|
On March 20 2013 01:12 Taekwon wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2013 22:02 blackone wrote:On March 19 2013 08:26 Taekwon wrote:On March 19 2013 06:09 blackone wrote:On March 19 2013 05:35 Taekwon wrote:
That's the spirit!
Now start doing better practices - like maybe no DRM?
Hmmmmmm? Always on is not the same as DRM, and as long as people pirate video games, publishers will try to stop them. I don't recall saying it was. And I don't think that will or should be the case. This isn't directed at you because I don't think anyone supports DRM but I do disagree with the idea that publishers will continue this practice. Anyone who bought a piece of property should be entitled to play it at any time, anywhere. Piracy is a widespread issue that will never, ever be stop or be stopped - it's an issue that along with security, needs to be dealt on the company's end without affecting the average consumer. It's fascinating how forgetful some gaming companies are becoming of grade school level public-business relations. When you're buying a game, you're not buying a piece of property (other than the actual DVD and the packaging). And I think SC2 and Diablo 3 have shown that always-on can be a great anti-piracy measure, even if you have to live with reddit shitstorms. You earnestly think that purchasing a product doesn't entitle you to playing it whenever or wherever you want it? Wings and D3 are laughable in comparison to their predecessors - their perception far precedes just reddit. If I buy a gameboy and pokemon red for 50 dollars, there should NOT be a stupid message popping up on the gameboy screen to say "Uh...you can't play", even if I'm on the fricking moon.
So what is your solution then? Games actually need to sell a LOT to earn back their investment. Game prices have been the same or even getting lower in the past 20 years, yet development costs have gone up by at least 10 times. With the rampant piracy and devaluation of games because of bundles and mobile/tablet platforms publishers and developers feel forced to do everything within their power to protect their games.
I agree, DRM does more harm than good, but the gamedev industry is a very tough and unstable industry. The animosity that game developers and publishers receive compared to how much effort they put in their games is mind boggling. It is like people have no clue how hard game developers work. It is quite incomparable to any other IT job I know, the crunches are brutal and you often have to relocate quite a bit and there are frequent lay offs after a game ships. How much cheers and praise piracy gets for essentially taking bread out of hard working peoples mouths is even more depressing.
|
Hopefully it will go up!
I need some better Madden Games.
|
Hopefully they stop ruining games, Fifa 13 is terrible compared to Fifa 12. Whoever thought putting a mechanic that operated at "random" which could completely change the outcome of a game is just retarded. Also momentum, aka scripting, is down right ridiculous.
|
I've been wanting to say those four letters so much  lol but I'll reside the 'large' urge. This is actually good imo, the company has been taking a terrible direction for many years and it's just simply losing it's prose.
I, for one, am excited to see if it decides to take a different turn.
|
On March 20 2013 02:18 blackone wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2013 01:12 Taekwon wrote:On March 19 2013 22:02 blackone wrote:On March 19 2013 08:26 Taekwon wrote:On March 19 2013 06:09 blackone wrote:On March 19 2013 05:35 Taekwon wrote:
That's the spirit!
Now start doing better practices - like maybe no DRM?
Hmmmmmm? Always on is not the same as DRM, and as long as people pirate video games, publishers will try to stop them. I don't recall saying it was. And I don't think that will or should be the case. This isn't directed at you because I don't think anyone supports DRM but I do disagree with the idea that publishers will continue this practice. Anyone who bought a piece of property should be entitled to play it at any time, anywhere. Piracy is a widespread issue that will never, ever be stop or be stopped - it's an issue that along with security, needs to be dealt on the company's end without affecting the average consumer. It's fascinating how forgetful some gaming companies are becoming of grade school level public-business relations. When you're buying a game, you're not buying a piece of property (other than the actual DVD and the packaging). And I think SC2 and Diablo 3 have shown that always-on can be a great anti-piracy measure, even if you have to live with reddit shitstorms. You earnestly think that purchasing a product doesn't entitle you to playing it whenever or wherever you want it? Wings and D3 are laughable in comparison to their predecessors - their perception far precedes just reddit. If a game says "REQUIRES ONLINE CONNECTION TO PLAY" on the box and I still buy it, than no, I am obviously not "entitled" to playing it whenever or wherever I want it. Wings of Liberty was a gigantic success, the only people who think its "laughable" are jaded Brood War veterans. Understandably so, but absolutely irrelevant compared to the masses who loved it.
lmfao, yep the only people that care about always online are jaded BW veterans.
|
Let's support companies for making good products and not support companies for making bad products. It's actually so easy to increase the quality of the stuff we consume, but it never seems to work.
I'd be happy to buy another EA product, the day they make a good one again.
|
On March 20 2013 09:04 Domus wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2013 01:12 Taekwon wrote:On March 19 2013 22:02 blackone wrote:On March 19 2013 08:26 Taekwon wrote:On March 19 2013 06:09 blackone wrote:On March 19 2013 05:35 Taekwon wrote:
That's the spirit!
Now start doing better practices - like maybe no DRM?
Hmmmmmm? Always on is not the same as DRM, and as long as people pirate video games, publishers will try to stop them. I don't recall saying it was. And I don't think that will or should be the case. This isn't directed at you because I don't think anyone supports DRM but I do disagree with the idea that publishers will continue this practice. Anyone who bought a piece of property should be entitled to play it at any time, anywhere. Piracy is a widespread issue that will never, ever be stop or be stopped - it's an issue that along with security, needs to be dealt on the company's end without affecting the average consumer. It's fascinating how forgetful some gaming companies are becoming of grade school level public-business relations. When you're buying a game, you're not buying a piece of property (other than the actual DVD and the packaging). And I think SC2 and Diablo 3 have shown that always-on can be a great anti-piracy measure, even if you have to live with reddit shitstorms. You earnestly think that purchasing a product doesn't entitle you to playing it whenever or wherever you want it? Wings and D3 are laughable in comparison to their predecessors - their perception far precedes just reddit. If I buy a gameboy and pokemon red for 50 dollars, there should NOT be a stupid message popping up on the gameboy screen to say "Uh...you can't play", even if I'm on the fricking moon. So what is your solution then? Games actually need to sell a LOT to earn back their investment. Game prices have been the same or even getting lower in the past 20 years, yet development costs have gone up by at least 10 times. With the rampant piracy and devaluation of games because of bundles and mobile/tablet platforms publishers and developers feel forced to do everything within their power to protect their games. I agree, DRM does more harm than good, but the gamedev industry is a very tough and unstable industry. The animosity that game developers and publishers receive compared to how much effort they put in their games is mind boggling. It is like people have no clue how hard game developers work. It is quite incomparable to any other IT job I know, the crunches are brutal and you often have to relocate quite a bit and there are frequent lay offs after a game ships. How much cheers and praise piracy gets for essentially taking bread out of hard working peoples mouths is even more depressing.
