Wait, did I just read a post with someone defending EAs record on buying companies and turning them to trash?
It would be different if it was just one...or two...or heck, six companies turned trashy...but you would actually have to do a TON of reading to try to find a company that EA bought out that did NOT turn to crap.
Every ship has a captain and every captain is responsible for the actions of his crew...and if the entire crew isnt doing their job...its the CAPTAINS fault. This is how business works, you fail from the top down, not the bottom up because its a LEADERSHIP issue when it fails in mass. Someone is making bad decisions at EA with managing new companies.
Wait, did I just read a post with someone defending EAs record on buying companies and turning them to trash?
It would be different if it was just one...or two...or heck, six companies turned trashy...but you would actually have to do a TON of reading to try to find a company that EA bought out that did NOT turn to crap.
Every ship has a captain and every captain is responsible for the actions of his crew...and if the entire crew isnt doing their job...its the CAPTAINS fault. This is how business works, you fail from the top down, not the bottom up because its a LEADERSHIP issue when it fails in mass. Someone is making bad decisions at EA with managing new companies.
I am sure it is not nice if you work in one of those companies trashed. However, i don't really care about it much, except as a curiosity and topic of conversation.
The real issue is whether the games are fun.
I like Dead Space 1 & 2. If they make another one (and that it review, or demo well), i will play it.
Originally posted by alexanys1982 I still really dont see how its ea's fault....they gave Bioware hundreds of millionsand 5 years to make a star wars mmo....they expected pre-nge swg excitment at the very least and WoW like numbers at most. How is this ea's fault?
For one, Bioware should have never been the dev to make that game. EA took a developer famous for expansive, story-driven, player-centric games and had them create a Star Wars MMO? Horrible decision. Plus, it's pretty obvious that SWTOR needed more time on the dev table before it came out.
Same with ME3. Obvious again that the game wasn't ready. Look at the face-import bugs, the broken quest journal, and the unsynced animations. They clearly had a deadline and weren't able to fix these glaring problems in time for release
Old Bioware would have just postponed the games' launches and fixed them. EAWare had deadlines to meet to appease shareholders. These problems were never seen in DA, BG, ME2, etc. They clearly started when EA purchased them
Is EA 100% to blame? I doubt it. But they rightfully get most of it
Wait, did I just read a post with someone defending EAs record on buying companies and turning them to trash?
It would be different if it was just one...or two...or heck, six companies turned trashy...but you would actually have to do a TON of reading to try to find a company that EA bought out that did NOT turn to crap.
Every ship has a captain and every captain is responsible for the actions of his crew...and if the entire crew isnt doing their job...its the CAPTAINS fault. This is how business works, you fail from the top down, not the bottom up because its a LEADERSHIP issue when it fails in mass. Someone is making bad decisions at EA with managing new companies.
I'm not defending EA I'm saying that blame lies with both parties involved but its always EA or "insert major corporation" and never the "alturistic games for gamers studio owners" that fans have elevated to mythical proportion in their head that get the vitriol from fans and to me thats not the reality of the situation. As I've said it take two to tango.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
Originally posted by alexanys1982 I still really dont see how its ea's fault....they gave Bioware hundreds of millionsand 5 years to make a star wars mmo....they expected pre-nge swg excitment at the very least and WoW like numbers at most. How is this ea's fault?
For one, Bioware should have never been the dev to make that game. EA took a developer famous for expansive, story-driven, player-centric games and had them create a Star Wars MMO? Horrible decision. Plus, it's pretty obvious that SWTOR needed more time on the dev table before it came out.
Same with ME3. Obvious again that the game wasn't ready. Look at the face-import bugs, the broken quest journal, and the unsynced animations. They clearly had a deadline and weren't able to fix these glaring problems in time for release
Old Bioware would have just postponed the games' launches and fixed them. EAWare had deadlines to meet to appease shareholders. These problems were never seen in DA, BG, ME2, etc. They clearly started when EA purchased them
Is EA 100% to blame? I doubt it. But they rightfully get most of it
SW:TOR was supposedly in production way before EA purchased Bioware and with your line in thinking Blizzrd should never have made World Of Warcraft.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
In the case of TOR, those storyline elements and VO is all Bioware. They are signature bio-ware featuers and gameplay. I highly doubt EA is forcing that decision on Bioware.
