EA Really Doesn't Want to be The Worst Company In America
- Thread starter The Wooster
- Start date
I absolutely love your response. I really do.Xdeser2 said:
On topic, allow me to handily translate everything that was being said.
*Many continue to claim the Always-On function in SimCity is a DRM scheme. It's not. People still want to argue about it. We can't be any clearer - it's not. Period. - Blatant lies. Demanding an Internet connection IS the standard DRM of today, a step up from serial keys and other such stupid-and-easily-subverted copy protection that plagued PC games before it.
*Some claim there's no room for Origin as a competitor to Steam. 45 million registered users are proving that wrong. - You forced Origin on us by automatically converting people's EA accounts into Origin accounts. This number is at best padded, and at worst pulled right out of your ass. Furthermore, Steam has well over 130+ million Community Contributors ALONE.
*Some people think that free-to-play games and micro-transactions are a pox on gaming. Tens of millions more are playing and loving those games. - See above. Numbers do not automatically mean a yes.
*We've seen mailing lists that direct people to vote for EA because they disagree with the choice of the cover athlete on Madden NFL. Yes, really... - What's this got to do with anything?
*In the past year, we have received thousands of emails and postcards protesting against EA for allowing players to create LGBT characters in our games. This week, we're seeing posts on conservative web sites urging people to protest our LGBT policy by voting EA the Worst Company in America. - "You just hate us because we stand for LGBT rights!". No. Just no. Fuck you and your disingenuous attempt at taking a non-existent high ground to subvert your well-deserved reputation as the shittiest gaming-related company in all history. Shame on you for trying to exploit vulnerable individuals. For fucking shame.
Well EA did work for it with their ridiculous DRM and locked out on disc content unless paid extra. They still deserve this award imo.
Grah, don't you hate it, when the freaking first post of a thread is so ingeious that we should both close and sticky this thread and maybe make it obligatory reading for the entire escapist user base? >:CDexter111 said:
OT: holy shit Moore's statement was so much foul-smelling hot air that it basically accelerated global warming by 75%. For Christ's sake, aren't there any sane PR managers at EA left? The only sensible advice to NOT fuck this up any further would be "shut up and stop fucking the customers anymore because no matter what bullshit you claim they don't like having their wallets raped"
http://consumerist.com/2013/04/05/ea-admits-it-can-do-better-but-blames-worst-company-success-on-homophobes-and-whiny-madden-fans/
Looks like the Consumerist made their own response to EA's statement.
Their claims that it's a conservative conspiracy are apparently in their own heads, because none of the traffic to the poll has been from any such websites.
I'm at the point where I'm beginning to wonder if EA is really trying to protect the LGBT community or if the LGBT label is being used as a shield from valid criticism.
Either way, EA is doomed here.
I'd agree these guys are no where near the worst, but they're small enough that losing this poll 2 times in a row is clearly upsetting them.
It's the simple pleasures in life my friends.
Looks like the Consumerist made their own response to EA's statement.
Their claims that it's a conservative conspiracy are apparently in their own heads, because none of the traffic to the poll has been from any such websites.
I'm at the point where I'm beginning to wonder if EA is really trying to protect the LGBT community or if the LGBT label is being used as a shield from valid criticism.
Either way, EA is doomed here.
I'd agree these guys are no where near the worst, but they're small enough that losing this poll 2 times in a row is clearly upsetting them.
It's the simple pleasures in life my friends.
Dexter111 nailed it like a master nailsman, so there's not much left to say, but I thought the whole LGBT+ thing was something BioWare did and then EA just let them keep doing it. I can't say I've seen the same approach to LGBT+ in EA games that aren't made by BioWare. So yeah, EA, you just didn't tell BioWare to stop doing what they were doing and all of a sudden you're great LGBT+ crusaders?
Honestly, after a history of poor business decisions, i'm surprised EA sin't trying to milk this "opportunity" for publicity or something.
I could see if before me "EA, america's worst company. Be a part of us, too!"
I could see if before me "EA, america's worst company. Be a part of us, too!"
See, this incident is a perfect example of my distaste for EA as a whole. Instead of admitting their mistakes and seeking to rectify them and avoid making them in the future, They blame others for it then double down on the mistakes. They say they want to improve but make no effort in doing so and say it's our fault for not recognizing it.
There's also a slightly more substantial list on the plus side when it comes to Valve - their digital distribution service actually works well and smooth, and their shenannigans with discounts alone will more than compensate any problems people have with their privacy policy or anti-lawsuit EULA (to name two examples).j-e-f-f-e-r-s said:
That, and the fact they don't make you wonder what poop-flinging monkey approved their latest PR stunt.
