Corporate Hatred

[Khazoth]

So, a lot of recent activity has been backlash against corporate hatred, and essentially wagging the finger at you for disliking certain companies. But I am here to tell you that there is a reason why people feel the way they do about EA, Activision, Valve, etc.

Let's start with the easiest target, Electronic Arts. For a while now they've noticed companies that sold better then the games they were trying to push, and bought them. With either poor management choices, or purposeful sabotage, they then proceeded to either run them into the ground or turned them into joyless sequel creators.

They've also been accused of dumbing down the entire genre with crass marketing as best seen with Dead Space 2. Where we, as the fans of an entire medium, were reduced to gibbering five year olds jumping on our bed and going. "Aww yeah, mom would HATE that."

Then we have stuff like forcing employees to work, reportedly hundreds of hours a week. Even accusations that their game quality have gone downhill over time. They release sequel after sequel, with people accusing them of doing nothing to improve the sequels. This has gotten so bad that the CEO has gone on record saying "We're boring people to death and making games that are harder and harder to play. For the most part, the industry has been rinse-and-repeat. There's been lots of product that looked like last year's product, that looked a lot like the year before."


We also have Activision, a company that has only relatively recently become one of the 'Prime Evils.' (See what I did there?) Doing everything from being accused of choking Blizzard's creativity, to being accused of wanting to make gaming a joyless, purely corporate term and remove any creativity or art from gaming. Bobby Kotick in recent years has become the face of corporate greed, his quotes becoming the thing of myth and infamy.


But lastly we also have Valve, a company that is to some the sortof company that has Jesus as the CEO, and to others just another company that has betrayed its fans for the almighty dollar. The term 'Valve Time' has become a rather casual addition to gamerspeak alongside "Soon?"



TLDR

The intent of this thread is to create an honest discussion on the hatred of game companies. To understand why people feel the way they do instead of shaking your head and going "Oh those crazy fanboys."


[small] Not hard to tell which company i'm particularly against after i've typed this out, eh? [/small]

 

[xPrometheusx]

First off, you may want to delete your double post if possible. I almost did the same thing earlier :/

I don't understand the valve hate, it seems completely unfounded. Any dev that gives their games as much attention as valve does is okay in my book. Admittedly, there's the whole EP3 thing, but other than that I don't see the complaint. They make good games.

Activision is just... uh, Activision. I don't particularly care for them, but there's nothing really truly bad about them, other than the fact that they seem determined to run their CoD devs into the ground and the devs themselves have a remarkable amount of stamina. They push out a new copy of the same game every year, which I find annoying and cheap, but honestly, with their orientation towards consoles (the xbox specifically, it seems) than their attitudes shouldn't really be surprising.

EA, honestly, is the only publisher that gives someone a legitimate reason to hate them. Or at least, strongly dislike them. Hating an organization as ridiculous as EA is a waste of energy unless they stabbed your grandmother or something. They're a big corporation only concerned with making money, whatever the cost might be to their employees or game quality, and the greed is really starting to show (read: battlefield premium + online passes...?). You can only hope that with their recent blockbusters (Battlefield, SWTOR, ME3... I guess MoH counts) being so... uh, average, (ME3 is a great game that's busted by a terrible ending, which averages out to mediocre. The ending honestly made me not want to play it), they'll start losing momentum.

 

[Vault101]

I do dislike companys practices

but I don't boycott...if I want it I want it

 

[FalloutJack]

Is it too much for people to be more awesome like Atlus? I don't often hear complaints about them...

 

[Pink Gregory]

Unfortunately the irony is that the companies that make laughably bad PR moves, prioritise profit over all else (although considering dev costs in the AAA market, that's debatable), are shown to mistreat their employees, run small studios into the ground and such; are the ones that get the most press through word of mouth, because it's easier for everyone to hate (a word used too often) something than to agree on liking/appreciating something.

and yet it's why EA/Activision that are the market leaders, because they are strictly business, and function just like other businesses; there's no room for the product, the saving grace are the developers, when the publishers stop piping and they can, even for a second, stop having to dance to their tune.

CAPTCHA: time will tell.

Indeed.

 

[Kae]

I don't understand the valve hate, it seems completely unfounded. Any dev that gives their games as much attention as valve does is okay in my book. Admittedly, there's the whole EP3 thing, but other than that I don't see the complaint. They make good games.

