298 réponses à ce sujet

[LinksOcarina]

Call of duty is Activison...not EA...

[InfinitePaths]

Why?Day 1 dlc to get more money,if our community doesn't give us money we will rip one of the best companions from the game so they can't enjoy the game the community payed 60& for it.If our community doesn't fell like playing multiplayer they can't have the best ending.Yeah EA is good,they rushed DA2,the game had so much potential,but nooo EA rushed bioware and made 60% of bioware DA fanbase hate DA(not me).See why EA suck?

[Heather Cline]

Before EA bought out Bioware, Bioware came out with ME1, and DA:O. After EA bought out Bioware we had games like DA2 which was rushed and shoddy. ME2 had femshep on malesheps skeletal rigging and made her walk like a man, removed the s/s romance options for ME2 and so on and so forth. Bioware has gone down hill since EA bought them. It's very obvious. ME3 is just another example of how they went down hill and they keep on going down hill. The whole grab for other gamers from other kinds of genre's is a perfect example of this.

Before EA bought them out they never would have bothered with trying to get gamers from other genre's or the casual crowd. They would have stuck to their guns. Games like Jade Empire, KoTOR, Neverwinter Nights and so on. Those are great games because they took their time, they put love, soul and heart into their games. Now... now it's just a quick cash grab.

[Aesieru]

EA has taken over a lot of companies that were good game developers, and they no longer exist and after being rushed and exploited a bit, their communities stopped respecting their brand and buying it and so EA devoured their studios and redistributed the workers OR, they rebooted the franchise later in attempts to get it to work again.

Contrary to popular belief, it wasn't JUST Westwood Studios which made Command and Conquer, but instead there were MANY more situations of that occurring.

Modifié par Aesieru, 25 mars 2012 - 03:31 .

[spirosz]

For rushing a series that could of been one of the greatest things in gaming history.

[Naughty Bear]

Why is EA releasing a new Medal of Honor to compete with their own Battlefield 3?

[ZtalkerRM]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Call of duty is Activison...not EA...

True, but they are pointing out that EA/Bioware's marketing strategy is starting to mirror that of Activision/Blizzard.
Blizzard is now actually creating a real-life money auction house for Diablo 3 (of which I believe a certain percentage will go them) and Activision is charging their fanbase extra money for something they should have provided them to start with (Elite for COD).

EA is not there yet though...but they will be

Modifié par ZtalkerRM, 25 mars 2012 - 03:33 .

[Volus Warlord]

Naughty Bear wrote...

Why is EA releasing a new Medal of Honor to compete with their own Battlefield 3?

They are desperate to release ANYTHING that could complete with CoD. Anything. 

They were trying to CoD-ize ME3, you know.

[LinksOcarina]

Thats because it worked for Activision and Activision is making tons of dough now off of it. EA would be foolish to not emulate some of that.

If they did it in a different way I would be more impressed...but we shall see what happens.

@Naughty Bear, they own both franchises, and instead of flooding the market every year with Battlefield or MoH, they are likely adopting a policy to release them in different years, to give time for the dev teams to finish the games. They won't compete with each other, and they are better offers than CoD each year, honestly.

[starscreamerx31]

Cause they rush broken unfinished games to market all the time.

[michael99887766]

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.

The (quite reasonable) suggestion is that takeovers by massive publishers like EA remove the last vestiges of soul from game creation and turn it into a totally commercialised process. As franchises get bigger and more lucrative, there's more and more pressure to get games out quickly and give them a broad appeal. Sadly, this often leads to rushing, comprimising on quality, and alienating the most loyal fans.

[Nepp]

EA is the death of all the good devs they bought out.

They destroyed the Command and Conquer series. C&C 4 was a peice of garbage. There are many more franchises they flushed down the toilet and liquidated their devs.

[Pallando]

mutermath wrote...

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)

Like Dead Space 2 ? It seems this game doesn't use dedicated servers... So you basically pay to communicate...
Moreover, lots of games let players set up their own dedicated servers (Couter-Strike, L4D, Mount&Blade:Warband, ...). Why can't they do that... ?

And about the development costs... I get the feeling that companies like EA pay as much (if not more) for marketing as they pay for actual development. Their objective is to sell a product, whatever it is, before it actually exists. I'm sure that less marketing and more developing would make better games that would sell better in the long run...

[mutermath]

Heather Cline wrote...

