Who hates EA games
from 
GalCiv2 Forums
GalCiv2 Forums
I hate EA, does anyone else hate EA.
205,142 views
55 replies
JoeUser Forums
American McGee's Alice is one of the greatest games ever made, period.
And it was released by EA.
And it was released by EA.
EA's influence hurts its games, but the company has aquired some really great publishers. For example, they bought Maxis, which makes most of the sandbox simulation games that a lot of people love.
Sins Forums
I don't really hat EA, I just hate their support years past and when they decide to develop the games with obsolete game engines and poor quality coding (sorry, still pissed off about retail BF1942 lagging at beyond recommended (demo was fine) way back then).
Nope, don't hate EA. Never had 'much' of a reason to except when they bought Westwood studios and killed Earth and Beyond(Which, in my opinion, was one of the better MMOs out at the time), but other than that I don't hate them.
And last I checked, isn't this type of topic discussion typically not allowed? (I recall the mods locking these types of threads before if memory serves)
And last I checked, isn't this type of topic discussion typically not allowed? (I recall the mods locking these types of threads before if memory serves)
Personally, the non-pc games made by EA have been some of the worst games ever, (except mabey the SSX games). Pc wise, they've done alright. (but mabey thats just cause maxis is so good)
I don't hate EA games, nor the actual company per se. I hate their corporate mentality that sets out to milk as much much money from the consumer, by providing subpar service, a minimum quality for a maximum of price. Now, I know it is a company, trying to make money and keep its shares up, but if it expects customer satisfaction and the "coming back for more" they should set their goals higher. No use only getting money in the short term by doing the aforementioned stuff, but they should look to the future trying to hook their customers with quality.
Acquiring new and old studios may have helped them gain more money and gave a chance for those studios to get out their games, but at what cost? I believe this process should be more decentralised, as it gives more rights and freedom to the developers, but with the increasing cost of development and more studios closing everyday, it is difficult to say the least. But what's better: a giant steamrolling over new studios' independence and producing mediocre games or the studios closing and producing no game at all. It's a tough choice.
They say that EA is starting to change. I'll believe it when I see it. When they get the euro/pound/dollar sign out of their eyes, and stop being a wolf in sheep's skin, I might actually go close to new EA games.
EDIT: Oh, and Sethpenguin, if you should have probably written a more fleshed out post, as it is it's just a rant
That would have made more people actually bother to post.
Acquiring new and old studios may have helped them gain more money and gave a chance for those studios to get out their games, but at what cost? I believe this process should be more decentralised, as it gives more rights and freedom to the developers, but with the increasing cost of development and more studios closing everyday, it is difficult to say the least. But what's better: a giant steamrolling over new studios' independence and producing mediocre games or the studios closing and producing no game at all. It's a tough choice.
They say that EA is starting to change. I'll believe it when I see it. When they get the euro/pound/dollar sign out of their eyes, and stop being a wolf in sheep's skin, I might actually go close to new EA games.
EDIT: Oh, and Sethpenguin, if you should have probably written a more fleshed out post, as it is it's just a rant
That would have made more people actually bother to post.
I hate their corporate mentality that sets out to milk as much much money from the consumer, by providing subpar service, a minimum quality for a maximum of price.
Yes, this is the major problem. The problem is that Americans eat up well-advertised mediocrity. MTV, AOL, certain movies (certain good movies DONT make it, eg. Shawshank Redemption didn't hit it big in the box office.), and Starbucks coffee are all great examples of Americans being highly conditioned spenders with no regard for quality.
EA's influence hurts its games, but the company has aquired some really great publishers. For example, they bought Maxis, which makes most of the sandbox simulation games that a lot of people love.
hopefully EA doesn't get Stardock.
hopefully EA doesn't get Stardock.
Why would Brad ever sell it?
Remember, it's not the gaming that brings Stardock the biggest bucks - we're just lucky enough to have a company that makes games, too. It's the desktop customization software (of which I am also a happy customer, and which I deal with a lot more often than the games, for that matter).
Even if not-MoM tanks or Demigod sucks balls (both of which I doubt) it won't kill Stardock enough that Brad would sell to EA. Remember - they can get rid of the games anytime they want, fire the game developers, and go back to making just desktop applications.
Granted, I'd cry if they did that, but your repeated worries along this line are unfounded.
I have trouble hating anyone - I'm just a big softy.
Well, maybe Microsoft, for inflicting Visual Studio 2005 on the world.
For games I'm looking for entertainment not perfection. EA are huge and are responsible for the distribution of a vast number of games - they are not all bad, and they are not all bad BECAUSE they are EA games.
The same thing happened with the movie industry with the creation of the mega-studio's churning out formulaic easy big-buck mass market movies. Not all of them are bad.
In both cases they do not (completely) stifle the independents, the quirky, and the great.
It's the old statistical bell curve - the big boys target the middle of the curve - the independents target the ends - you just hope for the top end
Well, maybe Microsoft, for inflicting Visual Studio 2005 on the world.
