88 réponses à ce sujet

[termokanden]

Ninja Stan wrote...
The individual consumer/gamer is extremely short-sighted, allowing each news article and discussion to inform their predictions about the company's future.

As tired as I am of the constant anti-EA threads, I don't see why we need to throw insults in both directions now. Not all consumers/gamers are as naive as you seem to suggest.

[RedArmyShogun]

Thats the mindset of the Industry. To them the typical consumer is a dog, who can be thrown chopped liver and will lap it up like choice cut.

[termokanden]

I hope not!

In any case, without predicting the future of any particular company, I will just say that microtransactions have become a factor I will take into consideration before buying games. I didn't always worry about this kind of thing, but through poor experiences I have become very aware of it. Even if you know what's going on, it's just so easy to get suckered into one more purchase when it's such small amounts and it's so easy.

I have already avoided some games because of it and I will be even more strict in the future.

Don't get me wrong though, a few DLCs that are actually worth the price of admission are fine by me, welcome in fact. Perhaps not so much day 1 DLC, but actual new content. That's not really what I'm talking about here.

I'm talking about something like for example a F2P MMO where you purchase stat point upgrades, items, mount upgrades and raiding supplies, that's what I'm after. It's too easy to spend your money quickly, and I just don't think it's consumer friendly. MMO players tend to always want the best for their character, and I feel F2P systems with these kinds of microtransactions exploit this fact quite shamelessly. I also dislike ME3's store system both because it is pay to win, and because it is really a kind of gambling where you might not even receive anything for your money.

Modifié par termokanden, 21 juin 2012 - 10:50 .

[Morroian]

Neo DrKefka wrote...

They've added a dungeon finder coming in the next patch but that still doesn't help since it's not cross servers and help with elite quests.

Incorrect, with the server transfers the groiup finder will be a huge help.

[Rockworm503]

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...

KingJason13 wrote...


You're clearly missing what free-to-play is all about. The "free" gets them onto your hard drive, the proverbial "foot in the door" so to speak, and then you have to PAY to have any chance of being successful at them( which is why they are often referred to as "pay-to-win" games). It becomes very easy to pay far in excess of the $60 you would have paid for a regular game outright.

Buying is a choice.  Not buying is a choice.

Me?  I get a free AAA game and I play it until I'm done with it.  I really like it?  I drop $20 on in game goodies.  I really, really like it?  I drop $40 on in game goodies.   I hate the game?  No money spent on it.

Tell me again how what EA is doing is bad?

You probably wont be able to get anywhere in the game without buying something.
Most free to play games become Pay to win meaning you have to buy the good gear or something.  I bet half the classes will be locked unless you pay or something.
But yeah as far as this goes I play what is free and ignore the rest.  If thats not good enough than their not going to get me to pay for more.

[Rockworm503]

Arcian wrote...

TheBlackBaron wrote...

If that's what EA thinks is the future, fine. I'll suck what fun I can out of their games and move on when I can't progress any further without giving them money. But Peter Moore is an idiot if he thinks the thing that built the industry - the $60 upfront AAA game - is going away or is going to become scarce. Even arguably worse companies like Activision and Ubisoft seem to be getting along just fine without trying to insert micortransactions into everything. 

Activision I can understand, but how in hell is Ubisoft worse than EA? The only really negative thing they have going for them is their perverse obsession with intrusive DRM.

I just have this feeling that Ubisoft is learning their lesson.  Activision and EA don't seem to think they have to learn anything.  The thing is most companies want to make good relations with their customers because they understand thats where their money is coming from.  EA especially seem to blame all their problems on their customers when they been bringing this on themselves for years.

[RedArmyShogun]

In fairness EA sports corners that end of the market. And that might rub off in General on EA as a whole.

If a massive sports sales favor them as there is no choice, then coupled with buy ups, its easy how they can look down.

I mean where else will you Buy NFL, NHL, or NBA games? Not that I play those, but the market for them is huge..lets say I sell...some new drink, and it appeals to a group. I can be the worst host, I can insult, demean, charge as I please, and guess what. So long as no one else can market that, or so long as you can't break the habit, well, who controls who?

EA's Marketing and ethical pratices are that of a Columbian Drug Lord.

However no matter how much one may hate such a man, he has resources, wealth, and mansions the likes of which you will never see. so from a standpoint, EA is winning. Of course its customers are fickle and as soon as someone who is better or with cheaper rates comes along...

Well those mansions tend to have many tenants over the years...

[jackofalltrades456]

www.youtube.com/watch

Globodyne: EA

News Anchor: Investors

Dick: PR rep

Ralph Nader:  Customers

[slimgrin]

Come on you guys, quit getting my hopes up.

