EA is not evil.
- Thread starter thebobmaster_v1legacy
- Start date
Recommended Videos
They put L4D and L4D 2 on sale a lot, actually. I can't speak for most Valve games because I don't give a damn, but I passed up several L4D2 sales before I finally bought it.thebobmaster said:
And of course, while I can't talk about the amount of free DLC, Valve has put out a ton of support for its games past what other companies would consider viable.
Valve also isn't a company whose stock price has been slipping for years. While correlation does not prove causation, it sure
like EA's business practices are hurting its stock price and therefore its shareholders.
While this is technically true, allow me to play devil's advocate here. Doesn't giving out free content and supporting games rather than charging for content and locking things kind of earn you points in this category? I don't know. I would view a company that gives me stuff more favourably than a company that locks me out of stuff.
I'm not a Valve fan. But both companies may be corporations and employ a means to an end, but one does so by being nice to consumers and the other does it by being utter dicks to them.
Yes, and again, that's great if you're viewing the history of both companies in a bottle. Valve time and EA time are pretty much opposite ends of a broad spectrum.
Ea arnt evil they are to willing to get their hands dirty Capcom on the other hand can get fucked
If you truly think that high metacritic score = high quality/good game, you are terrible, terribly wrong. Check Dragon Age 2 for that. A 82%.thebobmaster said:
8.0, 80, 80% or whatever score it is, should be a GREAT game. A 9+ an freaking amazing one.
It is know that reviewers receive "advantages" when they give good reviews to games. Very few "profissional" reviews and gaming sites can be taken seriously currently.
Okay, here's my stance on it.
I was never pissed at EA for the inclusion of Davik in ME3. I paid the extra 20 bucks for the expansion as well as some in-game content. I could have waited an paid the 15 for just the DLC, but I figured I'd go all out. In any case, I still had to fucking pay for it, and I was totally okay. Yes, he's Prothean. However, that didn't add much of anything to the game. The only noticeable thing was his little arguments with Liara in that temple on Thessia. That's. it.
Mass Effect 3 was not bad at all, and I still maintain it as one of my favorite games. People massively overreacted to the ending(which only accounted for around 1% of the game anyway).
I fully agree with the OP, EA is not evil and yes they are a corporation. I'm just glad other people noticed this so I wouldn't have to continually get in threads against EA and explain to them basic economics.
I was never pissed at EA for the inclusion of Davik in ME3. I paid the extra 20 bucks for the expansion as well as some in-game content. I could have waited an paid the 15 for just the DLC, but I figured I'd go all out. In any case, I still had to fucking pay for it, and I was totally okay. Yes, he's Prothean. However, that didn't add much of anything to the game. The only noticeable thing was his little arguments with Liara in that temple on Thessia. That's. it.
Mass Effect 3 was not bad at all, and I still maintain it as one of my favorite games. People massively overreacted to the ending(which only accounted for around 1% of the game anyway).
I fully agree with the OP, EA is not evil and yes they are a corporation. I'm just glad other people noticed this so I wouldn't have to continually get in threads against EA and explain to them basic economics.
"EA is not evil."
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.388061-Poll-Worst-publisher-based-on-Principles?page=5#15566144
332 people seem to disagree with you and I'm one of them, well maybe they're not evil but they are a shitty immoral company that cares nothing about making games and are just in it for the money and it shows. Worst reason to do anything IMO.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.388061-Poll-Worst-publisher-based-on-Principles?page=5#15566144
332 people seem to disagree with you and I'm one of them, well maybe they're not evil but they are a shitty immoral company that cares nothing about making games and are just in it for the money and it shows. Worst reason to do anything IMO.
So you're in favor of ruining good games to generate "mass appeal?"
And your claim that every studio that EA bought out was dying anyway: The last game Bioware published was Mass Effect before EA bought it out. Also: some companies don't have a choice when an a company offers to buy them out. One last thing: corporate meddling ruins games. What is EA infamous for?
No, they're not "evil." What they are is a really shitty company that cannibalizes devs to make sure that their bottom line isn't hurt.
And your claim that every studio that EA bought out was dying anyway: The last game Bioware published was Mass Effect before EA bought it out. Also: some companies don't have a choice when an a company offers to buy them out. One last thing: corporate meddling ruins games. What is EA infamous for?
No, they're not "evil." What they are is a really shitty company that cannibalizes devs to make sure that their bottom line isn't hurt.
For your attention grabbing three word title, I have a similarly attention grabbing three word rebuttal.
E.A is evil.
There is really no way around it, they seem to crave negative publicity in a way that only a fuckin' super villain conceivably would. Every single move they make inspires rousing hatred from every facet of Gaming Culture, and what, do you think that's just because they're a big corporation?