For games I'm looking for entertainment not perfection. EA are huge and are responsible for the distribution of a vast number of games - they are not all bad, and they are not all bad BECAUSE they are EA games.
The same thing happened with the movie industry with the creation of the mega-studio's churning out formulaic easy big-buck mass market movies. Not all of them are bad.
In both cases they do not (completely) stifle the independents, the quirky, and the great.
It's the old statistical bell curve - the big boys target the middle of the curve - the independents target the ends - you just hope for the top end
Brad said that Stardock is not for sale (Thank God, may I add)
Oh rats! I'll have to put the coins back in the piggy-bank. Probably just as well, I can only afford one software company a month.
Well I hate EA SPORTS and NFS titles, but other games r good. But I realy dont like a "must be every year with nearly no changes" policy.
There new "freedom like" business model seems better than what they used to have.
EA spots continues to be as innovative as ever.
EA spots continues to be as innovative as ever.
(only posting twice cot it won't let me edit)
I meant to say un-innovative.
Edit:
It decided it would let me edit my second post so I thought I would, weird that!
I meant to say un-innovative.
Edit:
It decided it would let me edit my second post so I thought I would, weird that!
I hate EA's actions more than their games. As others have said, they do put out some good must have games. The downside is most of those games were once property of independant devolopers that EA bought out, which meant a downturn of quality for some of the franchises that used to be great. They have improved on their PC offerings in the last few years and I could care less if they keep putting out rehashes every year for the tween consoler crowd. I still choose to play NFL2K5 over any of the recent Maddens.
Well, my point exactly: Why put out 'new games' instead of improving the one they have. They just do it to get the money. I suppose if they were any good, or adding any content or being more original they would be worth the time and money. But if they are just minor updates and being full priced, that's just ripping off. Oh and putting out an expansion pack just to patch the game and bringing it to playable standard does not constitute and actual expansion pack :grrr:
Now if it's what the gamers want, new expansions with minor content, then it's ok. I don't need to buy everything they sell. If other people want it, they can get it. No gripes with that. But don't underestimate them by selling hot air.
Now if it's what the gamers want, new expansions with minor content, then it's ok. I don't need to buy everything they sell. If other people want it, they can get it. No gripes with that. But don't underestimate them by selling hot air.
Demigod Forums
Do I hate EA games? Depends, are you asking me if I hate the games that EA puts out, the the corporate division that puts them out. Because some of the games are fun (Crysis was fun, if short...) but the policies that go with 'em... ick.
EA doesn't make bad games (Ubisoft is the worst, to be honest), EA just makes bad business decisions. They work for them, but they're just the epitome of corporate greed.
- Every title must be dumbed-down to appeal to the 'widest market' (meaning console retards) to maximize profits.
- If you're trying a new franchise, it must use old concepts. If you're trying new concepts, it must be in an established franchise.
- Anything for the almighty dollar - in-game advertising, nasty DRM, 'micropayments'...
They just treat customers like cattle.
- Every title must be dumbed-down to appeal to the 'widest market' (meaning console retards) to maximize profits.
- If you're trying a new franchise, it must use old concepts. If you're trying new concepts, it must be in an established franchise.
- Anything for the almighty dollar - in-game advertising, nasty DRM, 'micropayments'...
They just treat customers like cattle.
Oh and the whole 'acquire everything, make a huge monopoly, and fuck everyone else'... they basically want to become Capital Records - any bit of new talent, they're going to lure in, steal all their work and their IP, and then throw them to the hounds.
EA doesn't make bad games (Ubisoft is the worst, to be honest), EA just makes bad business decisions. They work for them, but they're just the epitome of corporate greed.
- Every title must be dumbed-down to appeal to the 'widest market' (meaning console retards) to maximize profits.
- If you're trying a new franchise, it must use old concepts. If you're trying new concepts, it must be in an established franchise.
- Anything for the almighty dollar - in-game advertising, nasty DRM, 'micropayments'...
They just treat customers like cattle.
- Every title must be dumbed-down to appeal to the 'widest market' (meaning console retards) to maximize profits.
- If you're trying a new franchise, it must use old concepts. If you're trying new concepts, it must be in an established franchise.
- Anything for the almighty dollar - in-game advertising, nasty DRM, 'micropayments'...
They just treat customers like cattle.
Agreed. All their RTS games follow the same pattern: Three sides. Small campaign. Small battles. Breakneck speed. Patchs that tweak the game so much that it ruins the whole thing.
Also, the only one to blame for games like Simcity: Societies is EA. When fans called for a new Simcity, EA said: "Fuck Maxis, lets be as penny-pinching as possible and hire Tilted Mill!" (For those who don't know, Tilted Mill is a group of bad developers who have taken every good city building series and wiped their butt with it.) EA doesn't realize what PC Gaming is. Hell, they don't even know console gaming.