[Brockololly]

A picture speaks a thousand words:


EA's stock plummeting is troublesome, mostly for John Riccitiello. As that article points out, Riccitiello's big gamble was acquiring BioWare for ~$1 billion and then TOR being the most expensive EA game ever produced and having that only performing "ok."

Basically, if we go by EA's February conference call, according to their most recent subscription numbers with TOR, it doesn't seem like it was a very good investment.



So the 500,000 number they bandied about as being a "breakeven" number is all relative to the capital cost of R&D in making TOR and how worthwhile it was to acquire BioWare, not necessarily the number they'd need to breakeven on keeping servers up and staff on TOR. Basicallyt by EA's own words, TOR is really only seen as a good investment if it stays around or above 1.5 million subs.

It will be very interesting to see what TOR's numbers look like at the end of July during EA's next conference call. If it keeps bleeding subs, one can only imagine that'll hurt EA's stock even more.

And the thing with EA's stock getting so low, is that they become a more tempting target for a takeover from some other entity.

Modifié par Brockololly, 22 juin 2012 - 04:21 .

[The Jackal]

I made a thread not too long ago about EA. I was not bashing the company in itself. Rather then showing a pattern. I was warned by a mod (NinjaStan) and told to be "Care full with my tone" I am rather surprised that this one has not been locked yet since it debates about the "future of EA" and unless it's met with rose petals and shouts that it will be great. It is normally, locked.

I take a bit of issue saying gamers are short sighed. Gamers know exactly what they want and if they are not getting it they generally look around the internet for articles that do re-confirm or validate what they already feel.

For example. Some generally felt that ME3 ending was far from perfect. A news article did not influence our thought. We felt that way at the ending. We are not saying it's not a great game only that we don't depend what we say based on news article, suggestions that we do simply do not make that much sense.

I'm devoted to Bioware. Look at all the games registered on my account. Yet I feel that I should be able to voice what I feel generally about a company because they "Vaule Feedback" and shouldn't be treated as "We simply do not understand" sort of feeling.

Simply put. I doubt that TOR turned out to be the cow they could milk from like Warcraft is. Not saying the story telling isn't compelling but as a MMO it fails to give the success that other MMO's have enjoyed.

[LegendaryBlade]

Is EA doomed?

We can only hope

[Chromie]

JasonRocker wrote...
I'm devoted to Bioware. Look at all the games registered on my account..

Does that me I'm more devoted than you? Since well I have more games registered.

[The Jackal]

Skelter192 wrote...

JasonRocker wrote...
I'm devoted to Bioware. Look at all the games registered on my account..

Does that me I'm more devoted than you? Since well I have more games registered.

Don't get cute. You are not good at it. You know exactly what I meant. In case I have to break down the obvious for you. I am not a random person bashing/hating on EA. I have actually registered games and I support this company. Thanks for your non contriubue of this thread. Impressive.

[Chromie]

JasonRocker wrote...
 I have actually registered games and I support this company.

You can clearly see that I do to.

On topic: Well EA has been turning great franchises into crap. Dead Space 3 anyone?

[slimgrin]

Brockololly wrote...


And the thing with EA's stock getting so low, is that they become a more tempting target for a takeover from some other entity.

Like Satan, since he might be the only one left willing to take EA under his scaly wing.

[naughty99]

Brockololly wrote...

So the 500,000 number they bandied about as being a "breakeven" number is all relative to the capital cost of R&D in making TOR and how worthwhile it was to acquire BioWare, not necessarily the number they'd need to breakeven on keeping servers up and staff on TOR.

Reaching a positive net present value in 5-10 years as Eric Brown described encompasses more than cashflow in excess of the monthly operating cost. It takes into account all the costs from the very first day they started working on this project (including cumulative royalties, employee salaries, server costs, etc.,)compared with the income over the period they are looking at, and what they could have earned by investing elsewhere.

What he seems to be saying is that if they still have 500,000 steady subscribers at a point in 5-10 years from now, then the total net revenue generated up to that point will be slightly less than what they could have earned if instead of developing TOR they had invested all that cash somewhere else. If the subscriber level is 1 million subs, then they will have earned slightly more.

[Neo DrKefka]

Morroian wrote...

Neo DrKefka wrote...

They've added a dungeon finder coming in the next patch but that still doesn't help since it's not cross servers and help with elite quests.

Incorrect, with the server transfers the groiup finder will be a huge help.

Server transfers are pointless all they do is bring people closer together without really fixing the problems the game has. The Group Finder was never supposed to be in the game and they claimed it would never happen until right before all those Bioware staff members were laid off.

The group finder is pointless if you want a group, you want a group now from any server not sit in long queues. Server transfers are for failed MMO's who do not want to fix the game or appease the majority. 

[Giggles_Manically]

They just keep sinking quicker and quicker into oblivion.