Wait, did I just read a post with someone defending EAs record on buying companies and turning them to trash?
It would be different if it was just one...or two...or heck, six companies turned trashy...but you would actually have to do a TON of reading to try to find a company that EA bought out that did NOT turn to crap.
Every ship has a captain and every captain is responsible for the actions of his crew...and if the entire crew isnt doing their job...its the CAPTAINS fault. This is how business works, you fail from the top down, not the bottom up because its a LEADERSHIP issue when it fails in mass. Someone is making bad decisions at EA with managing new companies.
I'm not defending EA I'm saying that blame lies with both parties involved but its always EA or "insert major corporation" and never the "alturistic games for gamers studio owners" that fans have elevated to mythical proportion in their head that get the vitriol from fans and to me thats not the reality of the situation. As I've said it take two to tango.
Again, if it was just a few out of many dozens you would be correct...but it isnt a FEW...its just about ALL of them.
This removes blame from just the company being bought because it points to EA digging their hands into the company and changing the way they operate. The proof is in that its happening TOO OFTEN to be a coincidence.
One of the first ever computer games I ever played was Sim City. Though I hate EA with a passion, my gaming "sweet heart" will forever be Maxis' Sim City. I am glad that they are making Sim City 5, I just wish Maxis was able to be free from EA.
Originally posted by sammandar One of the first ever computer games I ever played was Sim City. Though I hate EA with a passion, my gaming "sweet heart" will forever be Maxis' Sim City. I am glad that they are making Sim City 5, I just wish Maxis was able to be free from EA.
Why would you even care? If Sim City 5 is good, shouldn't you be happy to have a fun game that you like to play?
Originally posted by sammandar One of the first ever computer games I ever played was Sim City. Though I hate EA with a passion, my gaming "sweet heart" will forever be Maxis' Sim City. I am glad that they are making Sim City 5, I just wish Maxis was able to be free from EA.
Why would you even care? If Sim City 5 is good, shouldn't you be happy to have a fun game that you like to play?
As I said, I don't like EA; I like Maxis though. I care because I'm a huge fan of the Sim City franchise, I have played all versions of Sim City since "vanilla" (to use a wow reference) and I don't like it that Maxis is beholden to EA.
Just because you don't care doesn't mean other won't, it's the beauty of independent thought, I'm not obligated or forced to think like you or agree with you. I hope Sim City 5 turns out to be as good as it is being hyped to be, EA has a bad reputation for over-hyping their products. Though I do not purchase any EA products, I will have to make an exception in the case of Sim City 5; after all, it is my gaming sweet heart haha.
Originally posted by Calerxes But the question that is rarely ask or answered is that the original owners of these companies must of decided to sell in the first place so why not the emotion directed to them?
When Notch refused EA's offer to buy out Minecraft, he was showered in a glow of goodwill.
My suspicion is that most people assume that once a company sells out to EA, the original creative people who earned the loyalty of fans are no longer in charge of their company.
I think it's important to realize that most people not wearing suits don't actually buy into greed-is-good capitalism in their hearts.
Wait, did I just read a post with someone defending EAs record on buying companies and turning them to trash?
It would be different if it was just one...or two...or heck, six companies turned trashy...but you would actually have to do a TON of reading to try to find a company that EA bought out that did NOT turn to crap.
Every ship has a captain and every captain is responsible for the actions of his crew...and if the entire crew isnt doing their job...its the CAPTAINS fault. This is how business works, you fail from the top down, not the bottom up because its a LEADERSHIP issue when it fails in mass. Someone is making bad decisions at EA with managing new companies.
