E.A. is destroying the gaming business?

[Atmos Duality]

Absurd suggestion.

Especially when compared to what was there in the last game. I cant even begin to imagine what you mean by calling it whack-a-mole.

A tad defensive are we?
Truly I do live in Contraria, where even a simple joke is given contempt.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Subject matter leaves me on edge.
When people will declare developers soulless husks then what does that imply their feeling of those who enjoy their product.

What you say in jest others say in full conviction, and tone of voice does not something that can be truly applied to a written word.

Guess I can't blame you there; this forum is far too uptight and reactionary now anyway.
I had to get away from these forums just because of the negative element.

That said, I never found Mass Effect's combat to be terribly deep or difficult even with all the options available.
I tore through ME1 and ME2's Insanity difficulties using simple pattern-matching abilities/ammo and range-checking weapons.

Though I will admit I did not give ME3 more than a once-over, on account of only renting it with my friend.
But what I did play of it didn't blow me away for depth either.
*shrugs*

 

[FoolKiller]

My question is two-fold:
- Do you believe EA is harming the gaming business?

Quite a bit. And not only for the reasons you mentioned but others too. The best hypothesis for this is that they are publicly traded and therefore their bottom line is more important than anything else.

- Do you still buy games from EA?

No. But that doesn't mean I don't play them. I'll buy used, play DLC at a friend's house, or accept them as gifts but I've not let a dime spent go towards EA anymore. It sucks because in some cases I want to play more of the content (such as Mass Effect 3 DLC) but I can't.

 

[Atmos Duality]

A fair statement considering I didn't really suggest depth, but simply that the mechanics were at least solid in versions after ME1. Something as simple as having 2 assault rifles feel different goes a long way. Especially with ME1's lack of ammo making gunfights ever boring stalemates because there was no insentive of moving out of your cover until your enemy was dead. True Depth only came in ME3 where different skill combos and special enemies variety would would dictate the efficiency of your weapons. Thou that ofc came at a price in other areas.

The gun stats in ME1 were mostly a charade, something I ironically became further aware of in ME2 (because most of the upgrades to the models in ME2 were just as shallow).

I think I actually stopped and upgraded my weapons a total of three times for the entirety of ME1, just on account of how long combat eventually became.

Tangentially, about ME1, I did notice that there were significant differences between the Xbox version and PC version.

HUGE gameplay balance changes: Shotguns were gamebreaking in the 360 version; I remember my friend showing me his shotgun that had sniper-like precision and enormous damage, but none of the heat drawbacks of actual sniper rifles. Those were changed entirely in the PC version, and later snipers were given better heat ratios than before.

Bioware was at least aware of some mechanical problems at the time, as my PC version, patched, has smoother nuanced combat (mindless gun-running aside)...though still far too easy IMO.

 

[PinkiePyro]

I dont think EA is ruining games just that they are a bunch of dumbasses who no longer deserve any customers

 

[Roxor]

Considering how much hate EA gets, I'm surprised you guys aren't begging Activision and Ubisoft to buy them out.

 

[Gethsemani_v1legacy]

There is one funny thing I couldn't help but notice by your first chart and that is how DA:O's sales over the first 10 weeks kinda goes up and down where DA:2 is above DA:O the first, but follows an almost logarithmic graph. I think it gives us insight into how new franchisees are received compared to established franchises.

If you look at the chart you'll see decent first, second and third week sales for DA:O, followed by an increase from week 5 to 8, overall between week 3 and 8 it is a pretty stable sales figure. This suggests that the people who held off on DA:O and waited for friends/forum goers/game reviewers to give their opinion on it found that word of mouth was generally favorable and went ahead with their purchases. This is especially noticeable in week 7 and 8 sales, which even surpass week 2 sales.

DA2 on the other hand has a strong week 1 figure, representing all the pre-orders and people buying on release. After that it is a quick decline. This is probably because the people who held off and waited for word of mouth opinions got mostly negative reviews told to them and they in turn decided to not purchase the game.

Your theory could be correct if we had similar figures for other game franchises, but since this is an isolated graph we can't make any sweeping generalizations like that. Meanwhile, my theory has the strength that it takes into account the actual reception both games got and seems to be the generally accepted explanation for the tanking sales numbers of DA2. The game just wasn't very good and thus people didn't go out to buy it (meanwhile ME2 managed to garner a lot of sales after the release week thanks to positive word of mouth opinions).

Whatever DA2 and all its' failings was caused by EA-meddling is another topic. I personally don't think EA has much to do with it, but rather the general decline of quality from Bioware.