No, there are plenty of other gaming Corporations for that sort of inane hatred based solely on the fact that they are big and make lots of money. So it really can't be that, E.A isn't even the biggest and richest Publisher out there, you can't simplify this hatred because it is so very deep and so very pervasive across the entire spectrum of Gaming.
So why does it exist? It's like I said, every, single, move by E.A seems genuinely and carefully crafted to -inspire- the maximum amount of hatred from every Gamer possible.
It feels like they want it, it feels almost like they -need- it, like they're Hatred Vampires who die if psychic waves of absolute bile aren't being directed at them every second of every day. That may sound a little dramatic, but like I said, this hatred didn't come out of nowhere, and dismissing it in any way is to miss the point entirely, it -exists for a reason- and E.A has done -nothing- to dis-spell it. If ever there were a mark of being truly evil, enjoying being hated by the people you are supposed to serve is it, and frankly with E.A's behavior, I can't find any other explanation.
E.A is evil.
There is really no way around it, they seem to crave negative publicity in a way that only a fuckin' super villain conceivably would. Every single move they make inspires rousing hatred from every facet of Gaming Culture, and what, do you think that's just because they're a big corporation?
No, there are plenty of other gaming Corporations for that sort of inane hatred based solely on the fact that they are big and make lots of money. So it really can't be that, E.A isn't even the biggest and richest Publisher out there, you can't simplify this hatred because it is so very deep and so very pervasive across the entire spectrum of Gaming.
So why does it exist? It's like I said, every, single, move by E.A seems genuinely and carefully crafted to -inspire- the maximum amount of hatred from every Gamer possible.
It feels like they want it, it feels almost like they -need- it, like they're Hatred Vampires who die if psychic waves of absolute bile aren't being directed at them every second of every day. That may sound a little dramatic, but like I said, this hatred didn't come out of nowhere, and dismissing it in any way is to miss the point entirely, it -exists for a reason- and E.A has done -nothing- to dis-spell it. If ever there were a mark of being truly evil, enjoying being hated by the people you are supposed to serve is it, and frankly with E.A's behavior, I can't find any other explanation.
Sorry, but what is the definition of evil to you? I can tell you for a fact that EA brought a lot of negative elements in the industry. Does it make them evil? They do this stuff simply because they think it will yield more money, and sometimes it does.
There is no evil for the sake of evil in real life. The way you justify it robbers who murder a family to steal their money are not evil either. They simply needed money and people got in a way.
There is no evil for the sake of evil in real life. The way you justify it robbers who murder a family to steal their money are not evil either. They simply needed money and people got in a way.
Medal of Honor was a great game yes it was to short but it was super realistic (in a good way) and I really was worried about the characters that I had bonded with and the ending was a punch to the stomachfelbot said:
super realistic? no dude, arma is realistic, operation flash point is realistic, medal of honor? it was never realistic and this new one certainly is not realistic.David Huff said:
and that is not why i hate it, i hate it because its another generic shooter set in the middle east with regen health and arab enemies, the older games had health packs and were set in world war 2, which might not seem more original but it sure beats going around a desert doing anything.
i hate deserts, hell everything else could have been tolerable but fucking deserts man, i hate them.
felbot said:
I remeber the originals but I really liked the respectfulness and actual when you play on the hardest difficulty it took about one shot to kill you, and yes operation flashpoint was realistic to the fucking max that realism can go but medal og honor kept you there with the different and interesting characters that were fun to listen and interact with
dude, do you read you post before you post them?, that was a bit of a mess there.David Huff said:
i hobnestly cant figure out what you're trying to say here dude, its incomprihensible.
also please learn to punctuate man, it makes it a lot more easier to read.
Don't think EA is a bad or stupid company eh?
EA Sports. Justify the release of the same game year after year for me that benefits both the company and the customer. Explain why it is more profitable to release a full game every year that is the exact same as the one before it instead of just making it DLC. Because, frankly, it isn't.
But more on the main topic at hand, EA hasn't always been "evil" as they used to release quality products and be a "decent" company back in the before time of the long-long ago. It's only in recent years when they practices have gotten shadier that things have gone topsy-turvey.
The acquisition of companies and then allowing them to fail rather than supporting them is mostly their fault as they are responsible for keeping those companies afloat as long as possible. The acquisitions were not the choice of the studios like Pandemic, as it was likely out of their hands or they didn't have a choice because it was either that or shut down. It's also not about shutting down successful game studios, in my eyes. It's about people who love the medium being shut down because EA would support them or give them more freedom to do as what they wanted with their games. However, I argue no one has the full stories on what happened here other than those at EA and within the shut down studios and I'm sure there are a lot of details needed before we can make any other kind of claims.
Project 10-dollar is something I'm not necessarily against, but I'm also not happy about it. Especially now that Origin is out. Now that they can sell games on their own without any other distributor like Gamestop or Steam they can charge whatever they like... and then they charge $60 (more than most games on PC cost) instead of using their new service to the fullest extent. This is also a huge joke because of how EA reps have gone on record saying, "Games are too expensive and should be priced lower." If you're going to say it, then do it or you're just a fuckin' hypocrite.
