E.A. is destroying the gaming business? Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT | |
That wasnt your quote, i just copypasted for faster quoting without putting up a name. | |
Thanks for missing the point and only paying attention to one aspect, when I made it clear it's not just one game, but a whole string of bad things. Correction: Oops, make that less than 75% on average. Games released since the VG/EA buyout: Destroy All Humans 2: 76% metacritic, "The game sold over 340,000 copies and had a generated revenue of $13,000,000 in North America alone." Merc 3: 72%, about 1m according to VGChartz LOTR:Conquest: 55%, 0.8m The Saboteur, 72%, 0.42m. And then there's The Dark Knight video game, where it seems dev problems resulted in it missing the movie's launch, so there's bound to be penalties as part of the license agreement and tons of missed profit. I can't comment on how up to date and accurate the sales numbers are though, but still, I'd imagine EA was expecting higher numbers. And like I said, put into perspective, if the incoming was lower than the outgoing funds, coupled with the original purchase, sometimes it's better to cut your losses and shut the studio down. | |
I'd say that I'm afraid of some of its business practices becoming more widespread. It's nothing that can't be fixed if they pull their heads out of their asses, or destroy themselves, whichever comes first. I still buy games because I like to support developers. | |
I've heard a lot of cries lately that EA is dragging us into another video game crash, but honestly... it's just one dopey studio. I don't really play their games, but if EA dies off, then it dies off. It's a shame about all the jobs, but we got a solid indie market and even some larger publishers that deserve some credits (2K anyone?). The only people who are harmed are those who are fans of the franchises they produce and since there is no real future for Spore, I don't count myself among those. | |
Well, said. Unfortunately people don't look at it that way or just don't care. A good example is that of gold sellers in MMO's. The only reason there are gold sellers is because there are people who buy gold. If people would stop buying gold, the gold sellers would disappear also. So you can't really blame the gold sellers for trying. Instead blame the gold buyers.
No, I disagree. If a new studio would release their first game, they wouldn't have (m)any fans. Maybe by using the media the said studio could build up anticipation. Maybe one or more of the devs previously work on a well received game earning recognition. Then after the studio releases their first game can fans really be born. A studio has to earn its fans. And after that respect their fans. Otherwise the studio is going to lose their fans. It should be said that a fan is not the same thing as a consumer; a person who buys the game. There could be many people buying the game, but not everyone will become a fan. | |
Firstly Origin isn't broken. 1. No. Gaming is too huge to say that ANY company has control over its future. EA sure has effect on things, but I don't think EA is doing damage to the industry as a whole. 2. Yes. I don't hate EA and I know that many of the developers are people who really want to do a good job. EA does some bad shit, I know this, I am not blind. Un-realistic gamers might though. | |
I don't think this detracts from your point much if at all, but to be fair those numbers were just the North America sales. Lord of the rings Conquest sold 1.34 million copies worldwide and Saboteur sold .88 million worldwide. Just a minor nitpick though, otherwise I quite agree with your point. =) | |
Activision lolwut? On a serious note: The biggest problem here is that the large megacorporations don't know how to make games, let alone make them efficiently. You don't need a gizillion dollars to make a good game, you just need talent, a vision, and middleware if you're feeling fancy. Bioware was founded by three doctors and a hundred grand, and they kicked the CRPG genre into high gear with Baldur's Gate. Valve was founded by Gabe Newell and Mike Harrington, who both left Microsoft because they wanted to make games. Next thing you know, Half-Life is released, and you can still feel the effects of the game in FPSs released today. To all major publishers: | |
Is Origin required? I haven't purchased an EA game since Crysis 2. Initially Origin was meh then the news got out that it was monitoring your activities and that put me off. It is nice however that all the games I installed via Origin still work despite the program itself being uninstalled. Steam is fairly lightweight and has an offline mode. If Origin can subscribe to both of these functions then I'll let it slide. Bioware has been doing somewhat badly (though ME3 scored pretty well), but that's more on Bioware I think. I'm not fond of EA but I'm not at the point that I'll boycott them. | |
So in other words how good the game is.... irrelevant? It all about how much old school cred they can pull? Bullshit. They got product. Product speaks for it self. You liked the first one? good for you. Dont go thinking that makes you special. | |
I would add an 8th of respect your own medium. You are not a lower class medium for merchandising some other successful franchise. | |
We are destroying the gaming industry. Any opportunity for developers to try and be creative with their franchises... to do something different... is welcomed with backlash and uproar. Now developers like EA, Activision, and Ubisoft have found the formula where the casual gamers are buying more than gamers themselves and have focused all their attention on that market. We are all to blame for this... Business follow where the money is. Used games and video game reviews (if you don't get a 9 from Jim you don't get purchased) have basically created a market where gamers aren't really listened to. Unless you're on the PC and apart of the indie game market. | |
