DOWN the toilet with those suckers !
I hope they never ever will produce a shooter (stay away from our genre damn suckers...and go to hell with all your fifa shit !).
Greetings
RFK
The EA Bashing thread
-
Raidenfighter Kirkov
- Posts: 198
- Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 4:06 pm
- Location: Vienna / Austria
No, but it shows up the stupidity of your argument.Specineff wrote:I forgot to say that the RTS/Hair dyed silver bet applied only to non-already-existing franchises. I mean, a brand new, fresh RTS instead of rehashing one.
Does it still count?
"I hate EA, why don't they do [insert genre here]?"
"They do."
"Yes but they should do another series because that one is old."
I mean, wtf? Does it matter whether the game is called Command & Conquer or not? They could call it anything they want, and it wouldn't make a difference to whether the game is good, fresh, original or anything else. I expect a lot of people are very happy when a new C&C game is released, and would be very disappointed if one wasn't. It doesn't cause you any problems either way - if you don't like it, don't buy it!
They can call their games Super Duper Pinky Poop Magical Lollipop Adventures of Mischief, Mayhem and Ganbare Go Los Vatos Locos if they want. The point here is that EA ONLY REHASHES THE SAME GAMES OVER AND OVER WHETHER THEY ARE C&C, MADDEN AND THEIR OTHER CRAP.
For the record, I do like strategy games, and I have bought my share of them. I want to see them actually come up with something new. Buying the studio that created a franchise doesn't automatically make them the authors of such franchise.
Take a look at Activision. Sure, they do churn out sequels too, but at least they have had the cojones to experiment with other genres in the past.
Don't hold grudges. GET EVEN.
what about the sims? that was certainly fairly fresh and original when it was released. sure, they're going to milk it for all it's worth, because that's what successful businesses do. look at any major publisher, japanese, american, european, nintendo, sega, capcom, ubi soft, infogrames, activision, ea, they all do it. why? it keeps them in business, and funds the next idea they may have.
what about black & white? like the game or not, it was certainly something new and interesting to try. and don't say it doesn't count because EA didn't develop it, they published it, and games need publishers willing to put their money into the development in order to be produced.
why can they afford to take risks like the sims and black and white? because every year madden, fifa, need for speed et al sell millions upon millions of copies, so if some other game doesn't quite make enough money, they aren't screwed.
and buying the studio that made the game does make them the author of any future games in the series, such as the one i linked to. westwood are not a separate company to ea. westwood are part of ea. every c&c game from tiberian sun onwards was an ea game. whether they were better or worse for it, is a matter for people's tastes. but you can't say they don't count as ea games, just to prove your point that ea are crap, or whatever.
what about black & white? like the game or not, it was certainly something new and interesting to try. and don't say it doesn't count because EA didn't develop it, they published it, and games need publishers willing to put their money into the development in order to be produced.
why can they afford to take risks like the sims and black and white? because every year madden, fifa, need for speed et al sell millions upon millions of copies, so if some other game doesn't quite make enough money, they aren't screwed.
and buying the studio that made the game does make them the author of any future games in the series, such as the one i linked to. westwood are not a separate company to ea. westwood are part of ea. every c&c game from tiberian sun onwards was an ea game. whether they were better or worse for it, is a matter for people's tastes. but you can't say they don't count as ea games, just to prove your point that ea are crap, or whatever.
Peter Molyneux doesn't need EA. EA needs Molyneux.
Come on. Capcom doesn't release every year a fighting game that looks like the exact same game published the year before. (They rehash, but it doesn't feel like the same thing over again). Final Fantasy? Sure. But the magic system, storylines, setting and other stuff are not the same every new game. And every Mario and Zelda feel different from their previous incarnations.
Can't say the same for the latest Sonic games, though.
I know. It's not like you can do more for football, soccer and basketball than it has already been done. (perhaps a mortal mode like the Mutant League games?). But when Fifa: Road to the World Cup 98 and the France 98 World cup game are THE EXACT SAME DARNED GAME (plus Footix and that ThumbThumper song), I think I have reason to say that I'm tired of the same crap being sold over and over again.