Games did sell a lot 10 years ago. EA and Blizzard entertainment didn't become as big as they are now by doing this shit they are doing to there costumers now. The gaming industry the last 10 years has change and not for the good. They are run by wall street CEO now that only care about the bottom line. Greed are controlling them now and I'm very happy that the gamers/costumers are finally starting to have enough. The gaming industry needs to return to what made them big and that means selling finished products with a certain standard. Not selling unfinished shit with future DLC to fix a broken game.
The constant lying, deceit and undercover marketing and combine that with inferior product no wonder EA is not doing well. And if the gaming industry doesn't change to what it once was they will fall and thats maybe a good thing. We already see very successfully Indie companies. Because they actually do what EA and blizzard entertainment did in the past. Respect there costumers and have integrity in what they create and sell
For me personally I didn't buy any EA games for a long time and I didn't even buy Hots because of what blizzard entertainment did to D3. There is a sickness in the industry today and its called greed! And hopefully us the consumers can purge it.
|
On March 20 2013 09:04 Domus wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2013 01:12 Taekwon wrote:On March 19 2013 22:02 blackone wrote:On March 19 2013 08:26 Taekwon wrote:On March 19 2013 06:09 blackone wrote:On March 19 2013 05:35 Taekwon wrote:
That's the spirit!
Now start doing better practices - like maybe no DRM?
Hmmmmmm? Always on is not the same as DRM, and as long as people pirate video games, publishers will try to stop them. I don't recall saying it was. And I don't think that will or should be the case. This isn't directed at you because I don't think anyone supports DRM but I do disagree with the idea that publishers will continue this practice. Anyone who bought a piece of property should be entitled to play it at any time, anywhere. Piracy is a widespread issue that will never, ever be stop or be stopped - it's an issue that along with security, needs to be dealt on the company's end without affecting the average consumer. It's fascinating how forgetful some gaming companies are becoming of grade school level public-business relations. When you're buying a game, you're not buying a piece of property (other than the actual DVD and the packaging). And I think SC2 and Diablo 3 have shown that always-on can be a great anti-piracy measure, even if you have to live with reddit shitstorms. You earnestly think that purchasing a product doesn't entitle you to playing it whenever or wherever you want it? Wings and D3 are laughable in comparison to their predecessors - their perception far precedes just reddit. If I buy a gameboy and pokemon red for 50 dollars, there should NOT be a stupid message popping up on the gameboy screen to say "Uh...you can't play", even if I'm on the fricking moon. So what is your solution then? Games actually need to sell a LOT to earn back their investment. Game prices have been the same or even getting lower in the past 20 years, yet development costs have gone up by at least 10 times. With the rampant piracy and devaluation of games because of bundles and mobile/tablet platforms publishers and developers feel forced to do everything within their power to protect their games. I agree, DRM does more harm than good, but the gamedev industry is a very tough and unstable industry. The animosity that game developers and publishers receive compared to how much effort they put in their games is mind boggling. It is like people have no clue how hard game developers work. It is quite incomparable to any other IT job I know, the crunches are brutal and you often have to relocate quite a bit and there are frequent lay offs after a game ships. How much cheers and praise piracy gets for essentially taking bread out of hard working peoples mouths is even more depressing.
If you only care about the bottom-line (Money), why would you get into the game industry? When you could save all that trouble and start a real estate agency or accounting company instead, and not have to struggle with small profit margins in an unstable industry. Its just insanity.
That's the problem with big game companies, they are unstable simply because they only care about the bottom-line. They only care about getting bigger and bigger, and then requiring more and more money to fill the needs of its ever increasing (and already absurd) size. This ends up becoming a huge bubble that the companies have to go into crisis mode when revenue stops increasing (which has to happen eventually).
Keep in mind that these kinds of greedy for-profit businesses work on the basis that they want more profit every year, to pay their shareholders/executives, that means less money proportionally goes into development each year as well. The problem is not piracy at all. In this industry companies are eventually going to hit a brick wall and stop making more money, and when that happens these companies that absurdly rely on positive forecasts every year are going to go into crisis mode. That's where the problem lies.
Note that Valve isn't having anything like the kind of problems that other big gaming companies have, its not to do with the business model, its that they basically don't have sponsors and shareholders to worry about, and act like a not-for-profit business. I'm pretty sure most if not all of the proceeds are directly invested straight back into Valve.
Even if piracy was as prevalent 20 years ago, game companies wouldn't need DRM because they didn't need to sell a million copies of a game just to break even, and didn't work on the same profit margins and greedy business models.
The fact that flat-lined revenue is a crisis for big game companies is their own damn fault, a game is a luxury not a necessity, we can't expect money to increasingly pour into game companies forever in an ever increasingly competitive market. If not for piracy, something else would have happened and these companies would have the same problem. A lot more revenue was generated from people playing cod, than first generation consoles, companies are making more money than ever before and are still complaining.
Its just dumb business logic to expect to run a business based on profit in the game industry, when there are much more viable markets to be conducting business in that way.
|
|
|
On March 20 2013 15:00 sluggaslamoo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2013 09:04 Domus wrote:On March 20 2013 01:12 Taekwon wrote:On March 19 2013 22:02 blackone wrote:On March 19 2013 08:26 Taekwon wrote:On March 19 2013 06:09 blackone wrote:On March 19 2013 05:35 Taekwon wrote:
That's the spirit!
Now start doing better practices - like maybe no DRM?
