181 réponses à ce sujet

[Elhanan]

Volus Warlord wrote...

I'm not a shareholder (and I would NEVER put money into EA), I'm a customer. I do not care about how many they sold. I care if the product is one of quality.

As another customer, I have aquired all three titles. And while not a shareholder, am glad this company appears to be improving for their investors.

[Volus Warlord]

Elhanan wrote...

Volus Warlord wrote...

I'm not a shareholder (and I would NEVER put money into EA), I'm a customer. I do not care about how many they sold. I care if the product is one of quality.

As another customer, I have aquired all three titles. And while not a shareholder, am glad this company appears to be improving for their investors.

BioWare has one investor- EA.

EA as a whole is a different story entirely.

[Elhanan]

Volus Warlord wrote...

BioWare has one investor- EA.

EA as a whole is a different story entirely.

Then that seems to leave us at opinions vs opinions (ie; all being equal). Those that feel disappointed may then choose to pass, wait, etc. And others may choose to purchase and lay their games.

For me, Bioware has nothing to prove; already have done so repeatedly.

Modifié par Elhanan, 24 août 2012 - 05:35 .

[Joy Divison]

Bioware will recapture their fans whenever they make a memorable game that the majority of its customers find engrossing.

That being said, I wouldn't hold my breath.

[Volus Warlord]

Elhanan wrote...

Volus Warlord wrote...

BioWare has one investor- EA.

EA as a whole is a different story entirely.

*snip out the hippie nonsense*

For me, Bioware has nothing to proive; already have done so repeatedly.

That is a very silly mentality. 

A studio "proving" itself is not a simple rite of passage. It is a continuous and ongoing process that will last as long as the studio does. One good game does not make everything a studio makes good. Ten good games does not make everything a studio makes good. Strong, consistant, reliable performance is what will make them a good studio. BioWare recently has been erratic at best.

They must keep proving their worth and value through their products or lose there support from all but the blindest of followers. 

[Chromie]

Volus Warlord wrote...

Elhanan wrote...

Volus Warlord wrote...

BioWare has one investor- EA.

EA as a whole is a different story entirely.

*snip out the hippie nonsense*

For me, Bioware has nothing to proive; already have done so repeatedly.

That is a very silly mentality. 

A studio "proving" itself is not a simple rite of passage. It is a continuous and ongoing process that will last as long as the studio does. One good game does not make everything a studio makes good. Ten good games does not make everything a studio makes good. Strong, consistant, reliable performance is what will make them a good studio. BioWare recently has been erratic at best.

They must keep proving their worth and value through their products or lose there support from all but the blindest of followers. 

Are you serious? How dare you use logic and treat a company as a company and not a person!

[Elhanan]

"EA shipped seven titles in the fourth quarter that have already sold in over 1 million units each, life to date. Crysis®2, Dragon Age™ 2, and Dead Space™ 2 each sold in more than two million units.""

"Mass Effect 3 Sales Exceed $200 Million at Retail"

Yes; Google is quite handy. But please do not let facts get in the way of a good bias....

Modifié par Elhanan, 24 août 2012 - 05:21 .

[Elhanan]

greengoron89 wrote...

Elhanan wrote...

"EA shipped seven titles in the fourth quarter that have already sold in over 1 million units each, life to date. Crysis®2, Dragon Age™ 2, and Dead Space™ 2 each sold in more than two million units.""

"Mass Effect 3 Sales Exceed $200 Million at Retail"

Yes; Google is quite handy. But please do not let facts get in the way of a good bias....

Damn, he gave you a two-for-one deal on that one - meaningless numbers he dug up on Google and his trademark holier-than-thou insinuations that are just shy of being insults.

Who is this 'you' mentioned? This is for all the 'If the show does not fit, we'll jam it in anyway' crowd....

[Volus Warlord]

Elhanan wrote...

"EA shipped seven titles in the fourth quarter that have already sold in over 1 million units each, life to date. Crysis®2, Dragon Age™ 2, and Dead Space™ 2 each sold in more than two million units.""

"Mass Effect 3 Sales Exceed $200 Million at Retail"

Yes; Google is quite handy. But please do not let facts get in the way of a good bias....

All that and they still manage to lose money.  What a bunch of screwups. 

Man, if I bought them when there were $65/share, I'd be on the on the verge of suicide right now. (That was 2005)

But we need details on your idiotic, shortsighted, and fundamentally flawed assumptions.

1.) Lots of sales mean a game is good
No. Sorry. If anything, it means marketing was good. There are numerous games that sold brilliantly and were CRAP. There are numerous games that tanked financially and were BRILLIANT.

2.) Lots of sales mean a company is good
No. They are losing money and have been at best shaky. More so than many others throughout this recession. Their quarterly reports are not a reliable source of solid information. They are a sales pitch to try to pick up and appease shareholders. If they can't make a good sales pitch, they are hopeless.

3.) As a customer, I should be concerned with how much a product I buy sells.
No. I am concerned first and foremost with the quality and value of the product. If it's a good product, I will give the maker some goodwill, but ultimately the producer is not my problem. I am not obligated to support them because they made something I liked years ago.

4.) I should be happy if a company is successful 
No. Again, the companies well-being is not my problem. Plain and simple. My fiscal duty is first and foremost to me. Capitalism 101. 

So, ultimately none of those figures are relevant. Congratulations bringing in off-topic material.

[Elhanan]

Volus Warlord wrote...

All that and they still manage to lose money.  What a bunch of screwups. 

