Gamers Uncomfortable with Change, Says EA's Peter Moore

[vagabondwillsmile]

I for one embrace change, Mr. Moore - even at EA!

For example, if you were to lose your job - that would be great!

Or if EA could stop reskinning old product and charging full price, or releasing incomplete, broken buggy games and charging full price, locking away content of a game behind a DLC pay wall and charging full price, exploiting, cheating, LYYYYIIIINNNG.

Oh I love change and want to actually see some. Which of the two of us is really uncomfortable with it?

 

[Erttheking]

Ah, EA being good old EA. Something everyone can get properly steamed at.

Yeah, keep dressing up your bullshit policies as you being a misunderstood genius you in-bred fuckwit.

 

[Maphysto]

"Gamers don't like change"
-Peter Moore, a chief contributor to the gaming industry's inertia

 

[Kaymish]

i think its less a dislike of change and more a burning hatred of anal intercourse with EA and their ilk doing the giving. especially when they are using their patented Vaseline with the added sand and glass chips
"oh the proles just don't like change" yeah right

 

[Something Amyss]

Gamers might hate change, but that doesn't mean that the change you stand for is change that should be acceptable. I'm sorry that some of us actually aren't just money deployment units designed to dispense to your company at your whim, but we can't always get what we want. I want to see compelling, interesting, fun games from EA, for example.

Man, Peter had a good run where he didn't say much stupid. Then he opened his mouth again.

 

[Bat Vader]

I kinda agree with him a bit. Not with their business practices but about the change thing. A good number of my gaming co-workers don't like the idea of games with female only protagonists. One guy thinks just males should be player characters; while others think that either just males should be the PC or they should be able to choose between male and female but never just a female only PC.

 

[Dragonbums]

Honestly? Honestly?

He's actually right.

Take one look at any "we should have more women/colored people/LGBTQ" thread and for every two people supporting it you have four more business apologists saying "but money and statistiiiics" and crying sjw and "shoehorning" like their characters aren't already shoehorned to death as well.


It's a fucking fact. Gamers don't like change.

 

[A-D.]

Im having the most serious case of deja-vu ever with this Thread. Didnt he say pretty much the exact same thing couple years ago? In fact, yes he did. When i first saw the topic i was like "Somebodies dug up a necro there"..but nope, its actually a new one. Im going to save myself a long-winded retort to this man and just link to the last thread instead Here [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/7.386092.15432083]

Honestly? Honestly?

He's actually right.

Take one look at any "we should have more women/colored people/LGBTQ" thread and for every two people supporting it you have four more business apologists saying "but money and statistiiiics" and crying sjw and "shoehorning" like their characters aren't already shoehorned to death as well.


It's a fucking fact. Gamers don't like change.

I dont think thats the same thing, plus you are generalizing people who do actually make a valid point as to why we shouldnt do it. Or rather shouldnt do it badly, i.e. the whole issue with Tokenism and their inclusion just for the sake of being able to say they are featured. Its like how Ubisoft reacted to the AC:Unity issue by pointing out that there's lots of women in Farcry 4. You know, not helping anyone at all.

If a game features a black protagonist, should the fact that he is black be important? No.
If a game features a female protagonist, should the fact that she is a woman be important? No.
If a game features a LGBTQ protagonist, should the fact that they are LGBTQ be important? No.

If you make a black, female, or LGBTQ character for the sole reason to "represent" them, then you are not helping anyone. I dont want a character in a game that goes "Hey guys, im black", or "Hey guys, im a woman". Now if they make an interesting character that just happens to be black, or female and that fact is never brought to the forefront as if it needed a spotlight shining on it, then im all for it.

 

[azurine]

We don't hate change, we hate unnecessary, unneeded, money-grubbing, lying, deceitful, dishonest, thieving little bastards who somehow managed to gain control of one of the biggest companies in a new industry with so much potential, trying to siphon as much cash as fast as possible with not the slightest regard to damage done to said industry, and then calling said tactics "change", and any and all critics, "a vocal minority".

By all means, Mr. Moore, keep pushing your luck. When this bubble bursts, you will be splashed, and then you'll find out that you've been playing with a bubble made of acid this whole time. People will turn on you, they will reject you, they will find another who satisfies them, and when they do, we will ask "What's wrong? We thought you liked change!"

 

[Loop Stricken]

Back in 2011 EA announced [http://megagames.com/news/ea-adopts-games-service-model] 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.

Good Job on that front, EA; you've certainly become more offensive.

 

[Dragonbums]

If you make a black, female, or LGBTQ character for the sole reason to "represent" them, then you are not helping anyone.

I'm just going to say what someone else said on this matter.

As someone who has a total of maybe 5 characters in the entirety of video game history representing me as a whole, I'd rather take one mediocre shoehorned character that represents me than nothing.

 

[Karadalis]

Aparantly they gave Bagdad Bob a new Job as EA exec.. after they had him go through surgical faceswapping with some other dude.

Look EA.. no one takes you serious anymore.. nothing you say will be taken serious by any possible audience you can reach, by your competition or even your own staff.

We know it... they know it.. the only guys who seem to have not gotten the memo are the people that come out and give these ridiculus interviews.

Players dont like change? What change? Do you have numbers to back it up? Have you actually done some peer reviewed research on this? Or is it just your opinion? Or is it rather another excuse to your stockholders why youre still bleeding cash despite your "offensive" tactics to squeeze every last cent of money from your customers while sucking your franchises dry of fun?

 

[The Great JT]

No, we don't like change made to improve the bottom line and cut costs. Or to put it another way, "we don't like really stupid changes."

 

[Tyranicus]

Oh glob! I dont know what I would do if EA stopped ruining all their games. I couldnt handle it if EA decided to stop destroying every good company it ever acquired!

 

[Strazdas]

I have problem with change in gmaing industry. This is because change in gaming industry is very well represented by this picture:

This is the change i am very uncomfortable with. And if you want to push this change, your going to loose me as a costumer.

Not all change is good, and the trend in gaming right now is nowhere near what i would consider good. Fix that and then maybe we could see how people adapt to change. What we got right now is somone taking you into slavery and then complaining you "just dont like the change".

 

[Magmarock]

All I have to say Peter Moore is this. "EA NEEDS GAMERS, BUT GAMERS DON'T NEED EA."

I hope that puts things into prospective for you. Now hurry up and release Crysis 1 and Warhead on GOG already.

 

[thewatergamer]

Translation: Fuck you guys, we don't give a crap about you, instead of trying to make good games we are just going to try to sucker in as many uninformed games as possible, stop trying to foil our plans

Look I don't have a problem with change, change can be a good thing, what I do have a problem with is being lied to, extorted for money, and being treated as a mindless robot that throws money at a company that has good marketing campaigns

We don't need you EA, why can't you understand that?

If EA were to go out of business tomorrow the majority of gamers wouldn't give a shit, Alot of them would be happy because your franchises would have a chance to be bought by a company that might actually do something with them that doesn't involve exploitative and terrible business practices

 

[Sgt Pepper]

In my experience when someone calls people out for not embracing change it's because those changes aren't very good.

If the changes were good, even if the benefits were not immediately obvious, then Mr Moore wouldn't feel the need to say this.

Case in point: Valve - I don't think anyone, upon buying HL2 back in the day, saw the immediate benefit of Steam. But Valve stuck with their vision, turned Steam into something the many of us now consider a great service. They didn't blame us for not embracing change.

As mentioned elsewhere, we gamers have also embraced things like Kickstarter and Early Access. Whilst these do sometimes have problems of their own, especially the latter, we have at least given those things a chance.

 

[themilo504]

No we don?t like bad change, if my government decided to institute a tax for walking outside, I would complain not because I?m conservative, but because that?s a really stupid tax, ea is the government that taxes walking outside.

Also most new gamers don?t actually want your terrible free to play mechanics, most of them simply don?t know any better, if any of those new gamers ever play a good free to play game, then that customer is never going to touch your free to play games again.

 

[VoidWanderer]

Oh, Peter.

Poor, simple Peter.

We are comfortable with change, we just don't like what you call 'change'.