Hmmmmmm? Always on is not the same as DRM, and as long as people pirate video games, publishers will try to stop them. I don't recall saying it was. And I don't think that will or should be the case. This isn't directed at you because I don't think anyone supports DRM but I do disagree with the idea that publishers will continue this practice. Anyone who bought a piece of property should be entitled to play it at any time, anywhere. Piracy is a widespread issue that will never, ever be stop or be stopped - it's an issue that along with security, needs to be dealt on the company's end without affecting the average consumer. It's fascinating how forgetful some gaming companies are becoming of grade school level public-business relations. When you're buying a game, you're not buying a piece of property (other than the actual DVD and the packaging). And I think SC2 and Diablo 3 have shown that always-on can be a great anti-piracy measure, even if you have to live with reddit shitstorms. You earnestly think that purchasing a product doesn't entitle you to playing it whenever or wherever you want it? Wings and D3 are laughable in comparison to their predecessors - their perception far precedes just reddit. If I buy a gameboy and pokemon red for 50 dollars, there should NOT be a stupid message popping up on the gameboy screen to say "Uh...you can't play", even if I'm on the fricking moon. So what is your solution then? Games actually need to sell a LOT to earn back their investment. Game prices have been the same or even getting lower in the past 20 years, yet development costs have gone up by at least 10 times. With the rampant piracy and devaluation of games because of bundles and mobile/tablet platforms publishers and developers feel forced to do everything within their power to protect their games. I agree, DRM does more harm than good, but the gamedev industry is a very tough and unstable industry. The animosity that game developers and publishers receive compared to how much effort they put in their games is mind boggling. It is like people have no clue how hard game developers work. It is quite incomparable to any other IT job I know, the crunches are brutal and you often have to relocate quite a bit and there are frequent lay offs after a game ships. How much cheers and praise piracy gets for essentially taking bread out of hard working peoples mouths is even more depressing. If you only care about the bottom-line (Money), why would you get into the game industry? When you could save all that trouble and start a real estate agency or accounting company instead, and not have to struggle with small profit margins in an unstable industry. Its just insanity. That's the problem with big game companies, they are unstable simply because they only care about the bottom-line. They only care about getting bigger and bigger, and then requiring more and more money to fill the needs of its ever increasing (and already absurd) size. This ends up becoming a huge bubble that the companies have to go into crisis mode when revenue stops increasing (which has to happen eventually). Keep in mind that these kinds of greedy for-profit businesses work on the basis that they want more profit every year, to pay their shareholders/executives, that means less money proportionally goes into development each year as well. The problem is not piracy at all. In this industry companies are eventually going to hit a brick wall and stop making more money, and when that happens these companies that absurdly rely on positive forecasts every year are going to go into crisis mode. That's where the problem lies. Note that Valve isn't having anything like the kind of problems that other big gaming companies have, its not to do with the business model, its that they basically don't have sponsors and shareholders to worry about, and act like a not-for-profit business. I'm pretty sure most if not all of the proceeds are directly invested straight back into Valve. Even if piracy was as prevalent 20 years ago, game companies wouldn't need DRM because they didn't need to sell a million copies of a game just to break even, and didn't work on the same profit margins and greedy business models. The fact that flat-lined revenue is a crisis for big game companies is their own damn fault, a game is a luxury not a necessity, we can't expect money to increasingly pour into game companies forever in an ever increasingly competitive market. If not for piracy, something else would have happened and these companies would have the same problem. A lot more revenue was generated from people playing cod, than first generation consoles, companies are making more money than ever before and are still complaining. Its just dumb business logic to expect to run a business based on profit in the game industry, when there are much more viable markets to be conducting business in that way.
So that is your solution, stop making games because it does not make sense to make games? I agree with you though, it is simply dumb to start a game development company these days. It requires a ton of skill, dedication, risk, investment and time and a company gets little in return. I have worked in many different IT sectors and game development is by far the least rewarding in terms of revenue, but for me it is the most rewarding considering how fun it is to actually make games.
Sure, there are a hand full of companies that do manage to stay on top for a while. Someone mentioned Valve and Valve just has everything going for them, even though it is just a matter of time they make one product that is not perfect and get shit on. Look at Blizzard, one game, D3 does not live up to expectations and they take a massive hit in reputation that will have a major influence on future sales, even though they have been producing top quality games for decades.
It is like digging for gold or oil, there are a couple of success stories and a whole lot of failures. Also, the person who thinks the game development industry is run by greed is flat out wrong. Companies just want to stay in business so they can keep making games and one failure means bankruptcy and that can lead to very protective/safe game development with little innovation.
Just to be clear, game developers don't want to integrate DRM solutions in their games, it is a major hassle. Does anyone think that DRM would be in if there would not be piracy? But if you build 10000 cars and put them in a holding area and 9000 get stolen, then at some point you are going to put a lock or a fence somewhere.
|
On March 19 2013 09:52 unkkz wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2013 09:12 Itsmedudeman wrote:On March 19 2013 06:19 unkkz wrote:On March 19 2013 06:02 Grovbolle wrote:
Why do people buy EA games if they hate DRM? Speak with your wallet people, not that hard. People like my 12 year old nephew buy EA games. The "mindless masses" buy EA games. You have to consider that people on TL are a bit more dedicated to gaming then the average player these days hence has a superior taste/criteria or whatever. On topic i do doubt that this will change anything. EA likes money for their shareholders, current practices gets them lots of it so why would anything change. The fact that SW:ToR bombed hard wont change anything, the fact that Sim City was a clusterfuck wont change anything either. EA has been like this forever. And will be forever. The "mindless" masses are the people who think everyone else thinks the games suck ass. People who don't read reviews or just bandwagon on whatever internet sources say actually enjoy the game. It's pretty polarizing, but not everyone hates the games EA produces until someone tells them to. Last EA game i got was DA2, and that kinda sealed the deal for me. A complete murder of the series which i hope will be redeemed with DA3. DA2 is actually a really good example. Extremely low production time, extremely bad production value just to get it out while DA:O was still hot in everyones minds so it will sell more copies. I doubt, and hope that releasing DA2 or making it so rushed was not biowares decision. And reviews are a load of bull. DA2 got like game of the year awards all around and shit by various magazines being praised as "even better then the original" while anyone who has half a brain would know that it wasn´t even close. Several aspects were indeed improved but the overall game just wasn´t close. Think the metacritic reviewers score was 90%ish from journalists and like 20%ish from normal gamers.
man, I think I'm the only 'normal gamer' that likes DA2 because of sarcastic Hawke.
Not a very good reason to like the game as a whole, but still.
|
On March 20 2013 17:26 Domus wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2013 15:00 sluggaslamoo wrote:On March 20 2013 09:04 Domus wrote:On March 20 2013 01:12 Taekwon wrote:On March 19 2013 22:02 blackone wrote:On March 19 2013 08:26 Taekwon wrote:On March 19 2013 06:09 blackone wrote:On March 19 2013 05:35 Taekwon wrote:
That's the spirit!
Now start doing better practices - like maybe no DRM?