The problem is that again and again people denounce their games as ****, and then it goes on.

Investor: Oh it seems TOR was...so-so guess I will take my money else where....
Investor 2: Oh my the fans certainly seem enraged....and sales are flagging huh...

This sets off more and more people now putting money into the company, or buying their stocks.
Which then leads to them shrinking due to their funds and consumer trust shrinking very rapidly.

They still dominate with sports titles, but any investor following them knows that their other titles are hit and miss at the best.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Doooooooooomed.

But I certainly get the sense that the next 5 years is pivotal for the games industry. It's no longer growing at the rapid rate it was in the 2000-2008 period and consumers are becoming more and more exposed/wise to the decisions being made by developers and publishers as a result of social media and the influx of games journalism.

When Call of Duty reaches it's inevitable decline, it will be interesting to see the effects on the games industry as a whole, including EA.

Modifié par CrustyBot, 22 juin 2012 - 06:45 .

[hangmans tree]

slimgrin wrote...

Brockololly wrote...


And the thing with EA's stock getting so low, is that they become a more tempting target for a takeover from some other entity.

Like Satan, since he might be the only one left willing to take EA under his scaly wing.

Satan doesnt giva a damn about some crap, mud and dust on his sandals...

[Neo DrKefka]

Giggles_Manically wrote...

They just keep sinking quicker and quicker into oblivion.

The problem is that again and again people denounce their games as ****, and then it goes on.

Investor: Oh it seems TOR was...so-so guess I will take my money else where....
Investor 2: Oh my the fans certainly seem enraged....and sales are flagging huh...

This sets off more and more people now putting money into the company, or buying their stocks.
Which then leads to them shrinking due to their funds and consumer trust shrinking very rapidly.

They still dominate with sports titles, but any investor following them knows that their other titles are hit and miss at the best.

We are not fans we are, 'customers'

CrustyBot wrote...

Doooooooooomed.

But I certainly get the sense that the next 5 years is pivotal for the games industry. It's no longer growing at the rapid rate it was in the 2000-2008 period and consumers are becoming more and more exposed/wise to the decisions being made by developers and publishers as a result of social media and the influx of games journalism. 

When Call of Duty reaches it's inevitable decline, it will be interesting to see the effects on the games industry as a whole, including EA.

 


I think we see that with various developers. We have seen it happen to the Japanese Gaming Industry which seemed full of themselves. Now it seems the Western Gaming Industry is full of hubris. If you read all Bioware related news for the past two years you'll see what I am I talking about. The fact developers see themselves more as artists rather than a business they are losing sight of what they need to do to succeed.

The hubris on Western Developers like Bioware to where it took a turn to doing whatever they want now because they assume you're a fan rather than just a customer and you'll like it. If you don't someone else will but that isn't really happening. I wouldn't be surprised if we were in for another huge video game crash. Some in the industry seems to also be going through a phase where they do not care about the customer and they are willing to sink their own ship to save face. 

To where you see people in the industry lose their mind and you can see they do not care about presenting themselves in a creditable fashion. 

At this point some people in the industry have to take a cold hard look at themselves and understand it's not them (customers) it you. When you get to the point where you're in a job you hate and you bring negativity to yourself and customers you need to think about leaving that job and when you leave the job you should leave it completely behind and not volunteer to do it and pursue other ventures.

Even if those ventures are not taking off you should focus on that rather than being toxic somewhere that you are not happy or you notice people around you do not really like you especially customers.

EDIT: 

It's also important to note EA though they have made some bad decisions they are not totally responsible for Bioware's horrible personal decisions of late. As we can see with them laying off over 200 plus Bioware employees EA is unhappy as well with the performance of Bioware and the altitude and route they have taken. I think it's going to be more interesting to see what happens when Bioware fails with Command and Conquer since Bioware has lost a good amount customer confidence and what happens with The Old Republic.

Modifié par Neo DrKefka, 22 juin 2012 - 08:53 .

[Melca36]

KingJason13 wrote...

Ea's problem is that their anti-consumer attitudes are angering many of their (soon to be "former") customers.

Check this out, for example:

http://www.destructo...29894.phtml#ext

There is NO WAY EA will be able to handle f2p without being excessively douchey about it... and if they plan to move ALL of their games in that direction... than forget them.

Anybody remember EA's The Sims Online???

Look at how much they invested in that.  It was even hyped on TIME MAGAZINE.

I actually beta tested that before it came out and when I said what I considered it to be...A PAY BY THE MONTH ONLINE Chat Game............I was banned on the spot.

They predicted 2 million subscribers and it never happened. [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/lol.png[/smilie]

They let that game run for years before shutting it down.

TOR is beautiful but I don't get why they went with a LEVEL 50 CAP.