Poll: Who is more evil, EA or Activision?
- Thread starter NinjaDeathSlap
- Start date
Recommended Videos
EA is still the one buying up smaller studios, chopping their workforce so they can't get whatever game they were working on done properly, and then shutting down the rest of the studio because the game that they crippled didn't turn out to be that great.
EA is the one always putting extremely intrusive DRM into its PC games.
John Riccitiello says just as many stupid things as Bobby Kotick, but is a much bigger ass as well. I didn't see Kotick get on stage at E3, bash Microsoft for having Ice-T, then bring out three NFL players before being the special guest himself at Nintendo's conference.
EA is the one making those Online Passes for games that people rage constantly about (they don't bother me so much though because I buy new games and the last time I bought an EA game for the multiplayer was never; point is people rage like hell about EA doing it). EA also does Project Ten Dollar that people whine about but this time it is completely unjustified as you have to buy all the DLC separately whenever you buy a used game anyway; once again this is something EA does that Activision doesn't last time I looked and people rage over it.
And most importantly... EA murdered the shit out of the Command and Conquer franchise. Command and Conquer 4 is a game that belongs near the top of modern "worst game" lists, right next to Okami Wii and inFamous.
What did Activision do again? Bobby Kotick said some dumb things too, $15 CoD map packs (because EA would never charge such a high price if they could get their fans to pay it. oh wait.), and canceled a few games that weren't doing well in development such as True Crime which was being developed by UFG, the incompetent studio that brought us ModNat-loading..........-ion Ra-connection to server has been lost-cers, so of course they weren't making a great entry to the True Crime franchise either.
Activision has to make business decisions from time to time that people don't like, and fair enough. But EA is the one I see doing all the extra shit to try and make more money for themselves while fucking over the gamers, such as nasty DRM and such poor handling of new studios they pick up.
EA is the one always putting extremely intrusive DRM into its PC games.
John Riccitiello says just as many stupid things as Bobby Kotick, but is a much bigger ass as well. I didn't see Kotick get on stage at E3, bash Microsoft for having Ice-T, then bring out three NFL players before being the special guest himself at Nintendo's conference.
EA is the one making those Online Passes for games that people rage constantly about (they don't bother me so much though because I buy new games and the last time I bought an EA game for the multiplayer was never; point is people rage like hell about EA doing it). EA also does Project Ten Dollar that people whine about but this time it is completely unjustified as you have to buy all the DLC separately whenever you buy a used game anyway; once again this is something EA does that Activision doesn't last time I looked and people rage over it.
And most importantly... EA murdered the shit out of the Command and Conquer franchise. Command and Conquer 4 is a game that belongs near the top of modern "worst game" lists, right next to Okami Wii and inFamous.
What did Activision do again? Bobby Kotick said some dumb things too, $15 CoD map packs (because EA would never charge such a high price if they could get their fans to pay it. oh wait.), and canceled a few games that weren't doing well in development such as True Crime which was being developed by UFG, the incompetent studio that brought us ModNat-loading..........-ion Ra-connection to server has been lost-cers, so of course they weren't making a great entry to the True Crime franchise either.
Activision has to make business decisions from time to time that people don't like, and fair enough. But EA is the one I see doing all the extra shit to try and make more money for themselves while fucking over the gamers, such as nasty DRM and such poor handling of new studios they pick up.
People keep saying EA murdered Bioware, but if Activision was publishing Bioware, we'd have Mass Effect 1, 2, 3, 4, ME: Trading Card Game, Mass Effect: Future Warfare, and Guitar Hero: Mass Effect(I'd put that right around before GH died) with Mass Effect 5 and Mass Effect: Online in development. Bioware finally gets fed up with it and decides they won't take this shit anymore and Activision replaces them with Treyarch.
Activision is starting to make it a habit to run a game into the ground, beat it's corpse to ensure all of the money has fallen out of it, and then run off to the next one to repeat the process.
Activision is starting to make it a habit to run a game into the ground, beat it's corpse to ensure all of the money has fallen out of it, and then run off to the next one to repeat the process.
EA and activision are your basic types of evil, you know what they want and they do obviously evil ways of doing it.
Now Nintendo, they get the kids hooked early, with all their great games all with low ratings (not that I have any beef with them, I still love nintendo)
Now Nintendo, they get the kids hooked early, with all their great games all with low ratings (not that I have any beef with them, I still love nintendo)
Do we have to mention the long, tortuous marketing of Dante's Inferno?
Extra Credits summed it up pretty well, to be truthful.
Extra Credits summed it up pretty well, to be truthful.
EA is definitely the more incompetent of the two companies in my eyes. For the last five years I can't think of console games from a company with worse game menus, and all their games requiring you to start up EA accounts, EA sports accounts, EA skate accounts...
THIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIISSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS.Scizophrenic Llama said:
If activision made a game based on themselves, (wut?) It would be the 41st millennium before they decided to end it.
I'm fairly sure that neither of the companies are evil. In fact i'd say thats a pretty odd description of any group of people who get paid to do a job and do it. Is the guy working in the supermarket evil because they don't have my favourite pizza in stock and he only put out what was brought in that day?
Seriously guys, it's their job to fund your hobby as best they can, and people like kotick just happen to be great at making money for the games industry, i love games and fail to see how thats an evil thing..
Seriously guys, it's their job to fund your hobby as best they can, and people like kotick just happen to be great at making money for the games industry, i love games and fail to see how thats an evil thing..
Well EA ban your account for all sorts of things on The Sims 3 forum. Posting anything on there outside of 'I love the sims yay.' is like playing russian roulette
Oh and once your account is banned you cant play the game...you have to buy a new copy.
It's never happened to me but it says alot that I feel nervous posting this here because they might find out...
They once banned a girl for posting something about them on her personal blog...I kid you not.
Oh and once your account is banned you cant play the game...you have to buy a new copy.
It's never happened to me but it says alot that I feel nervous posting this here because they might find out...
They once banned a girl for posting something about them on her personal blog...I kid you not.
Going with Activision. All they seem to do is make a successful game then re-release it until no one wants to buy it anymore. That they're now part of Blizzard makes me pretty disapointed as well... though to be fair, I really wouldn't mind if it ment Blizzard would speed things up a bit. The wait for Diablo III is getting ridiculous.
EA makes poor decisions, Activision makes evil ones. I still remember when Activision fired the Modern Warfare guys after they'd made one of the top selling games of all time, but before giving them the money for having done that. That's not a bad decision (Activision got to keep the money), that's an evil decision (specifically amoral).
I've seen a lot of people calling me out for calling them 'evil', so let me reiterate...
I don't actually think either of them are evil, 'evil' just had a better ring to it than 'Who's business policies do you disagree with more, EA or Activision?' I also recognise that if corporations existed solely to pander to the self-interested fans of their products, the quality of those products would probably be no better, just look at Nintendo (I don't want to disrespect any Nintendo fans but could someone please explain to me why people paid money for the laziest, most blatant act of fan service in recent history that was 'New' Super Mario Brothers Wii, when they could have just played literally any of the previous ones and not notice the difference) so I'm sorry if I came off as entitled in that respect.
However, the argument 'It's just business' doesn't hold much water either. Companies need money to keep going yes, but that money comes from customers (which in the gaming industry also means fans who really feel like they can trust you), and consumers are squishy human being's with real thoughts and emotions. If you get to the stage that some of these big publishers have, where they are so obsessed with short term profit that they forget the virtues of consumer loyalty, or sometimes even just human emotion in general, it will come back to bite them in the arse in the long term. Because once the consumers realise that they are being taken for a ride, ripped off, and generally being considered as fools by companies who are only interested in their disposable incomes, they will abandon them in droves.
So, in short, yes. Businesses need to be successful, but I reckon some CEO's would be genuinely surprised by just how much progress you can make by, y'know, not treating your customers like shit.
I don't actually think either of them are evil, 'evil' just had a better ring to it than 'Who's business policies do you disagree with more, EA or Activision?' I also recognise that if corporations existed solely to pander to the self-interested fans of their products, the quality of those products would probably be no better, just look at Nintendo (I don't want to disrespect any Nintendo fans but could someone please explain to me why people paid money for the laziest, most blatant act of fan service in recent history that was 'New' Super Mario Brothers Wii, when they could have just played literally any of the previous ones and not notice the difference) so I'm sorry if I came off as entitled in that respect.
However, the argument 'It's just business' doesn't hold much water either. Companies need money to keep going yes, but that money comes from customers (which in the gaming industry also means fans who really feel like they can trust you), and consumers are squishy human being's with real thoughts and emotions. If you get to the stage that some of these big publishers have, where they are so obsessed with short term profit that they forget the virtues of consumer loyalty, or sometimes even just human emotion in general, it will come back to bite them in the arse in the long term. Because once the consumers realise that they are being taken for a ride, ripped off, and generally being considered as fools by companies who are only interested in their disposable incomes, they will abandon them in droves.
So, in short, yes. Businesses need to be successful, but I reckon some CEO's would be genuinely surprised by just how much progress you can make by, y'know, not treating your customers like shit.
EA customer service has to be the worst ever. Half of the time thier systems break then they deny there is a problem.NinjaDeathSlap said:
Blizzard tend to have decent customer service though.