I'm glad Stardock can't be bought. With all their succeses, I'm betting that they will soon be rival to EA. And if Stardock decides to buy developers, I'm sure they won't dissolve them. Stardock is what game companies should be: Talented people who care, and make good games, not lazy bigwigs who concentrate on money and nothing else, while making most of their workers nearly wage slaves (exaggeration)
Pretty soon, EA and the other titans will encounter trouble, and it will be someone else to carry the torch (BTW, I pray for the Olympics to be cancelled, Communists suck.)
Etrius
Yeah... Great title. Way to pick on the lesser of two evils when it comes to mega publishers for the pc. I'm with U235, Ubisoft is worse.
It's systematic of the entire industry. Sierra/Vivendi and Ubisoft aren't any better. Quite honestly, EA has been pushing bug ridden shit for a shorter time span than the other ones have. Anyone remember Lords of Magic? Bad ass game, bad ass OOS errors too, never did manage a network game... NFS Porsche unleashed was a pretty good game aside from the less than frequent hangs, shogun:TW was awesome and fairly bug free by the time they stopped patching it.
They put out plenty of good stuff, it just tends to be the vast minority, and usually has a flaw. Not much different from Ubisoft, who royally fuck over anyone that isn't making rainbow six. When was the last time you saw a strategy game from them that didn't have balance so bad that you'd be better off randomizing all the stats? I'm not dumb enough to buy an EA game without doing my homework first, but I'm not dumb enough to buy anything from the other major publishers either, and not just the top three.
As an aside, has anyone noticed how shitty the French are when it comes to supporting products?
It's systematic of the entire industry. Sierra/Vivendi and Ubisoft aren't any better. Quite honestly, EA has been pushing bug ridden shit for a shorter time span than the other ones have. Anyone remember Lords of Magic? Bad ass game, bad ass OOS errors too, never did manage a network game... NFS Porsche unleashed was a pretty good game aside from the less than frequent hangs, shogun:TW was awesome and fairly bug free by the time they stopped patching it.
They put out plenty of good stuff, it just tends to be the vast minority, and usually has a flaw. Not much different from Ubisoft, who royally fuck over anyone that isn't making rainbow six. When was the last time you saw a strategy game from them that didn't have balance so bad that you'd be better off randomizing all the stats? I'm not dumb enough to buy an EA game without doing my homework first, but I'm not dumb enough to buy anything from the other major publishers either, and not just the top three.
As an aside, has anyone noticed how shitty the French are when it comes to supporting products?
EA doesn't make bad games (Ubisoft is the worst, to be honest), EA just makes bad business decisions. They work for them, but they're just the epitome of corporate greed.- Every title must be dumbed-down to appeal to the 'widest market' (meaning console retards) to maximize profits.- If you're trying a new franchise, it must use old concepts. If you're trying new concepts, it must be in an established franchise.- Anything for the almighty dollar - in-game advertising, nasty DRM, 'micropayments'...They just treat customers like cattle.Agreed. All their RTS games follow the same pattern: Three sides. Small campaign. Small battles. Breakneck speed. Patchs that tweak the game so much that it ruins the whole thing.Also, the only one to blame for games like Simcity: Societies is EA. When fans called for a new Simcity, EA said: "Fuck Maxis, lets be as penny-pinching as possible and hire Tilted Mill!" (For those who don't know, Tilted Mill is a group of bad developers who have taken every good city building series and wiped their butt with it.) EA doesn't realize what PC Gaming is. Hell, they don't even know console gaming.I'm glad Stardock can't be bought. With all their succeses, I'm betting that they will soon be rival to EA. And if Stardock decides to buy developers, I'm sure they won't dissolve them. Stardock is what game companies should be: Talented people who care, and make good games, not lazy bigwigs who concentrate on money and nothing else, while making most of their workers nearly wage slaves (exaggeration)Pretty soon, EA and the other titans will encounter trouble, and it will be someone else to carry the torch (BTW, I pray for the Olympics to be cancelled, Communists suck.)Etrius
This is what the truth is about EA.
My complaint has been with the industry. A publisher gives money to a developer with the agreement a game will be ready by a certain time. The publisher expects a product by a certain date. So a developer pushes out a product whether it is ready or not because contractually they are required to do so. The programmers work ungodly hours to get the product out the door. It the game doesn't sell well initially then support for it is dropped and we are all stuck with a lousy game.
I despise Electronic Arts for all they've done to the PC gaming industry. The dumbing down of video games. Treating staff like cattle. (I have a friend who works for them.) Celebrating them buying other companies is NOT good. For every one that flies (Maxis) there's several that get squashed.
EA are evil and, for many reasons, represent all that is wrong in video games. I, by and large, boycott EA. (Spore is going to make it very hard to continue to do that.) I support indies like Stardock, and even smaller 1 or 2 person operations. Indie gaming is where all originality and quality is these days.
EA are evil and, for many reasons, represent all that is wrong in video games. I, by and large, boycott EA. (Spore is going to make it very hard to continue to do that.) I support indies like Stardock, and even smaller 1 or 2 person operations. Indie gaming is where all originality and quality is these days.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting and posting on the forums.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!