Hmmmmmm? Always on is not the same as DRM, and as long as people pirate video games, publishers will try to stop them. I don't recall saying it was. And I don't think that will or should be the case. This isn't directed at you because I don't think anyone supports DRM but I do disagree with the idea that publishers will continue this practice. Anyone who bought a piece of property should be entitled to play it at any time, anywhere. Piracy is a widespread issue that will never, ever be stop or be stopped - it's an issue that along with security, needs to be dealt on the company's end without affecting the average consumer. It's fascinating how forgetful some gaming companies are becoming of grade school level public-business relations. When you're buying a game, you're not buying a piece of property (other than the actual DVD and the packaging). And I think SC2 and Diablo 3 have shown that always-on can be a great anti-piracy measure, even if you have to live with reddit shitstorms. You earnestly think that purchasing a product doesn't entitle you to playing it whenever or wherever you want it? Wings and D3 are laughable in comparison to their predecessors - their perception far precedes just reddit. If I buy a gameboy and pokemon red for 50 dollars, there should NOT be a stupid message popping up on the gameboy screen to say "Uh...you can't play", even if I'm on the fricking moon. So what is your solution then? Games actually need to sell a LOT to earn back their investment. Game prices have been the same or even getting lower in the past 20 years, yet development costs have gone up by at least 10 times. With the rampant piracy and devaluation of games because of bundles and mobile/tablet platforms publishers and developers feel forced to do everything within their power to protect their games. I agree, DRM does more harm than good, but the gamedev industry is a very tough and unstable industry. The animosity that game developers and publishers receive compared to how much effort they put in their games is mind boggling. It is like people have no clue how hard game developers work. It is quite incomparable to any other IT job I know, the crunches are brutal and you often have to relocate quite a bit and there are frequent lay offs after a game ships. How much cheers and praise piracy gets for essentially taking bread out of hard working peoples mouths is even more depressing. If you only care about the bottom-line (Money), why would you get into the game industry? When you could save all that trouble and start a real estate agency or accounting company instead, and not have to struggle with small profit margins in an unstable industry. Its just insanity. That's the problem with big game companies, they are unstable simply because they only care about the bottom-line. They only care about getting bigger and bigger, and then requiring more and more money to fill the needs of its ever increasing (and already absurd) size. This ends up becoming a huge bubble that the companies have to go into crisis mode when revenue stops increasing (which has to happen eventually). Keep in mind that these kinds of greedy for-profit businesses work on the basis that they want more profit every year, to pay their shareholders/executives, that means less money proportionally goes into development each year as well. The problem is not piracy at all. In this industry companies are eventually going to hit a brick wall and stop making more money, and when that happens these companies that absurdly rely on positive forecasts every year are going to go into crisis mode. That's where the problem lies. Note that Valve isn't having anything like the kind of problems that other big gaming companies have, its not to do with the business model, its that they basically don't have sponsors and shareholders to worry about, and act like a not-for-profit business. I'm pretty sure most if not all of the proceeds are directly invested straight back into Valve. Even if piracy was as prevalent 20 years ago, game companies wouldn't need DRM because they didn't need to sell a million copies of a game just to break even, and didn't work on the same profit margins and greedy business models. The fact that flat-lined revenue is a crisis for big game companies is their own damn fault, a game is a luxury not a necessity, we can't expect money to increasingly pour into game companies forever in an ever increasingly competitive market. If not for piracy, something else would have happened and these companies would have the same problem. A lot more revenue was generated from people playing cod, than first generation consoles, companies are making more money than ever before and are still complaining. Its just dumb business logic to expect to run a business based on profit in the game industry, when there are much more viable markets to be conducting business in that way. So that is your solution, stop making games because it does not make sense to make games? I agree with you though, it is simply dumb to start a game development company these days. It requires a ton of skill, dedication, risk, investment and time and a company gets little in return. I have worked in many different IT sectors and game development is by far the least rewarding in terms of revenue, but for me it is the most rewarding considering how fun it is to actually make games. Sure, there are a hand full of companies that do manage to stay on top for a while. Someone mentioned Valve and Valve just has everything going for them, even though it is just a matter of time they make one product that is not perfect and get shit on. Look at Blizzard, one game, D3 does not live up to expectations and they take a massive hit in reputation that will have a major influence on future sales, even though they have been producing top quality games for decades. It is like digging for gold or oil, there are a couple of success stories and a whole lot of failures. Also, the person who thinks the game development industry is run by greed is flat out wrong. Companies just want to stay in business so they can keep making games and one failure means bankruptcy and that can lead to very protective/safe game development with little innovation. Just to be clear, game developers don't want to integrate DRM solutions in their games, it is a major hassle. Does anyone think that DRM would be in if there would not be piracy? But if you build 10000 cars and put them in a holding area and 9000 get stolen, then at some point you are going to put a lock or a fence somewhere.
Don't act like blizz's reputation started going downhill just because D3 didn't live up to expectations. It wasn't a terrible game but the reason the majority of people I met started hating on blizzard was because of their PR in relations to the game rather than the game itself. "Playing game wrong" "D2 wasn't that good you don't know what your talking about" not to mention the entire team bashing Brevik which essentially verbalized the views of a lot of the fans so it wasn't just a big fuck you to him.
The entire industry isn't run by greed that is true, plenty of great indie games I have played are on par with AAA titles in terms of fun and usually better with continued support, and therein lies the problem.
Most AAA gaming studios do not respect their consumers at all and view them as walking wallets, they sell their products based on addiction and releasing iterations that are little more than small patches as fully priced games. Not to mention cutting content and charging a premium for it. I don't think in any other industry this shit would fly for long. Thankfully blizzard doesn't engage in these practices so they do deserve a level of respect IMO.
I'm not naive enough to think that other industries wouldn't operate the same way if they could but they at least have the decency to pretend they are passionate about making us (the consumers) happy rather than gouging us for every penny we are worth.
Saying that though, there is a reason the large game companies are viewed with a great deal of cynicism and spite and most of it is warranted.
|
On March 20 2013 17:54 zbedlam wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2013 17:26 Domus wrote:On March 20 2013 15:00 sluggaslamoo wrote:On March 20 2013 09:04 Domus wrote:On March 20 2013 01:12 Taekwon wrote:On March 19 2013 22:02 blackone wrote:On March 19 2013 08:26 Taekwon wrote:On March 19 2013 06:09 blackone wrote:On March 19 2013 05:35 Taekwon wrote:
That's the spirit!
