EA Turns Its Back on Single-Player Games
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Recommended Videos
EA Labels President Frank Gibeau boasts that Electronic Arts no longer develops any games as single-player experiences.
so ea does not want my money
ok, i'm actually completely fine with that
i'm also fine with ea loosing 45% stock price overnight for that radically stupid comment
so ea does not want my money
ok, i'm actually completely fine with that
i'm also fine with ea loosing 45% stock price overnight for that radically stupid comment
Yeah multiplayer components can be well done and thoughtful. But the base idea that EVERYTHING needs some kind of multiplayer stitched on to it is just baffling, and adds nothing to the many once single player franchises EA holds.StriderShinryu said:
Seriously Dead Space, Dragon Age, Mass Effect, these games didn't need any kind of multiplayer to be amazing.
This is what I was thinking.MrBaskerville said:
There are a lot of people out there saying how we're just angry because it's EA, multiplayer is not inherently a bad thing, it can be done right and be quite good when it is. And you're right. Well done, please collect your off-centre-crosshair trophy for fatally missing the point.
The issue is not that we think "EA RAR HATE" or that every form of multiplayer is bad. Leaving aside the arguments for why it IS bad (such as the time, money and effort wasted on putting it in that could be spent on ironing out bugs or improving gameplay) the issue is not that there are multiplayer games. The issue is that sometimes we want to play games that are NOT multiplayer. Yes, chocolate is nice, I like to eat it. So if my local supermarket came out and told me proudly that from now on they would only stock chocolate products, would I be happy? Fuck no! I want to eat something other than chocolate, and I want to play games other than multiplayer shooters.
That's the general view in any case; I personally haven't played a multiplayer game (or, at least, the multiplayer component of a game) in several years, and not once have I felt like I was missing something.
Hey now! You obviously are just saying that because it is the cool thing to say.seditary said:
Nothing about their practices or beliefs are moronic nor do they negatively impact the gaming industry.
Heaven's knows they don't actively seek out innovative small companies, buy them, ruin their IPs then disband them.
Never.
Ever.
Go read the reviews of Madden 13 on Amazon.KoudelkaMorgan said:
It would appear that sports games as a wholly online medium makes no sense to sports games players.
I guess sports fans like to play with their mates and drink and laugh and stuff?
Weird, that socializing stuff I mean.
Ya'know what....
I don't care.
So long as the multiplayer is completely optional, if it isn't then they ain't gettin my monies. Simple as.
My consol isn't connected to the internet anyways so I tend to wait till the dlc is available on disc if i want it. If EA releases a game I want to play, i'll buy it and play it.
I don't care.
So long as the multiplayer is completely optional, if it isn't then they ain't gettin my monies. Simple as.
My consol isn't connected to the internet anyways so I tend to wait till the dlc is available on disc if i want it. If EA releases a game I want to play, i'll buy it and play it.
Damn, 8 pages worth of rants and yet, somehow, this must represent only a tiny, tiny, fraction of a minority in the gaming consumer market. Either that, or people are just yanking it. Because as soon as Battlefield 4 gets announced, they will sell more copies for launch than anything else. People LOVE EA, and they LOVE their games. I haven't bought anything from EA for about 2 years now, but the truth is right there in anything they release, they are killing it. Dead Space 2 did a lot better than I thought, sure they set the expectations unrealistically high for Dead Space 3, but they wouldn't even bother with the game if they didn't think it'd be a success. As much as they "ruined" the franchise according to many people (and me, if I dare say so), I gotta admit, their PR sucks, but their marketing and business models are somehow pretty genius.
Who else can continue to do so well despite raging minority groups like these in forums all over the internet.
Who else can continue to do so well despite raging minority groups like these in forums all over the internet.
Ah yes, it all makes sense. EA sees a company that makes great SINGLE player games, gobbles them up, and then wonders why that company folds under their shadow.
EAs vision for the future: Every year you buy the next iteration of a game with 201X tacked on the end, digitally, get a dismal single player experience and are forced to play the game only when EA servers are up, and with really lame multiplayer experience.
EA, I don't like your socialist future.
EAs vision for the future: Every year you buy the next iteration of a game with 201X tacked on the end, digitally, get a dismal single player experience and are forced to play the game only when EA servers are up, and with really lame multiplayer experience.
