backtop


Print 69 comment(s) - last by FaceMaster.. on May 20 at 3:26 PM

27 EA games last year went platinum, 15 went double platinum

In one of the biggest years ever in gaming, Electronic Arts posted a $454 million net loss in its fiscal 2008. That may come as a bit of a surprise, given that 27 of EA’s titles this year sold more than 1 million units, and 15 that sold more than 2 million.

In fiscal 2007, EA had 24 titles that surpassed the million mark, but managed a net income of $76 million. That’s not to say that EA just finished a bad year – far from it, as the games maker reported a net revenue of $3.665 billion in fiscal year ended March 31, 2008, up 19 percent as compared with $3.091 billion for the prior year.

In fact, the past fourth quarter was a record setting one, with sales up 84 percent to an impressive $1.13 billion. The record period was driven by PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 cross-platform titles Burnout Paradise, Army of Two and Rock Band. Despite that, net loss for the quarter was $94 million as compared with a net loss of $25 million for the prior year.

The cause for the loss can be partly attributed to the acquisition of game development studios BioWare Corp. and Pandemic Studios in a deal worth $860 million. Though not exactly of the same acquisition type, EA managed to lure former top Microsoft executive Peter Moore away from the Xbox business to helm EA Sports.

It’s clear that EA’s not finished in growing its family just yet. The massive game publisher recently borrowed $1 billion from Morgan Stanley and other lenders to help finance a possible acquisition of Take-Two Interactive.

EA also had other victories during the year, including it claiming itself the number one publisher across all platforms in North America with 19 percent share and in Europe with 20 percent share. The Sims franchise surpassed the 100 million copies sold milestone, with plenty more on the way. EA also secured exclusive rights from Hasbro to create games based upon intellectual properties including Monopoly, Scrabble, Yahtzee, Nerf, Tonka and Littlest Pet Shop.

EA CEO John Riccitiello earlier this year said publically that it’s his aim to improve the management of work environment of the company’s developers and other employees. In the recent financial report, EA revealed that a December 2007 employee satisfaction survey showed significant improvement over the last appraisal in 2004. Results included a double-digit gain in employee engagement.

"A year ago, we committed to an aggressive change agenda at EA. Our employees stepped up to the challenge and we finished fiscal year 2008 with non-GAAP revenue up 30% to $4 billion – a record for any third-party publisher. Our operating margins were flat to our prior year. On balance, we're very pleased with our revenue growth, but not yet happy with our profit margins," said Riccitiello. "In fiscal 2009, we expect to deliver another $1 billion in revenue growth and to double our operating profit on the strength of our slate of titles."



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

EA is Huge...
By Hiawa23 on 5/14/2008 10:13:30 AM , Rating: 2
If you run a company you kind of want to pattern yourself like EA which sounds alot like Microsoft.

It's an eat or be ate world & seems like EA is doing all the eating.

Like any other dev, I like alot of EA games, don't like others, so I have no issue with em, but this may not be good for the gaming industry if they have very little competition, or may not be good for gamers. My only issue with them acquiring Take 2 is what will happen to the 2k Sports which I have loved since the Dreamcast days & prefer them to the EA offerings.




RE: EA is Huge...
By FITCamaro on 5/14/2008 10:19:55 AM , Rating: 5
EA will continue buying companies until they own everyone. Even companies like Epic might some day disappear. Take 2 has a good thing going the way they are. But unfortunately stock holders care more about how much they can get for their stock than making good games.


RE: EA is Huge...
By bighairycamel on 5/14/2008 11:23:04 AM , Rating: 5
Nah that's not true. Activision/Bizzard is way too big for EA to purchase... let's just hope it stays that way.


RE: EA is Huge...
By HVAC on 5/14/2008 11:38:34 AM , Rating: 2
Now every software company is EA!

