[QUOTE=darkrei9n;39447690]Wow the people in this thread makes me sick. Just because you don't like the company you wish they would go out of business? What about the thousands of people employed there who honestly just want to make a great game?[/QUOTE]You think those people are better off under EA? The company that pushes crippling and borderline inhumane work hours, inadequate pay for non-management employees, destroys entire development studios just to cannibalize their IPs into other studios to cut down on employee payments while forcing others to continue working previously stated grueling work hours? In a field where, unless you are a major name in the industry/management, you may not even be kept to the end of the project? Given the success of smaller studios and Indie devs, if they genuinely have a passion for the field, there are plenty of places for them to go and virtually all of them better by no small margin. And with these devs going separate ways and heading to other studios, it means the recipients will be getting a wealth of fresh new talent and creativity.
Would it hurt for everyone in the short-term? Of course. Would it be better for everyone in the long-term? Absolutely.
[QUOTE=markg06;39447664]You mean the Homeworld that still belongs to THQ since they didn't sell it?[/QUOTE]
This makes me sad.
I assume too much.
I'm really excited for the future of the game industry.
Figures like these are showing that huge companies devoted to making huge AAA video games aren't going to stay profitable. I mean, Activision's being sold off, THQ just went bust, sales figures are trawling. The entire industry is slowly being dominated by smaller, independent companies who make games for the sake of art or for entertainment rather than for money and that shows in their quality. Just look at how well Minecraft is doing, for example.
It'll be interesting to see what the next generation of consoles do about this as well. If they adopted digital distribution games stores similar to those on smart phones and tablets where anyone with a license can upload their game, it'll do wonderful things to the variety of content we get.
[QUOTE=CrumbleShake;39447996]I'm really excited for the future of the game industry.
Figures like these are showing that huge companies devoted to making huge AAA video games aren't going to stay profitable. I mean, Activision's being sold off, THQ just went bust, sales figures are trawling. The entire industry is slowly being dominated by smaller, independent companies who make games for the sake of art or for entertainment rather than for money and that shows in their quality. Just look at how well Minecraft is doing, for example.
It'll be interesting to see what the next generation of consoles do about this as well. If they adopted digital distribution games stores similar to those on smart phones and tablets where anyone with a license can upload their game, it'll do wonderful things to the variety of content we get.[/QUOTE]
AAA video game companeis fail because they cant grasp the concept of creating market stability or customer gratitude, Let alone the top of command being completely clueless about the medium.
For the millionth time, look at valve. They spend as much of their time reaching out to the community as they do making games, (if not more....) They comb the community for talented individuals, give us tools to proove ourselves AS talented individials. And through their pure understanding of the functions of the medium, they keep reinventing the way it works.
for not to mention, their complete and utter dedication to making the value best for the consumer, not nescessarily themselves.
[QUOTE=Pvt. Martin;39447699]It's kinda funny in recent times.
Back in the 90s, you had Call of Duty riding on the success of WWII Shooters, Battlefield wouldn't introduce the fun of vehicle combat for a few years, and meanwhile Medal of Honor was one of the best! Combining great action, with great music and levels, to create a wonderful experiance.
Nowadays, Call of Duty is doing continuing storylines, Battlefield is still riding hard on vehicle combat[/QUOTE]
None of those series had games in the 90's (sans Medal of Honor). Medal of Honor first came out in 1999, then in 2002 you had 22 members of the team that created Allied Assault split off and create Infinity Ward to put out the first Call of Duty in 2003 with the goal of recreating the Medal of Honor experience (heavily scripted) while introducing much larger battles and introducing more perspectives. Also, Battlefield focused on a combination of vehicle and troop combat from the very beginning.
Medal of Honor died when they tried to jump on the Call of Duty bandwagon and go into the modern warfare scene. Before then, the Medal of Honor and Call of Duty games appealed to similar gamers in some ways, yet mostly different tastes in World War 2 shooters. Medal of Honor was designed from the start to be more like Saving Private Ryan (most of the early games were written by Steven Spielberg, even) with personalized stories and the lone gunman facing insurmountable odds. Call of Duty traded in that in order to show the amazing scope (within limits) of World War 2 battles. You could enjoy both, and play Call of Duty and Medal of Honor without feeling like one made the other redundant.