Well I don't hate Valve, but I understand the hate it gets, I mean Steam is not as good as everyone makes it out to be, as a person with a rather unstable Internet connection I can assure that there is nothing more annoying that wanting to play a single player game and not being able to because Steam offline doesn't work at all, and because my login was interrupted by losing the Internet, or the ever dreadful all servers are currently occupied, that sometimes happens, for you know single player games, so really I'm pretty sure most people that hate Valve just hate Steam's DRM, it can be quite annoying.

Also I don't know of anyone that hates CD Projekt Red/GoG.com

 

[lSHaDoW-FoXl]

I'm poor. Now with those two words said I'm sure you can take a guess what my post is going to be about. *Smiles delightfully*

How do I say this politely? How do I say this maturely? Well, to be honest I'm not sure if I can because there's just so much wrong with corporations. Libertarians you better close your eyes, because for the entirety of this wonderful little post I'm going to be the incarnation of everything you hate. Basically, I'm going to be EVERYTHING you imagine a liberal to be.

Firstly, let me begin by complaining about politicians and corporations in particular, because that's definitely a good way to get everyone to agree with me. Politicians and corporations, they like sucking the metaphorical dick of Capitalism and they love going on about the evils of socialism, up until you start to read a book, and then you find out that they don't 'really' like Capitalism. They only like certain aspects of Capitalism, and that's the parts where they get so much money that they can just snort it. What they don't like however, is that part where when you buy something, it's supposed to be yours and you're entitled to do whatever you want with it.

First thing that pisses me off about corporations - When you buy something you don't actually own it.

Remember that simple idea in Capitalism where if you buy something it's yours and you can do whatever you want with it? Well, some corporations being the dicks they are don't exactly abide to that. When they sell you something they still own the product, it's just they give you the privilege to play the game. DRM and laws against you altering your systems are perfect examples of this in action. And I believe my point is made when a game corporation can profit off a single game for as long as the game doesn't break. Lets see, what is there?

First, they sell you the game at three times the price they can make money off it, sixty dollars. (More if you're not in the U.S.A - Canada)To be honest though, I am quite fine with this. Because if people are willing to pay three times the price to play a game earlier, than that's cool. We can judge the value of a game based around how much people will actually buy the damn thing.

Secondly, after Roger A. Moron buys the game he has the option to get DLC. Now, I for one can't tell for sure whether he'll get DLC, but what's available to him are cheap things like alternate costumes ($2), more expensive things like Additional Levels ($5 - $15), and god knows what the fuck else. ($15 and up) So, from this if he were to get DLC, we can assume he'd spend from two dollars to buying fucking everything that's available to him. Sound unlikely? Well, screw you because I happen to have a friend that did that. Whatever the case, I'm pretty sure that all the content together would amount to being no less than the game its self in some cases.

Thirdly, Roger gets tired of his shitty game and gives it to a friend for $25 dollars. The corporation may not get money off this purchase, but his friend can buy DLC if he wishes to.

Fourth - The cycle continues, minus 50 dollars for the corporation each time.

So, clearly those poor corporations aren't getting any money from used game sales. I mean, clearly having the potential to constantly make money off a single game through its DLC just isn't enough. My transparent sarcasm aside though, I think this is ridiculous. I honestly can't name any other industry out there that has the potential to continually make money off a single product. After you sell a chair, the corporation that made it isn't going to make money off it ever again. It doesn't matter how much different asses sit atop it, they just aren't.

So with this, you'd think that DLC would be enough, right? No, of course not. Now they need to throw in DRM. So basically, they begin to restrict content and you have to pay 10 dollars to be entitled to the same game as someone who bought it from Walmart. Because you are filthy scum, and you deserve to rot in hell for the horrible crime of being poor and buying something second hand. Take a look at my four steps above. Doesn't that look like enough fucking money from a single copy of a game? So, instead of them being able to make money off a single copy of a game twice, they want to make money off a game three times for every time its sold.

Really, some of these guys in business should be in comedy with half the things they're saying. Who knows, maybe they really are just kidding but we can't see through their dead pan humor.

Oh right, and forget any corporation that goes on about the used game sales market being the bane of video games. It's because of the used games sales market that some people buy particular games. And with the existence of DLC, these people are all potential customers they might not have otherwise had. Ever.

EA makes the excuse for project ten dollar that bioware isn't making enough money. Well, to put it politely, I've heard more intelligent arguments from a five year old on why they need Mcdonalds. I think it went something among the lines of . . .

'I WANT MCDONALDS! I WANT MCDONALDS! I WANT MCDONALDS!'

