EA Wants "To Be 90 Plus Metacritic at Everything"

[FantomOmega]

Yes EA, I'm sure you do.

I'm sure you do.

Poor EA, all it wants is to be loved...


By its shareholders!

EA is the anti-spiral to "creativity"

...Wait, Why is EA STILL in existence if Nia had to disappear?!

 

[FantomOmega]

Yes EA, I'm sure you do.

I'm sure you do.

Poor EA, all it wants is to be loved...


By its shareholders!

EA is the anti-spiral to "creativity"

...Wait, Why is EA STILL in existence if Nia had to disappear?!

The only reason Nia disappeared is because Simon decided that the anti-spirals were right and that he should not, in fact, (row row) fight the power.

Would that imply that EA is "right"? (trows up in corner)

 

[Cid Silverwing]

EA wants Origin to be the Facebook to Steam's MySpace.

Facebook gathers the information you put on your page, records your IP then sells it to other corporations without asking you.

Origin is glorified spyware despite insistent denial from EA.

They want Origin to be the FACEBOOK to Steam's "MySpace"?

EA really is a Satanic corporation...


Captcha again: virtue of necessity

 

[sunsetspawn]

LOL!

And it closed at 12.11 today.

Let's see EA's stock can fall into the single digits by August.

 

[GryffinDarkBreed]

Except EA has neglected to realize that Steam is ever changing, ever improving. It does not stagnate. When someone else comes up with an idea, Valve takes it, refines it and implements it better than anybody else. Steam is probably the only DRM system that fans actually appreciate.

 

[inidu]

This just in: EA wants to keep doing what they're doing but to be Valve anyway.

 

[NerfedFalcon]

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Also, you used an ad hominem yourself when you said that only people with no leg to stand on quote Ayn Rand.

Actually the definition of insanity is:

the condition of being insane; a derangement of the mind.

I wasn't attack him personally just insinuating that he was using a logical fallacy to jump on a bandwagon.

Which doesn't excuse your earlier ad-hominem of trying to discredit his quote.

 

[A_Parked_Car]

You misunderstand - it's kinda pointless having the option to start in offline mode if there's no connection, but requiring a connection to do that. If there's no internet connection, but you've previously used the licenses for the games on that machine, why on earth shouldn't you be able to play them if your internet goes down? It just feels like there's something a bit broken with the offline mode.

But yeah, once offline it works fine; it's just getting there that's a bit unintuitive.

To get "start in offline mode" to work properly you have to have the "remember my password" thing checked off. If you don't have that checked off Steam won't let you access it until you have internet. That is simply because it doesn't know what profile you are trying to access if you don't let it hold onto your account password and such.

It took me forever to finally figure that out, but now I can get onto Steam when my laptop doesn't have internet at all. Although the last time I checked, Steam should identify the last profile that was logged in and use that to start offline mode. That last bit is a fairly new addition to Steam's functionality. It works flawlessly for me, so I hope it works for you too.

OT: Anyway, EA deeply annoys me. I only use Origin for BF3 and I can't stand it. Luckily for me I'm done with EA games from now on. Not just because I don't like EA, but because all of their new games genuinely don't interest me. I suppose Sim City and Command and Conquer: Generals 2 are somewhat intriguing, but they aren't intriguing enough to justify having to deal with Origin even more.

 

[Therumancer]

Except EA has neglected to realize that Steam is ever changing, ever improving. It does not stagnate. When someone else comes up with an idea, Valve takes it, refines it and implements it better than anybody else. Steam is probably the only DRM system that fans actually appreciate.

It also fails to acknowlege that STEAM has the wares of a lot of companies, and also offers frequent deep discounts, something that EA and other services have claimed they will not do, even going so far as to claim it devalues intellectual properties. In the final equasion nobody is going to beat STEAM unless they can beat their prices. No matter what incentives a company offers very little is going to beat getting decent, fairly new, games for like $10 a pop.

Not to mention that the appeal of having all your stuff in one place. As my crazy sized STEAM library grows, I increasingly find myself buying from STEAM when a hardcopy isn't viable or self contained, even when I buy something brandy new and at full price, just to keep all my digital games split between as few places as possible.

STEAM could be archaic and not innovate a thing, and I'd still use them due to their prices, and sheer inertia due to having done this much business with them so far.

 

[BehattedWanderer]

Better games make better scores, EA. Better games require time, patience, and dedication, not cheap swill rushed out as fast as can be. As for Origin--of course Newell has talked about it, you got all huffy and took your toys away from those that were playing with them, so that you could charge them to continue to play with them, while Steam just kind of shrugged it's shoulders, and brought out some new toys to make us happy in their place.

 

[Brawndo]

I don't know wether to laugh at them for their stupidy, rage at them for their arrogance, or just go "meh" and watch as their company blows up from the inside out.

Blow up from all those AAA releases EA keeps putting out and gamers keep gobbling up you mean. I don't agree with their business practices, but you cannot deny that they publish games that a lot of players want to buy.

 

[Something Amyss]

I dunno man. EA makes bad games, sure, but a) one of the reasons they make bad games is fishing for high metacritic scores, and b) other companies do that too. Even if EA was a terribad factory (and it is) , metacritic makes other companies be terribad too.

Metacritic is only part of why EA makes "bad" games, though. Most of it is fiscal policies decided by the executives. Now, they may want high metascores, but they also want max cash. That means the decisions mostly come from external deals, like the notion that removing content and calling it DLC or the proposed "charging for bullets" mentality is positive.

Metacritic is not without its flaws, but EA is setting a market standard on online passes, on-disc DLC, and baby eating. >.>

 

[ReinWeisserRitter]

Because we just didn't have enough proof that the people in charge of Origin were delusional, here we have a goal that can't be met anywhere short of bribery (which is hardly above most major developers, mind you) to make an effort to look really, really good on a site most people who actually play their games don't even give two shits about.

I'd say they've lost their minds, but this is how everyone's acting these days, with only a few exceptions, so maybe I'm the crazy one.

 

[Jezzascmezza]

90+ on Metacritic for everything?
They'll be forced to only focus on releasing about 4 games per year, and I've never really thought of EA as a publisher that strictly promoted "quality over quantity."

 

[Greg Waller]

This just reaffirms my determination to never again sink money into these assholes' coffers.

BOYCOTT EA, NO MATTER WHAT THEY RELEASE.

If you don't buy anything because they release nothing you want anymore, does that count as a boycott?

I'm saying that I'm boycotting them REGARDLESS of what they release in the future, even if it's something I really, really want. I'm not dropping another stinking penny on these bastards, no matter what.

 

[roostuf]

Wow.

I can't actually believe this.

It's like EA have no idea how much people hate them

They're the Cartman of the gaming world.

True words from a master.

OT: seriously though, EA needs to just go and die already along with that shit-stain of a conpitition to steam.