I'm not defending EA I'm saying that blame lies with both parties involved but its always EA or "insert major corporation" and never the "alturistic games for gamers studio owners" that fans have elevated to mythical proportion in their head that get the vitriol from fans and to me thats not the reality of the situation. As I've said it take two to tango.
Again, if it was just a few out of many dozens you would be correct...but it isnt a FEW...its just about ALL of them.
This removes blame from just the company being bought because it points to EA digging their hands into the company and changing the way they operate. The proof is in that its happening TOO OFTEN to be a coincidence.
Haven't EA continued to produce quality C+C games after buying Westwood and expand the C+C franchise with the Red Alert and Generals series, Maxis are still making Sim City, Origin carried on with the Ultima games right up until Ultima Online and thats regarded as one of the great MMO's, Bullfrog carried on makling Themepark games a new Populous game and made two Dungeon Keeper games. So I don't see the grinding them into the ground as these games were well recieved by the gaming fraternity.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
Originally posted by Calerxes But the question that is rarely ask or answered is that the original owners of these companies must of decided to sell in the first place so why not the emotion directed to them?
When Notch refused EA's offer to buy out Minecraft, he was showered in a glow of goodwill.
My suspicion is that most people assume that once a company sells out to EA, the original creative people who earned the loyalty of fans are no longer in charge of their company.
I think it's important to realize that most people not wearing suits don't actually buy into greed-is-good capitalism in their hearts.
Isn't that proving my point?
I'm not Gordon Gekko either but I'm still a Capitalist.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
Originally posted by sammandar One of the first ever computer games I ever played was Sim City. Though I hate EA with a passion, my gaming "sweet heart" will forever be Maxis' Sim City. I am glad that they are making Sim City 5, I just wish Maxis was able to be free from EA.
Why would you even care? If Sim City 5 is good, shouldn't you be happy to have a fun game that you like to play?
As I said, I don't like EA; I like Maxis though. I care because I'm a huge fan of the Sim City franchise, I have played all versions of Sim City since "vanilla" (to use a wow reference) and I don't like it that Maxis is beholden to EA.
Just because you don't care doesn't mean other won't, it's the beauty of independent thought, I'm not obligated or forced to think like you or agree with you. I hope Sim City 5 turns out to be as good as it is being hyped to be, EA has a bad reputation for over-hyping their products. Though I do not purchase any EA products, I will have to make an exception in the case of Sim City 5; after all, it is my gaming sweet heart haha.
Whats the point of standing against something and then cracking because its "my gaming sweetheart"? you are a corporations ideal customer, easily swayed by hype.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
Battlefield 2 was the best game I've ever played. That came out in 2005.
Since then they have completely destroyed what the Battlefield franchise could have been. They've removed all depth from the gameplay and codified it. I started up BF3 last week to see what it was like, there is a premium mode now, as well as BF4 coming out early next year. If you want to play the beta you have to buy Medal of Honor. It's going to be a yearly formula, release BF4, release next MoH, release BF5, release next MoH and so on and so on. All the games are the same with a slightly different gimmick.
That kind of blatent money grabbing is sickening to me and I know EA is behind it.
Bf3 is still very much battlefield. If your complaining becayse they released 4 close quarters maps then get over it. Alot of people enjoy those maps and Dice is going to be releasing more big open maps soon (Armored Kill). Premium mode? What is that? Premium like COD Elite is a one time payment to get all the DLC at a lower price than if you payed for it individually, how is that a bad deal? Also Dice already released a statement saying that there will be other ways to get into the beta than pre purchasing MoH, so whats the fuss about? It makes good business sense for them to tag on the beta to MoH to boost its sales. I mean wouldnt you do the same?
People complain about EA because its popular to complain about EA, yet still spend money on their games. Fact of the matter is they are a business and while miss management may have caused some games to go south they still have created titles that most people enjoy. If you are complaining that EA is solely out to get money then you might as well never buy video games again because every developer and publisher is out to make money.
