Gamers Uncomfortable with Change, Says EA's Peter Moore

[momijirabbit]

No Mr. Moore, we do not dislike change, we dislike shitty business practices that are designed to screw over the consumer.
We dislike being lied to about things like the graphical fidelity of games.
We dislike the simple fact that our ten year old games have a higher level of quality and content than 90% of games released in the past 4 years.
That is what we dislike.

 

[Gluzzbung]

"All generalisations are false, including this one." - Oscar Wilde

There are just so many things that are wrong with saying that Mr. Moore's statement is either right or wrong, because some gamers obviously just want gaming to stay, more or less, the same, see the huge sales numbers for CoD and FIFA for an example, but there are many others who really enjoy new things in the gaming industry, like the rise of indie games and things like that. However, i feel the change that EA is talking about is people not biting and buying into their ideas of 'free-to-play,' their DRM and rushed out games that are barely finished but promise DLC that may or may not fix the problems in the game at launch for a small fee. It highlights everything that's wrong with publisher's sales-strategies.

 

[dtgenshiken7]

Everything I want to say has already been said, but I find this too dumb not to throw something in anyway.

Trying to make other demographics looks down on us just to discredit our outrage of your business practice is a move that really only proves what's already been proven to death- EA stopped caring about its consumer base a long, long time ago. They've irrevocably changed, and now all they can do is more of the same and they have literally no argument against those of us who still argue except "We care about different people, no go away or we'll make them think you're stupid!"

All I can do is hope this all blows up in Moores face but honestly, most demographics they're now hounding for every last cent are too apathetic to care, so I'll just sit here, playing games from other developers, and from a time before we were expected to pay full price for half of an unfinished game.

 

[Weaver]

Yeah, it used to be you paid $50 for a game and then you got a working, final product! Now you spend $60 on an EA game that doesn't work (SimCity, Battlefield 4) and they have the gall to ask another $60 for DLC.

Man, us crazy core gamers resisting change. It's literally unthinkable how we would be against games that don't fucking wortk for (effectively) twice the price they used to be.

Also, EA, your games aren't free to play. Paying $60 then being given the honour of spending money on in game microtransactions is fee to pay. Free, you see, means no cost. You seem to have a lot of trouble with that concept.

 

[Tradjus]

The President of E.A made a tone deaf statement specifically engineered too piss off the people that they sell those 60$ "Services" too?
Uh.. how is that news? It happens every two or three minutes. ._.

 

[synobal]

If I've a problem with change why is it when Valve announces something I'm happy but when EA does I'm cautious and sometimes out right weary or distrustful. Consider this "Valve announces F2P Mobile Oregon trail" vs "EA announces F2P Mobile Oregon Trail" which one do you think gamers feel more comfortable with, taking a classic game and making a f2p mobile version of it?

 

[JagermanXcell]

"Gamer's uncomfortable with sleezy business tactics, Say's EA's forever oblivious Peter Moore"

It's 2014 EA, maybe it's time for YOU to grow up and change... NOOOO not your definition of "change"... Noooo EA stop microtransactioning yourself!... Bad EA! *smacks hand*

 

[Neverhoodian]

EA tries to blame the consumers for resisting their exorbitant DLC/pay-to-win bullshit. In other news, water is wet.

There's nothing inherently wrong with the business methods Moore mentioned. Rather, it's how companies like EA go about implementing them. For example, free-to-play titles can be amazing when done right, such as Team Fortress 2 and War Thunder. What does EA respond with? The new Dungeon Keeper. Not only is it a blatant cash grab, but it also shits all over the legacy of a beloved series (something else EA excels at).

"It's not the way it used to be. I used to put my disc in the tray or my cartridge in the top, and I'd sit there and play. And all of these young people coming in, or God forbid, these old people coming into gaming!"

I love how he's trying to spin this like it's a bad thing. Oh yes, I remember those terrible times when you could just pop in a game and play without worrying about draconian DRM, always-online requirements or on-disk DLC you had to pay extra for. The horror! And that jab at "old people?" You're not exactly a spring chicken yourself, Mr. Moore. Don't forget that it's the older demographics that tend to have more disposable income. Not exactly a good statement to make from a PR perspective.