Yup, that sounds just about right. Imagine if a father said his kids were starving for food. That sounds horrible and of course you'd want to help them, but in truth there's a few certain details he leaves out. That he's rich, and that he only feeds his children less than a quarter of what he eats. And well, that's exactly what EA is. And I'd like to think this is where I segue way to my next thing to ***** about -

Second thing that pisses me off about corporations - They're manipulative and they'll throw you away like a cum rag after they don't need you.

You see, they complain about Bioware not making any money, but the truth is there's absolutely no one to blame for Bioware not getting money but EA for not actually taking care of their developers. You'd think with them being one of the biggest publishers and one of the greatest in the greatest in marketing (They managed to sell the abhorrant Dragon Age 2, didn't they?) they'd actually be good at it. Well, I guess they are. But they aren't going to take care of you. If you sell a successful game then they'll feed you nothing more than the scraps of the dinner table and if you just drop dead, then they're simply not going to help you. No, instead they'll blame their customers.

Oh, would you look at that. We segue way to the next topic already.

Third thing that pisses me off about corporations - They love their scape goats.

It's never EA's fault when a developer that they're supposed to fund goes bankrupt or when a game of theirs doesn't sell. It's because of those pesky customers. You remember that part where I said something among the lines that businesses only like some aspects of Capitalism? Well, lets resurrect that argument and use it once more. Corporations only like some aspects of Capitalism. And I bring this up a second time because these corporations don't seem to want to be corporations, they're more like benevolent dictatorships. If you buy their product, you should just shut your mouth and be happy that they're kind enough to let you play it.

And given how entitled these corporations are, I wouldn't think this it too far off. Some corporations are far too entitled and they don't seem to realize that in spite of them making the product; it's because of their customers that they have the money to even make half the things they do. They don't treat their customers with any respect and they'll bring up a scape goat any time they can. As far as I'm concerned, a corporation that goes around blaming their customers isn't a corporation worth investing in, no matter their products quality.

Fourth thing that pisses me off about corporations - We never expect any responsibility on their part.

Their are some apologists that'll defend anything a corporation does. And one that's common amongst even non apologists is that a corporation isn't and shouldn't be responsible for anything outside of making money. Well, to be honest I think that's wrong. I'm not going to waste your time with this one, but I will say it's always annoyed me that we expect so much responsibility from people that can potentially cause little harm, but absolutely none from corporations that can cause a lot. Everything I've written about in this entire post has been leading up to this. Corporations can get away with DRM and selling you a game you don't even own, meanwhile you can't buy a game second hand without being treated like a criminal or alter something you purchased without possibly being arrested. We abide by simple rules of Capitalism, we get arrested. They don't, they get millions and people defending absolutely everything they do.

Some corporations have become a lot more like entitled spoiled brats. But should that surprise anyone when we let them get away with anything, just like a brat? If we want businesses to grow up maybe we should take away their toys.

TL;DR

I'm clearly not too fond of EA and corporations that have similar practices.

DISCLAIMER: I don't think all corporations are evil punks. I'm just bringing out the worst of them and why they shouldn't be supported or defended by anyone.

 

[Pink Gregory]

DRM is becoming a problem (becoming? HAHAHAHA etc), but I can imagine that large businesses are never going to expect that some people are always going to believe that they have the right to not pay for things; ain't shit we can do about that.

and, to make a point that's been made hundreds of times before, punishing the paying customers for paying for it with online passes, rather than rewarding them, this sentence doesn't need an end.

 

[FieryTrainwreck]

Valve is not publicly traded, which makes all the difference in the world.

A publicly traded corporation is reliably bad for everyone who isn't a shareholder because people with no interest in or ties to the product/service ("suits") end up making the decisions. Their sole concern is short-term profit. They do whatever they can to maximize short-term gains with no moral or human considerations. Without fail, this includes taking money out of the product/service (reducing value) or generating more money from labor (abusing employees).

Valve sounds scary on paper because they aren't accountable to public trading and they control a seemingly unhealthy percentage of the digital distribution market. In truth, because Valve is obviously comprised of a bunch of gamers with their fucking heads screwed on, it is actually a great company that provides consistently excellent service and products for customers while treating employees with respect and generating tremendous profits.

The reality of business is that people are everything. It doesn't matter how you set up your company if you don't have intelligent, considerate, and stable people on basically every level. The one exception to this rule is the publicly traded corporation because, as a system, it actually guarantees that the greediest, shittiest human beings on the planet will find their way into the board room and begin systematically shaving product quality and screwing employees.