Haven't EA continued to produce quality C+C games after buying Westwood and expand the C+C franchise with the Red Alert and Generals series, Maxis are still making Sim City, Origin carried on with the Ultima games right up until Ultima Online and thats regarded as one of the great MMO's, Bullfrog carried on makling Themepark games a new Populous game and made two Dungeon Keeper games. So I don't see the grinding them into the ground as these games were well recieved by the gaming fraternity.
1. No, the C&C series has been in a steady decline in quality with the last 3 iterations.
2. Sim City has recieved improved graphics and little improved features. Not exactly a challenge. the differences between 3000 & 4 is minimal. No I do not think of placing agriculture into its own industrial zone-type or having cities in "regions" with "segments" to be a big leap in gameplay.
3. Did you ACTUALLY name Ultima Online? Seriously? How far back are we going to go to try to defend EA? You have now gone from the current EA to back BEFORE several CEOs to a time when EA was still mostly just a DISTRIBUTOR in the PC field.
Try to find a company they have not screwed up in the last 8 years...
As much as we'd like to shit on EA for "ruining" Bioware, I can only think of one BioWare game that direct EA pressure and that was Dragon Age 2.
Mass Effect 3's ending had nothing to do with EA. BioWare was given a butload of money to make SWTOR so do you think it's really EA's fault that the game doesn't measure up to a lot of peoples expectations?
One thing I do hate about EA though, their customer service is abysmal. Easily the worst in the business.
Originally posted by sammandar One of the first ever computer games I ever played was Sim City. Though I hate EA with a passion, my gaming "sweet heart" will forever be Maxis' Sim City. I am glad that they are making Sim City 5, I just wish Maxis was able to be free from EA.
Why would you even care? If Sim City 5 is good, shouldn't you be happy to have a fun game that you like to play?
As I said, I don't like EA; I like Maxis though. I care because I'm a huge fan of the Sim City franchise, I have played all versions of Sim City since "vanilla" (to use a wow reference) and I don't like it that Maxis is beholden to EA.
Just because you don't care doesn't mean other won't, it's the beauty of independent thought, I'm not obligated or forced to think like you or agree with you. I hope Sim City 5 turns out to be as good as it is being hyped to be, EA has a bad reputation for over-hyping their products. Though I do not purchase any EA products, I will have to make an exception in the case of Sim City 5; after all, it is my gaming sweet heart haha.
Well, it is your perogative to do as you please with your money.
Personally, i dont boycott companies. I only boycott bad games. Dead Space 1 & 2 are good games, so i bought/played them disregarding who made them.
BioWare was given a butload of money to make SWTOR so do you think it's really EA's fault that the game doesn't measure up to a lot of peoples expectations?
Yes, the corporate entity works that way.
They recieved funding based on what they proposed to make. And that places all judgemental blame solely on the managers in charge stating it was not only a good idea, but that its worth the money to do it.
This is why CEOs are forced to step down for bad moves being made and agreed to impliment because the CAPTAIN IS ALWAYS IN CHARGE OF HIS SHIP. Jebus.
Bioware is not the Bioware we knew when Mass Effect 1, Baldurs Gate and Neverwinter Nights 1 were created. Bioware was merged with Mythic and they aquired all those no talent mindbots of EA. SWTOR might have been in development before EA took over. But when EA did take over Mythic devs who worked on WAR moved onto continue work on SWTOR.
Its like how Square-Enix is run now. Everyone loved Square when it was Squaresoft, there games were revolutionary to the RPG market delivering compelling story and character design. When they merged with ENIX, there was a lot of shifting in positions. Founder Miyamoto was no longer majority share holder and ENIX president Fukushima became Chairmain and majority share holder. Sakaguchi whom you all would know as the creator of the Final Fantasy series left Square just before the merger to Square-Enix.
So basically, just because the company still holds the name "Bioware" doesn't mean that is it the Bioware we used to know.
