298 réponses à ce sujet

[ZtalkerRM]

LinksOcarina wrote...

ZtalkerRM wrote...

Sentr0 wrote...

because EA is evil

I'll post this here :innocent:

Yes, because an article from 2008 is a shining source of truth. Especially if its from Jim Sterlings mouth.

Maybe the angelface smiley or overall tone of the article wasn't clear enough: It's SARCASM.

On a serious note:
I know EA is trying, but since I am in my mid 20's and have seen the gaming-sector evolve over the years, I can't help but think EA is a bad company. Some of their games (especially Battlefield) are extremely well done and truly are amazing. But some of their other games are pure sh*t. Need for Speed was GREAT at the time of Most Wanted and Pro Street but is now a simple cash cow. Same for Bioware.
You know you are defending a company that is trying to scam you (last message in ME3 was about DLC!) right? That's not a way to treat your clients.

I've been sick of them since I bought NFS: Undercover, FIFA 12, Dragon Age 2 in one year. They were all crap compared to their previous work.

If you know they can do better, and they don't, why shouldn't I say so? I am a teacher in real life and I refure to applaud a child when he/she score's a B- when I know they can score an A+.

[LinksOcarina]

ZtalkerRM wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

ZtalkerRM wrote...

Sentr0 wrote...

because EA is evil

I'll post this here :innocent:

Yes, because an article from 2008 is a shining source of truth. Especially if its from Jim Sterlings mouth.

Maybe the angelface smiley or overall tone of the article wasn't clear enough: It's SARCASM.

On a serious note:
I know EA is trying, but since I am in my mid 20's and have seen the gaming-sector evolve over the years, I can't help but think EA is a bad company. Some of their games (especially Battlefield) are extremely well done and truly are amazing. But some of their other games are pure sh*t. Need for Speed was GREAT at the time of Most Wanted and Pro Street but is now a simple cash cow. Same for Bioware.
You know you are defending a company that is trying to scam you (last message in ME3 was about DLC!) right? That's not a way to treat your clients.

I've been sick of them since I bought NFS: Undercover, FIFA 12, Dragon Age 2 in one year. They were all crap compared to their previous work.

If you know they can do better, and they don't, why shouldn't I say so? I am a teacher in real life and I refure to applaud a child when he/she score's a B- when I know they can score an A+.

1. The scam thing is over the top. That last message was expected, since they did in Mass Effect 2. We all know more DLC was also going to happen, how is this a scam exactly?

2. I also teach in real life, but the sad thing is no one is going to score that A+, no matter how much you encourage them. You make them go for the A-, the B+, make them improve upon that B-, but don't shoot for a brass ring, because if they fail to get perfection every time, you inflated expectations and made things worse for the student.

 Look, EA can do a lot better, but peoples expectations for some games are too high to begin with, so its a self-fulfilling prophecy in the end when they are not up to par for the consumer base. It also doesn't help that they try to do new things each time and get blasted for changing it, and when they leave it alone they get blasted for staying the same. There needs to be a middle ground, and honestly I thought Mass Effect 3 did that real well from a game mechanics point of view, emphasising the RPG elements more this time around. 

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 25 mars 2012 - 01:31 .

[mutermath]

Pallando wrote... 

Aver88 wrote...

mutermath wrote...

online passes are a bad thing?
they come with the cd you purchased so its kinda free
unless you bought a used cd, and if its a used cd then its their right to gget something out of you to get to play online.

So it would be normal for a car company to charge you if you want to drive on the public roads with a used car you just bought ?

You are using their servers that they paid money(to make) to play their games online(though they are not good). you will be getting the same thing as the players who payed more than you paid.
I'm not sure but  you wont get the same benefits with the one who bought the car new from the company(maybe insurance and other things)

Modifié par mutermath, 25 mars 2012 - 01:32 .

[Legion64]

Did you seriously ask, why EA is hated so much?

*facepalm*

[Jayzr]

I'll just leave this here for you to watch:

Modifié par Jayzr, 25 mars 2012 - 01:38 .

[mutermath]

ZtalkerRM wrote...

Sentr0 wrote...

because EA is evil

I'll post this here :innocent:

Thank you, my question has been answerers:)

Modifié par mutermath, 25 mars 2012 - 01:38 .

[daguest]

LinksOcarina wrote...

1. Pinnacle Station was made by BioWare under Microsoft, on their own, before being bought.

2. Thats not how the corporate structure works. BioWares growth is not unwarranted, becasuse of Dragon Age: Origins and Mass Effect 2 they were given more room and employees. Now BioWare, under Mythic and Victory, can do multiple projects at once. You need to realize that not all of the employees at BioWare are the same guys and gals who worked on Baldurs Gate back in 1998, or even Jade Empire. 

