EA Screws Over PS3 Gamers

[shadow skill]

Don't blame EA, blame Sony.... they didn't properly prepare for a true online platform, which is why PSN continually has to play catch up with XBox Live. Microsoft's box may have it's technical problems, but if there's one thing Microsoft did right with the original, it's XBox Live. Sure you have to pay for the service but they make it worth it by having nice features such as these. Microsoft is an internet and communications veteran... they have extensive experience in the world of PC gaming and basically made the 360 a PC with controllers, so they get all the features of a PC. This is why media center and XBox live work so well with it.

I'd always felt that Playstation was primarily for solitary gamers anyhow as they have very few good co-op games to begin with. Most of their exclusives are single-player titles or have shoddily built multi-player (read: Resistance). While I'm no fan of EA, they shouldn't be blamed for building games to the original PS3 specs. Changing their model now makes their entire back catalogue incompatible, and that is a lot of games. I believe the poor implementation of PSN was one of the reasons why Left 4 Dead was kept off the PS3, so once again, don't blame Valve, blame Sony.

That doesn't really make much sense. It's like saying it's Microsoft's fault that a bunch of programs broke in Vista because they needlessly require administrator level privileges just to function at correctly. If the majority of the games on the PS3 do work with the changes they have made it really is the fault of the people who have made the games that do not work. Even if it was the other way around it is still the manufacturer's responsibility to make sure that their products work with the current firmware.

 

[Joshimodo]

for me none of the new ones (C&C:RE 3 and C&C 3 :TW and KW) worked. I called EA about this issue and they told me that the games where incompatible with 64 bit vista but worked with 32 bit. They also said that this fact was clearly stated on the box (it was but only in size 8 font buried among other things. they also refused to give me my money back so i just had to give it to my friend.

Very strange. While Kane's Wrath had trouble working in the first try, the other two worked perfectly fine, and still do.

 

[Debatra]

Apparently it's just a rumor, at least if we're to believe Sony & EA

http://www.ps3news.com/PlayStation-3/ea-and-sony-deny-ps3-cross-game-voice-chat-rumors/

Based on some others' posts on the thread I linked to, the guy's been right a few times before.

And of course they're going to deny it. EA doesn't want to look bad, and Sony doesn't want a lawsuit; even if it has no basis.

 

[MrSnugglesworth]

Haha ps3 suckers!


*Rides away on his Xbox 360, laughing it up*

 

[MR.Spartacus]

Fine by me after Mirrors edge and Burnout Paradise any game that has EA on the box is a must avoid for me. Why don't they just make it mandatory for publisher's to support like they did with trophies.

 

[Debatra]

Fine by me after Mirrors edge and Burnout Paradise any game that has EA on the box is a must avoid for me. Why don't they just make it mandatory for publisher's to support like they did with trophies.

Well, if you read the article, you'd know that they wanted to, but EA threatened to drop PS3 support. Long story short, Sony caved.

 

[Frank_Sinatra_]

Spoiler

Holy balls that is overreacting. Christ...

(Now who would like to join me in a union to destroy EA ?)

Count me in. Can I be head of explosives?

Haha ps3 suckers!

Please don't add fuel to the already growing flames.


OT: So EA screws over the PS3/Gamers. What's new?
However this is irritating on many levels.

 

[MR.Spartacus]

Fine by me after Mirrors edge and Burnout Paradise any game that has EA on the box is a must avoid for me. Why don't they just make it mandatory for publisher's to support like they did with trophies.

Well, if you read the article, you'd know that they wanted to, but EA threatened to drop PS3 support. Long story short, Sony caved.

It just seems weird that they'd cave so easily. Especially to EA it's obviously a bluff.

 

[Imat]

I don't really get what the big deal is...So a company doesn't want their sales to drop because some other company came up with code that works well with everybody else's code but not with theirs? I honestly don't see that as EA being evil, I see that as EA trying it's hardest not to lose the market because somebody else's code makes their code not work.

The real evil is the propaganda you're spreading here by not mentioning that their sales would undoubtedly drop. How would you like to write a book and then, when you're finished, find out that some other language or genre was becoming more and more popular and threatened to stop all sales of your book? How do you think EA feels, putting a lot of work into coding a game (A game which, from what he's mentioned, works perfectly fine on it's own. And that's saying something, knowing what I do about game glitches and the like), and then somebody complains because the code they wrote breaks the code EA wrote. Not EA's fault. They shouldn't lose sales because of it. Otherwise everybody who is using a PC at this second should go complain to Microsoft because that virus they got while streaming...Adult materials...has caused some glitch in their machine (And Mac users, don't laugh. If the Mac ever becomes more widespread than the PC, viruses will find their way onto Macs as well. Not that that will happen, cuz PC's are just that much better ATM). Does it seem fair to blame Microsoft because you made a mistake and some loser created incompatible software? If it does, clearly you need to recheck what's fair and what ain't.