Now start doing better practices - like maybe no DRM?
Hmmmmmm? Always on is not the same as DRM, and as long as people pirate video games, publishers will try to stop them. I don't recall saying it was. And I don't think that will or should be the case. This isn't directed at you because I don't think anyone supports DRM but I do disagree with the idea that publishers will continue this practice. Anyone who bought a piece of property should be entitled to play it at any time, anywhere. Piracy is a widespread issue that will never, ever be stop or be stopped - it's an issue that along with security, needs to be dealt on the company's end without affecting the average consumer. It's fascinating how forgetful some gaming companies are becoming of grade school level public-business relations. When you're buying a game, you're not buying a piece of property (other than the actual DVD and the packaging). And I think SC2 and Diablo 3 have shown that always-on can be a great anti-piracy measure, even if you have to live with reddit shitstorms. You earnestly think that purchasing a product doesn't entitle you to playing it whenever or wherever you want it? Wings and D3 are laughable in comparison to their predecessors - their perception far precedes just reddit. If I buy a gameboy and pokemon red for 50 dollars, there should NOT be a stupid message popping up on the gameboy screen to say "Uh...you can't play", even if I'm on the fricking moon. So what is your solution then? Games actually need to sell a LOT to earn back their investment. Game prices have been the same or even getting lower in the past 20 years, yet development costs have gone up by at least 10 times. With the rampant piracy and devaluation of games because of bundles and mobile/tablet platforms publishers and developers feel forced to do everything within their power to protect their games. I agree, DRM does more harm than good, but the gamedev industry is a very tough and unstable industry. The animosity that game developers and publishers receive compared to how much effort they put in their games is mind boggling. It is like people have no clue how hard game developers work. It is quite incomparable to any other IT job I know, the crunches are brutal and you often have to relocate quite a bit and there are frequent lay offs after a game ships. How much cheers and praise piracy gets for essentially taking bread out of hard working peoples mouths is even more depressing. If you only care about the bottom-line (Money), why would you get into the game industry? When you could save all that trouble and start a real estate agency or accounting company instead, and not have to struggle with small profit margins in an unstable industry. Its just insanity. That's the problem with big game companies, they are unstable simply because they only care about the bottom-line. They only care about getting bigger and bigger, and then requiring more and more money to fill the needs of its ever increasing (and already absurd) size. This ends up becoming a huge bubble that the companies have to go into crisis mode when revenue stops increasing (which has to happen eventually). Keep in mind that these kinds of greedy for-profit businesses work on the basis that they want more profit every year, to pay their shareholders/executives, that means less money proportionally goes into development each year as well. The problem is not piracy at all. In this industry companies are eventually going to hit a brick wall and stop making more money, and when that happens these companies that absurdly rely on positive forecasts every year are going to go into crisis mode. That's where the problem lies. Note that Valve isn't having anything like the kind of problems that other big gaming companies have, its not to do with the business model, its that they basically don't have sponsors and shareholders to worry about, and act like a not-for-profit business. I'm pretty sure most if not all of the proceeds are directly invested straight back into Valve. Even if piracy was as prevalent 20 years ago, game companies wouldn't need DRM because they didn't need to sell a million copies of a game just to break even, and didn't work on the same profit margins and greedy business models. The fact that flat-lined revenue is a crisis for big game companies is their own damn fault, a game is a luxury not a necessity, we can't expect money to increasingly pour into game companies forever in an ever increasingly competitive market. If not for piracy, something else would have happened and these companies would have the same problem. A lot more revenue was generated from people playing cod, than first generation consoles, companies are making more money than ever before and are still complaining. Its just dumb business logic to expect to run a business based on profit in the game industry, when there are much more viable markets to be conducting business in that way. So that is your solution, stop making games because it does not make sense to make games? I agree with you though, it is simply dumb to start a game development company these days. It requires a ton of skill, dedication, risk, investment and time and a company gets little in return. I have worked in many different IT sectors and game development is by far the least rewarding in terms of revenue, but for me it is the most rewarding considering how fun it is to actually make games. Sure, there are a hand full of companies that do manage to stay on top for a while. Someone mentioned Valve and Valve just has everything going for them, even though it is just a matter of time they make one product that is not perfect and get shit on. Look at Blizzard, one game, D3 does not live up to expectations and they take a massive hit in reputation that will have a major influence on future sales, even though they have been producing top quality games for decades. It is like digging for gold or oil, there are a couple of success stories and a whole lot of failures. Also, the person who thinks the game development industry is run by greed is flat out wrong. Companies just want to stay in business so they can keep making games and one failure means bankruptcy and that can lead to very protective/safe game development with little innovation. Just to be clear, game developers don't want to integrate DRM solutions in their games, it is a major hassle. Does anyone think that DRM would be in if there would not be piracy? But if you build 10000 cars and put them in a holding area and 9000 get stolen, then at some point you are going to put a lock or a fence somewhere. Don't act like blizz's reputation started going downhill just because D3 didn't live up to expectations. It wasn't a terrible game but the reason the majority of people I met started hating on blizzard was because of their PR in relations to the game rather than the game itself. "Playing game wrong" "D2 wasn't that good you don't know what your talking about" not to mention the entire team bashing Brevik which essentially verbalized the views of a lot of the fans so it wasn't just a big fuck you to him. The entire industry isn't run by greed that is true, plenty of great indie games I have played are on par with AAA titles in terms of fun and usually better with continued support, and therein lies the problem. Most AAA gaming studios do not respect their consumers at all and view them as walking wallets, they sell their products based on addiction and releasing iterations that are little more than small patches as fully priced games. Not to mention cutting content and charging a premium for it. I don't think in any other industry this shit would fly for long. Thankfully blizzard doesn't engage in these practices so they do deserve a level of respect IMO. I'm not naive enough to think that other industries wouldn't operate the same way if they could but they at least have the decency to pretend they are passionate about making us (the consumers) happy rather than gouging us for every penny we are worth. Saying that though, there is a reason the large game companies are viewed with a great deal of cynicism and spite and most of it is warranted.
Well, like I said earlier, a AAA game needs to earn a lot to earn back its investment. Add-ons are another way to earn back the investment. It is really not that it is greed, having a staff of a 50-100 people working for 3 years costs a lot of money. It is just trying to keep your head above the water in a very competitive industry.
