So IGN decided to ask "why do people hate EA"

[Meight08]

I'm just going to say a few names:

Bullfrog
Pandemic
Westwood
......
Bioware

That is all.

Pandemnic: failed every project given to them in the last few years,ea needed budget cuts fast,Axed useless studio.

Westwood: They decided to create an expensive mmo that bombed ,work on another one at the same time,Make a sequel to a useless spinoff,They absorbed most of their staff into their main studio.

 

[Grimh]

Mmmm, IGN's gonna roll around in that juicy nerd-rage monay come tomorrow.

 

[PinkiePyro]

I hate them due to bad customer service, bad handling of several franchises, Bad DRM, and the worlds most idiotic PR and marketing departments

I would actually forgive them if they admitted that the whole broaden dead space appeal thing was/is stupid and are not going though with it
fired who ever came up with that moronic moms hate dead space 2
and are re-releasing the old maxis games on steam

 

[80Maxwell08]

people always mention c&c when it comes to westwood being killed, but a bit of history. at one time westwood were the bioware of their day. EA made sure they only made RTS games before finally killing them off.

and now bioware are being moved into the rts market. i cant help but wonder if history will repeat..

Bioware isn't being moved there EA took another studio originally called Victory Games and renamed them Bioware Victory. Also if I'm remembering this right the same people making the new C&C game also made C&C4. Though oddly enough the same guy who led that team also made New World Computing which made the Might and Magic series along with the Heroes of Might and Magic series. Didn't expect that.

 

[Apollo45]

I think the 'if you don't like it, don't buy it' ideal stills holds up in the above scenario because, as I've pointed out several times, all of the games mentioned in the example are sequels; if you like the series then you already have a previous installment in your collection.

That argument never holds up with media, because by its nature you have to buy it before you know if you'll like it. Which along with a few other factors makes it damn-near worthless as a control system.

Exactly, and games are the only product that function like this. Things like food processors, toasters, televisions, hell, even computers you can take back to the story if you find them broken or not to your expectations. Games? No such luck. And cars you get to test drive and read reviews on products which are fundamentally the same for every person who buys them. Games? You might get a demo, maybe, if you're lucky. And if you're even more lucky, that might actually tell you what the gameplay is like. More often, however, you end up with a demo that puts forth a small portion of the game that is decent while the rest of it is completely different, or you don't get any sort of demo at all.

You might relate it to movies, but with movies everyone has the same experience, sees the same movie, and rarely for more than $10. Games cost $60 at minimum, more with DLC and everything, and reviews (as has been proven over and over again) are often horribly inaccurate and gloss over at times ridiculous flaws in the game that should be addressed. There's no way to reliably figure out if you're going to like a game without buying it, and if you buy it you need to spend the money without having any way of getting that money back if the game isn't what you thought you were buying.

It's an exploitative business model that, sadly, doesn't really have any way to fix it unless businesses decide to accept returns on already played games.

 

[Nikolaz72]

IGN loves it's corporations. Escapist loves anything "indie".

I didn't say the escapist is better, but they don't write stupid ass articles. Like that douche bag who went on about how fans had the right to complain about the changes made to Cole in Infamous 2, but then turned around and called those same people entitled whiners with the whole ME3 debacle.

It may seem silly, but you could generate IGN articles with this and probably not notice the difference.

I just want to inform you that link has brought me plenty of entertainment. Here's a couple of highlights.

What Halo could learn from Call of Duty
How miniguns could increase DmC's popularity.

To be honest when I read the first one of those I immediately googled it to see if it actually existed because I could totally see that as a real article. Sadly (in humor terms only) it doesn't.

I got 'Farmville meets Assassin's Creed in the new Devil May Cry sequel'. That is the best thing ever.

I feel like I'm encouraging being off topic here but some of these are just too good.

What Professor Layton could learn from Dora the Explorer.
Should Beyond Good & Evil be a breeding simulator? (oh dear god the fan fiction)
Crackdown meets Sim City in the new Duck Tales sequel. (duck tails aside that sounds kickass)
Should Skyrim be more cinematic? (I swear I can see articles like this actually happening)
Should Minecraft be a browser game? (definitely can see this as being a real article. especially since it can be played in browser)
GDC: The screen resolutions in Ratchet & Clank gave me herpes. (A lesson to Jessica Chobot to stop licking sony handhelds)

Ok I'm stopping now.

Rapelay and Proffesor Layton meets in the new CSI sequel. (Should have been Ace Attorney, youknow. Keep em all Japaneese)
Should IGN be an MMORPG?
Top Ten Nicest Transexual Vampires in Modern Videogames.

Yep, could definetely be real articles this stuff.

 

[digipinky75910]

I understood that EA was supporting SOPA and the like - Is that still true, or ever true? (It's possible I got my letters wrong)

 

[-Samurai-]

I really like how gaming isn't about games anymore, but about the companies that produce them and make them a possibility.

Fuck the company that makes my bread. They laid off 4 employees and are therefore an evil company that doesn't deserve to sell me bread.

 

[kingthrall]

EA sucks because of Origin, I dont even care about their products or how great/terrible they are but if I have software scanning my pc without my consent then they can go to hell.

 

[lacktheknack]

Of course I understand that thanks to those unaffiliated people we get increased budgets.

Springboarding off of this, I've heard that a frankly jaw-dropping amount of said budgets are spent on marketing, which spits out things like "Your Mom Hates Dead Space" and "Sin to Win Dante's Inferno". Another reason to hate EA.

 

[lacktheknack]

I really like how gaming isn't about games anymore, but about the companies that produce them and make them a possibility.

Fuck the company that makes my bread. They laid off 4 employees and are therefore an evil company that doesn't deserve to sell me bread.

Yep. However, it's less "my bread company laid off employees" and more like "my bread company sold me bread that was moldy and won't refund me for it".

If I have a choice between sending money to EA via Origin, Valve via Steam or CD Projekt via gog.com, CD Projekt wins every time because they offer the game with the fewest strings attached (more specifically, NONE). If I hadn't paid attention to which company did what, I'd never have found this out.

 

[lacktheknack]

It may seem silly, but you could generate IGN articles with this and probably not notice the difference.

I just want to inform you that link has brought me plenty of entertainment. Here's a couple of highlights.

What Halo could learn from Call of Duty
How miniguns could increase DmC's popularity.

To be honest when I read the first one of those I immediately googled it to see if it actually existed because I could totally see that as a real article. Sadly (in humor terms only) it doesn't.

I got 'Farmville meets Assassin's Creed in the new Devil May Cry sequel'. That is the best thing ever.

'Tomb Raider Meets Little Big Planet in the New Diablo Sequel'
'Top Ten Out of Nowhere Zombies In Videogames'
'Should Battlefield Be More Streamlined?'
'Top Ten Shortest Creepers in Videogames'

...

'Top Ten Shortest Creepers in Videogames'

...

'Top Ten... Shortest... Creepers... in Videogames...'

<img width=350>http://cdn.planetminecraft.com/files/resource_media/screenshot/1218/Many-Baby-Creepers_2180510.jpg

Best. Article. Ever. Escapist, get on it!

 

[Atmos Duality]

Rarely, the one big defense I see when people bring up Pandemic, Westwood, Bullfrog, etc is that "With or without EA buying them out, those companies would have destroyed themselves."

Which I find some small truth in; the last games the original developers worked on (and not just those who inherited the name when the founders left) would not have happened without EA funding them. And I remember seeing Westwood reel from two years of poor sales just prior to their acquisition by EA.

...But then I look at games like C&C:Generals, Ultima 8 and 9, and (more recently) Dragon Age 2; I can see the obvious marks of corporate meddling.
None of those games were given a realistic chance to succeed. You can't even try to stretch the truth to blame the developers there; they were given horribly short deadlines to meet for no good reason.

EA had to know that. They had to know that they would fail to meet expectations. And there is a real reason that the whole EA Spouse debacle ended in EA being sued by their employees.

And that's where I draw the line; there's a difference between a company who backs the wrong horse, and one who just shoots the horse after buying it because they don't like it and they don't want anyone else to have it either.

people always mention c&c when it comes to westwood being killed, but a bit of history. at one time westwood were the bioware of their day. EA made sure they only made RTS games before finally killing them off.

If I recall correctly, the last game the actual core Westwood team worked on was their one and only FPS, C&C Renegade. They left the company after that, and EA filled in the roster with new hires; the same people who went on to make Red Alert 2 (which was based on the aging Tiberian Sun game engine, which itself was an upgrade of the Red Alert 1 Engine) and then C&C Generals (which was...bland and poorly coded).