"In the immediate future, we have this one, and then weve got another one that is actually going to be so were going to have, what we want to do, is in January, what were targeting to do, this may or may not happen, so you cant hold me to it. But what were targeting to do, is have a fun anniversary to the Ilum shenanigans that happened. An alien race might invade, and they might crash into Ilum and there might be some new activities that happen on the planet." ~Gabe Amatangelo
Battlefield 2 was the best game I've ever played. That came out in 2005.
Since then they have completely destroyed what the Battlefield franchise could have been. They've removed all depth from the gameplay and codified it. I started up BF3 last week to see what it was like, there is a premium mode now, as well as BF4 coming out early next year. If you want to play the beta you have to buy Medal of Honor. It's going to be a yearly formula, release BF4, release next MoH, release BF5, release next MoH and so on and so on. All the games are the same with a slightly different gimmick.
That kind of blatent money grabbing is sickening to me and I know EA is behind it.
Bf3 is still very much battlefield. If your complaining becayse they released 4 close quarters maps then get over it. Alot of people enjoy those maps and Dice is going to be releasing more big open maps soon (Armored Kill). Premium mode? What is that? Premium like COD Elite is a one time payment to get all the DLC at a lower price than if you payed for it individually, how is that a bad deal? Also Dice already released a statement saying that there will be other ways to get into the beta than pre purchasing MoH, so whats the fuss about? It makes good business sense for them to tag on the beta to MoH to boost its sales. I mean wouldnt you do the same?
People complain about EA because its popular to complain about EA, yet still spend money on their games. Fact of the matter is they are a business and while miss management may have caused some games to go south they still have created titles that most people enjoy. If you are complaining that EA is solely out to get money then you might as well never buy video games again because every developer and publisher is out to make money.
There are plenty of legitimate reasons to complain about EA. I honestly can't see how you could have read my post in this thread and act like it is not a legitimate reason to complain.
Also, I agree that BF3 is not a bad game, but it definitely lacks the vision that BF2 had. BF2 brought SO many awesome things to the table, when you compare it to 1942...jets, commander mode, helicopters, many more class options, squads, modern setting ...
But when you compare BF3 to BF2, all it really brought was more destructible terrain and better graphics.
Haven't EA continued to produce quality C+C games after buying Westwood and expand the C+C franchise with the Red Alert and Generals series, Maxis are still making Sim City, Origin carried on with the Ultima games right up until Ultima Online and thats regarded as one of the great MMO's, Bullfrog carried on makling Themepark games a new Populous game and made two Dungeon Keeper games. So I don't see the grinding them into the ground as these games were well recieved by the gaming fraternity.
1. No, the C&C series has been in a steady decline in quality with the last 3 iterations.
2. Sim City has recieved improved graphics and little improved features. Not exactly a challenge. the differences between 3000 & 4 is minimal. No I do not think of placing agriculture into its own industrial zone-type or having cities in "regions" with "segments" to be a big leap in gameplay.
3. Did you ACTUALLY name Ultima Online? Seriously? How far back are we going to go to try to defend EA? You have now gone from the current EA to back BEFORE several CEOs to a time when EA was still mostly just a DISTRIBUTOR in the PC field.
Try to find a company they have not screwed up in the last 8 years...
I'm not defending EA I'm trying to prove a point there's a difference and you moving the goalposts makes you arguement moot.
EA purchased Origin Systems in 1992 and produced multiple Ultima games including the Ultima Sandbox UO in 1997. Also when this arguement rears its head usually Origin are first on the list.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
Comments
Wait, did I just read a post with someone defending EAs record on buying companies and turning them to trash?
It would be different if it was just one...or two...or heck, six companies turned trashy...but you would actually have to do a TON of reading to try to find a company that EA bought out that did NOT turn to crap.
Every ship has a captain and every captain is responsible for the actions of his crew...and if the entire crew isnt doing their job...its the CAPTAINS fault. This is how business works, you fail from the top down, not the bottom up because its a LEADERSHIP issue when it fails in mass. Someone is making bad decisions at EA with managing new companies.
There will be a new iOS version of BG soon. I can't wait.