 

[superdark]

First off, you may want to delete your double post if possible. I almost did the same thing earlier :/

I don't understand the valve hate, it seems completely unfounded. Any dev that gives their games as much attention as valve does is okay in my book. Admittedly, there's the whole EP3 thing, but other than that I don't see the complaint. They make good games.

I do like valve, they make good games, but some of their buisness practices are kind of scary. Because once you get games through them, you cannot play those games apart from them. You're forced to come back to steam in order to play your games. You can only play those games when connected to the steam server. It's a monopoly, and the operation of our game libaries depends on the continued existence of a company.

 

[Enizer]

i hear a lot of hate on companies, mostly EA, and a little bit about activision for general evil, and then ubisoft for really annoying DRM, but most recently:

valve

valve? seriously?
even after reading that article i found nothing solid that valve did that was evil

according to the whine i hear about valve, it's horribly evil to actually provide a good dependable service, with some complaining about offline mode being hard to get to work, the first time i tried to use offline mode, it took me mabey 5 minutes to learn everything i needed to make it work perfectly

i honestly suspect that the valve complaining is an industry plant to make other critisism look bad

 

[Weaver]

So, a lot of recent activity has been backlash against corporate hatred, and essentially wagging the finger at you for disliking certain companies.

Your entire post hinges on this one premise being true, and I really don't think it's true. Could you please provide some examples?

 

[Zhukov]

Backlash?

What backlash?

It's been "corporate hatred" from wall to wall. I haven't heard anyone say anything positive about EA since the rainbow biscuit.

I haven't seen anyone accuse Valve of betrayal either. Or at least, nobody who wasn't frothing at the mouth.

 

[lSHaDoW-FoXl]

-snipping-

Now a few things I want to address here that you get factually wrong.

Number 1
Game pricing

You talk about corps selling games are 3 times the price they make money off it. Now I have no idea how the heck you got to that conclusion since games dont have a set individual production price but rather a price dependent on sale.

A triple A games production cost often lies in in the 28 million dollar, for this example we are going to say 27 million dollar for easier calculation later.

Because the games costs millions to produce, but is more or less free to copy the games individual value will be dependent on how many copies are sold

Original production cost. Divided by units sold. Times profit per unit sold.

With a 60 dollar title on the Xbox only 27 dollars goes back into the pocket of the original producer. Now I know some of the expenses is licencing for using the platform, but I dont know if that is a % or a specific amount of the 60. One would assume that printing the actual disk is a fixed expense. It is hard to say what impact lowering the 60$ pricetag would have on profit per unit sold.

Never the less with a price model of 60$ for our made up Xbox game the publisher would have to sell 1 million copies to break even, and will first start making profit after the 1 mil unit sold.



Here is the thing.

I dont know the logic you put behind the

they sell you the game at three times the price they can make money off it

statement, but as far I can tell its not solid.

Also when you complain about the publisher trying to prevent the sale of used games you are not taking that into account. Used games do cut sale of new. GameStop made a direct business out of cutting into first week sales. Now this wouldn't be a problem except as we already demonstrated that games dont make a profit per unit sold, but only after X units sold.

After some time games are usually sold for just 20 dollars. That's what I mean when I say that they sell games at three times the price they can make off it. When a game is at it's lowest price, it's twenty dollars. At it's highest, it's 60. My point here is there's definitely a huge fucking difference. And regardless of all the costs it takes to create a game, they still manage to sell it for the price of sixty dollars. They shouldn't be complaining. There are around 30 people in New York City alone and 30 million people in Canada. In terms of selling '1 million copies' before they can even make a profit I wouldn't be too worried about those poor, poor big publishers like EA. DA2 cut more corners than a circle and yet in just two weeks they managed to sell one million. And frankly, I wouldn't think that game is worth even thirty dollars.

I'm not saying they need to sell games at twenty dollars at launch. I'm saying they shouldn't have to go three times above what they can possibly make money off, regardless of how very little it may be. I would think that double the price would be good enough.

I don't know how Gamestop could cut into first week sales, but then again I don't understand much about Gamestop to begin with. I don't see how Gamestop being a corporation that has a better business model than them gives them justification to make getting games harder for their customers. It doesn't matter how much money they sink into making a game, they can't complain about used game sales if they demand such high prices for their customers to pay and slap on DRM afterwards. So, really, their idea of countering Gamestop's business ethics is taking your money and kneeing you in the balls. Now lets consider for a moment how whiny these publishers are. They're always using something as a scape goat, so I wouldn't be surprised if this is just another instance on their part.