Why does EA get so much hate?
#201
Posté 25 mars 2012 - 08:37
#202
Posté 25 mars 2012 - 08:38
Its nothing new.
#203
Posté 25 mars 2012 - 08:40
UBER GEEKZILLA wrote...
uh guys......EA owned bioware when they made mass effect 2...and that was biowares most acclaimed game ever.........just thought id let you all know
In mid to late development yeah. Everything developed since then has been lower quality than Bioware's traditional product. Coincidence? Maybe!
#204
Posté 25 mars 2012 - 08:45
UBER GEEKZILLA wrote...
uh guys......EA owned bioware when they made mass effect 2...and that was biowares most acclaimed game ever.........just thought id let you all know
EA owned them in ME1 and DA:O doesn't mean anything. ME2 was the one that had the most influence.
And ME2 is not their most acclaimed game ever, it's just the one with the most game of the year awards, which means nothing. ME2 had the taint of EA on it, but ME3 is EA.
#205
Guest_simfamUP_*
Posté 25 mars 2012 - 08:54
Guest_simfamUP_*
BobSmith101 wrote...
People prefer to blame EA than to blame Bioware.
Well, I personally blame producers over developers. Obsidian was rushed by Lucas arts for KOTOR II for example. I think it's every dev's dream to have all the time they want, but obviously it's a business too. And money goes over quality :-)
#206
Posté 25 mars 2012 - 08:54
#207
Posté 25 mars 2012 - 09:00
UBER GEEKZILLA wrote...
EA owned them in ME1 and DA:O doesn't mean anything. ME2 was the one that had the most influence.
And ME2 is not their most acclaimed game ever, it's just the one with the most game of the year awards, which means nothing. ME2 had the taint of EA on it, but ME3 is EA.
Uhh that's a lie. EA did NOT own Bioware for ME 1 and DA: O. Hence you don't see the EA logo in ME 1 or DA: O. ME 1 was PUBLISHED by microsoft in-case you didn't know. EA got their grubby hands on ME-2 in the middle to almost late development cycle. Everything since has been garbage. DA 2 and now to a lesser extent - ME 3.
As to the OP's question of why 'so much EA hate' . . . .
Please do yoursevle a favor and look up prior game-companies/studios bought up by EA only to be destroyed by EA. The Sims-3 is a great example to hate EA. In a nut-shell EA for the most part releases rushed-games that usually have the 'this game feels in-complete' stigma to them that and EA is DLC driven.
If you can't get a game out in 2 years under EA's watch - your hurting their bottom-line.
#208
Posté 25 mars 2012 - 09:03
UBER GEEKZILLA wrote...
uh guys......EA owned bioware when they made mass effect 2...and that was biowares most acclaimed game ever.........just thought id let you all know
Actually Dragon Age: Origins was more acclaimed than ME2. And that was finished before EA bought BW. EA added a year onto the dev of DAO due to console porting.
#209
Posté 25 mars 2012 - 09:05
The reason EA gets such bad press is probably because they put profit margins ahead of creativity. When that happens everyone loses.
#210
Posté 25 mars 2012 - 09:07
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.
Many reasons, but mainly this one: Because of who they used to be, and how far they have fallen to be what they are now.
This says it better than I ever could.
Modifié par Shadow of Light Dragon, 25 mars 2012 - 09:16 .
#211
Posté 25 mars 2012 - 09:19
EA, as the publisher, is actually not really involved in the creative process, but manages the financial side of things (which, with ME3, is pretty big). BioWare is the developer and therefore trying to create the best game they can, EA wants it to be the most profitable game possible.
That sometimes leads to compromises (such as release dates).
People are angry at publishers because sometimes their release dates are too early, leading to better sales but a rushed game. Or because big games have to become more and more accessible, need to appeal to wider audiences, leading to compromises in terms of quality, originality and innovation. The financial benefits are evident here, which is why many think publishers are behind many of these choices.
#212
Posté 25 mars 2012 - 09:31
Modifié par Blc949, 25 mars 2012 - 09:32 .
#213
Posté 25 mars 2012 - 09:38
Euno17 wrote...
UBER GEEKZILLA wrote...
EA owned them in ME1 and DA:O doesn't mean anything. ME2 was the one that had the most influence.
And ME2 is not their most acclaimed game ever, it's just the one with the most game of the year awards, which means nothing. ME2 had the taint of EA on it, but ME3 is EA.