(my apologies to Demolition Man)


RE: EA is Huge...
By killerroach on 5/14/08, Rating: 0
RE: EA is Huge...
By KernD on 5/14/2008 12:14:13 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
heavy-handed control of internal studios


Do you work for Activision? I do, and thats just not true, Activision's business model with it's studios is not like that. Our studio boss leads the studio, not some guy back at the HQ.


RE: EA is Huge...
By OblivionMage on 5/14/2008 3:53:37 PM , Rating: 2
Blizzard, activision, and a couple other are owned by Vivendi, who is 102981204983248372 times bigger then EA.


RE: EA is Huge...
By kyleb2112 on 5/16/2008 1:59:15 AM , Rating: 2
Vivendi is exactly 102981204983248373 times bigger. Sheesh, get your numbers right.


RE: EA is Huge...
By Quiescent on 5/14/2008 11:48:55 AM , Rating: 5
And as they buy those companies out, gaming as we knew (because it's already started), will be so crappy, that gaming will become just a fad that we knew of. (Remember what they said in the 1980s?) Companies like Sid Meier's and Volition Inc. (Known as Parallax Software) are great and have made games that go beyond gameplay, that go behind graphics. Take a look at DESCENT III, at the time it was released, you could hardly play the game at medium settings. It took them this long to get games to have intensive graphics like DESCENT III did (and does). However, instead of a great balance that DESCENT III was made with, you mostly have games that have great graphics and sucky gameplay. Ontop of this poor balance, you also have people running out of ideas for games and just doing the same games over and over again, or copying someone else's idea, but adding more crap.

The gaming world is becoming a sad one.


RE: EA is Huge...
By Quiescent on 5/14/2008 11:53:07 AM , Rating: 2
beyond* graphics.

And in additon, I almost forgot to say it:

But EA, you've made the gaming industry suffer. I hope you suffer a harsh blow in your profits over crappy games. Look what you did to Command & Conquer. I may not know what happened between you and Frank Klepacki, but it was better for him to leave your sorry ***! His music shouldn't be touched by such crap!


RE: EA is Huge...
By Pirks on 5/14/08, Rating: 0
RE: EA is Huge...
By cmdrdredd on 5/14/08, Rating: 0
RE: EA is Huge...
By Pirks on 5/14/2008 4:28:42 PM , Rating: 1
Crysis published by EA is utter #hit? Are out of your #ucking mind?

Was American McGee's Alice utter #hit?

Was Medal of Honor Allied Assault utter #hit?

Seek some professional help. You definitely need to see a doctor if you call all of these games above "utter #hit"


RE: EA is Huge...
By RMSe17 on 5/14/2008 5:35:58 PM , Rating: 2
If Crysis wasn't so much in the headlight, I am sure EA would have taken much more control over it and screwed it up like they do with pretty much everything other than sport games. They couldn't screw over Crysis because CryTek could switch to any other publisher. Everyone wanted to publish that game...


RE: EA is Huge...
By Pirks on 5/14/2008 6:08:49 PM , Rating: 1
Compared to how Microsloth screwed Halo big time by allowing it to be published only on Xbox (fcked up late PC port of Halo 2 only makes things worse and Halo 1 is a joke) or how Starbreeze/2K screwed The Darkness by dropping PC port - EA is a cool publisher.

EA will publish Dead Space on PC! Woohoo! EA rocks!

2K sucks! Starbreeze sucks! And don't even start about moronic ballmerish Microsloth who's consciously killing Windows as a gaming platform by publishing their fcking games on Xbox only. Bald mutherfcker!

I'm telling ya - even though EA is far from the best gaming publisher in the world (Valve and ID are at the top right now, game quality-wise) they are much better than A LOT of other braindead publishers, I mean where the fck is GTA IV for PC? Activision is fckd beyond all recognition!

So stop bashing EA and bash reall mutherfcks like 2K, Activision and MS, these idiots are bringing PC gaming down as much as they can, and EA DOES _NOT_ DO THAT! Their decision to publish Dead Space on PC supports my point. I'm not even mentioning Crysis again - yeah, everyone COULD publish it, but Crytek went FOR EA! They HAVE NOT CHOSEN mutherfckas like idiotic MS or Activision, they went for the !_best_! PC game publisher - turns out it is !_EA_!, so eat this, stupid EA bashing lamers and just shut fck up, please, will ya?