The sad part is that they actually had some good things going for them. Medal of Honor Heroes was heralded as a great leap forward in handheld first person shooters, and they should have continued it on the PS Vita. The Wii games were pretty shit, but they wasted a lot of effort in creating that brand new AI system for Airborne only to get rid of it after one game.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;39447786]To be fair, they also did this
[video=youtube;hOB4q01VCVg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOB4q01VCVg[/video][/QUOTE]
EA published some of the best games of my youth. Battlefield 1942 and Battlefield 2, a number of Medal Honour games (especially the Allied Assault series) and Red Alert 2 are just a few.
But then it went through some horrible mutation that turned it evil or something.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;39447786]To be fair, they also did this
[video=youtube;hOB4q01VCVg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOB4q01VCVg[/video][/QUOTE]
[video=youtube;vg0Tmydj29M]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vg0Tmydj29M[/video]
I like this one better.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;39447885]You think those people are better off under EA? The company that pushes crippling and borderline inhumane work hours, inadequate pay for non-management employees, destroys entire development studios just to cannibalize their IPs into other studios to cut down on employee payments while forcing others to continue working previously stated grueling work hours? In a field where, unless you are a major name in the industry/management, you may not even be kept to the end of the project? Given the success of smaller studios and Indie devs, if they genuinely have a passion for the field, there are plenty of places for them to go and virtually all of them better by no small margin. And with these devs going separate ways and heading to other studios, it means the recipients will be getting a wealth of fresh new talent and creativity.
Would it hurt for everyone in the short-term? Of course. Would it be better for everyone in the long-term? Absolutely.[/QUOTE]
EA doesn't fuck over their employees more than any other large publisher does.
[editline]2nd February 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Sprockethead;39448040]AAA video game companeis fail because they cant grasp the concept of creating market stability or customer gratitude, Let alone the top of command being completely clueless about the medium.
For the millionth time, look at valve. They spend as much of their time reaching out to the community as they do making games, (if not more....) They comb the community for talented individuals, give us tools to proove ourselves AS talented individials. And through their pure understanding of the functions of the medium, they keep reinventing the way it works.
for not to mention, their complete and utter dedication to making the value best for the consumer, not nescessarily themselves.[/QUOTE]
Triple AAA video game companies fail because more and more is expected of their games while still staying remaining the same price, and with the same development cycle.
Valve are a special case, they should never be brought up in these discussions because they are more retail store than an actual game company. Their development costs are covered by selling other people's games, without having to worry about physical distribution.
From what I hear, working at DICE is quite nice.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;39447739]I'm actually experiencing a Battlefield 3 resurgence after trying out some gamemodes I neglected to do before. Dunno if that would get you more interested in the game though.
Excited for BF4 personally, then again I'm a bit of a Battlefield fanboy :v:[/QUOTE]
I've pretty much tried all the gamemodes on offer and the ones that could still be interesting (Tank Superiority especially) are ruined by the awful players
I mean fucking seriously, it's "Tank" Superiority, not fucking "Recon with SOFLAMs and Sniper Rifles feat. Engineers with Javelins" Superiority.
[QUOTE=darkrei9n;39447690]Wow the people in this thread makes me sick. Just because you don't like the company you wish they would go out of business? What about the thousands of people employed there who honestly just want to make a great game?[/QUOTE]
Boohoo too fucking bad. Its a shit company, just because it employs people doesn't mean I won't want it dead. Yeah people will lose jobs, people lost jobs when the Third Reich went down too (hyperbole, before someone says I'm comparing Hitler to EA).
[QUOTE=Best4bond;39447561]The devs at EA owned dev companies are great, its sad that they have to be imprisoned in that horrible place.[/QUOTE]
[IMG]https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/644411_528379457183676_1086191926_n.jpg[/IMG]
I remember the months ramping up to Warfighter's release, Danger Close we're posting numerous pictures of what it was like working there, the fact that they use ammo boxes as foot rests and the sort, they were generally people who wanted to make a good game (which in my mind they did but as we all know it was awfully received.) After the game came out and the reviews came in we haven't even heard a word come out of their mouths which worries me a bit as they are really a bunch of good people. I don't believe working at EA is NEARLY as bad as people make it out to be as people just use stories they hear from various sites, which as well all know people will start controversy when there is none to be had over a company they dislike despite with very little evidence suggesting they even work there though closing dev studios isn't something I endorse in the slightest.