Uhh that's a lie. EA did NOT own Bioware for ME 1 and DA: O. Hence you don't see the EA logo in ME 1 or DA: O. ME 1 was PUBLISHED by microsoft in-case you didn't know. EA got their grubby hands on ME-2 in the middle to almost late development cycle. Everything since has been garbage. DA 2 and now to a lesser extent - ME 3.
As to the OP's question of why 'so much EA hate' . . . .
Please do yoursevle a favor and look up prior game-companies/studios bought up by EA only to be destroyed by EA. The Sims-3 is a great example to hate EA. In a nut-shell EA for the most part releases rushed-games that usually have the 'this game feels in-complete' stigma to them that and EA is DLC driven.
If you can't get a game out in 2 years under EA's watch - your hurting their bottom-line.
Sorry but on this original-purchase I have of Dragon Age Origins for the PC there is VERY OBVIOUSLY an EA SYMBOL with a DRAGON AROUND IT at the bottom right.
Same for Mass Effect PC.
So maybe I was wrong, they got in at the time of Origin, points remain.
---
AS for EA only being a publisher and thus not messing with anything, EA owns BioWare.
Modifié par Aesieru, 25 mars 2012 - 09:39 .
#214
Posté 25 mars 2012 - 09:38
Blc949 wrote...
Lets just say if EA were a car manufacturer, they'd buy out Toyota, raise prices and make the cars designed to be bricked at 100,000 miles.
If EA was a car manufacturer, you'd get your car delivered to you to find out it doesn't have an engine. You'll have to wait a week for the "EA engine ricer with cool Type R stickers" DLC pack. The engine was orignally in the car, but at the last moment they took it out.
#215
Posté 25 mars 2012 - 09:43
#216
Posté 25 mars 2012 - 09:46
#217
Posté 25 mars 2012 - 09:47
Nepp wrote...
Blc949 wrote...
Lets just say if EA were a car manufacturer, they'd buy out Toyota, raise prices and make the cars designed to be bricked at 100,000 miles.
If EA was a car manufacturer, you'd get your car delivered to you to find out it doesn't have an engine. You'll have to wait a week for the "EA engine ricer with cool Type R stickers" DLC pack. The engine was orignally in the car, but at the last moment they took it out.
And then all the fanbois would say 'It really does have an engine it's just too complicated for you to understand, whiner.'
#218
Posté 25 mars 2012 - 09:48
#219
Posté 25 mars 2012 - 10:07
Jebediah Springfield wrote...
Just look at BF3. They taking away servers so that people will have to rent them. They're now charging for COD style multiplayer after DICE said they'd never charge for dlc, and they're looking at a pay per month service.
And they put in a singleplayer campaign that had such terrible level design and claimed it was a GREAT STORY.
#220
Posté 25 mars 2012 - 10:11
#221
Posté 25 mars 2012 - 10:15
Salis777 wrote...
Nepp wrote...
Blc949 wrote...
Lets just say if EA were a car manufacturer, they'd buy out Toyota, raise prices and make the cars designed to be bricked at 100,000 miles.
If EA was a car manufacturer, you'd get your car delivered to you to find out it doesn't have an engine. You'll have to wait a week for the "EA engine ricer with cool Type R stickers" DLC pack. The engine was orignally in the car, but at the last moment they took it out.
And then all the fanbois would say 'It really does have an engine it's just too complicated for you to understand, whiner.'
And the fanbois tells me it runs by SPACE MAGIC then?
Sounds about right.
#222
Posté 25 mars 2012 - 10:20
#223
Posté 25 mars 2012 - 10:24
#224
Posté 25 mars 2012 - 10:24
In my opinion, ME3 was sold as a barebones game with the rest yet to come in the form of DLCs. Not to mention they've effectively made multiplayer mandatory if you want to get the "best" ending. Making MP mandatory means people must buy onlines passes or buy the game new. But if you don't like MP or if you have slow connection, then too bad for you.
Modifié par 2484Stryker, 25 mars 2012 - 10:25 .
#225
Posté 25 mars 2012 - 10:28
Game is half finished? Who cares, they'll buy the other half as DLC.
Need some more time to iron out some bugs or finish up production? Here's 3 months, even though you asked for 6.
All said, ME2 and DA:O (2 of my favorite-ever video games) were pubslished by EA.
Modifié par o Ventus, 25 mars 2012 - 10:29 .





Retour en haut