By the way, I didn't mention Sony in my rant but I coud not give even a smallest damn about their stinking Playstation excreta, I think Nintendo beats them well and Sony simply must die as a game publisher, they are WAY worse than MS (although many people think nothing can be worse game publisher than MS but these people are clearly wrong)

P.S. hey, my rant is highly subjective and is from the point of view of hardcore PC gamer, so please, console fanboys, pass along and don't start another flame war here, my highly subjective view is that consoles are a piece of cheapo junk and the more I play Crysis on my new gaming rig - the more I get convinced in that. Sorry console fanboys, nothing personal. It's just about the game.


RE: EA is Huge...
By FITCamaro on 5/15/2008 9:19:48 AM , Rating: 2
That brings me to my next point kids. Don't smoke crack.


RE: EA is Huge...
By Quiescent on 5/14/2008 9:36:00 PM , Rating: 2
Typical troll. Take some advice: Keep your personal life to yourself. Don't go trolling a respectable news area because you have problems out in the real world. This is not the place for this crap. I have no idea why you haven't been banned yet.

Trashing threads with negative posts and completely ruining the atmosphere of the dailytech posting area to articles like this is certainly trolling. It's certainly killing the mood of Dailytech, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who thinks of you like this.


RE: EA is Huge...
By Pirks on 5/14/08, Rating: -1
RE: EA is Huge...
By GlassHouse69 on 5/14/2008 10:29:22 PM , Rating: 1
crysis fucking sux

so do you

you fucking suck

hah


RE: EA is Huge...
By Pirks on 5/14/2008 10:42:03 PM , Rating: 2
Stop playing Crysis on that IBM PC XT, moron! Buy yourself a REAL gaming hardware.


RE: EA is Huge...
By Quiescent on 5/14/2008 9:32:52 PM , Rating: 1
I don't play games anymore. I stopped after The SIMs and Empire Earth. Sure I have a hand-me-down 7800GT, but I've seen Command and Conquer 3, I've seen Crysis. Sure their gameplay was alright, but maybe it was because EA is learning that they are losing. And Crysis looked pretty boring in that alien part. (My boyfriend has an 880GT, q6600 at 4Ghz, 8GB of RAM, 5TB of space, Audigy 2 ZS btw). My experience is that a lot of these games have barely survived, but then you have others sucking. When I did speak of good graphics, sucky gameplay, I spoke of the industry as a whole. Oblivion is another example, which guess what, IT can play on my 7800GT. DESCENT III is certainly better graphics than Crysis. Crysis is pretty easy going on the graphics. You can't tell me that's the best you can get in graphics.

To be honest, you seem to respond in a lot of these articles here. And it's funny that you think that I am too poor to buy a better computer. Oh I will get a better computer, but not for gaming.


RE: EA is Huge...
By Pirks on 5/14/2008 10:06:13 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
DESCENT III is certainly better graphics than Crysis
Try to play Crysis not on weak hardware like 8800GT, try 9800GTX at the very least.

It's funny how you compare last century graphics of Descent 3 with Crysis. Wanna maybe compare Crysis with Doom 2 as well? I bet you can find Doom 2 graphics better than the graphics of Crysis, you're that type of prson, ya know ;-)


RE: EA is Huge...
By FITCamaro on 5/15/2008 9:25:13 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah funny though that the 9800GTX isn't much better than an 8800GT. It's the same chip practically as an 8800GTS 512MB and performs practically identical. The 9800GTX is a joke.

I mean why would I pay $280ish for a 9800GTX when I can either get an 8800GTS 512MB for $180-200 and have the same performance. An 8800GT can be had for $150-160 and isn't much slower.

