EA: who are they and what is their relationship

[SpellAndShield]

Over at bioware social forums you often read how people love bioware but hate EA; where is this hate coming from? What exactly is EA? They sort of sound like Umbrella Corp or some other kind of syndicate of sinister entities. Anyone care to explain?

[micalov]

The a publishing company that owns bioware, famous for releasing constant crap sequels like sport games and closing down legendary dev stuudios like westwood ( makers of Comand and conquer and Earth and Beyond)

[Povuholo]

The a publishing company that owns bioware, famous for releasing constant crap sequels like sport games and closing down legendary dev stuudios like westwood ( makers of Comand and conquer and Earth and Beyond)

And now they cancelled Mirror's Edge 2 so DICE could make Battlefield 3 instead. :confused:

 

Goodbye unique game, hello yet another military shooter!

Edited February 16, 2011 by Povuholo

[IndorilTheGreat]

And now they cancelled Mirror's Edge 2 so DICE could make Battlefield 3 instead. :confused:

 

I think that a part of me just died inside...

 

You know what bugs me? Is that EA criticized Mirror's Edge as a bad game, because it didn't have any multiplayer.

 

I mean, come on. Just how shallow and pretentious can you get?

Edited February 16, 2011 by IndorilTheGreat

[JimboUK]

Look at the direction Mass Effect 2 took and what direction Dragon Age 2 is taking, that's EA. They buy up developers, slowly destroy them by removing anything that made the developer stand out before closing them down. Like Activision they are a cancer.

[SpellAndShield]

Look at the direction Mass Effect 2 took and what direction Dragon Age 2 is taking, that's EA. They buy up developers, slowly destroy them by removing anything that made the developer stand out before closing them down. Like Activision they are a cancer.

 

They (EA) probably would argue that they do the hard work that no one else wants to do or admits to doing and that without them there would be no bioware...or what would they say to this?

[JimboUK]

Look at the direction Mass Effect 2 took and what direction Dragon Age 2 is taking, that's EA. They buy up developers, slowly destroy them by removing anything that made the developer stand out before closing them down. Like Activision they are a cancer.

 

They (EA) probably would argue that they do the hard work that no one else wants to do or admits to doing and that without them there would be no bioware...or what would they say to this?

 

I don't remember any talk of Bioware being in financial trouble prior to EA taking over, there was talk of securing the company but that was from those who stood to make a lot of money from the sale.

[Vagrant0]

Most of the hate comes because EA buys up new games and franchises, and then starts doctoring them to fit with their own beliefs about how games should be. The problem with this is that EA tends to maintain their belief that most gamers are age 6-10, and that people like paying $20-30 for a tiny addon. In more recent years they have become less open to the idea of modding communities, and more open to releasing their own brand of modifications for a nominal fee.

 

The best example of what is wrong with EA can be seen in the Sims 3. The game is just a re-hash of older titles with more mini-game elements, but have watered down the content significantly and adopted a standard which all but killed the thriving modding community which existed for Sims 1 and 2. They also released several small addon packs and expansions which have a bit of flash, but not much substance. Then there is their online store for Sims items, which takes the concept of micropayments and does it in the worst way possible; by integrating the system throughout the games interface and still releasing sub-standard content. They adopted a system of baked textures and swatches, so not only does the game look graphically worse than its predecessor (in most cases), but it also makes creation of new content that much more difficult. Now while one can say pretty much the same thing about any other game made by any other company, what makes this case significant is that there is a clear progression away from a moddable, sandbox game toward one which has become more around sucking money out of players and linear progression.