Now get the hell off my lawn!

*Waves cane*

 

[Itchi_da_killa]

This guy wears his soul on his face. He can go screw himself. Unfortunately this shady practice is catching on because of all the casuals, and the people that are down for getting screwed just so they can keep on gaming.
I don't buy the games that have spawned from these changes in the industry.

 

[ungothicdove]

"Gamers don't like change," he says as free to play games like LoL, Dota 2, and TF2 make boatloads of cash. Not to mention that thousands or perhaps millions of fans will subsidize just an IDEA of a game with kickstarters.

"Half the people loved the fact that we were showing well into the future. And then the other 50 percent were basically calling BS because it was conceptual prototypes (which is how we build games, by the way). So you're kind of damned if you do and damned if you don't." Hm, maybe gamers are not a homegeneous bunch and certain gamers will like one model and other gamers will like another? Like say, some want to play multi-player games such as Call of Duty or what have you while other gamers would like to play single player games like Skyrim. This is such a shocking revelation that Peter Moore cannot begin to fathom that different people like different things.

Overall, he kind of comes across as saying, "I'm right and you're all just being whiny." Which, to be fair, gamers do whine a lot, but it's not as if all of the belly aching is completely unfounded. Games that don't work at launch? Yeah, that will probably piss a lot of people off.

 

[Kameburger]

Personally, I'm "uncomfortable" with game executives talking about and treating their consumers like nothing but potential pirates or ungrateful, entitled penny pinchers.

For what ever reason ironically that never seems to change in the industry.

 

[Adept Mechanicus]

There's nothing like being told what I want by a corporate American Vladimir Lenin knock-off.

 

[Nurb]

"Where do these customers think they dictate how we make our products? They should be thankful we're screwing them so hard. It's the only screwing these nerds are gonna get!"

 

[Imre Csete]

Oh thank God, I was worried with all these recent EA statements about admitting their mistakes, it seemed like that their PR department ran out of pixie dust.

And now this, back to the same old EA we know and love.

 

[Lilani]

Gamers want plenty of change. Every day we're talking about how we want more female protagonists, more gay characters, more diversity in many ways. New locations, new gameplay mechanics, we're fine with new.

What we aren't fine with is transparent marketing schemes geared toward nickel and diming people rather than giving the quality products.

 

[FoolKiller]

Back in 2011 EA announced they were taking a more offensive approach to their business strategy, which was dubbed as the 'games-as-a-service' business model. Essentially EA would continue to work rigorously on games even after they launched, to provide customers a continuos and deeper experience to their titles--and Moore has been a strong advocate of this approach. A part of that model entailed more DLC, free-to-play and mobile games, and microtransactions.

This was a cynical strategy though. Basically they would release a product that would be generally inferior on launch, while keeping it at £40 ($60) and then complete the game down the line for extra money through DLC, all the while shoving microtransactions in there for good measure. It's worse than the Early Access bullshit going on right now.

He's kind of right, core gamers don't like change, but when people are getting screwed over it's the core gamers that bring this shit down upon them because they are the most cynical watchful consumers. They are the ones that get the hate train rolling. Sometimes EA, you fucking deserve it.

My favourite line of the whole thing is the concept that EA would continue to work rigourously on games even after they launched. Really? Where are my servers for NHL 10, 11, 12 etc? They forgot to mention that shutting down a game to push their new update at full price is part of rigourous work.

 

[MCerberus]

Oh thank God, I was worried with all these recent EA statements about admitting their mistakes, it seemed like that their PR department ran out of pixie dust.

And now this, back to the same old EA we know and love.

This recent statement is a week after EA accidentally let slip that they still think it was just a matter of pricing for the Dungeon Keeper game.

 

[JarinArenos]

What a bunch of smug bullshit. It's painfully obvious this was expressly tailored to spin any future negative public response to anything as "fear of change". No, Peter, you enormous humanoid duck schlong, we don't dislike free-to-play because it's different, we dislike it because 99% of the time it's money-grubbing game-destroying garbage; and your company is one of the worst offenders.