I agree, indies are taking a different approach. But most indies I know are either lucky or crazy in the risks they take. They often put everything on the line both financially and their social life to make that one game ( I am an indie game dev myself these days so I know what I am talking about  ). But there aren't that many indies that can keep doing it for more than a couple of years and the ones that do make it often resort to the same methods AAA studios do, like making expansions, sequels, etc.
|
On March 20 2013 17:26 Domus wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2013 15:00 sluggaslamoo wrote:On March 20 2013 09:04 Domus wrote:On March 20 2013 01:12 Taekwon wrote:On March 19 2013 22:02 blackone wrote:On March 19 2013 08:26 Taekwon wrote:On March 19 2013 06:09 blackone wrote:On March 19 2013 05:35 Taekwon wrote:
That's the spirit!
Now start doing better practices - like maybe no DRM?
Hmmmmmm? Always on is not the same as DRM, and as long as people pirate video games, publishers will try to stop them. I don't recall saying it was. And I don't think that will or should be the case. This isn't directed at you because I don't think anyone supports DRM but I do disagree with the idea that publishers will continue this practice. Anyone who bought a piece of property should be entitled to play it at any time, anywhere. Piracy is a widespread issue that will never, ever be stop or be stopped - it's an issue that along with security, needs to be dealt on the company's end without affecting the average consumer. It's fascinating how forgetful some gaming companies are becoming of grade school level public-business relations. When you're buying a game, you're not buying a piece of property (other than the actual DVD and the packaging). And I think SC2 and Diablo 3 have shown that always-on can be a great anti-piracy measure, even if you have to live with reddit shitstorms. You earnestly think that purchasing a product doesn't entitle you to playing it whenever or wherever you want it? Wings and D3 are laughable in comparison to their predecessors - their perception far precedes just reddit. If I buy a gameboy and pokemon red for 50 dollars, there should NOT be a stupid message popping up on the gameboy screen to say "Uh...you can't play", even if I'm on the fricking moon. So what is your solution then? Games actually need to sell a LOT to earn back their investment. Game prices have been the same or even getting lower in the past 20 years, yet development costs have gone up by at least 10 times. With the rampant piracy and devaluation of games because of bundles and mobile/tablet platforms publishers and developers feel forced to do everything within their power to protect their games. I agree, DRM does more harm than good, but the gamedev industry is a very tough and unstable industry. The animosity that game developers and publishers receive compared to how much effort they put in their games is mind boggling. It is like people have no clue how hard game developers work. It is quite incomparable to any other IT job I know, the crunches are brutal and you often have to relocate quite a bit and there are frequent lay offs after a game ships. How much cheers and praise piracy gets for essentially taking bread out of hard working peoples mouths is even more depressing. If you only care about the bottom-line (Money), why would you get into the game industry? When you could save all that trouble and start a real estate agency or accounting company instead, and not have to struggle with small profit margins in an unstable industry. Its just insanity. That's the problem with big game companies, they are unstable simply because they only care about the bottom-line. They only care about getting bigger and bigger, and then requiring more and more money to fill the needs of its ever increasing (and already absurd) size. This ends up becoming a huge bubble that the companies have to go into crisis mode when revenue stops increasing (which has to happen eventually). Keep in mind that these kinds of greedy for-profit businesses work on the basis that they want more profit every year, to pay their shareholders/executives, that means less money proportionally goes into development each year as well. The problem is not piracy at all. In this industry companies are eventually going to hit a brick wall and stop making more money, and when that happens these companies that absurdly rely on positive forecasts every year are going to go into crisis mode. That's where the problem lies. Note that Valve isn't having anything like the kind of problems that other big gaming companies have, its not to do with the business model, its that they basically don't have sponsors and shareholders to worry about, and act like a not-for-profit business. I'm pretty sure most if not all of the proceeds are directly invested straight back into Valve. Even if piracy was as prevalent 20 years ago, game companies wouldn't need DRM because they didn't need to sell a million copies of a game just to break even, and didn't work on the same profit margins and greedy business models. The fact that flat-lined revenue is a crisis for big game companies is their own damn fault, a game is a luxury not a necessity, we can't expect money to increasingly pour into game companies forever in an ever increasingly competitive market. If not for piracy, something else would have happened and these companies would have the same problem. A lot more revenue was generated from people playing cod, than first generation consoles, companies are making more money than ever before and are still complaining. Its just dumb business logic to expect to run a business based on profit in the game industry, when there are much more viable markets to be conducting business in that way. So that is your solution, stop making games because it does not make sense to make games? I agree with you though, it is simply dumb to start a game development company these days. It requires a ton of skill, dedication, risk, investment and time and a company gets little in return. I have worked in many different IT sectors and game development is by far the least rewarding in terms of revenue, but for me it is the most rewarding considering how fun it is to actually make games. Sure, there are a hand full of companies that do manage to stay on top for a while. Someone mentioned Valve and Valve just has everything going for them, even though it is just a matter of time they make one product that is not perfect and get shit on. Look at Blizzard, one game, D3 does not live up to expectations and they take a massive hit in reputation that will have a major influence on future sales, even though they have been producing top quality games for decades. It is like digging for gold or oil, there are a couple of success stories and a whole lot of failures. Also, the person who thinks the game development industry is run by greed is flat out wrong. Companies just want to stay in business so they can keep making games and one failure means bankruptcy and that can lead to very protective/safe game development with little innovation.
You're exaggerating the issues by a massive degree.
One failure only means bankruptcy when millions of dollars are spent on it. And for that matter, it has to be an absolutely spectacular failure to destroy a massive company.
Take a look at Gearbox. Duke Nukem Forever, complete flop...but it certainly didn't kill any hype for Borderlands 2. Aliens: Colonial Marines, a completely trash game that got brutalized by players and reviewers...no bankruptcy.
The only time a single game is going to destroy an entire company is when they overspend, devote almost everything they have into it, and fail to turn profit. Anything short of that means the CEO actually managed his resources properly.
Just to be clear, game developers don't want to integrate DRM solutions in their games, it is a major hassle. Does anyone think that DRM would be in if there would not be piracy? But if you build 10000 cars and put them in a holding area and 9000 get stolen, then at some point you are going to put a lock or a fence somewhere.
Car analogies are always so stupid...
If you build 10000 cars, find 20000 exact duplicates on the road the next day, but still sell 98% of your cars, would you keep every employee you have under complete security lockdown for the entirety of their employment? And when all of your employees quit, do you act as though it was the copycats that drove away your work force?