Man, if I bought them when there were $65/share, I'd be on the on the verge of suicide right now. (That was 2005)

But we need details on your idiotic, shortsighted, and fundamentally flawed assumptions.

1.) Lots of sales mean a game is good
No. Sorry. If anything, it means marketing was good. There are numerous games that sold brilliantly and were CRAP. There are numerous games that tanked financially and were BRILLIANT.

2.) Lots of sales mean a company is good
No. They are losing money and have been at best shaky. More so than many others throughout this recession. Their quarterly reports are not a reliable source of solid information. They are a sales pitch to try to pick up and appease shareholders. If they can't make a good sales pitch, they are hopeless.

3.) As a customer, I should be concerned with how much a product I buy sells.
No. I am concerned first and foremost with the quality and value of the product. If it's a good product, I will give the maker some goodwill, but ultimately the producer is not my problem. I am not obligated to support them because they made something I liked years ago.

4.) I should be happy if a company is successful 
No. Again, the companies well-being is not my problem. Plain and simple. My fiscal duty is first and foremost to me. Capitalism 101. 

So, ultimately none of those figures are relevant. Congratulations bringing in off-topic material.

Agreed; sales do not a good game make, but it helps. Still, for those that adore to reflect upon DAO vs DA2, good to know. And this will not be 'diappointing' to their investors.

And as far as money loss, this is improved over the losses made in 2008, I believe. Still not out of th hole, but taking the upward path. I am not an economist, but things appear to be better.

And as you say, the figures may be irrelevant; opinion vs opinion as I mentioned before.

[Elhanan]

greengoron89 wrote...

This is the part where he'll passive-aggressively insult you for posting on an open forum that's owned by Bioware/EA and welcomes criticism, then prop himself up for being the sole morally righteous individual among us. The egomania is almost tangible.

Wrong again; must be getting used it, though....

[Addai]

Elhanan wrote...
Agreed; sales do not a good game make, but it helps. Still, for those that adore to reflect upon DAO vs DA2, good to know. And this will not be 'diappointing' to their investors.

And as far as money loss, this is improved over the losses made in 2008, I believe. Still not out of th hole, but taking the upward path. I am not an economist, but things appear to be better.

And as you say, the figures may be irrelevant; opinion vs opinion as I mentioned before.

Maybe you should google "EA stock price drop," for some balance.

Here, let me help.

[cdtrk65]

You can list me as caution about DA3 but will still buy around the release date. If there is ever a ME4 I would buy it as well. Only because I like both worlds and am willing to give them one more go.

[Volus Warlord]

Elhanan wrote...

Volus Warlord wrote...

All that and they still manage to lose money.  What a bunch of screwups. 

Man, if I bought them when there were $65/share, I'd be on the on the verge of suicide right now. (That was 2005)

But we need details on your idiotic, shortsighted, and fundamentally flawed assumptions.

1.) Lots of sales mean a game is good
No. Sorry. If anything, it means marketing was good. There are numerous games that sold brilliantly and were CRAP. There are numerous games that tanked financially and were BRILLIANT.

2.) Lots of sales mean a company is good
No. They are losing money and have been at best shaky. More so than many others throughout this recession. Their quarterly reports are not a reliable source of solid information. They are a sales pitch to try to pick up and appease shareholders. If they can't make a good sales pitch, they are hopeless.

3.) As a customer, I should be concerned with how much a product I buy sells.
No. I am concerned first and foremost with the quality and value of the product. If it's a good product, I will give the maker some goodwill, but ultimately the producer is not my problem. I am not obligated to support them because they made something I liked years ago.

4.) I should be happy if a company is successful 
No. Again, the companies well-being is not my problem. Plain and simple. My fiscal duty is first and foremost to me. Capitalism 101. 

So, ultimately none of those figures are relevant. Congratulations bringing in off-topic material.

Agreed; sales do not a good game make, but it helps. Still, for those that adore to reflect upon DAO vs DA2, good to know. And this will not be 'diappointing' to their investors.

And as far as money loss, this is improved over the losses made in 2008, I believe. Still not out of th hole, but taking the upward path. I am not an economist, but things appear to be better.

And as you say, the figures may be irrelevant; opinion vs opinion as I mentioned before.

The money does not necessarily help. Some of the biggest moneymakers are the most hopelessly stagnant ones. Yes, you can do good things with money, but that is only with some careful decision making and good planning, and I do not really see either in EA.  Luck helps too, but that you've no control over.

What makes a company a good investment is its overall profile, NOT any specific individual product. Yes, they help, but it may not cover losses elsewhere. As is currently the case with EA. One great product may not cover for ten that suck, or, if the suck is big enough, ten great products might not cover for one that sucks.

But again, I am not an investor. I am a previous and potential customer. I am not concerned with their issues, innerworkings, sales, and stock. I am concerned with the quality of their products. If they don't make the cut, I go to a company that can.

And I will NEVER invest in EA. Never never never never. Too much risk for too little gain. I'd be better off with startups. 

[Elhanan]

Addai67 wrote...

Maybe you should google "EA stock price drop," for some balance.

Here, let me help.

Thanks, but I prefer to go to this source. Supposedly these results are audited, so there is accountability:

http://files.shareho...ables_FINAL.pdf

[Elhanan]

greengoron89 wrote...

You mean you prefer to go to a source that better fits your personal view, "accountable" or not.

Pot; meet kettle....

HGH2

[Elhanan]

greengoron89 wrote...

Elhanan wrote...

Pot; meet kettle....

The irony is strong with this one.

Nice pun! Pot, kettle, irony! You have learned well, Padawan.....