The basic issue here is that people are forced to endure EA's tactics if they want to play EA's games. It's a matter of "endure or go without". When it comes to things like Origin or Microtransactions, EA is intentionally overlooking that a lot of people hating on them are those who used those systems and hate EA for being made to deal with them. 45 Million users on Origin doesn't consider how many of those people wanted to install or use Origin compared to those who were forced to do so in order to play the games. EA didn't really include a effective way to "opt out" and when it comes to microtransactions it's a matter of "either pay more for the full product, or to not be inconveinenced and forced to waste time grinding and not enjoying the game due to our tacked on mechanics, or suffer". EA is great about talking around the issue of Microtransactions by claiming they are extras or "enhancements to a game someone already likes" but we all know otherwise when they are developed alongside the game, or represent things shaved off of the game because executives believe they can charge more for it. The plot-integral Prothean squad member in "Mass Effect 3" is a classic example, as is the whole "Microtransactions for salvage" system in Dead Space 3, where technically it's not cheating to exploit a "glitch" to get around this (if you find it) but basically you need to spend extra hours doing nothing but grinding if you want to avoid having to pay more than the $60 price tag for the game in order to get everything the salvage system allows.
In short EA deserves the distinction they are facing, and I find it oddly disturbing that they are so quick to dismiss the criticism. Of course then again they doubtlessly figure they have a bunch of gaming addicts to exploit. It doesn't matter of sheep object to being sheared, or junkies don't like having their fix cut with crap, if people want what they have they are going to have to endure it. The fact that people who want to play EA titles can only get them from EA in their mind means they can do whatever the hell they want. Especially seeing as it's a luxury good which so far puts them beyond any kind of regulation.
As far as the LGBT issue, I'm not going to argue the specifics of that, but I do feel the need to point out that despite what a lot of people might want to believe roughly 50% of the US population alone is anti-gay, and that goes up substantially when you look at things through a wide enough global lens (albiet involving a lot of countries EA probably doesn't do direct business with). If EA decides to take a side on an issue like this they should expect backlash and it to influance their perceptions. If you listen to the media it's easy to convince yourself that there is some kind of clear majority or supermajority supporting gay rights, but that's hardly the case. There is a reason why most businesses approach the situation cautiously. Few people had much of an issue when there just happened to be some non-heterosexual options in the games, but when EA allowed itself to become a flashpoint for the issue of LGBT entitlement it took on a whole differant meaning. This is ultimatly a side issue, but basically EA should have expected the response, and at the end of the day taking sides the way it's done has legitimatly pissed off a lot of their customer base whether they (or other customers) like it or not. That said, this in of itself wouldn't have had much of an effect overall, since even people who were hardly pro-gay were playing these games even if they found the content distasteful. EA mostly tries to use "political bravery" as a shield here, to try and cover up for the fact that it's their business practices that are really pissing people off.
In short EA deserves the distinction they are facing, and I find it oddly disturbing that they are so quick to dismiss the criticism. Of course then again they doubtlessly figure they have a bunch of gaming addicts to exploit. It doesn't matter of sheep object to being sheared, or junkies don't like having their fix cut with crap, if people want what they have they are going to have to endure it. The fact that people who want to play EA titles can only get them from EA in their mind means they can do whatever the hell they want. Especially seeing as it's a luxury good which so far puts them beyond any kind of regulation.
As far as the LGBT issue, I'm not going to argue the specifics of that, but I do feel the need to point out that despite what a lot of people might want to believe roughly 50% of the US population alone is anti-gay, and that goes up substantially when you look at things through a wide enough global lens (albiet involving a lot of countries EA probably doesn't do direct business with). If EA decides to take a side on an issue like this they should expect backlash and it to influance their perceptions. If you listen to the media it's easy to convince yourself that there is some kind of clear majority or supermajority supporting gay rights, but that's hardly the case. There is a reason why most businesses approach the situation cautiously. Few people had much of an issue when there just happened to be some non-heterosexual options in the games, but when EA allowed itself to become a flashpoint for the issue of LGBT entitlement it took on a whole differant meaning. This is ultimatly a side issue, but basically EA should have expected the response, and at the end of the day taking sides the way it's done has legitimatly pissed off a lot of their customer base whether they (or other customers) like it or not. That said, this in of itself wouldn't have had much of an effect overall, since even people who were hardly pro-gay were playing these games even if they found the content distasteful. EA mostly tries to use "political bravery" as a shield here, to try and cover up for the fact that it's their business practices that are really pissing people off.