Oh come on guys!!!
EA does have a couple of very nice things (e.g.: The Need For Speed series is for the most part a very good one :-), except the fact they don’t have Ferraris and that they are biased towards American cars and Porsches 
)
And for the Sony comment: I’m sorry but Sony does produce aawesome products (TVs good, projectors nice, music stuff OKish and PSs are fairly good machines , even though I don’t own one because I prefer PCs )
They really sell alot of good games.
But sometimes I wonder if they care more about money than
about customers.
They changed so much in the final part of the C&C tiberium saga
that the game doesn’t really fit into there anymore. I would want
HL³ still to be “HLish” and not HL:Modern Warfare 2 with sand,
terrorists and the combine working together with me because
there’s tiberium all over the place).:freeman:
Also they told the customers they would not include a DRM system.
They did it anyway.:jizz: Their definition of “DRM” seems to differ
from the customer’s.
I also dislike the way they bring out some games.
For example:
Sims; be it 1, 2 or 3. The procedure was exactly the same,
as in “Game, Addon, Addon, Addon, Addon” (everything in exchange
for money, of course).
FIFA Soccer/Madden NFL/NHL 10; Here it was “every year a game, with slightly adjusted gameplay and presentation”.
^
You spoke from my heart.
It’s good that not every new member is a fag like Danny Smith…
The only ones of NfS I enjoyed where Most Wanted and carbon. The rest just suck’s balls, like EA.
Really the only good stuff EA actually worked on for a part was the SPORE beta (I swear to God Imma kill the fucker that pulled the plug of the underwater stage), some parts of NfS and the Sims, and even the Sims is fucked up now that you have to buy the expansions, instead of downloading it for free. Really, EA is just bad and puts pricetags on everything. I don’t know how they got so big, but that honestly shouldn’t have happen’d.
If Sims 3 was a thirty dollar game (that’s 29.99, not 39.99) instead of fifty, and all future expansions were five dollars (optimistically, but at least no more than ten) instead of half-priced games (20-25 dollars), it would be acceptable.
At this stage, Sims 2 should be a 20 dollar game with free/2.50-max expansion packs, or a thirty dollar game that includes all the damn addons. And Sims 1 (why the hell anybody would play that anymore) should be freeware.
EA sucks in general, tho. For every “good” thing they do, some random hobo can probably rattle off a list of a dozen bad things (not including statements to the effect of ‘they don’t give me food’).
EA has made some good games that are entertaining the first play through. But thats the problem. Replayability. I admit, I have enjoyed some of their games. Most of their games though, I don’t even touch such as their sports games. Like Maddan or Fifa, Need for Speed, maybe. A true gamer can see a game for what it is, with out even trying it. They have limits, and can judge a game by it’s box, or casing. Though at the same time. Paying money for Demos, is just not right. Demo by it’s name, is a demonstration. Showing you how something is. I play a demo once, maybe twice if I like it before I go out and buy it. "
Fan boys" as they call it, will pay money no matter what. They don’t know how to judge a game, untill they’ve played a piece of it. And if it’s from a popular, over used series, they don’t even need a demo. They will buy it anyways. Just to play it and say how “Awesome” They are and grow their E-penis by a few centimeters. Awards and trophies don’t help. while it’s fun collecting them. You don’t really need to pay attention to em and you will get them randomly.
A game replayability isn’t measured by the collectable stuff, but by how memorable it was. Take Half life. PLay throughs don’t change, but people even today still play it. Hell People are making a mod on the source engine. So it’s even more entertaining memorable.
EA, hasn’t made one memorable game to me. From what I have read, they are no better than an actor in a drama, who thinks he can lead the entire show by himself, no help from others.
I thought the fact that EA was evil was common knowledge.
This.
PLease just edit your post, it really annoys us when people don’t. I agree though, when effort is applied games turn out good, where annual titles are involved, games fail. That is one reason new titles are always better than sequels.
Who else hates the mofo that pulled the plug out of the water stage from SPORE?
ME!
And me! Who cares they have a deadline! Just because you have to do something instead of just programming easy mode and letting freelancers do everything instead of full time employees doesn’t mean it’s bad for busenis.
My two cents-
Some of EA’s subsidaries make good titles. More specifically, I think Mirror’s Edge was actually quite the bold experiment. It was fun while it lasted, but it was too short. Working on Dead Space, very close to RE4’s brand of horror with the added shock of being attacked by monsters in a vacuum. That is high octane nightmare fuel, pure in simple.
In space, no one can hear you scream, and you can’t hear monsters creeping up on you either.
Criterion was acquired by EA, and Burnout Revenge/Paradise were both quality games. The first three were good too, but one thing EA’s oversight added was a good soundtrack and, in a first for EA, plenty of free downloadable content. (Granted, Criterion probably said “Charge for this? Over our dead body”). Too bad they didn’t pick up Black 2, they’re missing a good profit.
NFS Most Wanted was good fun. Fast, furious, and it never took itself too seriously. Carbon gave us the drift races and narm. Assholes.
Won’t even talk about Prostreet or Undercover. Haven’t tried Shift.
And they did publish Mass Effect 2 and gave us the Cerberus Network, and if you got it launch day it was a pack-in content delivery system. All levels and characters through Cerberus were free. Of course I waited on downloading so I bypassed all the problems on initial launch. Lucky me.
no, it isn’t… it isn’t even a simulation - ARMA 2 is 
BC 2 is just an simple arcade shooter with nice GFX compared to ARMA 2 (the REAL Operation Flashpoint 2 from the same company who did OF 1!)
Good sides:
EA&IW -> cod6 = good
Down sides:
cod6 -> lobbys + undetectable cheaters = not worth playing
You realize cod6 wasn’t EA, it was Activison (which is far more evil than EA).
Totally true <3 . Computer games are a new form of computerized collective art on multiple levels (music, programming, design, plot etc.)
But ever since 2002 (America’s army) all sorts of lobbies discovered the unconscious power, computer games have over young men. Don’t believe me? Just play the AC-130 part of COD4 and compare it to the latest wikileaks video about the collateral murder of two journalist.
Ever since Ubisoft, EA and Activision have been busy sucking the d***s of the military, the automobile industry and record labels, etc. …
So yes, EA is evil. As evil as a rich, aging musician appearing in a pepsi commercial.
Call of Duty Modern warfare 1&2 had the most exciting and completely astonishing single players, but the mp’s were made IMO just to hurt us sensitive internet usesrs.
edit: my bad, i may have gono over the line. Lets just say that cod4 had an excellent sp and great mp. cod6 instead had nice sp, even tho the idea made almost no sense. Its mp was adjusted to the perfection, EXECPT for the fking lobby and useless vac. oh and the hidden game modes made me stunned too 
They just Published it, BIOWARE made it. It’s like saying that the PS3 version of TF2 was made by EA games.
.
.
so look what happened to Medal Of Honor or NFS… MoH and NFS are no more what they was a few years ago… for example MoH Allied Assault and NFS 1 to NFS Porsche, they were so great games… NFS Shift is not bad, but can’t tell me seriously that u can compare it with Dirt 2 or Forza Motorsport 3 or other good racing games… and I’m afraid about the new MoH, what i’ve seen about it now looks like a Modern Warfare clone…