Destroy All Humans 2 was out quite a bit before the EA acquisition. And why are you looking at just the North American sales? These are the global stats: Mercenaries 2 - 2.20m 4.4 million total, with a good amount of unaccounted for PC sales. That's really not a bad load. Riccitiello himself has said neither scores or sales were the issue, but the high upkeep for employees in California, which he should've been fully aware of at the time of the deal. Looks to me Pandemic was simply the redheaded stepchild of the EP/EA deal, with BioWare being the real objective and Pandemic having no place in EA's company structure. Considering Riccitiello was a party on both sides of the agreement, it seems like an irresponsible way to handle 200 people's jobs. | |
Whoops, read the wrong column. Still, while it's not bad, it's not spectacular either given the prices paid. I already said:
Of course, one has to wonder if EA hadn't stepped in, would they have went under, sooner, regardless of their influence? People always see a downward trend after an acquisition, but what if that was already happening, hence allowing themselves to be bought out? And of course, there's the classic cliche of the owners cashed out and leaving the juniors to pick up the pieces. | |
EA is a company without too much talent, and with sleazy business practices. That we should not at all criticize them or their business practices, or that it would be a great thing if the company crashed and burned are both false. | |
Check out "War for the overworld". It is the spiritual successor to Dungeon Keeper 2. | |
Wait, what? Unlike that of Origin, Steam staff actually treats people like human beings, the system functions extremely well, there's excellent support for all kinds of games of any size or department, software other than games is also allowed... I could go on. Valve is loved and EA is despised by a lot of people. This is a reflection of their online distribution systems. Steam has been refined over years, being polished to a shine, growing stronger and better. Origin on the other hand has been absolute rubbish. It's like you're saying that if we like a golden system, we must show equal support for its crappy rival. In fact, this actually sounds rather familiar. | |
All I know is that Bioware games were good, then EA took over. Now Bioware games are bad. | |
While I don't like some of EA's practices you cannot say they are destroying the industry. If the consensus is that they are destroying the industry then how are they the biggest name around? How do they control that massive portion of the dev market? Why do they sell so many games? Businesses make money. EA is a business and they need to make as much money as possible so they can recycle it back into development and make more improvements. Don't think they are improving the market? Fine. Don't buy their stuff but they are successful for a reason and trying to deny that success means you live in denial. | |
Yes, to the first, no to the second. "Destroying" is putting it too harshly, but as the field of AAA developers continues to dwindle, they're certainly not helping. It goes without saying that the cost of making the "blockbusters" of the game world is only going to continue to rise, barring some revolution in the field that finally gives people a truly efficient and unified set of tools to work with (some claim that Epic is trying to more or less do that with the Unreal engine, but then, Epic itself is showing some cracks these days.) EA is trying to find ways to allay those costs, but the means it has come up to do that seem "penny wise, pound foolish". Much like Microsoft and Blockbuster before them, EA seems to absorb or demolish smaller competitors who otherwise might have maintained the kind of nimbleness on the ground that could enable them to adapt to changing, hostile conditions in the medium and the industry. The resulting structure looks like a juggernaut, but behaves like a dinosaur. The attempts to push into new borders like social and mobile gaming feel obligatory and poorly managed. Customers don't see the new AAA games as shiny next-generation wonders; they see them as games much like the old ones, but now the $50-60 price tag comes with an expectation that the player will shell out more money up the road, with the games designed to encourage that behavior. If platforms like the Steambox (in whatever form it finally manifests) and the various Android TV consoles "make it" in the next decade, it's probably going to have less to do with their ability to compete directly with the AAA market and more to do with the AAA market having ceased to exist in its present form. | |
^I agree with this^. | |
Interesting sets of points. Though you know what other industries in the past have done similar and been called out on? Just about everything. We have consumer rights and actual information on the food we eat and the drugs we take BECAUSE people called out businesses on practices. The general point is that the Games industry, unlike nearly all other industries, is extremely new. Even successful businessmen from other areas who have investments in it don't understand what failures are good failure (safe and don't reflect long term issues) and what failures are bad. Similar issues arose in the Railway industry (see all the unused lines in England) and with the Movie Industry. While I personally don;t agree with every point against EA (or any other developer) I do believe they are a sign that those developers are missing vital signs of an impending failure on their part, instead trying to ignore it and carry on as always. The fact that so many studios are failing as a result of 1 or 2 projects is likely a bad failure and suggests an issue with the general makeup of the system. So people are right to complain and to point out that these are real issues. If the railways had the same feed back maybe more of it would be still functioning and less track would have been laid. Disclaimer: I act only as a devils Advocate to encourage discussion, I do not intend to shoot down anyone's argument. I only seek to see it better informed and hopefully bring both sides to a better understanding of each other (you know before they start opening fire once again XD) OT: My personal view is that EA is making collectively very bad choices. Individually they are acceptable, or just show bad luck or a mistake or two. However, I see very little sign of the company learning form mistakes or truly taking the safe route customer interaction wise. Where they take chances