I am sure it is not nice if you work in one of those companies trashed. However, i don't really care about it much, except as a curiosity and topic of conversation.
The real issue is whether the games are fun.
I like Dead Space 1 & 2. If they make another one (and that it review, or demo well), i will play it.
For one, Bioware should have never been the dev to make that game. EA took a developer famous for expansive, story-driven, player-centric games and had them create a Star Wars MMO? Horrible decision. Plus, it's pretty obvious that SWTOR needed more time on the dev table before it came out.
Same with ME3. Obvious again that the game wasn't ready. Look at the face-import bugs, the broken quest journal, and the unsynced animations. They clearly had a deadline and weren't able to fix these glaring problems in time for release
Old Bioware would have just postponed the games' launches and fixed them. EAWare had deadlines to meet to appease shareholders. These problems were never seen in DA, BG, ME2, etc. They clearly started when EA purchased them
Is EA 100% to blame? I doubt it. But they rightfully get most of it
I'm not defending EA I'm saying that blame lies with both parties involved but its always EA or "insert major corporation" and never the "alturistic games for gamers studio owners" that fans have elevated to mythical proportion in their head that get the vitriol from fans and to me thats not the reality of the situation. As I've said it take two to tango.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
SW:TOR was supposedly in production way before EA purchased Bioware and with your line in thinking Blizzrd should never have made World Of Warcraft.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
In the case of TOR, those storyline elements and VO is all Bioware. They are signature bio-ware featuers and gameplay. I highly doubt EA is forcing that decision on Bioware.
Again, if it was just a few out of many dozens you would be correct...but it isnt a FEW...its just about ALL of them.
This removes blame from just the company being bought because it points to EA digging their hands into the company and changing the way they operate. The proof is in that its happening TOO OFTEN to be a coincidence.
Why would you even care? If Sim City 5 is good, shouldn't you be happy to have a fun game that you like to play?
As I said, I don't like EA; I like Maxis though. I care because I'm a huge fan of the Sim City franchise, I have played all versions of Sim City since "vanilla" (to use a wow reference) and I don't like it that Maxis is beholden to EA.
Just because you don't care doesn't mean other won't, it's the beauty of independent thought, I'm not obligated or forced to think like you or agree with you. I hope Sim City 5 turns out to be as good as it is being hyped to be, EA has a bad reputation for over-hyping their products. Though I do not purchase any EA products, I will have to make an exception in the case of Sim City 5; after all, it is my gaming sweet heart haha.
When Notch refused EA's offer to buy out Minecraft, he was showered in a glow of goodwill.
My suspicion is that most people assume that once a company sells out to EA, the original creative people who earned the loyalty of fans are no longer in charge of their company.
I think it's important to realize that most people not wearing suits don't actually buy into greed-is-good capitalism in their hearts.
Haven't EA continued to produce quality C+C games after buying Westwood and expand the C+C franchise with the Red Alert and Generals series, Maxis are still making Sim City, Origin carried on with the Ultima games right up until Ultima Online and thats regarded as one of the great MMO's, Bullfrog carried on makling Themepark games a new Populous game and made two Dungeon Keeper games. So I don't see the grinding them into the ground as these games were well recieved by the gaming fraternity.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
Isn't that proving my point?
I'm not Gordon Gekko either but I'm still a Capitalist.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
Whats the point of standing against something and then cracking because its "my gaming sweetheart"? you are a corporations ideal customer, easily swayed by hype.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
The death-by-focus-group of Spore killed all goodwill I had for for Maxis.
Bf3 is still very much battlefield. If your complaining becayse they released 4 close quarters maps then get over it. Alot of people enjoy those maps and Dice is going to be releasing more big open maps soon (Armored Kill). Premium mode? What is that? Premium like COD Elite is a one time payment to get all the DLC at a lower price than if you payed for it individually, how is that a bad deal? Also Dice already released a statement saying that there will be other ways to get into the beta than pre purchasing MoH, so whats the fuss about? It makes good business sense for them to tag on the beta to MoH to boost its sales. I mean wouldnt you do the same?