EA bought Westwood up after the old Click-Adventure Genre dried up on them; this being significant because the game that brought Westwood low enough to be snatched up by EA was their Blade Runner game (which is actually quite excellent, and one of the few examples of good branching narrative structure in a game. But it was HELLA expensive to produce).

It wasn't a case of Westwood making a bad game; it was just a case of them making a very good game for a very dead market.

 

[Launcelot111]

"IGN isn't Lassie. It's also not Cujo." ...oh, you're done arguing, IGN? That was some persuasive stuff right there

 

[-Samurai-]

I really like how gaming isn't about games anymore, but about the companies that produce them and make them a possibility.

Fuck the company that makes my bread. They laid off 4 employees and are therefore an evil company that doesn't deserve to sell me bread.

Yep. However, it's less "my bread company laid off employees" and more like "my bread company sold me bread that was moldy and won't refund me for it".

If I have a choice between sending money to EA via Origin, Valve via Steam or CD Projekt via gog.com, CD Projekt wins every time because they offer the game with the fewest strings attached (more specifically, NONE). If I hadn't paid attention to which company did what, I'd never have found this out.

Bread analogy aside, there is no excuse for not knowing what you're buying. Especially these days. There are always screenshots, gameplay videos, shitty "lets play" videos, and millions upon millions of reviews for every product under the sun. People would rather blame their poor purchase on the creator of the product than their poor researching skills.

And everyone knows that day one purchases are a gamble, so there's no excuse there, either. Patience pays off.

The entire gaming community is pathetic. People are constantly bitching about business practices as if they have no choice but to hear about it and talk about it. They're bitching about series' being killed off as if they have some stake in them. They ***** about changes being made to games and act like they're being forced to buy and play it, despite not wanting to. They're bitching about companies, in stead of looking at their product.

When the company belongs to you(not you, specifically, lacktheknack), the titles belong to you, the money belongs to you, and the time it takes to make them belongs to you, you can ***** about changes, practices, and prices until your jaw falls off. Until then, you can either buy it, or skip it. Either way, shut the fuck up about the developer/publisher, and the things you feel entitled to, and move on to the next title.

We are consumers, not share holders. And we are on a gaming site, not a business site. Talk about the fucking games.

 

[lacktheknack]

I really like how gaming isn't about games anymore, but about the companies that produce them and make them a possibility.

Fuck the company that makes my bread. They laid off 4 employees and are therefore an evil company that doesn't deserve to sell me bread.

Yep. However, it's less "my bread company laid off employees" and more like "my bread company sold me bread that was moldy and won't refund me for it".

If I have a choice between sending money to EA via Origin, Valve via Steam or CD Projekt via gog.com, CD Projekt wins every time because they offer the game with the fewest strings attached (more specifically, NONE). If I hadn't paid attention to which company did what, I'd never have found this out.

Bread analogy aside, there is no excuse for not knowing what you're buying. Especially these days. There are always screenshots, gameplay videos, shitty "lets play" videos, and millions upon millions of reviews for every product under the sun. People would rather blame their poor purchase on the creator of the product than their poor researching skills.

And everyone knows that day one purchases are a gamble, so there's no excuse there, either. Patience pays off.

The entire gaming community is pathetic. People are constantly bitching about business practices as if they have no choice but to hear about it and talk about it. They're bitching about series' being killed off as if they have some stake in them. They ***** about changes being made to games and act like they're being forced to buy and play it, despite not wanting to. They're bitching about companies, in stead of looking at their product.

When the company belongs to you(not you, specifically, lacktheknack), the titles belong to you, the money belongs to you, and the time it takes to make them belongs to you, you can ***** about changes, practices, and prices until your jaw falls off. Until then, you can either buy it, or skip it. Either way, shut the fuck up about the developer/publisher, and the things you feel entitled to, and move on to the next title.

We are consumers, not share holders. And we are on a gaming site, not a business site. Talk about the fucking games.