Christ do you work for EA or some hardware magazine?


RE: EA is Huge...
By Pirks on 5/15/2008 3:11:08 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
why would I pay $280ish for a 9800GTX when I can either get an 8800GTS 512MB for $180-200 and have the same performance
I paid $200 for my 9800GTX, dunno why people buy it for $280
quote:
Christ, do you work for EA
Christ works for Pope :P


RE: EA is Huge...
By Quiescent on 5/15/2008 10:27:43 AM , Rating: 2
DESCENT III couldn't even run at medium settings with the graphics cards available in 1998. It probably couldn't even run at max settings until about maybe 2 years ago. With the 8800GT, you could actually go into the config file and change the max settings for it to go as great as the 8800GT can set (E.G. the AA anti-aliasing technique that wasn't available at that time).

Like I said kid, you think DESCENT III was decade ago graphics, but if it was, how come you couldn't even play the game at medium settings with the best graphics card available at that time? Explain to me why it's a decade ago graphics with that?

Kind of funny. Just because a game was made a decade ago, doesn't make the graphics suck. The DESCENT games have always been far ahead in graphics than every game in it's time.

Get your facts straight kid:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Descent_III


RE: EA is Huge...
By Quiescent on 5/15/2008 10:31:05 AM , Rating: 2
Hahaha. Sorry wrong URL, but you can look how much more advanced that game was too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Descent_3#Engine_Feat...

That is what I want you to see.


RE: EA is Huge...
By Pirks on 5/15/2008 2:17:40 PM , Rating: 1
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CryEngine_2#Technical...

It's your turn now. Go there and observe how Crysis 3D engine pisses, spits and rubs it in that ancient Descent's 3D engine


RE: EA is Huge...
By Pirks on 5/15/2008 3:29:05 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
DESCENT III couldn't even run at medium settings with the graphics cards available in 1998
And Crysis can't even run at full graphical settings on your machine TODAY, now what does this tell ya?
quote:
how come you couldn't even play the game at medium settings with the best graphics card available at that time? Explain to me why it's a decade ago graphics with that?
How about you explain me why you can't play Crysis properly with full graphics NOW?
quote:
Just because a game was made a decade ago, doesn't make the graphics suck
Oh, so you think in ten years from now I'm going to CONTINUE praising Crysis as having the best graphics in 2018? If you think so, you too need to see a doctor.


RE: EA is Huge...
By Pirks on 5/14/2008 10:33:47 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
When I did speak of good graphics, sucky gameplay, I spoke of the industry as a whole
Tell that stupid bull#hit to gazillions of players enjoying Gears of War, Halo, Bioshock and many other triple A titles. They'll teach you about graphics and sucky gameplay alright, you'll regret you started it ;-) Also you might want to try out some games without triple A graphics but with great gameplay, maybe you should start with Sins Of A Solar Empire, or Witcher, or even Call of Cthulhu. Maybe this will help you.
quote:
DESCENT III is certainly better graphics than Crysis. Crysis is pretty easy going on the graphics. You can't tell me that's the best you can get in graphics.
And besides running it on a sucky 8800GT you also running it with graphics set to Low or something. Of course you look like an idiot after that. Ever tried to run it on Very High in DX10 on Vista? You have no idea Crysis can scale graphics to the levels unheard of, this is why Descent 3 seems such a great game to you.
quote:
I don't play games anymore
Then you should stop posting here, because you don't belong to gamers. Only a gamer or game developer can say something of interest about games, without hands on experience with _modern_ games and _modern_ gaming hardware (not your pathetic 7800GT) you'll only pollute this thread, believe me. I'm not going to post comments in automotive threads because I have no experience in auto industry nor I am a racer, so you should follow the same rule.

Your laments about OLD games are not interesting to modern gamers. People love their modern games, and who cares if you loved this Descent thing when you were young? I loved a lot of older games like MDK as well, but why would I bash modern game publishers for not doing clones of MDK or other ancient games again and again? You sound like an old fart proclaiming that "in his age and times" grass was greener, girls were hotter and stuff like that. Don't you understand you look stupid by saying things like this?