People complain about EA because its popular to complain about EA, yet still spend money on their games. Fact of the matter is they are a business and while miss management may have caused some games to go south they still have created titles that most people enjoy. If you are complaining that EA is solely out to get money then you might as well never buy video games again because every developer and publisher is out to make money.
Scoobin it up on the daily.
1. No, the C&C series has been in a steady decline in quality with the last 3 iterations.
2. Sim City has recieved improved graphics and little improved features. Not exactly a challenge. the differences between 3000 & 4 is minimal. No I do not think of placing agriculture into its own industrial zone-type or having cities in "regions" with "segments" to be a big leap in gameplay.
3. Did you ACTUALLY name Ultima Online? Seriously? How far back are we going to go to try to defend EA? You have now gone from the current EA to back BEFORE several CEOs to a time when EA was still mostly just a DISTRIBUTOR in the PC field.
Try to find a company they have not screwed up in the last 8 years...
As much as we'd like to shit on EA for "ruining" Bioware, I can only think of one BioWare game that direct EA pressure and that was Dragon Age 2.
Mass Effect 3's ending had nothing to do with EA. BioWare was given a butload of money to make SWTOR so do you think it's really EA's fault that the game doesn't measure up to a lot of peoples expectations?
One thing I do hate about EA though, their customer service is abysmal. Easily the worst in the business.
Well, it is your perogative to do as you please with your money.
Personally, i dont boycott companies. I only boycott bad games. Dead Space 1 & 2 are good games, so i bought/played them disregarding who made them.
Yes, the corporate entity works that way.
They recieved funding based on what they proposed to make. And that places all judgemental blame solely on the managers in charge stating it was not only a good idea, but that its worth the money to do it.
This is why CEOs are forced to step down for bad moves being made and agreed to impliment because the CAPTAIN IS ALWAYS IN CHARGE OF HIS SHIP. Jebus.
Bioware is not the Bioware we knew when Mass Effect 1, Baldurs Gate and Neverwinter Nights 1 were created. Bioware was merged with Mythic and they aquired all those no talent mindbots of EA. SWTOR might have been in development before EA took over. But when EA did take over Mythic devs who worked on WAR moved onto continue work on SWTOR.
Its like how Square-Enix is run now. Everyone loved Square when it was Squaresoft, there games were revolutionary to the RPG market delivering compelling story and character design. When they merged with ENIX, there was a lot of shifting in positions. Founder Miyamoto was no longer majority share holder and ENIX president Fukushima became Chairmain and majority share holder. Sakaguchi whom you all would know as the creator of the Final Fantasy series left Square just before the merger to Square-Enix.
So basically, just because the company still holds the name "Bioware" doesn't mean that is it the Bioware we used to know.
"In the immediate future, we have this one, and then weve got another one that is actually going to be so were going to have, what we want to do, is in January, what were targeting to do, this may or may not happen, so you cant hold me to it. But what were targeting to do, is have a fun anniversary to the Ilum shenanigans that happened. An alien race might invade, and they might crash into Ilum and there might be some new activities that happen on the planet." ~Gabe Amatangelo
There are plenty of legitimate reasons to complain about EA. I honestly can't see how you could have read my post in this thread and act like it is not a legitimate reason to complain.
Also, I agree that BF3 is not a bad game, but it definitely lacks the vision that BF2 had. BF2 brought SO many awesome things to the table, when you compare it to 1942...jets, commander mode, helicopters, many more class options, squads, modern setting ...
But when you compare BF3 to BF2, all it really brought was more destructible terrain and better graphics.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
I'm not defending EA I'm trying to prove a point there's a difference and you moving the goalposts makes you arguement moot.
EA purchased Origin Systems in 1992 and produced multiple Ultima games including the Ultima Sandbox UO in 1997. Also when this arguement rears its head usually Origin are first on the list.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_acquisitions_by_Electronic_Arts
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.