EA, I don't like your socialist future.
And now, like so many others, EA has only solidified that they've lost me as a customer. Good job, EA.
I'm beginning to think that EA is doing some kind of bet. "Let's see what stupid shit we can do that would totally crush a smaller company."
I'm beginning to think that EA is doing some kind of bet. "Let's see what stupid shit we can do that would totally crush a smaller company."
I personally have more or less fallen out with most singleplayer games. They simply can't hold my attention for more than a couple of hours, they feel like a chore to play.
Here's how Skyrim went for me:
> Maxed graphics settings, ventured out into the world, checked my frame rates
> Splashed around in the water, admired some scenery
> Ran around a forest, killed a bear or two, more scenery
> Climbed to the highest mountain and jumped to my death
And all that was only ~2 hours in, after which I was so incredibly bored I started staring blankly at the ceiling with the overwhelming feeling of "what the hell am I even doing?".
For example I will be buying Crysis 3 entirely for multiplayer, because I know for a fact that the campaign won't keep me busy for more than 6-8 hours. Not only is it a waste of $110 NZD for jack-all entertainment, I don't gain any satisfaction from outsmarting a bunch of 0's and 1's as much as I get from killing actual players and my success going onto recorded scoreboards.
I'll admit I fell in love with the Mass Effect series - not because they were a challenge to play, but because they had mind-blowing stories and depth to them. It was more of an interactive narrative (with decisions influencing everything) which I really enjoyed, paired with a spoonful of combat to round it all up.
Here's how Skyrim went for me:
> Maxed graphics settings, ventured out into the world, checked my frame rates
> Splashed around in the water, admired some scenery
> Ran around a forest, killed a bear or two, more scenery
> Climbed to the highest mountain and jumped to my death
And all that was only ~2 hours in, after which I was so incredibly bored I started staring blankly at the ceiling with the overwhelming feeling of "what the hell am I even doing?".
For example I will be buying Crysis 3 entirely for multiplayer, because I know for a fact that the campaign won't keep me busy for more than 6-8 hours. Not only is it a waste of $110 NZD for jack-all entertainment, I don't gain any satisfaction from outsmarting a bunch of 0's and 1's as much as I get from killing actual players and my success going onto recorded scoreboards.
I'll admit I fell in love with the Mass Effect series - not because they were a challenge to play, but because they had mind-blowing stories and depth to them. It was more of an interactive narrative (with decisions influencing everything) which I really enjoyed, paired with a spoonful of combat to round it all up.
"Yeah! I wanna play DAIII completely online and with multiplayer!!!" said no one ever.
Way to go EA. If you weren't dicks before, you are now. -_-
Way to go EA. If you weren't dicks before, you are now. -_-
"To be fair to EA, that doesn't mean it's abandoning single-player, just that nothing is being made that can't support a multiplayer component, Facebook tie-in and/or whatever else the company can pile onto it"
This practically didnt even need to be said considering they've been doing this already for a long enough time that it's sickening.
This practically didnt even need to be said considering they've been doing this already for a long enough time that it's sickening.
EA announces that their games all have an online competent, (probably mostly for DLC and crap), gamer immediately make a hasty conclusion (because EA is the devil and if you don't immediately go into a blind rage upon the mention of their name, you are also the devil). In other news, crooks steal Maple Syrup in Canada, hilarity ensue.
After all the bluster and hasty anger, all this really is is EA once again phrasing their statements poorly. Most games now-a-days have some online component to them anyways.
Edit: Also, shame on the writer for using a clearly inflammatory title for the story. I hate yellow journalism on my news sites.
After all the bluster and hasty anger, all this really is is EA once again phrasing their statements poorly. Most games now-a-days have some online component to them anyways.
Edit: Also, shame on the writer for using a clearly inflammatory title for the story. I hate yellow journalism on my news sites.
Yep, people are jumping the gun. In fact Gabe Newell said the same thing months ago, yet no one complained then.Twilight_guy said:
SOURCE:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DMgfPU9y3yo
I think it's a combination of blind EA hatred, and nerdbaiting title that leads to all these stupid comments.
And that is how long you should expect any game to last from EA.... one year. Then they want you to buy the slightly newer one that is the more or less the same thing to be able to continue online.Andy Chalk said: