NeonSpyder"Das est NTLDR?"Join Date: 2003-07-03Member: 17913Members
<!--QuoteBegin-BulletHead+Jun 1 2005, 08:59 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (BulletHead @ Jun 1 2005, 08:59 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Valve has EA's talent in a single cell of it's body
And that's being generous to EA <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> that was an extremely confusing sentance, surely you could have said something like...
"Gabe Newall has more talent in his little pinky then EA has in it's entire flailing membrenous core of evil."
QuaunautThe longest seven days in history...Join Date: 2003-03-21Member: 14759Members, Constellation, Reinforced - Shadow
<!--QuoteBegin-The Necroscope+Jun 1 2005, 04:51 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (The Necroscope @ Jun 1 2005, 04:51 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Don't even get me started on the EA "Big" titles such as the 100% average SSX. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Play SSX 3, then talk. Its the best Action Sports game I've played in my entire life, thanks, and has damn good music to boot.
NeonSpyder"Das est NTLDR?"Join Date: 2003-07-03Member: 17913Members
I rather loved SSX Tricky, i havn't played SS3 though i imagine it would be rather enjoyable as well, though i absolutely believe that it would be SSX Tricky with "moderate" improvements such as the addition of 3 outfits and a new track, and a pickle.
I don't give a **** about how many "bad" games a publisher puts out. I only care about the good. Battlefield 2, mmmmm 3 weeks away.
Stop hopping on the EA R EVIL bandwagon.
Regarding the sports games: Have you ever heard "If it ain't broke, don't fix it"? The Madden games consistently outsold, and reviewed better than the competitors. Of course they're going to make more. And practically every sports game title has yearly editions, not just EA's.
QuaunautThe longest seven days in history...Join Date: 2003-03-21Member: 14759Members, Constellation, Reinforced - Shadow
<!--QuoteBegin-baconflaps+Jun 1 2005, 07:24 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (baconflaps @ Jun 1 2005, 07:24 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I don't give a **** about how many "bad" games a publisher puts out. I only care about the good. Battlefield 2, mmmmm 3 weeks away.
Stop hopping on the EA R EVIL bandwagon.
Regarding the sports games: Have you ever heard "If it ain't broke, don't fix it"? The Madden games consistently outsold, and reviewed better than the competitors. Of course they're going to make more. And practically every sports game title has yearly editions, not just EA's.
Shut up. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Sorry, nope. With Sega ESPN Football '05, it on average had a perfect/near-perfect score compared to Madden's great/near-perfect scores.
And its better anyway. Maddens controls feel like the developers have never actually ran in their lives. You're gonna tell me that a reciever that spends well over 100 hours a week in training can't outjuke a huge linebacker? Right.
<!--QuoteBegin-BulletHead+Jun 2 2005, 01:59 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (BulletHead @ Jun 2 2005, 01:59 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Valve has EA's talent in a single cell of it's body
And that's being generous to EA <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> And that's being insulting to all EA's talented workers who are just doing their jobs and have no creative input as to what the game they're crunching this week is.
Sure, year after year cranking out a shinier version of a sports franchise is dull, but hey, that's gone on year after year, that's not a recent thing and it's most certainly not an exclusive thing. Other companies do it now, other companies did it then. Live with it.
The games industry, whilst still pretty removed from the likes of the music or film industry, is growing more and more with each new year, heaven forbid making your company profitable!
The music industry has existed for decades, and are there still independant musicians and publishers? Yes.
The film industry has existed for decades, and are there still independant films? Yes.
The games industry is still pretty much in it's infancy compared to the aformentioned entertainment giants, you really can't expect big companies to simply not exist or turn down a profit, can you. That's just being niave.
EDIT: And on the Valve issue, i really wish people would stop brown-nosing them quite so much. Valve made a total fluke with Half-Life, it turned out very successful and very popular, which isn't too common with new, independant developers, and followed it up with a game that would've sold millions <i>even if it sucked</i>. So that's a grand total of 2 games they've put out, and the second one they did, in a number of areas, a pretty sloppy job with. Now compare that to EA who have some extremely talented coders, artists, mappers, etc. Just because they're a profitable company, that gives you the right to insult what are some very talented people working under their banner? I thought not.
QuaunautThe longest seven days in history...Join Date: 2003-03-21Member: 14759Members, Constellation, Reinforced - Shadow
<!--QuoteBegin-esuna+Jun 1 2005, 07:34 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (esuna @ Jun 1 2005, 07:34 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-BulletHead+Jun 2 2005, 01:59 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (BulletHead @ Jun 2 2005, 01:59 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Valve has EA's talent in a single cell of it's body
And that's being generous to EA <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> And that's being insulting to all EA's talented workers who are just doing their jobs and have no creative input as to what the game they're crunching this week is.
Sure, year after year cranking out a shinier version of a sports franchise is dull, but hey, that's gone on year after year, that's not a recent thing and it's most certainly not an exclusive thing. Other companies do it now, other companies did it then. Live with it.
The games industry, whilst still pretty removed from the likes of the music or film industry, is growing more and more with each new year, heaven forbid making your company profitable!
The music industry has existed for decades, and are there still independant musicians and publishers? Yes.
The film industry has existed for decades, and are there still independant films? Yes.
The games industry is still pretty much in it's infancy compared to the aformentioned entertainment giants, you really can't expect big companies to simply not exist or turn down a profit, can you. That's just being niave. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Well said. And for a little perspective: Games seem to be going much the route of music.
Music started out a personal thing in the early 1900s. All independent, litterally no companies.
Once it began becoming a large force in the entertainment industry, large companies started up. They reigned for a long time, and were in it mostly for the money.
But Indie kept growing and finding its way up, encouraging most of the money to go to the artist, not the Record Company.
Now its exactly that: Artists get payed quite a bit, and Record Companies get payed their share(mostly), and Indie still is a very viable industry within the Music Industry.
Were on "But Indie kept growing..." with the modding community becoming such a large force in gaming.
<!--QuoteBegin-Lofung+Jun 2 2005, 02:52 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Lofung @ Jun 2 2005, 02:52 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> i like THEIR idea, but not the way they draw money from your pockets. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Then don't buy their games. Simple.
Well as far as I see it I can get why some ppl hate EA.
I do like C&C Generals minus the patches. But I just got C&C generals cos of the Mechwarrior Mod. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Also with these sports games, each year the graphics doesnt seem to change THAT drasticlly. Can't EA just put out a major patch. Though of course they won't make money out of that.
What ever happend to Microsoft Gaming? Thought that was getting big at one point.
Microsoft is almost just as bad, they bought out rare, which was extremly flipping stupid. Rare made awesome games, like goldeneye and perfect dark. We wont see perfect dark 2 because of them, gg m$ :/
ONLY thing I didnt like about rare was that their titles were nintendo-only, no pc versions for the awesome games like stated above <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-stormliong+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (stormliong)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> What ever happend to Microsoft Gaming? Thought that was getting big at one point. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
QuaunautThe longest seven days in history...Join Date: 2003-03-21Member: 14759Members, Constellation, Reinforced - Shadow
<!--QuoteBegin-Drfuzzy+Jun 1 2005, 09:15 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Drfuzzy @ Jun 1 2005, 09:15 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Microsoft is almost just as bad, they bought out rare, which was extremly flipping stupid. Rare made awesome games, like goldeneye and perfect dark. We wont see perfect dark 2 because of them, gg m$ :/
ONLY thing I didnt like about rare was that their titles were nintendo-only, no pc versions for the awesome games like stated above <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Rare has been a overrated developer since the day they were borne into existence. None of their games have been above average, and everyone overlooks their downright bad games.
<!--QuoteBegin-Ho Chi Mizzle+Jun 2 2005, 01:29 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Ho Chi Mizzle @ Jun 2 2005, 01:29 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> lol, this is silly
EA takes over other companies inorder to make MORE MONEY (which happens to grease the wheels of commerce)
Once taken over, EA can do whatever the hell they want with em. They own them now. Full stop. Why have a bunch of sub companies make a bunch of small scale games, when you can have everyone work together to make a product that will sell and turn a large profit.
Profit, isnt that waht all big companies are about? Its not the quality of the games. Only small developers can really focus on a certian core fanbase and turn out "specialized" games. take a look around. only indie developers can develop specialized games like that. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Nope, companies dont need BIG profits, the mearly need profit to survive, to pay shareholders, do shreholders care about games? most likely not much. Look at Interplay, the sharehodlers wanted cash so they churned out crap average games that KILLED at least 3 series.
There is no good reason why games companies cant be not for profit organisations, ie where ALL the money goes back into making games and staff wages.
Another thought, why can't big game companies occasionally risk their OMGHOOJLOL profit margins and give back to the community that spawned it? It's not like they have to put money on an innovative/non formulaic game every single time, but with all the money they make from the formulaic games, why oh why can't they at least put money on games that break boundaries/demographics? Lucas Arts, I'm looking at you. I still cannot forgive you for killing Sam & Max 2. But really, the mega studios can stand to do this. TAKE SOME RISKS AND START GIVING BACK TO US!
<!--QuoteBegin-ZeroByte+Jun 2 2005, 12:09 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (ZeroByte @ Jun 2 2005, 12:09 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Another thought, why can't big game companies occasionally risk their OMGHOOJLOL profit margins and give back to the community that spawned it? It's not like they have to put money on an innovative/non formulaic game every single time, but with all the money they make from the formulaic games, why oh why can't they at least put money on games that break boundaries/demographics? Lucas Arts, I'm looking at you. I still cannot forgive you for killing Sam & Max 2. But really, the mega studios can stand to do this. TAKE SOME RISKS AND START GIVING BACK TO US! <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Because games costs are going up. No one wants to risk a high cost venture if its unlikely the game will sell.
The market is skewed at the moment so any "innovotive" games get pounded to the floor while people rush to buy the same thing.
Games that break genres DON'T SELL AS WELL AS THE SAME STUFF EVERYONE IS USED TO
Take something like Republic. That bombed. But it was something no-one had done before.
i bought all the battlefield games, and i own all the C&C games. What I don't like about EA is their hostility toward other devolpers...like Ubisoft. Ubisoft scored big with splintercell now EA wants to cash in on it. Its one thing to absorb a company that is struggling its another to take one over. What they are doing to ubisoft is close to crossing the line of illegal. I'll buy Battlefield 2 becuase it looks to be really fun. And its not as simple to just "leave" EA becuase that means your unemployed..and starting a new company does not mean your going to turn a profit. I don"t hate the devs at EA, I hate the people responsible for deciding how much support to give a game and its community. the people who decide to release 500000 expansion packs for a game. the people who try to absorb every gaming company out there. etc
KungFuSquirrelBasher of MuttonsJoin Date: 2002-01-26Member: 103Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor
<!--QuoteBegin-Drfuzzy+Jun 1 2005, 11:15 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Drfuzzy @ Jun 1 2005, 11:15 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Microsoft is almost just as bad, they bought out rare, which was extremly flipping stupid. Rare made awesome games, like goldeneye and perfect dark. We wont see perfect dark 2 because of them, gg m$ :/
ONLY thing I didnt like about rare was that their titles were nintendo-only, no pc versions for the awesome games like stated above <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--><!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Yeah, they were Nintendo-only because Nintendo owned them. They got sold to MS, and Nintendo got the good end of the deal. Kameo is showing some potential promise, but beyond that they've not really done much of anything of note in years.
Also note that Rare is <i>still making games</i>, unlike most EA purchases, which have over time rolled over into teams of almost entirely new talent if they weren't shut down entirely. Most publishers that purchase studios do so to bolster their available talent <i>and</i> franchises. Microsoft also owns Bungie. An example I have some personal involvement with is Activision: Over the years they've acquired Raven, Gray Matter, and Infinity Ward. They recently picked up Vicarious Visions for the Alchemy middleware and have also picked up a couple smaller studios in recent months, Toys for Bob and Beenox. All of these studios are notable in that they retain their own identity and retain a hefty selection of employees. Being directly owned helps guarantee funding and gives the opportunity for studios to expand and handle more projects simultaneously. It's generally a pretty good situation to be in.
EA's purchases, however, are for franchise power and technology. EA's purchase of Criterion? Renderware. Westwood? C&C. Now the real Westwood guys are at Petroglyph making a kick-**** looking game. EA's move against Ubi can be safely assumed solely to be to secure their franchise rights. I doubt most Ubi teams would survive (Ubi has viewed the action as a hostile takeover attempt, and hostile takeovers generally involve taking everything of monetary value and tossing aside the employees to go find other jobs). Hopefully it won't end like that. But there's no reason to assume otherwise at this point.
I think the biggest harmful effect EA has had, though, is the attitude that games are a promotion for other forms of entertainment. They have a man with a job dedicated solely to marketing music through EA's games, for crying out loud. And this comes from elsewhere, too - the proposed SAG strike, for example, viewing games as another form of actor promotion. I mean, we're fighting to be recognized as a legitimate entertainment industry, and you're using it as a goddamned marketing vehicle?
EA's recruitment of late, too, consists of plucking naive college or just post-college kids with not much experience into the fold. That lack of experience is valuable in convincing people that things are the same everywhere, that every company will require 80 hour work weeks from you, sometimes up to a full year straight. Or that every company may have to toss you to the street after your game ships (or perhaps even shortly before). That's nowhere near true, of course, but people will believe it. Then of those who do finally leave, they often leave the industry entirely, giving up hope on what they thought they could enjoy. This is young, creative talent (the entire future of the industy, for crying out loud!) and it's being driven straight back to the general work force. Rock.
No publisher is perfect by any means, and the coming years will probably see some upheaval in how that system works, but in the meantime factoring all of EA's actions plus the working conditions (mandatory crunch, post-project layoffs, etc.) leaves a pretty bitter taste in one's mouth. You can be the big dog and still be awesome. No company immediately becomes evil when they hit the top of the market. But that's too much time and money, I suppose.
<!--QuoteBegin-Rellix+Jun 2 2005, 06:52 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Rellix @ Jun 2 2005, 06:52 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Ho Chi Mizzle+Jun 2 2005, 01:29 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Ho Chi Mizzle @ Jun 2 2005, 01:29 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> lol, this is silly
EA takes over other companies inorder to make MORE MONEY (which happens to grease the wheels of commerce)
Once taken over, EA can do whatever the hell they want with em. They own them now. Full stop. Why have a bunch of sub companies make a bunch of small scale games, when you can have everyone work together to make a product that will sell and turn a large profit.
Profit, isnt that waht all big companies are about? Its not the quality of the games. Only small developers can really focus on a certian core fanbase and turn out "specialized" games. take a look around. only indie developers can develop specialized games like that. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Nope, companies dont need BIG profits, the mearly need profit to survive, to pay shareholders, do shreholders care about games? most likely not much. Look at Interplay, the sharehodlers wanted cash so they churned out crap average games that KILLED at least 3 series.
There is no good reason why games companies cant be not for profit organisations, ie where ALL the money goes back into making games and staff wages.
Ill rant more later. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> You forget what country we're in, and what kind of economic system we use.
honnestly, i'll agree with whoever said the following statement (or something like it):
"If you don't like EA's games, don't buy them" Thats the end of story right there folks. If you dont like em, dt buy em, dt play em, just forget about em.
NeonSpyder"Das est NTLDR?"Join Date: 2003-07-03Member: 17913Members
<!--QuoteBegin-Ho Chi Mizzle+Jun 2 2005, 09:24 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Ho Chi Mizzle @ Jun 2 2005, 09:24 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> honnestly, i'll agree with whoever said the following statement (or something like it):
"If you don't like EA's games, don't buy them" Thats the end of story right there folks. If you dont like em, dt buy em, dt play em, just forget about em. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> it doesn't matter if we buy them or not, there are still the unwashed masses who <i>do</i> buy them, therefore feeding the EA beast.
and kungfusquirrel, i completely agree with you in every respect, you said everything i tried to say but you made it sound sexy and awesome. i bow before your grace and beauty, and Ho Chi i strongly suggest you *attempt* to reply to kung fu's post. if you dare.
<!--QuoteBegin-Ho Chi Mizzle+Jun 2 2005, 10:24 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Ho Chi Mizzle @ Jun 2 2005, 10:24 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> honnestly, i'll agree with whoever said the following statement (or something like it):
"If you don't like EA's games, don't buy them" Thats the end of story right there folks. If you dont like em, dt buy em, dt play em, just forget about em. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Fact is, we can't. Read KFS' post. He's in the game industry and that is his viewpoint. That EA's status as Big Dog is affecting the industry <i>as a whole</i>. We as gamers can't just be so shortsighted and ignore something this big if it is going to affect our hobbies and for some, our dreams.
EpidemicDark Force GorgeJoin Date: 2003-06-29Member: 17781Members
<!--QuoteBegin-esuna+Jun 1 2005, 03:54 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (esuna @ Jun 1 2005, 03:54 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Lofung+Jun 2 2005, 02:52 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Lofung @ Jun 2 2005, 02:52 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> i like THEIR idea, but not the way they draw money from your pockets. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Then don't buy their games. Simple. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> What's the alternative once they own the market? :X
KungFuSquirrelBasher of MuttonsJoin Date: 2002-01-26Member: 103Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor
I'll complement my previous post with a more positive one now, if I may.
To be fair, EA is doing a <i>lot</i> of things <i>right</i>. They know where to place their funds and efforts for some phenomenal success. And, as businesspeople, they're very good at what they do.
But again, it feels like a lot of things are suffering at the expense of profit. I mean, think about all the raw unbridled good that amount of cash can do. I mean, look at Spore. Incredible concept, incredible guy behind it. Why is it being made? Is it because we're entering a new age of original and intelligent titles flooding the market? No. It's Will Wright. EA can't afford to let him go, so he can get what he wants. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> But imagine that sort of focus with a mass market approach.
When you're the industry leader or a major player, people follow you, whether it's to the utopian bliss of an energetic and exciting industry or a corporate graveyard. All it takes is one gamble.
Maybe I'm just too idealistic for the current corporate climate and am too attached to the idea of games staying strong as a more casual industry. But meh.
I don't think EA is all that bad, but thats just my opinion. I don't have any experience in the gaming industry, just some thoughts and feelings on the small parts of it i can see.
I'll let the ones who really know what they're talking about go on with this discussion.
Mizzle, out <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Quaunaut+Jun 2 2005, 05:17 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Quaunaut @ Jun 2 2005, 05:17 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Drfuzzy+Jun 1 2005, 09:15 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Drfuzzy @ Jun 1 2005, 09:15 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Microsoft is almost just as bad, they bought out rare, which was extremly flipping stupid. Rare made awesome games, like goldeneye and perfect dark. We wont see perfect dark 2 because of them, gg m$ :/
ONLY thing I didnt like about rare was that their titles were nintendo-only, no pc versions for the awesome games like stated above <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Rare has been a overrated developer since the day they were borne into existence. None of their games have been above average, and everyone overlooks their downright bad games. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Name me a bad Rare game.
from back in the N64 days, that is, because all their good talent left when microsoft bought them out.
<!--QuoteBegin-raz0r+Jun 2 2005, 03:54 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (raz0r @ Jun 2 2005, 03:54 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Quaunaut+Jun 2 2005, 05:17 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Quaunaut @ Jun 2 2005, 05:17 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Drfuzzy+Jun 1 2005, 09:15 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Drfuzzy @ Jun 1 2005, 09:15 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Microsoft is almost just as bad, they bought out rare, which was extremly flipping stupid. Rare made awesome games, like goldeneye and perfect dark. We wont see perfect dark 2 because of them, gg m$ :/
ONLY thing I didnt like about rare was that their titles were nintendo-only, no pc versions for the awesome games like stated above <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Rare has been a overrated developer since the day they were borne into existence. None of their games have been above average, and everyone overlooks their downright bad games. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Name me a bad Rare game.
from back in the N64 days, that is, because all their good talent left when microsoft bought them out. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Well, Banjo-Kazooie, the original one, was average. I quite liked 2, though. Rare has been doing awful lately because microsoft is so wrapped up into the "Adult" gaming scene, a game such as Banjo-Kazooie would be canceled the minute a Rare director thought it up.
Comments
And that's being generous to EA <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
that was an extremely confusing sentance, surely you could have said something like...
"Gabe Newall has more talent in his little pinky then EA has in it's entire flailing membrenous core of evil."
Play SSX 3, then talk. Its the best Action Sports game I've played in my entire life, thanks, and has damn good music to boot.
Otherwise yeah they suck.
Stop hopping on the EA R EVIL bandwagon.
Regarding the sports games: Have you ever heard "If it ain't broke, don't fix it"?
The Madden games consistently outsold, and reviewed better than the competitors. Of course they're going to make more. And practically every sports game title has yearly editions, not just EA's.
Shut up.
Stop hopping on the EA R EVIL bandwagon.
Regarding the sports games: Have you ever heard "If it ain't broke, don't fix it"?
The Madden games consistently outsold, and reviewed better than the competitors. Of course they're going to make more. And practically every sports game title has yearly editions, not just EA's.
Shut up. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sorry, nope. With Sega ESPN Football '05, it on average had a perfect/near-perfect score compared to Madden's great/near-perfect scores.
And its better anyway. Maddens controls feel like the developers have never actually ran in their lives. You're gonna tell me that a reciever that spends well over 100 hours a week in training can't outjuke a huge linebacker? Right.
And that's being generous to EA <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And that's being insulting to all EA's talented workers who are just doing their jobs and have no creative input as to what the game they're crunching this week is.
Sure, year after year cranking out a shinier version of a sports franchise is dull, but hey, that's gone on year after year, that's not a recent thing and it's most certainly not an exclusive thing. Other companies do it now, other companies did it then. Live with it.
The games industry, whilst still pretty removed from the likes of the music or film industry, is growing more and more with each new year, heaven forbid making your company profitable!
The music industry has existed for decades, and are there still independant musicians and publishers? Yes.
The film industry has existed for decades, and are there still independant films? Yes.
The games industry is still pretty much in it's infancy compared to the aformentioned entertainment giants, you really can't expect big companies to simply not exist or turn down a profit, can you. That's just being niave.
EDIT: And on the Valve issue, i really wish people would stop brown-nosing them quite so much. Valve made a total fluke with Half-Life, it turned out very successful and very popular, which isn't too common with new, independant developers, and followed it up with a game that would've sold millions <i>even if it sucked</i>. So that's a grand total of 2 games they've put out, and the second one they did, in a number of areas, a pretty sloppy job with. Now compare that to EA who have some extremely talented coders, artists, mappers, etc. Just because they're a profitable company, that gives you the right to insult what are some very talented people working under their banner? I thought not.
And that's being generous to EA <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And that's being insulting to all EA's talented workers who are just doing their jobs and have no creative input as to what the game they're crunching this week is.
Sure, year after year cranking out a shinier version of a sports franchise is dull, but hey, that's gone on year after year, that's not a recent thing and it's most certainly not an exclusive thing. Other companies do it now, other companies did it then. Live with it.
The games industry, whilst still pretty removed from the likes of the music or film industry, is growing more and more with each new year, heaven forbid making your company profitable!
The music industry has existed for decades, and are there still independant musicians and publishers? Yes.
The film industry has existed for decades, and are there still independant films? Yes.
The games industry is still pretty much in it's infancy compared to the aformentioned entertainment giants, you really can't expect big companies to simply not exist or turn down a profit, can you. That's just being niave. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well said. And for a little perspective: Games seem to be going much the route of music.
Music started out a personal thing in the early 1900s. All independent, litterally no companies.
Once it began becoming a large force in the entertainment industry, large companies started up. They reigned for a long time, and were in it mostly for the money.
But Indie kept growing and finding its way up, encouraging most of the money to go to the artist, not the Record Company.
Now its exactly that: Artists get payed quite a bit, and Record Companies get payed their share(mostly), and Indie still is a very viable industry within the Music Industry.
Were on "But Indie kept growing..." with the modding community becoming such a large force in gaming.
With ten being a microsoft and five being Roadrunner tech support...
EA scores an eleven.
Then don't buy their games. Simple.
Well as far as I see it I can get why some ppl hate EA.
I do like C&C Generals minus the patches. But I just got C&C generals cos of the Mechwarrior Mod. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Also with these sports games, each year the graphics doesnt seem to change THAT drasticlly. Can't EA just put out a major patch. Though of course they won't make money out of that.
What ever happend to Microsoft Gaming? Thought that was getting big at one point.
ONLY thing I didnt like about rare was that their titles were nintendo-only, no pc versions for the awesome games like stated above <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-stormliong+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (stormliong)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> What ever happend to Microsoft Gaming? Thought that was getting big at one point. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Oh it's Big.
ONLY thing I didnt like about rare was that their titles were nintendo-only, no pc versions for the awesome games like stated above <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Rare has been a overrated developer since the day they were borne into existence. None of their games have been above average, and everyone overlooks their downright bad games.
EA takes over other companies inorder to make MORE MONEY (which happens to grease the wheels of commerce)
Once taken over, EA can do whatever the hell they want with em. They own them now. Full stop. Why have a bunch of sub companies make a bunch of small scale games, when you can have everyone work together to make a product that will sell and turn a large profit.
Profit, isnt that waht all big companies are about? Its not the quality of the games. Only small developers can really focus on a certian core fanbase and turn out "specialized" games. take a look around. only indie developers can develop specialized games like that. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Nope, companies dont need BIG profits, the mearly need profit to survive, to pay shareholders, do shreholders care about games? most likely not much. Look at Interplay, the sharehodlers wanted cash so they churned out crap average games that KILLED at least 3 series.
There is no good reason why games companies cant be not for profit organisations, ie where ALL the money goes back into making games and staff wages.
Ill rant more later.
Because games costs are going up. No one wants to risk a high cost venture if its unlikely the game will sell.
The market is skewed at the moment so any "innovotive" games get pounded to the floor while people rush to buy the same thing.
Games that break genres DON'T SELL AS WELL AS THE SAME STUFF EVERYONE IS USED TO
Take something like Republic. That bombed. But it was something no-one had done before.
ONLY thing I didnt like about rare was that their titles were nintendo-only, no pc versions for the awesome games like stated above <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--><!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah, they were Nintendo-only because Nintendo owned them. They got sold to MS, and Nintendo got the good end of the deal. Kameo is showing some potential promise, but beyond that they've not really done much of anything of note in years.
Also note that Rare is <i>still making games</i>, unlike most EA purchases, which have over time rolled over into teams of almost entirely new talent if they weren't shut down entirely. Most publishers that purchase studios do so to bolster their available talent <i>and</i> franchises. Microsoft also owns Bungie. An example I have some personal involvement with is Activision: Over the years they've acquired Raven, Gray Matter, and Infinity Ward. They recently picked up Vicarious Visions for the Alchemy middleware and have also picked up a couple smaller studios in recent months, Toys for Bob and Beenox. All of these studios are notable in that they retain their own identity and retain a hefty selection of employees. Being directly owned helps guarantee funding and gives the opportunity for studios to expand and handle more projects simultaneously. It's generally a pretty good situation to be in.
EA's purchases, however, are for franchise power and technology. EA's purchase of Criterion? Renderware. Westwood? C&C. Now the real Westwood guys are at Petroglyph making a kick-**** looking game. EA's move against Ubi can be safely assumed solely to be to secure their franchise rights. I doubt most Ubi teams would survive (Ubi has viewed the action as a hostile takeover attempt, and hostile takeovers generally involve taking everything of monetary value and tossing aside the employees to go find other jobs). Hopefully it won't end like that. But there's no reason to assume otherwise at this point.
I think the biggest harmful effect EA has had, though, is the attitude that games are a promotion for other forms of entertainment. They have a man with a job dedicated solely to marketing music through EA's games, for crying out loud. And this comes from elsewhere, too - the proposed SAG strike, for example, viewing games as another form of actor promotion. I mean, we're fighting to be recognized as a legitimate entertainment industry, and you're using it as a goddamned marketing vehicle?
EA's recruitment of late, too, consists of plucking naive college or just post-college kids with not much experience into the fold. That lack of experience is valuable in convincing people that things are the same everywhere, that every company will require 80 hour work weeks from you, sometimes up to a full year straight. Or that every company may have to toss you to the street after your game ships (or perhaps even shortly before). That's nowhere near true, of course, but people will believe it. Then of those who do finally leave, they often leave the industry entirely, giving up hope on what they thought they could enjoy. This is young, creative talent (the entire future of the industy, for crying out loud!) and it's being driven straight back to the general work force. Rock.
No publisher is perfect by any means, and the coming years will probably see some upheaval in how that system works, but in the meantime factoring all of EA's actions plus the working conditions (mandatory crunch, post-project layoffs, etc.) leaves a pretty bitter taste in one's mouth. You can be the big dog and still be awesome. No company immediately becomes evil when they hit the top of the market. But that's too much time and money, I suppose.
EA takes over other companies inorder to make MORE MONEY (which happens to grease the wheels of commerce)
Once taken over, EA can do whatever the hell they want with em. They own them now. Full stop. Why have a bunch of sub companies make a bunch of small scale games, when you can have everyone work together to make a product that will sell and turn a large profit.
Profit, isnt that waht all big companies are about? Its not the quality of the games. Only small developers can really focus on a certian core fanbase and turn out "specialized" games. take a look around. only indie developers can develop specialized games like that. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Nope, companies dont need BIG profits, the mearly need profit to survive, to pay shareholders, do shreholders care about games? most likely not much. Look at Interplay, the sharehodlers wanted cash so they churned out crap average games that KILLED at least 3 series.
There is no good reason why games companies cant be not for profit organisations, ie where ALL the money goes back into making games and staff wages.
Ill rant more later. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
You forget what country we're in, and what kind of economic system we use.
honnestly, i'll agree with whoever said the following statement (or something like it):
"If you don't like EA's games, don't buy them" Thats the end of story right there folks. If you dont like em, dt buy em, dt play em, just forget about em.
"If you don't like EA's games, don't buy them" Thats the end of story right there folks. If you dont like em, dt buy em, dt play em, just forget about em. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
it doesn't matter if we buy them or not, there are still the unwashed masses who <i>do</i> buy them, therefore feeding the EA beast.
and kungfusquirrel, i completely agree with you in every respect, you said everything i tried to say but you made it sound sexy and awesome. i bow before your grace and beauty, and Ho Chi i strongly suggest you *attempt* to reply to kung fu's post. if you dare.
"If you don't like EA's games, don't buy them" Thats the end of story right there folks. If you dont like em, dt buy em, dt play em, just forget about em. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Fact is, we can't. Read KFS' post. He's in the game industry and that is his viewpoint. That EA's status as Big Dog is affecting the industry <i>as a whole</i>. We as gamers can't just be so shortsighted and ignore something this big if it is going to affect our hobbies and for some, our dreams.
Then don't buy their games. Simple. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
What's the alternative once they own the market? :X
To be fair, EA is doing a <i>lot</i> of things <i>right</i>. They know where to place their funds and efforts for some phenomenal success. And, as businesspeople, they're very good at what they do.
But again, it feels like a lot of things are suffering at the expense of profit. I mean, think about all the raw unbridled good that amount of cash can do. I mean, look at Spore. Incredible concept, incredible guy behind it. Why is it being made? Is it because we're entering a new age of original and intelligent titles flooding the market? No. It's Will Wright. EA can't afford to let him go, so he can get what he wants. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> But imagine that sort of focus with a mass market approach.
When you're the industry leader or a major player, people follow you, whether it's to the utopian bliss of an energetic and exciting industry or a corporate graveyard. All it takes is one gamble.
Maybe I'm just too idealistic for the current corporate climate and am too attached to the idea of games staying strong as a more casual industry. But meh.
I don't think EA is all that bad, but thats just my opinion. I don't have any experience in the gaming industry, just some thoughts and feelings on the small parts of it i can see.
I'll let the ones who really know what they're talking about go on with this discussion.
Mizzle, out <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Yes. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
QFT. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
QFT squared THEN cubed.
ONLY thing I didnt like about rare was that their titles were nintendo-only, no pc versions for the awesome games like stated above <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Rare has been a overrated developer since the day they were borne into existence. None of their games have been above average, and everyone overlooks their downright bad games. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Name me a bad Rare game.
from back in the N64 days, that is, because all their good talent left when microsoft bought them out.
ONLY thing I didnt like about rare was that their titles were nintendo-only, no pc versions for the awesome games like stated above <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Rare has been a overrated developer since the day they were borne into existence. None of their games have been above average, and everyone overlooks their downright bad games. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Name me a bad Rare game.
from back in the N64 days, that is, because all their good talent left when microsoft bought them out. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, Banjo-Kazooie, the original one, was average. I quite liked 2, though. Rare has been doing awful lately because
microsoft is so wrapped up into the "Adult" gaming scene, a game such as Banjo-Kazooie would be canceled the minute a Rare director thought it up.