See, the way development studios tend to work is to hire people for a job like the movie industry. The thing is they tend to hire people they are familiar with, have a good working rapport, etc. The addition to these studios just makes them bigger, yes, and more to delegate, but since they are all seperate and working under different dev teams, its less of an issue than you think.

3. You never played Shattered Steel or MDK, did you? Those were BioWare games and they weren't RPGs.

4. Mass Effect is an RPG with Shooter elements, always has been. 

5. 2 photoshopped pictures is not enough to **** about a 40 hour experience, which is a part of a 150 hour series. I'm sorry but thats full on nitpicking. 

1/ I remember BW avoiding the ****storm on this forum years ago saying "it's not bw who made the dlc". Maybe they were lying.

2/ I'm sorry, but Mythic entertainement is Mythic. And do not become suddenly Bioware because EA say it's bioware now. Of course these are not the same people than back in '98 or so. But every place you work use to have its way. You don't expect CoD suddenly becoming a solo RPG, or FF becoming a multiplayer shooter.

3/ Also, I played MDK, it wasn't truly a RPG, I agree. About shatered, it was the first one, on MS dos if I'm right, and not played. Not sure talking about the very first game on MS dos is the way to go.

4/That's what I said. ME1 was a RPG with shooter element. ME2-3 is a shooter with RPG element. See the point ?

5/ About the photoshop it's an example on how things are rushed and not made by passion. You can't say it's passion and love when photoshopping a picture.... Many people wanted to see the tali's face, it's part of the lore, how the quarian looks like ? And we have a photoshoped picture. There is something truly wrong in it, and it's far from what BW used to do in the past. It may have some rushed jobs on past BW games, and I don't remember it, but not so badly done.

[ZtalkerRM]

LinksOcarina wrote...

ZtalkerRM wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

ZtalkerRM wrote...

Sentr0 wrote...

because EA is evil

I'll post this here :innocent:

Yes, because an article from 2008 is a shining source of truth. Especially if its from Jim Sterlings mouth.

Maybe the angelface smiley or overall tone of the article wasn't clear enough: It's SARCASM.

On a serious note:
I know EA is trying, but since I am in my mid 20's and have seen the gaming-sector evolve over the years, I can't help but think EA is a bad company. Some of their games (especially Battlefield) are extremely well done and truly are amazing. But some of their other games are pure sh*t. Need for Speed was GREAT at the time of Most Wanted and Pro Street but is now a simple cash cow. Same for Bioware.
You know you are defending a company that is trying to scam you (last message in ME3 was about DLC!) right? That's not a way to treat your clients.

I've been sick of them since I bought NFS: Undercover, FIFA 12, Dragon Age 2 in one year. They were all crap compared to their previous work.

If you know they can do better, and they don't, why shouldn't I say so? I am a teacher in real life and I refure to applaud a child when he/she score's a B- when I know they can score an A+.

1. The scam thing is over the top. That last message was expected, since they did in Mass Effect 2. We all know more DLC was also going to happen, how is this a scam exactly?

2. I also teach in real life, but the sad thing is no one is going to score that A+, no matter how much you encourage them. You make them go for the A-, the B+, make them improve upon that B-, but don't shoot for a brass ring. EA can do a lot better, but peoples expectations are too high to begin with, so its a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Funny you mention the self-fulfilling prophecy.
If you expect your pupils to only reach a B+ they will never reach that A anyway. It works both ways, I have to give you that. But I try to squeeze the maximum potential out of my own pupils. The Multiple Intelligences theory of Gardner is my personal favorite.
Look, a good company knows what it's doing at all times. If you dare to put in a DLC anouncement after a (they must have known) at least controversial and perhaps even bad ending, more tact would've been apreciated.

In my opinion, they've dropped the ball too much times after oneother. Where I used to expect B+ and A's from EA, I think a C+ is the maximum potential they have now.

Modifié par ZtalkerRM, 25 mars 2012 - 01:39 .

[Admiral H. Cain]

mutermath wrote...

 People keep bashing EA on this site.
Can some please explain why?
I dont get it.
Some are saying the made bioware rush DA2 and now I see others saying ME3 too.

Have you played Madden football recently?

[Abirn]

At the end of the day its because EA imposes budget restrictions and time tables on developers. This was obviously the case of Mass Effect 3.

Now compare that to games made by valve and blizzard and realize those two companies never rush games to meet artificial deadlines, they work on them till they are done.

Blizzard and valve produce works of art that are of the highest quality in the industry, Bioware does not.

[Wrathra]

Things like this is why EA  got a bad rap. I hear things are different management wise, but who knows.


www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/issues/issue_14/87-The-Conquest-of-Origin

Modifié par Wrathra, 25 mars 2012 - 01:45 .