I also love the shots recently at Steam's service, claiming that all the big sales devalue the IPs that Steam sells... and then they have a 75% off sale on Origin right after that statement was made. Now only is the "devaluing of IPs" argument bullshit and nonsensical, but they looked like hypocrites again.
I think most of the problem comes from EA's PR more than anything. They make statements that make the company look like it's employees are nothing but rampant cocks. Without that bad PR, perhaps we'd take them a bit more seriously. We'd also get less bullshit incidents like all the promotion behind the release of Dante's Inferno (fake protests and "Sin to Win"), the Medal of Honor Al Qaeda incident, or the shitty advertisements for Dead Space 2. While I pretty much quoted "Extra Credits" on that, they were right because these incidents were childish and inexcusable for a company that should better represent the industry with all the weight its actions carry.
That's my take on it. I'm sure someone will argue against me for something. Regardless, that's where I stand.
EA Sports. Justify the release of the same game year after year for me that benefits both the company and the customer. Explain why it is more profitable to release a full game every year that is the exact same as the one before it instead of just making it DLC. Because, frankly, it isn't.
But more on the main topic at hand, EA hasn't always been "evil" as they used to release quality products and be a "decent" company back in the before time of the long-long ago. It's only in recent years when they practices have gotten shadier that things have gone topsy-turvey.
The acquisition of companies and then allowing them to fail rather than supporting them is mostly their fault as they are responsible for keeping those companies afloat as long as possible. The acquisitions were not the choice of the studios like Pandemic, as it was likely out of their hands or they didn't have a choice because it was either that or shut down. It's also not about shutting down successful game studios, in my eyes. It's about people who love the medium being shut down because EA would support them or give them more freedom to do as what they wanted with their games. However, I argue no one has the full stories on what happened here other than those at EA and within the shut down studios and I'm sure there are a lot of details needed before we can make any other kind of claims.
Project 10-dollar is something I'm not necessarily against, but I'm also not happy about it. Especially now that Origin is out. Now that they can sell games on their own without any other distributor like Gamestop or Steam they can charge whatever they like... and then they charge $60 (more than most games on PC cost) instead of using their new service to the fullest extent. This is also a huge joke because of how EA reps have gone on record saying, "Games are too expensive and should be priced lower." If you're going to say it, then do it or you're just a fuckin' hypocrite.
I also love the shots recently at Steam's service, claiming that all the big sales devalue the IPs that Steam sells... and then they have a 75% off sale on Origin right after that statement was made. Now only is the "devaluing of IPs" argument bullshit and nonsensical, but they looked like hypocrites again.
I think most of the problem comes from EA's PR more than anything. They make statements that make the company look like it's employees are nothing but rampant cocks. Without that bad PR, perhaps we'd take them a bit more seriously. We'd also get less bullshit incidents like all the promotion behind the release of Dante's Inferno (fake protests and "Sin to Win"), the Medal of Honor Al Qaeda incident, or the shitty advertisements for Dead Space 2. While I pretty much quoted "Extra Credits" on that, they were right because these incidents were childish and inexcusable for a company that should better represent the industry with all the weight its actions carry.
That's my take on it. I'm sure someone will argue against me for something. Regardless, that's where I stand.
First flaw is that EA can afford to take risks. If you don't know EA grosses 4.5 billion dollars a year, taking a risk and having it be a flow will suck but its not going to be a huge blow to there company. Not to mention they have executives making millions every year, if they really were worried about closing down studios and losing jobs maybe they could take a cut in their income. Even Nintendo executives were willing to do that (and by 55% if I remember correctly). Not to mention they still make multi-million dollar flops all the time. Remember Dante's Inferno?thebobmaster said:
Second flaw is that EA can buy out a studio even if the studio doesn't want it for many reasons. First of all, the majority of people working in the studio has no say in the decision, so even if the majority doesn't want to join EA then to bad. Second if a company is a public company where anyone can buy shares all it takes is buying a controlling share to be in charge of the company. So EA can buy a studio with the majority or even all of it not wanting it to be bought.
I can say a lot more bad about EA, they are a terrible company. But that doesn't mean I don't think companies like Activision and Ubisoft are any better. Activision makes yearly CoD games that sell like crazy despite them knowing damn well they are the exact same thing and Ubisoft just recently got rid of its 'always online' PC DRM, not to mention they have been leading us with a carrot on a stick with Beyond Good and Evil 2 for years now. Very few good publishers exist anymore, and all of the ones I can think off are developers AND publishers like Rockstar and the revered Valve. But at the end of the day, nobody does more bullshit then pretends that its either a good thing or a necessity than EA and that is why above all of the other companies I hate them the most. Its not about the games, its about the money.