Come on. Capcom doesn't release every year a fighting game that looks like the exact same game published the year before. (They rehash, but it doesn't feel like the same thing over again). Final Fantasy? Sure. But the magic system, storylines, setting and other stuff are not the same every new game. And every Mario and Zelda feel different from their previous incarnations.
Can't say the same for the latest Sonic games, though.
I know. It's not like you can do more for football, soccer and basketball than it has already been done. (perhaps a mortal mode like the Mutant League games?). But when Fifa: Road to the World Cup 98 and the France 98 World cup game are THE EXACT SAME DARNED GAME (plus Footix and that ThumbThumper song), I think I have reason to say that I'm tired of the same crap being sold over and over again.
Don't hold grudges. GET EVEN.
Peter Molyneux has a tendency to promise the world with his games, takes years longer than anyone expected, then when they do get released, they always end up half-baked and with at least one badly thought out mechanic that kills the enjoyment of the game. In the case of Black and White, it's the stupid do-nothing villagers you have to micromanage. Fable just came out so half-baked it's not worth bothering with. In those cases it's somewhat disappointing too, since the results are games that are initially quite compelling, but after four hours you want to toss the disc out the window.
Exactly how Peter Molyneux got a reputation for being some sort of game design genius is beyond me.
Exactly how Peter Molyneux got a reputation for being some sort of game design genius is beyond me.
-
Super Laydock
- Posts: 3094
- Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 10:24 pm
- Location: Latis / Netherlands
Hey, leave Ubisoft alone will yah. What the hell did they do wrong?Super Mega C wrote:I own almost a dozen systems and hundreds of games, but I've actually managed to never by an EA or Ubi soft game. Amazing, especially considering the amount of stuff both these companies churn out.
They are nowhere near the monstrosity that EA is.
Fifa '96 was the last EA game I've actually bought and I do not regret it being the last.
Barroom hero!
Bathroom hero!
Bathroom hero!
Well really, EA don't need Molyneux either. Capcom's fighting games are, to someone who doesn't really play them much, for all intents and purposes, identical to the rest in the series. Yes, I know there are subtle differences between various versions of Street Fighter 2 which make a world of difference to gameplay, you know that, but that's because we (well, me, I assume you too) enjoy this sort of game and see these differences.Specineff wrote:Peter Molyneux doesn't need EA. EA needs Molyneux.
Come on. Capcom doesn't release every year a fighting game that looks like the exact same game published the year before. (They rehash, but it doesn't feel like the same thing over again). Final Fantasy? Sure. But the magic system, storylines, setting and other stuff are not the same every new game. And every Mario and Zelda feel different from their previous incarnations.
Can't say the same for the latest Sonic games, though.
I know. It's not like you can do more for football, soccer and basketball than it has already been done. (perhaps a mortal mode like the Mutant League games?). But when Fifa: Road to the World Cup 98 and the France 98 World cup game are THE EXACT SAME DARNED GAME (plus Footix and that ThumbThumper song), I think I have reason to say that I'm tired of the same crap being sold over and over again.
There are differences in EA's sport games too. They look identical to people who don't play them much though. I mean, there MUST be something different, because I really enjoyed the ones you mentioned, RTWC 98 and France 98 (yes, ok, they WERE pretty much identical, i'll give you that), but I thought FIFA 99 and 2000 were crap, and much prefer Winning Eleven\Pro Evo now. Ok, making games worse isn't really something good, but they clearly are changing something, just something I don't like being changed, I guess
But stop and think for a minute how long ago RTWC 98 and France 98 were. About 7 years! That's a pretty long time in the gaming world, and they didn't do the same thing again for the 2002 World Cup, did they?
I genuinely don't think much new can be done with sports games at the moment, other than catering for different styles which players prefer. FIFA is very different to Pro Evo, which is very different to ISS, which is very different to Virtua Striker and so on. It's just little touches here and there which improve (or at least, try to improve) the game, and that's not just the case for EA's sports games, it's the case for almost all sports games!
I understand what you're saying, and really, I don't buy many EA games at all. But they do make some decent stuff, and I don't think it's worth complaining about them as much as some people do.
Ever played Populous? Or, better still, Syndicate?Vexorg wrote:Exactly how Peter Molyneux got a reputation for being some sort of game design genius is beyond me.
I might not like the fact that EA now has exclusive license agreements with FIFA, NASCAR, and the NFL, but EA makes some damn good games. It's simply bad for competition, and we're not going to see price wars for NFL games anymore.
But, there's no way I can refuse a good 007, EA Sports, Medal of Honor, or Need For Speed game.
EA has made the BEST street racing game: Need For Speed: Underground 2. NO OTHER street racing game has come close.
Everything or Nothing is the BEST 007 game I've ever played (single player wise anyways). It FEELS like you are actually Bond. And the production values (i.e. using the real actors) are top-notch. That's how much time and effort game developers should put into games based on movies and/or TV shows.
But, there's no way I can refuse a good 007, EA Sports, Medal of Honor, or Need For Speed game.
EA has made the BEST street racing game: Need For Speed: Underground 2. NO OTHER street racing game has come close.
Everything or Nothing is the BEST 007 game I've ever played (single player wise anyways). It FEELS like you are actually Bond. And the production values (i.e. using the real actors) are top-notch. That's how much time and effort game developers should put into games based on movies and/or TV shows.
IndyCar Series. One series. All the stars.
Preposterous suggestion. It may look pretty but the open cities aren't really, the handling is still terrible, the online support is using EAs extremely poor servers, and it doesn't even come -close- to the raw burning heat that was Midnight Club 2 online.y2kgamer wrote: EA has made the BEST street racing game: Need For Speed: Underground 2. NO OTHER street racing game has come close.
Time for some more schooling..
MC2 - a pretty good although viciously hard street racing game. Had fairly plain graphics. Is that all it was? Not at all. The handling was superb, as close to perfect arcade style as anyone has ever been, and ever will be again. While plain, the graphics shifted at 60fps, which was hugely important given the near-wip3out speeds the high end cars could hit. The cities were open. Really open. So open that you could jump on top of buildings, if you could find a way. They were littered with tunnels, alleys, 90 degree bends, overpasses, stuff you'd find in a city, and you could drive over all of it. Take this framework and set up a large selection of circuit courses with jumps and torturous turns, and make the multiplayer racing so exciting that people sharpen their skills to the point where 8 racers finish within seconds of eachother on a 3 lap race. Now add Capture The Flag mode. CTF in cars sounds unworkable and sluggish doesn't it? Not with the agility and handling model it had, busy CTF matches with 8 players required adrenaline on a drip feed, you could come away from a 20 minute solid stint of absolute max effort, shaking and blinking like a drug addict. Come up on a guy with the flag at 200mph, blast him with a stop powerup just as hes approaching a dip in the road, hit nitro as he slows into it, skimming off his roof and taking the flag, touch the handbrake for a millisecond and let another nitro go drifting round a sweeping corner and tightening into an alleyway barely wide enough for 1 car, without slowing past 180? Yep, go for it. See the flag guy is running down an alley? Race up to the exit and pop a handbrake turn blocking it - but wait, he jams the brakes on and hits you with a go powerup, causing you to drive away. Team mate has the flag? High speed formation driving through these crazy streets, viciously fighting with the other team to protect them. Want to escape some pursuers? How about turning onto a ramp entrance over a river, hitting stealth and turning the corner into a 270 spin, then blasting off away from it? Odds are the guys chasing would think you'd tried to cloak the jump and leap over there, putting themselves out of the running. Standard practise, just some ways to play it, of thousands And it was the best gaming I have ever experienced, regardless of genre. It sucked 5-6 hours of my day, every day of the week for nigh on 6 months, and smaller hours for much longer. Despite the servers being pretty quiet now to say the least (it is a rather old game of course), there's still nothing to touch it when a bunch of the old guys get together and have a blast.
Here's hoping they don't screw all that up in MC3. Those who were part of the MC2 scene, will know exactly where I'm coming from.
I don't care too much for EA, but they're not as bad as some people are making them out to be.
First, yes, they make a lot of sports games. So what? Someone has to, and most companies tend to specialize in a certain genre. I don't hear anyone complaining about Cave because they haven't diversified. Why should they? They're good at what they do, their fans like what they do, and it works for them.
And of course there are differences between their sports games. As someone else said, there's about as much as there is between the different iterations of Street Fighter, or Puyo Puyo. If you're not a fan, they all look the same. If you are a fan, you can appreciate the tweaking between each new release. But football isn't going to suddenly change into something else, and if you expect it to then you're looking at the wrong series.
Then, of course, there's Need for Speed, Medal of Honor, the Bond series of games, Burnout 3, etc. They're not the best games ever, but they're far from the worst and really don't deserve all the stuff that gets thrown at them. They're decent games, sometimes great, rarely classic, but there are plenty of companies releasing far, far worse games.
That said, I hate their business practices, but that's another issue.
First, yes, they make a lot of sports games. So what? Someone has to, and most companies tend to specialize in a certain genre. I don't hear anyone complaining about Cave because they haven't diversified. Why should they? They're good at what they do, their fans like what they do, and it works for them.
And of course there are differences between their sports games. As someone else said, there's about as much as there is between the different iterations of Street Fighter, or Puyo Puyo. If you're not a fan, they all look the same. If you are a fan, you can appreciate the tweaking between each new release. But football isn't going to suddenly change into something else, and if you expect it to then you're looking at the wrong series.
Then, of course, there's Need for Speed, Medal of Honor, the Bond series of games, Burnout 3, etc. They're not the best games ever, but they're far from the worst and really don't deserve all the stuff that gets thrown at them. They're decent games, sometimes great, rarely classic, but there are plenty of companies releasing far, far worse games.
That said, I hate their business practices, but that's another issue.
-
OptimusPrimeX
- Posts: 57
- Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 7:23 pm
- Location: New Jersey
i <3 this thread because i hate EA.................
well put.. ^_^ lol.... I had enough of EA when they decided to support the PS2 instead of SEGA, who by the way basicly brought them up to where they are now, at least concerning sports games.
Their business practice over the years has just been too shoddy and unappealing, that it has actually caused me to abandon them as anything close to a worthy developer or potential buy on my part. I could list 100 reasons why EA sucks and how many companies kind of abstractly they bash under their feet. But i've already spent too much time arguing EA on every crevice on the internet.
Basicly i think EA hurts the industry as a whole (especially America where buyers want flashy, media driven, brand name games) They grab up every pop cultre fenomenon they can(movies, trends etc) and bank on it, not completely concerned about content, the videogame industry as a whole, or have any respect for other developers. If it was up to them they would dominate the whole market, and completely obliterate anything with substance, story or intelligence, for some ADD games.
jp wrote:Wow... I'm simply surprised it took half of the gaming world this long to realize that EA sucks and "EA" stands for "Evil Assholes".
But yeah, fuck EA. I've hated them ever since the 32-bit era.
well put.. ^_^ lol.... I had enough of EA when they decided to support the PS2 instead of SEGA, who by the way basicly brought them up to where they are now, at least concerning sports games.
Their business practice over the years has just been too shoddy and unappealing, that it has actually caused me to abandon them as anything close to a worthy developer or potential buy on my part. I could list 100 reasons why EA sucks and how many companies kind of abstractly they bash under their feet. But i've already spent too much time arguing EA on every crevice on the internet.
Basicly i think EA hurts the industry as a whole (especially America where buyers want flashy, media driven, brand name games) They grab up every pop cultre fenomenon they can(movies, trends etc) and bank on it, not completely concerned about content, the videogame industry as a whole, or have any respect for other developers. If it was up to them they would dominate the whole market, and completely obliterate anything with substance, story or intelligence, for some ADD games.
-
Thunder Force
- Posts: 1773
- Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 11:21 am
- Location: research and development facility for Vasteel Technology.
EA Sports + Nintendo brand = wtf
http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=4375&type=mov
Edit: for those on narrowband, here's a screenshot to get the basic effect.
http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=4375&type=mov
Edit: for those on narrowband, here's a screenshot to get the basic effect.