Fuck yeah; crash and burn you sons of bitches!
Sure it's only a "small" loss, but I dearly hope it snowballs as dumbshit investors pull out and end up reducing the publisher's value by exponential amounts.
[QUOTE=ironman17;39448905]Fuck yeah; crash and burn you sons of bitches!
Sure it's only a "small" loss, but I dearly hope it snowballs as dumbshit investors pull out and end up reducing the publisher's value by exponential amounts.[/QUOTE]
I now wish that EA had invested in more free-to-play IPs. Then people would interpret this loss as a result of them making free-to-play games, and everyone would stop making them.
I love how people in this thread treat EA like they make the games first hand
I like how nobody in the first page of the thread knows what the article was talking about nor bothered to read it. They were celebrating EA's improvements apparently.
Before they completely tank it, release Mirrors Edge 2, and promptly die in a fire straight after so you can't fuck it over with DLC.
omg the reason for the loss is obviously piracy on the pc, lets stop making pc games now and only cawadoody on xbox
[QUOTE=VeniVidiVici74;39447515]I have a love-hate relationship with EA. I really like some of their games, but I hate their business strategies. I don't want them to fail, but them losing money isn't going to stop them from being cuntbags.[/QUOTE]
I used to say the same thing, but they've run all their series' that I like into the ground so I just don't care anymore what they do because I don't even enjoy their games anymore.
[QUOTE=icemaz;39447712]Call of Duty came out in 2003 while Battlefield 1942 came out in 2002. Medal of Honour didn't really get good until Allied Assault again in 2002.
Medal of Honour kinda deserved to die in the 00's, they milked it to shit.[/QUOTE]
Never played the original MoH, but MoH: Underground was absolutely amazing for the time. I had it on the Playstation, and played it so many times. Hell, I've got the first mission memorised, despite not playing it for 12 years. Manon was also a pretty good character, especially for the time.
[QUOTE=Lizzrd;39447535]Nah it was average if not better than most america fuck yeah military shooters.[/QUOTE]
I felt like the black ops 2 campaign was actually innovative over warfighter.
that's just sad
I didn't buy warfighter because it looked like trash in the trailers.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;39447885]Would it hurt for everyone in the short-term? Of course. Would it be better for everyone in the long-term? Absolutely.[/QUOTE]
I'm not so sure about that.
"Thanks for coming in for this interview."
"No problem, I'm really exited to be working with you guys."
"So, what was the most recent project you worked on?"
"Well, I uh, I was one of the lead designers of the latest Medal of Honor wait where are you going"
yeah I'm gonna rate this WINNER
so happy that EA has lost money so the shareholders freak the fuck out and deny any possible request for a game that actually innovates in some way
nope, I'm sure looking forward to call of rehash: modern reuse of assets 4!
[QUOTE=latin_geek;39449658]yeah I'm gonna rate this WINNER
so happy that EA has lost money so the shareholders freak the fuck out and deny any possible request for a game that actually innovates in some way
nope, I'm sure looking forward to call of rehash: modern reuse of assets 4![/QUOTE]
You really think that if they made a profit they would release a bunch of innovative and fantastic games? Hell no they would keep doing what they were doing and release more generic shit to keep that profit up.
[QUOTE=Rankxerox;39447657]Activision can make good games, if you dont count in COD :v:[/QUOTE]
COD was good. Why am I like the only one in SH who liked the games? (Except MW3, which was really bad.)
[QUOTE=latin_geek;39449658]yeah I'm gonna rate this WINNER
so happy that EA has lost money so the shareholders freak the fuck out and deny any possible request for a game that actually innovates in some way
nope, I'm sure looking forward to call of rehash: modern reuse of assets 4![/QUOTE]
If we are luckily, EA might finally start to see that current business practices aren't working and that they need to produce something new and innovative - so don't get all snarky just yet.
(This post has been rated 'O' for 'Optimistic')
Maybe if they endorsed the making of better games, stopped pushing these idiotic Free To Play and DLC policies of theirs, were a bit more mature with the publishing of their games (aka stop making origin exclusives on PC) and were a bit more generous with sales on Origin, they would be able to manage it out of this mess.
But for now all I can see for them is a deep dive down the sea of shit until they touch rock bottom and go bankrupt for being such shitlords.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.