 

For example, when the Sims 1 came out, it was released with not only modding tools to create new objects and clothing, but there were also many free downloads available from the official website that added the sorts of things the original game was lacking. The expansions were also rather heavily content driven, adding in many new objects, clothing, or interactions, and after later expansions came available earlier ones were being bundled with the base game in a nice low-price package. The Sims 2 started out this way with a built-in way to create some new content, but most of object creation was locked away in the code needing to be figured out by modders. Instead of offering free downloads for the game, they opened up the exchange, which was a subscription service which allowed you to download content made by others. Similarly, while the expansions were still fairly content driven, they had more minigame elements in them and were joined by small little add-on packages that contained some extra bits that weren't included in the expansion. With Sims 3, modding was left entirely to the community who had to figure out new methods and standards without any help while EA went producing their own paid content which can be downloaded. The expansions, while still expansions, are less of an addition to the main game and are mostly just mini-games that have little connection with the main game while the add-on packages have been more common and still just as devoid of meaningful content. Due to a dwindling player base (can't imagine why), they've slowed down their efforts regarding this franchise considerably and show no sign of changing their direction.

 

 

While this is just one EA game, it best shows the way in which they have taken a franchise and managed to suck as much life and money out of it as they can. This same trend has also happened with Spore, which was killed almost as soon as it started, and to some degree even EA mainstays, like the Madden franchise. If it was one or two games, it might be unnoticed, but given that EA actively seeks out and purchases new titles to suck the life out of, it's no surprise that people cringe at the thought of EA being involved in anything which has any sort of following.

[evilneko]

O Electronic Arts of yore, where hast thou gone?

[SpellAndShield]

Most of the hate comes because EA buys up new games and franchises, and then starts doctoring them to fit with their own beliefs about how games should be. The problem with this is that EA tends to maintain their belief that most gamers are age 6-10, and that people like paying $20-30 for a tiny addon. In more recent years they have become less open to the idea of modding communities, and more open to releasing their own brand of modifications for a nominal fee.

 

The best example of what is wrong with EA can be seen in the Sims 3. The game is just a re-hash of older titles with more mini-game elements, but have watered down the content significantly and adopted a standard which all but killed the thriving modding community which existed for Sims 1 and 2. They also released several small addon packs and expansions which have a bit of flash, but not much substance. Then there is their online store for Sims items, which takes the concept of micropayments and does it in the worst way possible; by integrating the system throughout the games interface and still releasing sub-standard content. They adopted a system of baked textures and swatches, so not only does the game look graphically worse than its predecessor (in most cases), but it also makes creation of new content that much more difficult. Now while one can say pretty much the same thing about any other game made by any other company, what makes this case significant is that there is a clear progression away from a moddable, sandbox game toward one which has become more around sucking money out of players and linear progression.

 

For example, when the Sims 1 came out, it was released with not only modding tools to create new objects and clothing, but there were also many free downloads available from the official website that added the sorts of things the original game was lacking. The expansions were also rather heavily content driven, adding in many new objects, clothing, or interactions, and after later expansions came available earlier ones were being bundled with the base game in a nice low-price package. The Sims 2 started out this way with a built-in way to create some new content, but most of object creation was locked away in the code needing to be figured out by modders. Instead of offering free downloads for the game, they opened up the exchange, which was a subscription service which allowed you to download content made by others. Similarly, while the expansions were still fairly content driven, they had more minigame elements in them and were joined by small little add-on packages that contained some extra bits that weren't included in the expansion. With Sims 3, modding was left entirely to the community who had to figure out new methods and standards without any help while EA went producing their own paid content which can be downloaded. The expansions, while still expansions, are less of an addition to the main game and are mostly just mini-games that have little connection with the main game while the add-on packages have been more common and still just as devoid of meaningful content. Due to a dwindling player base (can't imagine why), they've slowed down their efforts regarding this franchise considerably and show no sign of changing their direction.

 

 

While this is just one EA game, it best shows the way in which they have taken a franchise and managed to suck as much life and money out of it as they can. This same trend has also happened with Spore, which was killed almost as soon as it started, and to some degree even EA mainstays, like the Madden franchise. If it was one or two games, it might be unnoticed, but given that EA actively seeks out and purchases new titles to suck the life out of, it's no surprise that people cringe at the thought of EA being involved in anything which has any sort of following.

 

After reading this and other comments I worry for the future of Dragon Age and Mass Effect (my two favourite series so far)...hopefully Bioware will be able to maintain their creativity and such...scary stuff....