EA is not in the wrong to dislike this software. You are in the wrong for hating them for it, however.

this feels weird because I'm usually the first to pour gasoline on sony (cause they're dicks, and they fucked up the PSP) but anyway did you even read that even a little? The code would work with 95% of the BACK CATALOG meaning games already sold so it's not affecting new games. Second if it doesn't work it won't break the game unless you try to use it in said game in which case it might crash the game or just refuse to work, it won't break the game permanently just when you try to use said unsupported feature. Yah I'm sure EA would lose a hell of a lot of revenue because certain old games they published don't support cross game chat or custom sound tracks, because not having a bonus feature is a deal breaker these days. And your analogy is flawed as hell, but let's adapt it to the truth. this isn't Microsoft releasing a patch for XP (fuck vista) that allows 64-bit screen depth in programs but crashes any program, like let's say half-life, run that doesn't support 64-bit screen depth. It's like Microsoft releasing said patch and valve pulling support because it makes half life look inferior to say Morrowind which can render in 64-bit depth. Now stop being an EA fanboy and learn to read.

Wow...Attacking my person because you feel you're right. Never been done before, applause for your originality good sir.

Past that, however, I'd just like to point out that it is NOT just "Back catalog." Sure, all games in production now will be more likely to have support for this feature cuz the programmers know it exists and can put it in, but games released today or even just a few months ago probably didn't have anything in them about this program. Which means that even "new" games may not have support. You think that the code will magically place itself in all games programmed recently? They may not have even known about it until some random Sony rep decided to go hating on EA. I don't see how you expect all "new" games to magically support this. It seems like you know nothing about the production time of games or the complexity of code.

And the guy himself said EA's games (Which did not go well with the code) would become less popular. And yes, features matter a lot. Maybe supporting a custom soundtrack won't get you any extra attention (95% of the games do), but not having that support will definitely affect popularity (Because people just cannot see why it shouldn't have the feature, a symptom of ignorance). And again, not old games (Unless you consider at most a year to be old, in which case you yourself are ancient...Comparatively). Final note on this subject: People who experience major glitches in games, no matter who's fault, tend to dislike the game. The general populous expects perfect games and when they don't get that they panic and usually give up on said game.

And you analogy is flawed, I'm sorry to say. This is like MS releasing a patch (For XP or Vista, because I don't hate Vista) which causes L4D or TF2 to crash, so Valve complains and demands the patch be repatched. I'm fairly certain they wouldn't mind this software at all if it didn't mean large losses for their company (And investors). In fact I mentioned that the only way EA could be petty in this matter is if they continued coding in a way which doesn't support the code. It's not like EA thinks this code is evil incarnate and must be stopped at all costs. They simply feel they should try and make money instead of spending it all with no possibility of profit.

On one final note: I did read it. Judging by what you said, I wonder how thoroughly YOU read it, if at all. "Now stop being" the general masses "and learn to read."

 

[fenrizz]

"Death to EA!!! Kill it with Fire!!!"

I must agree with this sentiment.
Fire is the only way to make sure it dies.

 

[Debatra]

I don't really get what the big deal is...So a company doesn't want their sales to drop because some other company came up with code that works well with everybody else's code but not with theirs? I honestly don't see that as EA being evil, I see that as EA trying it's hardest not to lose the market because somebody else's code makes their code not work.

The real evil is the propaganda you're spreading here by not mentioning that their sales would undoubtedly drop. How would you like to write a book and then, when you're finished, find out that some other language or genre was becoming more and more popular and threatened to stop all sales of your book? How do you think EA feels, putting a lot of work into coding a game (A game which, from what he's mentioned, works perfectly fine on it's own. And that's saying something, knowing what I do about game glitches and the like), and then somebody complains because the code they wrote breaks the code EA wrote. Not EA's fault. They shouldn't lose sales because of it. Otherwise everybody who is using a PC at this second should go complain to Microsoft because that virus they got while streaming...Adult materials...has caused some glitch in their machine (And Mac users, don't laugh. If the Mac ever becomes more widespread than the PC, viruses will find their way onto Macs as well. Not that that will happen, cuz PC's are just that much better ATM). Does it seem fair to blame Microsoft because you made a mistake and some loser created incompatible software? If it does, clearly you need to recheck what's fair and what ain't.

EA is not in the wrong to dislike this software. You are in the wrong for hating them for it, however.

this feels weird because I'm usually the first to pour gasoline on sony (cause they're dicks, and they fucked up the PSP) but anyway did you even read that even a little? The code would work with 95% of the BACK CATALOG meaning games already sold so it's not affecting new games. Second if it doesn't work it won't break the game unless you try to use it in said game in which case it might crash the game or just refuse to work, it won't break the game permanently just when you try to use said unsupported feature. Yah I'm sure EA would lose a hell of a lot of revenue because certain old games they published don't support cross game chat or custom sound tracks, because not having a bonus feature is a deal breaker these days. And your analogy is flawed as hell, but let's adapt it to the truth. this isn't Microsoft releasing a patch for XP (fuck vista) that allows 64-bit screen depth in programs but crashes any program, like let's say half-life, run that doesn't support 64-bit screen depth. It's like Microsoft releasing said patch and valve pulling support because it makes half life look inferior to say Morrowind which can render in 64-bit depth. Now stop being an EA fanboy and learn to read.

Ignore this guy. He's been defending EA this whole thread, and you're not going to change his mind.