Anybody who calls themselves a gamer can say that EA pretty much has a stranglehold on sports games. They are one of the best known developers in the world, creating such classics as Battlefield, Dead Space, and Need For Speed, but their dominance truly shines through when you look at the sports genre of video games to find that nearly every top title is EA. They have a tradition of making quality games. They have one major flaw, however. They do not care about the players. Release after release is praised for it's wonderful quality, but soon falls flat because of the ridiculous approach to customer support and abusive treatment of their fans.
I will be the first to tell you that I love EA games. Recently, I have been playing Bulletstorm, and loved it. I am following Battlefield 3 news religiously. But my current favorite game is NHL 11. It's so great that it has received 22 sports game of the year awards. It's gotten extremely high scores from critics, and is regarded as one of the best sports game of all time. But there is one thing that I cannot stand. EA doesn't care about me, only the money that I give for it's products.
We'll start with one common injustice that many EA games come with: online passes.
The very basis of private ownership is that if you pay for something, it is yours, and you are free to do with it as you wish. However, EA won't have it. Starting with Tiger Woods PGA Tour 11, EA Sports began including "online passes" with it's games: one-time, single-use codes that gave access to online features. This means that only one person will be able to use the online features of one game. And if someone without a pass wants to access these features, they will have to shell out $10.
According to Peter Moore, President of EA SPORTS, "it allows us to accelerate our commitment to enhance premium online services to the entire robust EA SPORTS online community." This is easily one of the most ironic statements I have ever had the displeasure of hearing. What it really is is an attack on used video game markets. EA only implemented this as a way of keeping their revenue for themselves, and hurting the income of used-game retailers, such as Gamestop.
What EA doesn't realize, is that even though they are only trying to attack used-game retailers, (a monumentally stupid decision in itself) they also prevent siblings, roommates, and even borrowers of games from accessing features that they take for granted. I shouldn't have to mention the fact that people who borrow games usually do so because they are interested in it and considering buying it, but it is very hard to come to a conclusion when you can't play online.
In summary of my online pass point, EA thinks they can get away with limiting what people can do with what they bought and what they rightfully own. All they are concerned with is squeezing money out of their loyal customers. I will elaborate on two more examples of EA's belligerence later.
I will be the first to tell you that I love EA games. Recently, I have been playing Bulletstorm, and loved it. I am following Battlefield 3 news religiously. But my current favorite game is NHL 11. It's so great that it has received 22 sports game of the year awards. It's gotten extremely high scores from critics, and is regarded as one of the best sports game of all time. But there is one thing that I cannot stand. EA doesn't care about me, only the money that I give for it's products.
We'll start with one common injustice that many EA games come with: online passes.
The very basis of private ownership is that if you pay for something, it is yours, and you are free to do with it as you wish. However, EA won't have it. Starting with Tiger Woods PGA Tour 11, EA Sports began including "online passes" with it's games: one-time, single-use codes that gave access to online features. This means that only one person will be able to use the online features of one game. And if someone without a pass wants to access these features, they will have to shell out $10.
According to Peter Moore, President of EA SPORTS, "it allows us to accelerate our commitment to enhance premium online services to the entire robust EA SPORTS online community." This is easily one of the most ironic statements I have ever had the displeasure of hearing. What it really is is an attack on used video game markets. EA only implemented this as a way of keeping their revenue for themselves, and hurting the income of used-game retailers, such as Gamestop.
What EA doesn't realize, is that even though they are only trying to attack used-game retailers, (a monumentally stupid decision in itself) they also prevent siblings, roommates, and even borrowers of games from accessing features that they take for granted. I shouldn't have to mention the fact that people who borrow games usually do so because they are interested in it and considering buying it, but it is very hard to come to a conclusion when you can't play online.
In summary of my online pass point, EA thinks they can get away with limiting what people can do with what they bought and what they rightfully own. All they are concerned with is squeezing money out of their loyal customers. I will elaborate on two more examples of EA's belligerence later.