DRM is never about recovering losses. It's about pretending that potential sales are recoverable lost sales, and sacrificing reputation, customer rapport and real money and resources into the hopes that you gain enough of those potential sales to offset the differences.
|
On March 20 2013 18:20 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2013 17:26 Domus wrote:On March 20 2013 15:00 sluggaslamoo wrote:On March 20 2013 09:04 Domus wrote:On March 20 2013 01:12 Taekwon wrote:On March 19 2013 22:02 blackone wrote:On March 19 2013 08:26 Taekwon wrote:On March 19 2013 06:09 blackone wrote:On March 19 2013 05:35 Taekwon wrote:
That's the spirit!
Now start doing better practices - like maybe no DRM?
Hmmmmmm? Always on is not the same as DRM, and as long as people pirate video games, publishers will try to stop them. I don't recall saying it was. And I don't think that will or should be the case. This isn't directed at you because I don't think anyone supports DRM but I do disagree with the idea that publishers will continue this practice. Anyone who bought a piece of property should be entitled to play it at any time, anywhere. Piracy is a widespread issue that will never, ever be stop or be stopped - it's an issue that along with security, needs to be dealt on the company's end without affecting the average consumer. It's fascinating how forgetful some gaming companies are becoming of grade school level public-business relations. When you're buying a game, you're not buying a piece of property (other than the actual DVD and the packaging). And I think SC2 and Diablo 3 have shown that always-on can be a great anti-piracy measure, even if you have to live with reddit shitstorms. You earnestly think that purchasing a product doesn't entitle you to playing it whenever or wherever you want it? Wings and D3 are laughable in comparison to their predecessors - their perception far precedes just reddit. If I buy a gameboy and pokemon red for 50 dollars, there should NOT be a stupid message popping up on the gameboy screen to say "Uh...you can't play", even if I'm on the fricking moon. So what is your solution then? Games actually need to sell a LOT to earn back their investment. Game prices have been the same or even getting lower in the past 20 years, yet development costs have gone up by at least 10 times. With the rampant piracy and devaluation of games because of bundles and mobile/tablet platforms publishers and developers feel forced to do everything within their power to protect their games. I agree, DRM does more harm than good, but the gamedev industry is a very tough and unstable industry. The animosity that game developers and publishers receive compared to how much effort they put in their games is mind boggling. It is like people have no clue how hard game developers work. It is quite incomparable to any other IT job I know, the crunches are brutal and you often have to relocate quite a bit and there are frequent lay offs after a game ships. How much cheers and praise piracy gets for essentially taking bread out of hard working peoples mouths is even more depressing. If you only care about the bottom-line (Money), why would you get into the game industry? When you could save all that trouble and start a real estate agency or accounting company instead, and not have to struggle with small profit margins in an unstable industry. Its just insanity. That's the problem with big game companies, they are unstable simply because they only care about the bottom-line. They only care about getting bigger and bigger, and then requiring more and more money to fill the needs of its ever increasing (and already absurd) size. This ends up becoming a huge bubble that the companies have to go into crisis mode when revenue stops increasing (which has to happen eventually). Keep in mind that these kinds of greedy for-profit businesses work on the basis that they want more profit every year, to pay their shareholders/executives, that means less money proportionally goes into development each year as well. The problem is not piracy at all. In this industry companies are eventually going to hit a brick wall and stop making more money, and when that happens these companies that absurdly rely on positive forecasts every year are going to go into crisis mode. That's where the problem lies. Note that Valve isn't having anything like the kind of problems that other big gaming companies have, its not to do with the business model, its that they basically don't have sponsors and shareholders to worry about, and act like a not-for-profit business. I'm pretty sure most if not all of the proceeds are directly invested straight back into Valve. Even if piracy was as prevalent 20 years ago, game companies wouldn't need DRM because they didn't need to sell a million copies of a game just to break even, and didn't work on the same profit margins and greedy business models. The fact that flat-lined revenue is a crisis for big game companies is their own damn fault, a game is a luxury not a necessity, we can't expect money to increasingly pour into game companies forever in an ever increasingly competitive market. If not for piracy, something else would have happened and these companies would have the same problem. A lot more revenue was generated from people playing cod, than first generation consoles, companies are making more money than ever before and are still complaining. Its just dumb business logic to expect to run a business based on profit in the game industry, when there are much more viable markets to be conducting business in that way. So that is your solution, stop making games because it does not make sense to make games? I agree with you though, it is simply dumb to start a game development company these days. It requires a ton of skill, dedication, risk, investment and time and a company gets little in return. I have worked in many different IT sectors and game development is by far the least rewarding in terms of revenue, but for me it is the most rewarding considering how fun it is to actually make games. Sure, there are a hand full of companies that do manage to stay on top for a while. Someone mentioned Valve and Valve just has everything going for them, even though it is just a matter of time they make one product that is not perfect and get shit on. Look at Blizzard, one game, D3 does not live up to expectations and they take a massive hit in reputation that will have a major influence on future sales, even though they have been producing top quality games for decades. It is like digging for gold or oil, there are a couple of success stories and a whole lot of failures. Also, the person who thinks the game development industry is run by greed is flat out wrong. Companies just want to stay in business so they can keep making games and one failure means bankruptcy and that can lead to very protective/safe game development with little innovation. You're exaggerating the issues by a massive degree. One failure only means bankruptcy when millions of dollars are spent on it. And for that matter, it has to be an absolutely spectacular failure to destroy a massive company. Take a look at Gearbox. Duke Nukem Forever, complete flop...but it certainly didn't kill any hype for Borderlands 2. Aliens: Colonial Marines, a completely trash game that got brutalized by players and reviewers...no bankruptcy. The only time a single game is going to destroy an entire company is when they overspend, devote almost everything they have into it, and fail to turn profit. Anything short of that means the CEO actually managed his resources properly. Show nested quote +Just to be clear, game developers don't want to integrate DRM solutions in their games, it is a major hassle. Does anyone think that DRM would be in if there would not be piracy? But if you build 10000 cars and put them in a holding area and 9000 get stolen, then at some point you are going to put a lock or a fence somewhere. Car analogies are always so stupid... If you build 10000 cars, find 20000 exact duplicates on the road the next day, but still sell 98% of your cars, would you keep every employee you have under complete security lockdown for the entirety of their employment? And when all of your employees quit, do you act as though it was the copycats that drove away your work force? DRM is never about recovering losses. It's about pretending that potential sales are recoverable lost sales, and sacrificing reputation, customer rapport and real money and resources into the hopes that you gain enough of those potential sales to offset the differences.