RE: EA is Huge...
By Quiescent on 5/15/2008 1:41:20 PM , Rating: 1
Oh, 16 stream processors more, 500mhz more Memory clock, and 170mhz more core clock surely justifies the $160 more price, eh?

You must be shitting out money to not care about what kind of money you waste on crap that isn't much better. Some of us rather pay the price for an 8800GT over the whopping $349 9800GTX. Woo!


RE: EA is Huge...
By Pirks on 5/15/2008 3:24:10 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
16 stream processors more, 500mhz more Memory clock, and 170mhz more core clock surely justifies the $160 more price
That's only for stupid people who don't know how to shop online. Are you one of those? ;)
quote:
Some of us rather pay the price for an 8800GT over the whopping $349 9800GTX
Some of you idiots indeed pay for 8800GT because you have no idea you can get 9800GTX for $195 after rebate. Being an idiot is hard, dontcha agree? ;-)


RE: EA is Huge...
By FaceMaster on 5/20/08, Rating: 0
RE: EA is Huge...
By tedrodai on 5/15/2008 10:27:59 AM , Rating: 1
Get over your e-peen, cause you don't have to hate all of EA's games, or be unable to play them, to dislike EA.

I'm not going to argue about whether those games were good or not--a company that big BETTER publish some good games. I've got a pretty decent gaming rig and play Crysis on somewhere between mid and high settings, and I've enjoyed it.

Anyways, the point is not whether they publish good games--anyone with the money can publish those same games--but what they CONTRIBUTE to the games they publish: things like in-game advertising that intrudes on your personal information and horrendous rights-limiting DRM (trying to stop pirates is fine, but not with some of the methods they've employed). Not to mention the multitude of creative companies EA has swallowed and choked to death over the years. EA says they're now listening to customers and turning over a new leaf, but we'll just have to see.


RE: EA is Huge...
By Pirks on 5/15/2008 3:17:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
in-game advertising that intrudes on your personal information and horrendous rights-limiting DRM
Haven't seen any in-game advertising in Crysis, but saw A LOT of stupid in-game advertising in Ubisoft's games like Splinter Cell. So it's actually Ubisoft that SUCKS, not EA :-P

Horrendous DRM? What rights does it limit? To pirate that game? Go to PirateBay forums and cry a river THERE, alright? This forum is not pro-piracy, so please shut up about game copy protection that horrendously limited your right to pirate Crysis or whatever. What a piece of hypocrtical bull#hit.


RE: EA is Huge...
By archcommus on 5/14/2008 10:20:34 AM , Rating: 2
Regarding the little competition and not good for gamers thing, I think the answer to that is more online distribution systems directly from developers like Steam. With EA being so huge and Activision also a major player, it's clear no other significant publishers are going to enter the scene. But if more people distribute on Steam or if more big-time devs like id develop their own similar systems, the publishers will have to compete with better retail pricing and gamers will benefit.


RE: EA is Huge...
By Enigmatic on 5/14/2008 11:56:59 AM , Rating: 2
Though EA is huge, isn't Activision Blizzard the number one third-party publisher in the world? On a number a key franchises they do directly compete (Rock Band vs Guitar Hero and Skate vs Tony Hawk for example). The only thing they don't have is a sports game line-up. If they did I believe they would begin to seriously threaten EA.


RE: EA is Huge...
By FaceMaster on 5/20/2008 3:09:06 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
seems like EA is doing all the eating.


Your Mum follows the same strategy


Madden
By Bender 123 on 5/14/2008 10:11:18 AM , Rating: 5
Oh good...Even more reasons for them to cut costs. I am sure this years version of the sports franchises will include an overlay for your TV that you can apply during the title screen . The overlay will cover the previous year with 2008/2009. This will even eliminate the overhead cost of programmers going in and changing this. It will be just like an old odyssey system.




RE: Madden
By therealnickdanger on 5/14/2008 10:19:59 AM , Rating: 2
Actually, previews with the new Madden are shaping up extremely well. Early reports state that this will be the best version yet. One thing is for sure, it will be the best NFL game released this year!


RE: Madden
By FITCamaro on 5/14/2008 10:32:03 AM , Rating: 5
They say that every year. ;)


RE: Madden
By JonnyDough on 5/14/2008 10:55:47 AM , Rating: 5
Your sarcasm warrants you a rating of SIX. Now if only I were bestowed the power to give you the love you deserve. But alas, I am a poster to this rather dull tidbit of a news article, and so I shall end my plight with...a period.


RE: Madden
By maverick85wd on 5/14/2008 7:20:50 PM , Rating: 2
I find it interesting people rated you up to a 5 but didn't rate therealnickdanger up at all

I agree, it is hilarious.


RE: Madden
By Bender 123 on 5/14/2008 9:23:45 PM , Rating: 2
I would rate him up, because I get it, I get jokes. Since I already commented, I will give an imaginary "worth reading" to therealnickdanger.


RE: Madden
By Bender 123 on 5/14/2008 11:45:17 AM , Rating: 2
It sure is! After I received my preview version in 2003, I can honestly say the best (only) NFL game will be Madden. The annual public betas have really gotten people excited about what the final product will look like.


RE: Madden
By archcommus on 5/14/2008 10:22:01 AM , Rating: 4
They might as well just sell downloadable roster updates online for like $40 after the free ones end. Almost the same thing as getting the new game.


The Analogy
By JonnyDough on 5/14/2008 10:51:46 AM , Rating: 5
EA:Game Development
as
WalMart:Local Stores

Flooding the world with junk, driving out the small time game developer and grocery store owner, and feeding us that happy, save-you-money bullcrap marketing so that we forget about child labor and boring games. The last thing we need is another regurgitated title. Spit the good game game companies back out that you've swallowed please EA? I for one would not miss you if you were gone.




RE: The Analogy
By JonnyDough on 5/14/2008 10:53:20 AM , Rating: 1
Game game? Mumbles obscenities under his breath about an edit button...


RE: The Analogy
By Polynikes on 5/14/2008 11:29:38 AM , Rating: 2
The only problem is... EA doesn't save consumers money.

Maybe if they hired some smaller dev teams (but didn't buy them, we don't need that) to make games, they wouldn't have to speed $100 million per game and we'd actually get something that wasn't a watered-down, re-hashed sequel. And they'd make more money, so everyone would win.


RE: The Analogy
By JonnyDough on 5/14/2008 11:55:25 AM , Rating: 2
"The only problem is... EA doesn't save consumers money."

In the long run, neither does WalMart. Monopolization has only served to hurt the American public.

I can't even think of a single big company that has actually benefited the public aside from a little philanthropy (which is usually offset somewhat by evil greedy deeds anyway) and invention.

My further speculation is that opening a company to public investment just means the rich get richer. The movie Zeitgeist discusses an important point about how the privatization of banks has led to living in debt and how as a society we are indebted to the wealthy who control our lives by using "just law." Freedoms flew out the door when the federal reserve was implemented. Many famous people of old warned us against the privatization of banking. Woodrow Wilson, Charles Lindberg, Truman...

J.D. Rockafeller pulled out of the stock market right before it collapsed. Go figure. The government backed their money with gold, by stealing it from the public...

If you haven't yet, watch the movie.

http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com

Some think it's crap, others love it. Watch it for yourself.


RE: The Analogy
By Hiawa23 on 5/14/2008 3:38:10 PM , Rating: 3
"The only problem is... EA doesn't save consumers money."

In the long run, neither does WalMart. Monopolization has only served to hurt the American public.


not sure why the Walmart hate, but compared to the other stores, Sam's & Walmart save me quite a bit, compared to Publix, Winn dixie & other grocery stores here in Florida, so I am fine with Walmart & Sam's. Continue the hate though, & i don't have to buy anything Walmarts is selling me on as I comparison shop which is why I shop at Walmart & Sams exclusively.


RE: The Analogy
By RMSe17 on 5/14/2008 5:39:14 PM , Rating: 3
The problem is that in small towns, people who used to own their own stores and get sufficient income, now all work for the superwalmart, making minimum wage. gg.


RE: The Analogy
By Schrag4 on 5/14/2008 6:04:22 PM , Rating: 2
You know, the buggy whip factories all shut down after people started buying automobiles. It's really sad, so I think we should all ditch our cars and go back to horse-and-buggy.

In all seriousness, though, WalMart DOES save a lot of people a lot of money. If it didn't, the small-town store owners would still be in business, wouldn't they? After all, nobody forces the people in the area where a new WalMart opens to shop there.


RE: The Analogy
By mcturkey on 5/14/2008 9:53:29 PM , Rating: 2
Walmart puts tremendous pressure on manufacturers to reduce prices and plays them off each other, thus forcing them eventually to either cut wages here in the US or ship the jobs overseas. That's why Walmart is bad in the long run for the US economy, even more so than because of the destruction of local jobs.


RE: The Analogy
By JonnyDough on 5/15/2008 1:04:54 AM , Rating: 2
Walmart deals in bulk, and has a huge mega stores with lots of capital investment. Could the little guy compete? No, but just because they can't compete by being a bulk seller in 50 states doesn't mean they didn't offer something of value.

We need to get it into our heads that just because the little guy is out competed in pricing does not mean that another company is "better." Most small businesses today get by because they can offer superior service and customization.

It's the consumer who fails to realize that they are bagging their own groceries at the checkout, having to wait in line at the service counter, and making minimum wage when working for a mega corporation that are to blame for the loss of their own small businesses in the end. It's as if we believe we are too stupid to compete with Walmart, so we may as well just shop there. The rise of mega large corporations was planned by the privatized bankers anyway. We're all suckers and we don't even know it. Did you know that there isn't a law that demands you pay taxes? It's a little unwritten law made up by the private banking system. You can go to prison if you don't pay them, but there isn't a law that requires you to. I'm sorry, how is that freedom again? Democracy is not real.

Watch Zeitgeist. And don't give me that stuff about "it not being researched or backed up." The sources are given, you have to find them on the site.


RE: The Analogy
By Screwballl on 5/15/2008 9:56:16 AM , Rating: 2
I have to agree on one point:

quote:
Flooding the world with junk, driving out the small time game developer and grocery store owners...


They gobble up precious real estate in their respective business goals and what we get in return is low quality rehashed crap over and over with a pretty new label.

I myself and others have already sought to boycott EA. Many of us have already refused to completely buy anything with EA's name on it. The less we buy, the less money they will have to use to make games and the less crap we see from them on the shelves. Granted even with this line of reasoning and knowing EA, even if they only released 5 games in the past year, all 5 would all still be complete crap.

They are bullying out competition in the form of either buying the company out or signing exclusive deals so no other company can use that specific sport's icons or names.

Boycott EA completely!


RE: The Analogy
By JonnyDough on 5/15/2008 12:02:38 PM , Rating: 2
I say support good games, but be selective on your purchases. Rent first, or download the demo. Long gone are my days of going out and buying a hyped up $50 or $60 game only to be left disappointed. Is it worth $500 to play 10 bad games for one week each? I don't think it is. Heck, for that much I can pay my car insurance for a year. Why yes, I do drive a POS and I do have a spotless driving record at least since I grew up and quit driving like I was Dale Earnhardt.


By MrBlastman on 5/14/2008 10:13:14 AM , Rating: 1
Oh wait, I can't hear it! In fact, they should enjoy their pain and suffering with this loss (they won't suffer at all) - because that little gem they want so badly...

The one that they are reaching out to with all arms extended, fingertips straining, quivering sweat glands dripping with anticipation... Might just slip right past them if the shareholders have a solid head on their shoulders.

What is this I allude to? What is this object of EA fantasy that they dream about every night within the very vestibule of enthrallment, their fascination - oh woe it might just wane and pass with the maniacle cackles of the masses. Perhaps like a child on a playground surrounded by the gaggle of peers laughing as they toss small rocks their way chanting: HAAAA HAAAA!

Oh wait... That is Take Two I am talking about.

Oh well, suffer EA, I am not sad for your woes and should Take Two avoid your clutches we all shall rejoice and laugh that much more.




By Spoelie on 5/14/2008 10:46:51 AM , Rating: 2
By MrBlastman on 5/14/2008 10:57:41 AM , Rating: 2
Would you rather be one of these?

http://gallery.chris-crockett.com/v/GenCon/2005/St...

Serving EA blindly? :)


By elpresidente2075 on 5/14/2008 10:59:59 AM , Rating: 2
Despite the savage burn on your exquisitely worded piece you previously posted, you must admit: that was a good one.


By MrBlastman on 5/14/2008 11:34:47 AM , Rating: 2
Yes, indeed it was. Touché!


By elpresidente2075 on 5/14/2008 10:58:52 AM , Rating: 2
I lol'd


what ea should do
By dare2savefreedom on 5/14/2008 1:45:55 PM , Rating: 2
what ea should do:

make a mac version of madden sell it for $499 and have steve jobs on the cover.

Raise the price of the xbox and ps3 versions of madden to $149 - what are you going to do buy some other company's product?




RE: what ea should do
By MrBlastman on 5/14/2008 1:55:46 PM , Rating: 2
i-madden

Now with an improved 1-button interface!


RE: what ea should do
By FITCamaro on 5/14/2008 2:25:26 PM , Rating: 2
Hey why not. Context sensitive controls are all the rage.

"How do I tackle?" Push the button.
"How do I dodge?" Push the button.
"How do I dive?" Push the button.

"How will it know which one to do?" It has the power of Jesus!


"If we can't beat them...
By Clauzii on 5/14/2008 10:46:04 AM , Rating: 2
... buy them!"




RE: "If we can't beat them...
By FaceMaster on 5/20/2008 3:26:40 PM , Rating: 2
I'd prefer to do both to your Mum.


DRM
By smitty3268 on 5/14/2008 2:34:00 PM , Rating: 2
I wonder how many millions of dollars EA spent on complex copy protection schemes that never stopped a single person from pirating their games.




RE: DRM
By JonnyDough on 5/15/2008 12:19:42 PM , Rating: 2
It stopped ME from pirating their games. Ok, ok. So it wasn't the DRM that stopped me. I don't even do the piracy thing. I'm against piracy, and I buy all my software legit - even music.

You can relax though, I'm not a narc and I won't turn you in to the RIAA.

I am willing to sit idly by, paying increasingly high amounts for the decent computer games I buy while others steal theirs.

I am even willing to watch the computer gaming industry DIE. Yes, that's right. DIE!

Heck, I should be working or spending time with someone rather than wasting away in an office chair anyway.

I hope you know that I'm kidding. I just want to pwn some baddies in a dark dungeon, or get scared out of my sweatpants and ketchup-stained t-shirt while kicking it in Alone in the Dark 3.

If I really think about it though, I'm not a fan of DRM either so we can blame it all on that if you'd like.

Either way honest guys like me lose out on quality entertainment to those that choose to steal theirs.

Screw DRM, pirates, AND EA.

I just want some easily installable, back-upable, quality games that I can become obsessed with to the point of ruining any chance at a relationship with a woman while I gain weight every night after work until my heart gives out from all the HotPockets™ and lack of excercise.

Really, is it too much to ask?


"I'm an Internet expert too. It's all right to wire the industrial zone only, but there are many problems if other regions of the North are wired." -- North Korean Supreme Commander Kim Jong-il














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki