BigTuk said:
So EA's answer to the dire problem of:
"Our consumers are buying so much stuff that they want that they can't possibly play them all.. we have to do something about this"
Is "we're going to sell you games you want instead of impulse buys you'll never play."
I'm not seeing where this is a bad statement.
"I know, we'll sell less stuff and higher prices on a more restrictive DRM platform. That way they won't want as much stuff and won't buy as much"
Well, no. The prices here are comparable to a Steam sale. And what do you mean by "more restrictive?" People on here indicate you can uninstall Origin once you've downloaded the games. How is that more restrictive than the Steam client?
Seriously. What next. McDonald's cashiers saying. Oh I'm sorry we no longer sell Big Macs. Too many people couldn't finish them.
A more apt comparison would be Burger King coming up with a burger "you'll actually want to finish."
This is EA taking the classic PR strategy of making their weakness *sound* like a strength.
Their weakness is games people actually want? Because that's what they're advertising here.
Granted, Steam has this great setup going: people are more likely to impulse buy, especially with a ticking clock on a sale. They're also less likely to actually use these games because they probably wouldn't have bought them if they weren't an impulse buy.
Hell, Steam runs sales on games that aren't even complete or don't function.
Seriously though is it really a problem if I have games I haven't played...
Was anyone actually saying it is?
Of course, it can be, which I will say. There are people on here who ***** about slogging through their backlogue. And why are they doing that? Because your "joy of acquisition" has now become a "chore of justification." But it doesn't have to be. Still, EA is saying "We're going to offer you big titles you'll actually want to play, rather than leave sitting in your library forever."
I honestly do not get the histrionics that have arisen from such a statement. Are people latching on simply because EA is the antichrist? When one has to make up the reasons to attack an entity, one should reevalute one's position. Unless that one owns Fox News, because that one is making mad cash off it.
I mean you over look that a fundamental part of the consumer experience is just the joy of the purchase.
No need to misrepresent me because you're inferring incorrect information.
So yeah EA has found another solution to the scourge of consumer happiness.
I'm not sure how offering "games you'll actually play" has a negative impact on consumer happiness. Because everything else is at your inference.