No, I am not exaggerating at all. You thinking I am exaggerating shows that you don't know how bad it really is. Maybe there are a couple of companies from the 90's that still had some money. Back then 1 success could cover about 4 failures. But the newer game development studios really can't survive a single failure. Hell, the money even isn't at the game development studios anymore, it is at the publishers. Game development studios get "hired" to build a game by a publisher, if it fails the game development studio is done. The money a game development studio gets for making a game covers only that game, nothing more.
Like I said, DRM is stupid, but people spend more time blaming DRM than they spend actively speaking out against piracy, and that is what annoys me. DRM is there because if you don't you will get a 90%+ piracy rate, and again that is no exaggeration. I am not saying this means a company misses out on 90% of its sales, but it does make a big difference.
|
Making expansions, sequels and DLC is fine. I have no problem with developers being there to make money and nothing else, its the way most businesses operate. It's the way Blizzard operates too but they at least realise that continued support of their games and releasing quality products makes customers like them and want to buy from them in the future.
However, the gaming industry in general seems to be a bit behind the trend when it comes to selling products. Most people do not want to buy products from a company that doesn't treat them with respect as consumers.
Releasing products half finished with misleading advertising, paid reviews etc makes people not want to buy products from you. The industry itself has a poisonous culture that thrives on exploiting its employees and gullible morons. Eventually people will get sick of this shit and stop working for and buying goods from companies that have this attitude.
I am aware making software is incredibly expensive. If you try and pull the same shit that most AAA gaming company pulls in any other sect of the IT software industry your company would crash and burn and you would be laughed out of the room.
The companies that make quality games and products still make the most money, people are learning and eventually companies like EA will go under or adapt.
I can almost guarantee you companies like Blizzard or Valve are fairing better than EA and I would say that is attributed to the fact they actually care about their public image.
|
On March 20 2013 18:38 zbedlam wrote:
The companies that make quality games and products still make the most money, people are learning and eventually companies like EA will go under or adapt. I disagree. I think EA is how it is now and not dying because of what it's done. It caters lots to the average Joe, the ignorant, and the casual gamers (and such people will never go away); they make cash cows and food for the masses. They are a McDonalds of the gaming industry. Their products are very successful despite many them being of poorer quality than others.
I'm not a fan of it, but it's the way things go, particularly in a capitalist world where money is the bottom line.
|
tl;dr: If you don't like a game or the company that develops or publishes it, then don't buy it. Simple as that.
I'll second the suggestion of protesting with your wallet. I'm a longtime Command & Conquer fan, having played all of the games (except Sole Survivor, since I didn't have an Internet connection then) up to Kane's Wrath. While Kane's Wrath was not a bad game per se, the fact that EA abandoned it so quickly in favor of Red Alert 3 was the straw that broke the camel's back.
I should've seen it coming, too, since the Kane's Wrath box actually says that it has a beta key for Red Alert 3 (the next game in the franchise, which was a year away). Sure enough, Kane's Wrath was abandoned after only a few patches, leaving it an unfinished, unbalanced mess. To add insult to injury, the ending of Kane's Wrath was a blatant advertisement for C&C 4.
I didn't stop buying EA games, but I did avoid doing so. The last EA game I bought was Dragon Age and its expansion on Steam, and only because it was on sale for a huge discount, and because it was made by Bioware. Despite its critical and popular acclaim, Dragon Age Origins actually has a ton of bugs and balance issues beneath the surface; on par for an EA game. Most of the Archery powers don't work as advertised, and mages are OP as hell. Still fun to play, though.
|
On March 20 2013 17:34 DoNotDisturb wrote:
Last EA game i got was DA2, and that kinda sealed the deal for me. A complete murder of the series which i hope will be redeemed with DA3. DA2 is actually a really good example. Extremely low production time, extremely bad production value just to get it out while DA:O was still hot in everyones minds so it will sell more copies. I doubt, and hope that releasing DA2 or making it so rushed was not biowares decision.
And reviews are a load of bull. DA2 got like game of the year awards all around and shit by various magazines being praised as "even better then the original" while anyone who has half a brain would know that it wasn´t even close. Several aspects were indeed improved but the overall game just wasn´t close. Think the metacritic reviewers score was 90%ish from journalists and like 20%ish from normal gamers. I never played it because I didn't like the original. I'm kinda curious what I'd think of it, but I'd guess I'd say it's about the same.
I felt the original Dragon Age was more or less mediocre 'garbage' just like some/many EA-developed games (I don't mean it's a bad game, even calling it mediocre is perhaps a bit harsh, but it just isn't anything special, which is huge when there's lots of great games out there and only a limited amount of time to play); The developers (seemed to focus far too much on voiceovers and graphics; that's pretty much all the game had going for it. The game had like 1/10th the dialogue and coolness, and other quality stuff (items, spells? non/less-linear events, AI, difficulty, etc.) as an older game like Baldur's Gate 2. I can only assume this is due to the fact that adding more story or more items or more spells or more dialogue would mean that they'd have to spend EVEN MORE on graphics and voiceovers. The problem with making a game with too much good graphics or things like voiceovers is that you get really limited in adding quality gameplay content. Dragon Age is a game where it just seems to scream this, and I'll remember this problem in future games to come for a long time.
On March 20 2013 19:22 Eternal Dalek wrote:
tl;dr: If you don't like a game or the company that develops or publishes it, then don't buy it. Simple as that.. I'm not sure if you thought about this when you said it, but that's true when people can pirate games to try them out. Otherwise, people won't know if they dislike a game without being able to play it (although boycotting a company would still work). With online-only games, even the try-before-you-buy option is removed though.
|
On March 20 2013 19:15 Xapti wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2013 18:38 zbedlam wrote:
The companies that make quality games and products still make the most money, people are learning and eventually companies like EA will go under or adapt. I disagree. I think EA is how it is now and not dying because of what it's done. It caters lots to the average Joe, the ignorant, and the casual gamers (and such people will never go away); they make cash cows and food for the masses. They are a McDonalds of the gaming industry. Their products are very successful despite many them being of poorer quality than others. I'm not a fan of it, but it's the way things go, particularly in a capitalist world where money is the bottom line.
Definitely debatable.
But remember when McDonalds starting getting a bad name they went on a huge marketing spree touting how much they have improved etc etc?
It may take awhile but eventually even the ignorant masses will learn.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