I'm one of the biggest advocates of "figure out what you're buying first". You're preaching to the choir there. I just did badly with the bread analogy, sorry. D:

Anyways, I don't complain a whole lot about the companies, I just keep on top of which ones do things I don't like. And you're right, I AM the consumer. However, I'm not a blind consumer. I actually give a rip about where my products come from, what it took to make them, and the strings attached to them. Free range eggs exist entirely to appeal to consumers who want ethical animal treatment, even though it has little to do with the eggs themselves (whether or not free range chickens are actually free is a different thread). What I think of the people selling me the game is a perfectly valid thing to consider.

As I said, I love gog.com. I like Steam. I dislike Origin. I make this opinion based on the companies running them and the attached requirements. THIS IS VALID. It's worth discussing. People who purchase games they didn't look up are silly, yes, but I don't. I've never bought a game I didn't like. It doesn't stop me from giving care about the other factors surrounding the game, often connected directly to the developer or publisher.

And I refuse to talk about the merits of Diablo 3, newer Assassin's Creeds, etc, because there's an entry barrier I can't surmount on them. Thus, I'm trapped outside of the game, and the only input I have is on the entry barrier.

"What do you think about Assassin's Creed: 's new features?"

"Sorry, I have no idea because my internet is too unstable to even consider buying a game with such restrictive DRM."

See the problem?

 

[-Samurai-]

Snipt

I'm one of the biggest advocates of "figure out what you're buying first". You're preaching to the choir there. I just did badly with the bread analogy, sorry. D:

Anyways, I don't complain a whole lot about the companies, I just keep on top of which ones do things I don't like. And you're right, I AM the consumer. However, I'm not a blind consumer. I actually give a rip about where my products come from, what it took to make them, and the strings attached to them. Free range eggs exist entirely to appeal to consumers who want ethical animal treatment, even though it has little to do with the eggs themselves (whether or not free range chickens are actually free is a different thread). What I think of the people selling me the game is a perfectly valid thing to consider.

As I said, I love gog.com. I like Steam. I dislike Origin. I make this opinion based on the companies running them and the attached requirements. THIS IS VALID. It's worth discussing. People who purchase games they didn't look up are silly, yes, but I don't. I've never bought a game I didn't like. It doesn't stop me from giving care about the other factors surrounding the game, often connected directly to the developer or publisher.

And I refuse to talk about the merits of Diablo 3, newer Assassin's Creeds, etc, because there's an entry barrier I can't surmount on them. Thus, I'm trapped outside of the game, and the only input I have is on the entry barrier.

"What do you think about Assassin's Creed: 's new features?"

"Sorry, I have no idea because my internet is too unstable to even consider buying a game with such restrictive DRM."

See the problem?

I'm gonna start out by saying that when I said "you", I didn't mean "you" personally, but I think you got that.

I'm going to try to simplify my thoughts on this, but I'm afraid I might not be able to do so properly.

People are forgetting that gaming is about the games. It's about the enjoyment you get when you play them. It isn't about business practices. They have absolutely no effect on your enjoyment.

For example; I like Call of Duty. Always have. Now, let's say Activision donates $100,000,000 to a charity. Does that make me like Call of Duty more(or less)? What if Activision spent $100,000,000 on euthanizing dogs in shelters instead? Would that make me like Call of Duty less(or more)?

No.

My concern is with the game, not the company. I don't care if they buy everyone in the world a muffin, or if they curb stomp stray cats for fun. It has no effect on my opinion of the game, and if you dislike a product/service just because you dislike the company that made it, you're a moron. And that's the nicest way I can put it. You can dislike the product because of its quality all you want, but we both know that isn't what happens around here. Anything attached to EA is quickly dismissed for no reason other than being attached to EA.

Take a quick look at the gaming section of the forums and tell me if it looks like a gaming section, or a "***** and complain about developers/publishers" section.

 

[CarlMin]

I love how people in this thread are instantly attacking the IGN article, while simultaneously proving it's point. And the fact that some people would vote EA as worst company in America really proves just how completely out of touch with the reality some individuals in our gaming community has become.

In one way, I'm ready to applaud IGN and Campbell for at least daring to post an article about EA which distinguishes itself from, and even questions, the irrational, mainstream sentient against the company, when it would be so much easier for them just to echo the exact opinions their obdurate target audience wants to hear, just like most other gaming websites.

A daring move that will, ironically, generate exactly the kind of impulsive hatred that the article condemns.