[spacehamsterZH]

I'm old enough to remember when the "Art" in "Electronic Arts" still meant something. In the 80s and early 90s, EA was actually a really cool company with forward-thinking people that wanted to create great games and were always thinking about how to take it to the next level. Now they're a soulless corporate entity that forces their studios to release games before they're finished and milks their customers with forced Origin integration and online passes.

That's what's sad about it. You can say they're a games publisher, and they're a company that exists to make money. As such, they're really no better or worse than, say, Activision. But they actually used to be a company with ideas beyond how to maximize profit.

I'm a bit of a Johnny-Come-Lately to Bioware as I'm really only familiar with ME and DA, but it's pretty clear where the EA influence is in Mass Effect. Of course at the end of the day that's all speculation, but I seriously, seriously doubt there would be online multiplayer, for example, if it wasn't an EA policy that all their games must have an online component.

[orangesonic]

spacehamsterZH wrote...

I'm old enough to remember when the "Art" in "Electronic Arts" still meant something. In the 80s and early 90s, EA was actually a really cool company with forward-thinking people that wanted to create great games and were always thinking about how to take it to the next level. Now they're a soulless corporate entity that forces their studios to release games before they're finished and milks their customers with forced Origin integration and online passes.

That's what's sad about it. You can say they're a games publisher, and they're a company that exists to make money. As such, they're really no better or worse than, say, Activision. But they actually used to be a company with ideas beyond how to maximize profit.

I'm a bit of a Johnny-Come-Lately to Bioware as I'm really only familiar with ME and DA, but it's pretty clear where the EA influence is in Mass Effect. Of course at the end of the day that's all speculation, but I seriously, seriously doubt there would be online multiplayer, for example, if it wasn't an EA policy that all their games must have an online component.

yeahh... i remember that too... good old days

[Farbautisonn]

Anyone who remembers "Syndicate" of old, can now google and see the EA version of "Syndicate" of today.

Do not bring razors or eletronic equipment capable of violent discharges.

That's the "EA" way.

[PaddlePop]

I don't see the difference any more. Bioware is EA, and EA is Bioware.

[Bratinov]

mutermath wrote...

Bratinov wrote...

There are many reasons, of the top of my head:

rushed games
running good studios into the ground
releasing the same game every year with a different number at the end
DRM
bloatware
digital "collectors" editions
online passes
day 1 dlc
pre order dlc
overpriced dlc
supporting the dlc craze
DLC gets priority over game patches

online passes are a bad thing?
they come with the cd you purchased so its kinda free
unless you bought a used cd, and if its a used cd then its their right to gget something out of you to get to play online.
besides all game have passes now

I don't buy used CDs, but don't like the online pass practice either, I don't see how publishers feel entitled to that extra money since a multiplayer slot is already reserved for that particular cd-key, and given how soon EA servers are closed its a complete rip off.

[Bratinov]

PaddlePop wrote...

I don't see the difference any more. Bioware is EA, and EA is Bioware.

This.

[LinksOcarina]

Bratinov wrote...

mutermath wrote...

Bratinov wrote...

There are many reasons, of the top of my head:

rushed games
running good studios into the ground
releasing the same game every year with a different number at the end
DRM
bloatware
digital "collectors" editions
online passes
day 1 dlc
pre order dlc
overpriced dlc
supporting the dlc craze
DLC gets priority over game patches

online passes are a bad thing?
they come with the cd you purchased so its kinda free
unless you bought a used cd, and if its a used cd then its their right to gget something out of you to get to play online.
besides all game have passes now

I don't buy used CDs, but don't like the online pass practice either, I don't see how publishers feel entitled to that extra money since a multiplayer slot is already reserved for that particular cd-key, and given how soon EA servers are closed its a complete rip off.

EA closed servers that had less than 1% of their user-base on them. I don't see how thats a complete rip-off. Also, sport games have had servers shut down since few people go back to them after a new title is released, so any maddens and MLBs and what not from 2006, you are out of luck, but that makes sense from a business standpoint; hell, Microsoft closed down the Xbox servers for Halo 2 and MechWarrior a while back, and Sony shut down all PS2 servers back in 2009/2010. Sucks for some games that used online for it, but it doesn't mean the company is to blame for removing something that is cost-effective. 

As for the online pass stuff, its to prevent used sales, where publishers get no money instead of ten bucks extra to go with the $25 they get from putting a game on sale in Gamestop. Publishers notroriously take a loss for every title produced, uness if its a million seller like Call of Duty always is. 

Point being, they are not making money as you think they are, because every game that comes out is a technical financial failure. Mass Effect as a franchise has sold over $10-$20 million in terms of games, DLC, and extra bits, but that $20 million is likely the cost of Mass Effect 1's development time. So the publishers have to find a way to get more revenue.