Before EA bought out Bioware, Bioware came out with ME1, and DA:O. After EA bought out Bioware we had games like DA2 which was rushed and shoddy. ME2 had femshep on malesheps skeletal rigging and made her walk like a man, removed the s/s romance options for ME2 and so on and so forth. Bioware has gone down hill since EA bought them. It's very obvious. ME3 is just another example of how they went down hill and they keep on going down hill. The whole grab for other gamers from other kinds of genre's is a perfect example of this.

Before EA bought them out they never would have bothered with trying to get gamers from other genre's or the casual crowd. They would have stuck to their guns. Games like Jade Empire, KoTOR, Neverwinter Nights and so on. Those are great games because they took their time, they put love, soul and heart into their games. Now... now it's just a quick cash grab.

I'm quite sure DA:O was published by EA, at least the one I played

[Nepp]

mutermath wrote...

I'm quite sure DA:O was published by EA, at least the one I played

It was. It was developed and finished before EA bought Bioware. Hence the retarded tv commercials blasting Marilyn Mansons "New s hit" music. EA is king of stupid advertising.

[MingWolf]

It's hard for me to really place much respect for EA unless they start doing things a little more philantropical, and I'm not just suggesting the typical donation to charity like most corporations do anyway.

The problem is, they tend to place lofty corporate goals ahead of their games, ahead of the creations of their studios. Money first, entertainment second. It is in my opinion that it should really be the other way around: entertainment first, and money will follow. The way they market their products (aggressively via DLC, advertisements that doesn't paint the full picture, and various viral methods) seems to point back to their corporate goals.

They also place extensive controls on their products. When you buy from them, you are more or less buying the privilege to use their games, and not the game itself. If you look at Origin in relation to Mass Effect 3, this is exactly what it is.

What it comes down to is the big buck, and my personal disagreement with this corporation is that too often, they place the big buck ahead of their own customers.

[slimgrin]

 https://encrypted-tb...yw6b8l3zGRisPT7

[mutermath]

Nepp wrote...

mutermath wrote...

I'm quite sure DA:O was published by EA, at least the one I played

It was. It was developed and finished before EA bought Bioware. Hence the retarded tv commercials blasting Marilyn Mansons "New s hit" music. EA is king of stupid advertising.

So was it EA that made them go cross platform?
Or was that BW intensions?

Modifié par mutermath, 25 mars 2012 - 03:54 .

[Pallando]

Nepp wrote...

mutermath wrote...

I'm quite sure DA:O was published by EA, at least the one I played

It was. It was developed and finished before EA bought Bioware. Hence the retarded tv commercials blasting Marilyn Mansons "New s hit" music. EA is king of stupid advertising.

Don't forget the "in-game" advertising through Levi Dryden...
I think we can agreeit was EA's idea...

[Nepp]

mutermath wrote...

So was it EA that made them go cross platform?
Or was the BW intensions?

It was EA. It was finished and ready to release on PC. Then it was delayed close to a year to port it over to the consoles.

EDIT @ Pall.

Yeah.. forgot about that silly Levi bit...

Modifié par Nepp, 25 mars 2012 - 03:54 .

[CroGamer002]

Volus Warlord wrote...

Naughty Bear wrote...

Why is EA releasing a new Medal of Honor to compete with their own Battlefield 3?

They are desperate to release ANYTHING that could complete with CoD. Anything. 

They were trying to CoD-ize ME3, you know.

Except that they didn't.

[Esmeraldita95]

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

^This

[mutermath]

Nepp wrote...

mutermath wrote...

So was it EA that made them go cross platform?
Or was the BW intensions?

It was EA. It was finished and ready to release on PC. Then it was delayed close to a year to port it over to the consoles.

In taht case I'm glad they took over 

[Nepp]

mutermath wrote...

Nepp wrote...

mutermath wrote...

So was it EA that made them go cross platform?
Or was the BW intensions?

It was EA. It was finished and ready to release on PC. Then it was delayed close to a year to port it over to the consoles.

In taht case I'm glad they took over 

You're glad for craptastic games then?

[Pallando]

mutermath wrote...

Nepp wrote...

mutermath wrote...

So was it EA that made them go cross platform?
Or was the BW intensions?

It was EA. It was finished and ready to release on PC. Then it was delayed close to a year to port it over to the consoles.

In taht case I'm glad they took over 

Why is it a good thing ? They "casualize" good and profound games.
I don't have anything against console players, but it was the beginning of the end : they made it cross-platform for the wrong reasons...

When you see what was DA2, a casual hack'n'slash ported on PC, I can't say I'm impressed with what the series became.

Modifié par Pallando, 25 mars 2012 - 04:02 .