appears to be in areas detrimental to customer relations. Compare that with other companies and you at least see attempts being made to 'make up' for mistakes or undesirable chances (Steam locks you into it's service but does a good job of making that seem an ok thing to do). I think both sides have valid arguments to make on the topic of EA and that the discourse is good in at least letting people make their own choices about how they feel about the practices involved. The biggest issue is that at the moment they only choices are buy or do not buy, due to the business model not properly allowing for a reflection of interest in certain aspects. As a result doing 2 things right and 1 wrong with results in no sales and they take the 2 right being wrong, or they get sales and the 1 wrong is considered right (yep, tis confusing isn't it). Well that is my wall of text. Agree, disagree, but ultimately, try and understand both sides a little better, regardless what you decent to stand for. | |
Wait so my experiences with origin staff doesn't exist? Oh nvm you are probably referring when a ton of people got their accounts banned for stuff they did on the forums and couldn't play their games.... was that steam or origin again? Oh yeah it was both. Both of them had the same screw up yet you decide to define one of the platforms on it and the other... not so much. You say yourself that steam has been refined, just like I did. And unlike what you appear to be aware off, steam was utter crap and a lot worse than origin when it did first pop up. Origin will need a bit of time to get the stuff right. Even with Steam there as a model. And at least it isn't starting as far back as steam originally did. The same errors deserve the same complaints mister double standards. But yeah mean moviebob making a video will rewrite history for you. | |
Oh no they are very good for business and extremely bad for gaming as a medium, and no it has nothing to do with evil it is just pure business. | |
Draech, are you always this aggressive when voicing your opinions? You bash everyone down with no regards whatsoever. Or is it just this topic (for whatever reason)? | |
The only thing I have to bring u on E.A. is: | |
ALRIGHT. WE GET IT EA has shitty business practices just like every game company ever created in the history of everything. No game company is run by saints. In fact, here's an interesting little chart for you. The reflexive hatred toward EA has far surpassed the point of being reasonable. While I'm all for calling out a company on their bullshit, all EA has done is franchises and sequels, and fail to keep dying companies alive. They haven't done anything truly evil. So the whining dipshits need to get over themselves. You don't have to buy their games, or their DLC. So there's no point in crying about them. | |
couldn't agree more. I actally wanted to write something similar :) Yet there is something else. Large Publishers and Developers have lost control over their costs not least to plunge into the exact market. They lost sight of the middle market for games like Baldurs Gate or Fallout which just needs some millions instead of tens of millions. At the moment we have basically the big blockbusters and the homebrew and very little in between. Games like Dead Space or Mirrors Edge where never meant for a bloody mainstream market, yet they were produced in this premise. | |
Its the topic more than anything. The way to many gamers (pointless title I know) seem to live in their very own self sustained bubble with the understanding of how their actual medium equal to a 5 year olds understanding of where the food comes from. Almost every issue is limited to a perspective around themselves solely. "Developers should listen to the fans!" says the fan, is what I am getting. It is the "The customer is always right" taken to its logical conclusion. And it infuriates me because I want to see this from from multiple angles yet there is always a que of 50 people going on about how developer X cheated them by selling 30 mins worth of content as an extra when they were sold 40 hours for 50$. The endless stream of argumentation based around "I could have had more!" and then the complete and utter denial of their own greed. And trust me I got plenty complaints about EA. I could talk about their medieval methods of making budget and green lighting project costing studios again and again. How the complete and utter disconnect the low level management and high lvl cost millions worth of dmg, and in the end employee pay with their jobs. Yet it pales compared to the torrent of bullshit people will make up in order to justify their self entitled rights over games. If people get into their skulls that they dont exist in a void, and that the industry isn't designed based on their desires I would be a much calmer man. | |
Eh. I don't think they are destroying the industry, sure they do some stupid business practices but hey I like their developers. Also I still buy EA games, I am really looking forward to Battlefield 4 and whatever the next Burnout game is going to be. | |
Considering I don't like C&C any more ever since C&C 4 and having stopped playing BF3 3 months after it came out I'd probably say I "dislike" EA since I can't use the word hate as some people would rather slam me first than try to understand my disdain for that company. Sure they are fine in the industry does not excuse them from executing bad business practices like they have done in the past, it also begs the question "is there really anything bad in the industry" because if there isn't where can I grab those happy conformity pills?. | |
To be honest I think it's the consumer who is more likely to "destroy" gaming. | |
EA does what we as consumers encourage them to do with our money. They're a corporation. | |
well, they aren't any worse than actvision / valve / ubi.. on the other hand, they most certainly don't help. | |
| Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT | |
2 things.
1: the Eula is of Steam is more or less the same as Origin. As well as netflix, GFWL ect.
Nothing here that isn't in the others.
Secondly Please point me to the the source that second quote is. I have no idea why you are bring it up. I am not even talking reviews.