I think they need a revamp of the system a bit, but honestly, DLC is not too bad until it goes into the dangerous territory of intentionally leaving things out, like what Capcom did for Street Fighter X Tekken. As for Mass Effect 3, the From Ashes DLC it has been argued ad-nauseum over the fact that it may or may not be on disk, or that it was cut content restored for the collectors edition buyers. It doesn't matter in the end because the perception of the DLC is tainted for people. That perception of it being legitemate or not is more dangerous than the truth, sadly.

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 25 mars 2012 - 02:44 .

[ShadowyMOON]

Westwood. C&C 4.
The rest I can more or less deal with. Gutting Westwood? Never.

[mutermath]

Admiral H. Cain wrote...

mutermath wrote...

 People keep bashing EA on this site.
Can some please explain why?
I dont get it.
Some are saying the made bioware rush DA2 and now I see others saying ME3 too.

Have you played Madden football recently?

the last one i played was  2007 and a little of 08

[YeGodz]

Because the nostalgia filter does weird things to the mind, and some people have convinced themselves that, back in days of yore, Bioware was this wonderful gamer charity, producing hundred-hour "true western RPGs" pro-bono, until EA came along and infected it with with deadlines and capitalism.

[spacehamsterZH]

Bratinov wrote...

I don't buy used CDs, but don't like the online pass practice either, I don't see how publishers feel entitled to that extra money since a multiplayer slot is already reserved for that particular cd-key, and given how soon EA servers are closed its a complete rip off.

I think we can argue about whether or not publishers are entitled to anything until we're blue in the face. In principle, you can say that as long as it's clear what you're getting, it's a fair deal. What people (including me) don't like is that it's clearly a case of a corporation throwing its weight around in order to outright destroy an entire market because they think they can squeeze a few extra bucks out of said destruction.

[hitorihanzo]

I would swear that we have EA employees as members of this board. It's one thing to say that certain posters may be overly harsh in their criticism of EA, but some of the EA defenders act like we insulted their mother LOL.

[mutermath]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Bratinov wrote...

mutermath wrote...

Bratinov wrote...

There are many reasons, of the top of my head:

rushed games
running good studios into the ground
releasing the same game every year with a different number at the end
DRM
bloatware
digital "collectors" editions
online passes
day 1 dlc
pre order dlc
overpriced dlc
supporting the dlc craze
DLC gets priority over game patches

online passes are a bad thing?
they come with the cd you purchased so its kinda free
unless you bought a used cd, and if its a used cd then its their right to gget something out of you to get to play online.
besides all game have passes now

I don't buy used CDs, but don't like the online pass practice either, I don't see how publishers feel entitled to that extra money since a multiplayer slot is already reserved for that particular cd-key, and given how soon EA servers are closed its a complete rip off.

EA closed servers that had less than 1% of their user-base on them. I don't see how thats a complete rip-off. Also, sport games have had servers shut down since few people go back to them after a new title is released, so any maddens and MLBs and what not from 2006, you are out of luck, but that makes sense from a business standpoint; hell, Microsoft closed down the Xbox servers for Halo 2 and MechWarrior a while back, and Sony shut down all PS2 servers back in 2009/2010. Sucks for some games that used online for it, but it doesn't mean the company is to blame for removing something that is cost-effective. 

As for the online pass stuff, its to prevent used sales, where publishers get no money instead of ten bucks extra to go with the $25 they get from putting a game on sale in Gamestop. Publishers notroriously take a loss for every title produced, uness if its a million seller like Call of Duty always is. 

Point being, they are not making money as you think they are, because every game that comes out is a technical financial failure. Mass Effect as a franchise has sold over $10-$20 million in terms of games, DLC, and extra bits, but that $20 million is likely the cost of Mass Effect 1's development time. So the publishers have to find a way to get more revenue.

I think they need a revamp of the system a bit, but honestly, DLC is not too bad until it goes into the dangerous territory of intentionally leaving things out, like what Capcom did for Street Fighter X Tekken. As for Mass Effect 3, the From Ashes DLC it has been argued ad-nauseum over the fact that it may or may not be on disk, or that it was cut content restored for the collectors edition buyers. It doesn't matter in the end because the perception of the DLC is tainted for people. That perception of it being legitemate or not is more dangerous than the truth, sadly.

i think they intended to use it as day one dlc after using your redeem code like zaeed on the ps3to encourage players to buy the game new, but when they realized the amount of pre orders they made it paid. that just my thought though 

[Julie the bogan]

hitorihanzo wrote...

I would swear that we have EA employees as members of this board. It's one thing to say that certain posters may be overly harsh in their criticism of EA, but some of the EA defenders act like we insulted their mother LOL.

You really think your not going to get a highly opinionated answer from a fan?

Don't get me wrong, I miss Ultima, I miss C&C. But then again I hate that CoD is up to what? 15 now, last one I bought was CoD 2.