Why we do let EA abuse us and get all hyped up for TitanFall?

[Ieyke]

I am cautiously optimistic about Titanfall not in ANY way because of EA, but because of Respawn.
Those are the guys who originally made Call Of Duty into a smash hit, and are the reason Activision can continuously ride that series straight into the ground. They're EXTREMELY good at what they do, and this is what they WANTED to do.
Also, I'm casually friends with their Community Manager, Abbie Heppe. I know her well enough to know how high her standards are, and that she left her job at G4 working with Adam Sessler on blind faith to work for Respawn (a company that didn't even exist yet) because of how much she respected the team they had put together and how much she believed in their project.
And she's still 1000% behind it, and even Adam Sessler seems to be right there with her on that, seemingly very impressed and proud of what his friend's company has put together.

NOW, however.....the ball is in EA's court. EA already pulled the rug out from under Respawn by making the game exclusive to PC and Xbone when Respawn had been working under the understanding that it would obviously be on all possible systems.
Respawn was kinda pissed.

From here on out it's up to EA to maintain the servers, to market it properly, to make it available in places where people will actually buy it *coughSteamcough*, to allow Respawn to properly support it, etc etc etc....and that's obviously where this all gets shaky, yea?

Now we have to hope they put it on Steam and we don't have to deal with Origin.
We have to HOPE the servers work.
We have to HOPE it gets patched properly.

All hope for Titanfall is based on Respawn's reputation. Them being good enough to make something great IN SPITE of EA's meddling failure.

 

[spartan231490]

Easy answer. Because EA doesn't actually abuse us. They provide us with good games and, like the coddled, entitled whiney-babies we are, we whine because this or that tiny little issue that isn't exactly how we'd want it.

Except for the games that aren't good, or don't work, and have issues that make them either a completely different experience than they should be, or not playable at all. You know what? Gamers are entitled. They are entitled to ask for games to be not shit. They are entitled to want products that actually work. They are entitled to complain when a game does not work as it should, or even at all, because they paid for the game that was advertised, not the buggy mess they were given.

If you bought a car that was advertised to be work completely fine, run well with a good gas mileage, not many miles on it, and a decent interior, I think you'd expect that car. If you instead got a car that needed constant repairs, had shit mileage, had many thousands of miles on it, and the interior looked like someone smeared it with shit, I think you would complain. Same applies for games.

But I suppose that if you don't agree with this, the best thing to do is insult anyone that does feel the need to criticize games and expect a quality product from game companies.

Sure, they don't make good games. That's why Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Madden, the Sims, Dead Space, Battlefield, and Crysis never have sequels and have such poor sales. /sarcasm

Get off the cross.

Five of those had games that resulted in several backlashes and major PR shitstorms for EA.

Which is exactly my point. Despite the fact that people bitched and moaned they still bought a lot of the games and their sequels. Makes the bitching and moaning very disingenuous.

 

[spartan231490]

Easy answer. Because EA doesn't actually abuse us. They provide us with good games and, like the coddled, entitled whiney-babies we are, we whine because this or that tiny little issue that isn't exactly how we'd want it.

So Sim City,the BF4 lawsuits,and the PR problems EA has had for the past 2 years don't mean anything?If you're going to be a EA apologist then come up with a better argument than the tired 'whiny,entitled babies' ad hominem.

My argument isn't an ad hominem. What you call an ad hominem fallacy is simply an extraneous opinion. My argument is inherent in the good games comment. If EA was really abusive, we wouldn't continue paying their bills by buying their games. They're providing us with a good at a price we agreed to pay. You can whine about day one dlc or forced online play, but you bought the game, which shows that you believed the game, as it was, to be worth the price. And if, in retrospect, you really concluded that EA was delivering games that weren't worth the price, you'd stop buying their products. Nice fallacy fallacy though, try again.

As for your comments, those are appeal to authority and appeal to popularity fallacies.

Lastly, I'm not an EA apologist, I hate EA, I'm just sick of people whining about it when they're clearly still buying EA games.

Your comment suggested otherwise,why else would you resort to ad hominem to describe people who don't like the way EA does things?You act like EA is doing people a favor and that they should shut up and accept whatever bullshit the company does.

That my friend is the kind of logic corporate apologists use when trying to undermine consumer rights.

It's not an ad hominem because it's not an argument. It's an opinion about the kind of people who complain about EA.

Also, EA does do people a favor, they produce and distribute games. You don't like how they do business? Don't do business with them, it's really that simple.

Also, your last statement is a begging the question fallacy. You don't even remotely support the claim you make that my comment is the kind of comment made by corporate apologists who are undermining consumer rights, nor do you support the inherent claims that my comment is inaccurate, or that making such a statement once would make me such a person. Even if you did, the entire chain of logic is an ad hominem.

'They provide us with good games and, like the coddled, entitled whiney-babies we are, we whine because this or that tiny little issue that isn't exactly how we'd want it.'

That entire post was a ad hominem....you insult a entire group of people simply because you disagreed with how they view EA.

An insult is not necessarily an ad hominem. For it to be an ad hominem, it has to be the argument. I never argued or even implied you were wrong because you're whiny. In fact, what I said was the exact opposite, that you're wrong but whine anyway. You're just fucking wrong, I didn't make an ad hominem. I insulted whiny people who complain about tiny issues in games they still love so much that they push the game's and its sequel's sales through the roof.

I repeat: Get. Off. The. Cross.