwood and Command and Conquer, and we can see their influence in their various properties

C&C Tiberium Sun- Awesome, C&C 3+kanes wrath- Pretty damn good, C&C 4- OH GOD WHY WOULD YOU DO THAT?!

Mass Effect 1- Awesome,2 ME2- Still pretty good, ME3- Pretty good until the last five minu... OH GOD WHY WOULD YOU DO THAT?!

Dragon Age: Origins- Awesome, DA2- Still pretty... ah fuck it... OH GOD WHY WOULD YOU DO THAT?!

Dead Space- Awesome, DS2- Pretty good, DS3- PLEASE DONT DO WHAT WE THINK YOU ARE!

EA is pretty damn consistent in how they do things.

Because they always want to "broaden the audience" IE. Make a shooty shooter of everything.

Can't help but notice how the article makes no mentions of EA's habit to buy out promising/successful developpers and franchise, then grind mediocre, poorly developed sequels till they become a mere joke of what they once were and then EA can then close the studio.

Ya know, like Ultima 8&9, Dragon Age II (DA:O had begun development before EA happened to Bioware), etc...

I'm sure everyone's got their own memory of franchise going to hell after EA happens to them.

I think IGN is going to see their numbers start dropping pretty soon. With their lack of acknowledgement of the fiasco that was the ME 3 ending, lack of comment on Diablo 3 problems, and articles like this cropping up, their viewership will (hopefully) realize that this site doesn't voice opinions they value and leave.

The main thing i hate is when they say there going to make the next game for a wider audience (nothing wrong with that), usually when it comes to dev's working for EA that means scrap most things the previous game has and make it different!

Theres also the fact they push such tight deadlines on developers that it affects the work, just look at Dragon age 2 compared to origins, the amount of recycling going on is dreadful. Personally i think that alot of developers which EA have working for them would be better off with other publishers.

rob_simple:

It's like when people rage over a company changing the format of a game like Dead Space 3 (without even having played it): if you don't like the new direction the developer is taking, then you still have two perfectly good games that you clearly already like to play; let the rest of us who aren't so close-minded try something new and also, if it really is the wrong direction, let the sales dictate that.

It's really easy to say, "Hey everyone, lets all hold hands and forget about our worries; to each their own." One could technically use this argument against almost any grievance others might have, but sadly life isn't that easy. You can say 'let us enjoy this new thing while you cling to your old' but you completely ignore the fact that this is the death of the series. That is not an opinion, but the reality you have to accept. This "New Direction" has increased production costs so much, they said if the game doesn't sell 5 million, they will kill the franchise because it is no longer profitable. In case you don't know about the average game sales, it's basically guaranteed not to sell that much, (the second game didn't even sell half that much) hence Dead Space is now no-more, thanks to EA's business practices. They created a problem, asked us to bail them out, all because they made changes to a franchise, changes that no one asked them to make.

rob_simple:
I think the 'if you don't like it, don't buy it' ideal stills holds up in the above scenario because, as I've pointed out several times, all of the games mentioned in the example are sequels; if you like the series then you already have a previous installment in your collection.

That argument never holds up with media, because by its nature you have to buy it before you know if you'll like it. Which along with a few other factors makes it damn-near worthless as a control system.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked