EA (Electronic Arts)

First off, EA has the best games like Mass Effect and The Sims but just stop EA for having too MUCH DLC for your games already! Come on! You're now with a ****ing lawsuit with Battlefield 4 and before you were rated the worst company in all of America. AMERICA! And anyways, this video may have answered my opinion about EA when they make just too much DLC'S!

Edit: This video is just about everyone's opinion and if you would like to buy DLC: The Game, go to your computer and download Level 1! Then download your character on over the internet! And if you want to go to level 2, just pay the $900 to go to level 2! DLC: THE GAME, developed by EA and other companies that have too much DLC. GET IT NOW! :D

 
Last edited:
Angry fanboys voted in a poll where Comcast should have won, let's be honest. I'd take EA's games over awful internet speeds, connections and lies.
 
Please note that that was just a joke and an exaggeration of my fear whenever I post an unpopular opinion. The only purpose of this is to humor you, even those who are choosing to diagree with me. This is not meant to offend anyone in any way.

*Puts at gun point*

Offense taken.
 
I don`t like that EA sauce they throw over every big franchise, it makes them all feel the same. Dragon Age Origins was so awesome, then part 2 came (still good granted), but it just got totally EA'd. Its to slick and clean. Bleh. Not to mention they make it to liniair. Its not work, its a GAME. And yea, otherwise, they want your money, but they all do, just don`t make it so obvious....
 
What I've seen of Dragon Age 3 looks amazing. What I've seen of The Sims 4 looks amazing. I don't think EA is out to destroy their games.

Game designers work with EA, and EA works with the game designers. EA is a business. They do what they think will sell well. All businesses do what they think will sell well. Sometimes they hit, sometimes they miss. And you can't assume all decisions are made based off of firm things EA does. For all you know that 'sauce' you speak of could be something thought up by the designers, or a decision made by the game designers. Companies are trying to make money, just like every other person with a job. They experiment and if people like what they do, they keep up with that. If they get too much back draft that negatively impacts them, they change it.

-People didn't like how the latest Sim City is always online. Guess what? The Sims 4 is not going to require being online.
-Regardless of how much I hate the Sims 3 online store, people still eat up all the items in there like it's candy. The Sims 4 will likely have an online store.
-I loved dragon age II. *pauses for gasps of horror and threats of death* The only thing I didn't love about it was the small world, repetitive maps, and how it felt like my choices didn't mean diddly. As did most people, apparently. Go look at everything about Dragon Age III. They pretty much took everything I hated about two and put it down like Old Yeller. Now if only they can promise me they won't let Felicia Day write any more self insert fanfiction and get it canonized, I'll be a happy camper.
-I'm excited to hear news about the next Mass Effect game. I loved what I've played of the series so far (though what I've heard about certain things in 3 distresses me, I choose to not let it upset me that badly) but I'm sure they'll fix any major issues that caused a rise in the fan base. If they even have to since Shepard's story is over. All they have to do is look at what the majority of their customers didn't like, and try something new. Like all businesses.

Seriously, EA is not video game company Hitler.
 
This sums up my opinion pretty nicely.

meme___scumbag_ea_by_reddock12-d6ao81b.jpg

I love the Sims, but the main features of the game (expansions) cost about ?30+ each every time. Irritating.
 
Expansions are expansions. They are not the main features, by definition. The base game is the main game. Expansions just add to the experience. They add different ways to play the game. Each expansion usually adds at least 3 or 4 new hairstyles, many MANY different furniture models, sometimes new textures, a lot of different animations and new programming for all the new features they added, as well as other things.

If you were complaining about the store, which seems to me like the sets in the store are highly overpriced, I'd understand. However, not only do they have to pay programmers, artists, and other people, they also have to pay for producing all those CDs, all those containers the CDs come in, and everything else. EA rips you off through their store. The expansions have always been that way. Would you prefer having only the base game? Because if you take away the expansions, that's all you're gonna get.

I'd say that the main issue with everything about content in the Sims 3 (besides the store's outrageous prices but they wont be going anywhere because the casual players eat it up, like I said) is that from what I have read in various places, the game's base programming was NOT made to be altered easily. Which means a lot of time was probably taken up between each and every expansion trying to fiddle with the game mechanics getting them to work right. Which meant less content went into the expansions because more effort and time was put into making everything actually work.

Another issue wast he Create-A-Style that the fanbase worships so much and is so upset over not being in TS4. Let me simplify the problem for you. Imagine there are 20 (flat)patterns. Imagine there are 20 colors. That is 400 possible combinations that the game constantly has to have qued up just in case there's a furniture item with any particular combination of pattern and color. That number gets even BIGGER when taking into account that each pattern is *not* a flat design and has multiple color options on it. And there are far more than 20 colors. Now. Add to the fact there are multiple items where you could have any combination of those patterns and colors on them. That number got even bigger. And the computer has to be ready to pull these up at any time. And there's a big reason why TS3 doesn't work as well as it could.

All of this seems to be getting fixed in the Sims 4, so any expansions will likely be WORTH that price tag. Also... if the price of an expansion is the only thing about them that bothers you that much.. wait for the price to drop. It's really no simpler than that.
 
O…Okay. I wasn't really complaining anyway. I don't purchase them myself. I have downloaded them from someone else's Origin previously. I was just saying they're a little overpriced for features that actually make the game interesting; like seasons or pets.
 
What I've seen of Dragon Age 3 looks amazing. What I've seen of The Sims 4 looks amazing. I don't think EA is out to destroy their games.

Game designers work with EA, and EA works with the game designers. EA is a business. They do what they think will sell well. All businesses do what they think will sell well. Sometimes they hit, sometimes they miss. And you can't assume all decisions are made based off of firm things EA does. For all you know that 'sauce' you speak of could be something thought up by the designers, or a decision made by the game designers. Companies are trying to make money, just like every other person with a job. They experiment and if people like what they do, they keep up with that. If they get too much back draft that negatively impacts them, they change it.

Well you just went besides my point (as far as this is aimed towards me), they make mainstream games to the taste of most gamers out of popular franchises. I feel that takes away the identity of the game. I know the sauce is from EA, because its the same thing they add to every game they produce. Especially the menu`s, music and presentation reek of it.

I don`t hate EA, ofcourse they do what they do to make more money and thats fine. However, my gaming taste doesn`t match what EA considers best quality. Regardless of that, I will buy Dragon Age 3 anyways, because its still a good game. But I wouldn`t buy for example sportsgames from FIFA. Its all the same concept. It doesn`t appeal to me.

In the end I`m a mostly nintendo gamer for a reason, because they embody best what I look for in a franchise/game. I can accept a hit and miss curve easier, when the designers push their imaginations to the limit. I don`t feel EA does that, although they are making some impressive changes with FIFA (they had to though, they were being overtaken for a few years by pro evolution soccer).
 
Last edited:
I'm not trying to go beside your point because right now I have no idea what your point it. To be honest, it just sounds like you're upset EA isn't making the game as you think they should be made. I don't understand how that takes away from the identity of a game. The Sims, Dragon Age, and Mass Effect all have their own identity and EA has done nothing to change it. So I honestly have no idea where you're coming from with that.

The term 'EA Sauce' you keep using is making you sound less like you have actual reasoning behind your dislike of EA and sounds more like you're just bashing EA because they don't do what you want, which you literally just stated. If your taste doesn't match up with the games EA puts out, you should try to go look for games that do match your taste. It's not EAs fault you don't like the kind of games they make. You really shouldn't bash them for that.

What exactly does Nintendo 'embody' for you anyway? I can't exactly say they 'push their imaginations to the limit' all that much. EA does a lot more than Nintendo does. For example, compare the Sims 1 to the Sims 3. While the base mechanics are the same, there's no denying the two are totally different games. They've made big changes. EA isn't afraid to change something up in a game. Nintendo on the other hand has very little in the way of innovation (besides the waggle waggle sticks and giant game pad that they refuse to get rid of and actually isolate people who play their games and you know... can't use their hands as well as other people due to medical conditions or other such things). Super Mario Brothers on the NES plays near identically to most of the New Super Mario Brothers games. Heck, they made Super Mario Galaxy twice in a row and just added Yoshi. A Link Between Worlds is at least a change to the usual Zelda formula from what I've seen of it though.

Don't get me wrong, I love Nintendo games. But Nintendo is not my favorite company (now that I think about it, I wouldn't know who to call my favorite company). I was cringing through the entire last Nintendo Direct. It was painful all the stuff they were announcing like it was something I should be excited about.

Playing the Devil's advocate is tiring...
 
I'm not trying to go beside your point because right now I have no idea what your point it. To be honest, it just sounds like you're upset EA isn't making the game as you think they should be made. I don't understand how that takes away from the identity of a game. The Sims, Dragon Age, and Mass Effect all have their own identity and EA has done nothing to change it. So I honestly have no idea where you're coming from with that.

My point is that EA is a very mainstream oriented company. Mostly visable in the standard presentation they provide their games with.

The term 'EA Sauce' you keep using is making you sound less like you have actual reasoning behind your dislike of EA and sounds more like you're just bashing EA because they don't do what you want, which you literally just stated. If your taste doesn't match up with the games EA puts out, you should try to go look for games that do match your taste. It's not EAs fault you don't like the kind of games they make. You really shouldn't bash them for that.

The EA sauce that I mentioned once and only used again since that made me feel you refered to my post, is the thing that makes EA games all stand together. I`m not "bashing" EA, they can do whatever the hell they want, I`m just voicing my opinion that it isn`t my cup of tea, that is all. Superb franchises like Dragon Age (which are only published by EA) still stand out to me.

What exactly does Nintendo 'embody' for you anyway? I can't exactly say they 'push their imaginations to the limit' all that much. EA does a lot more than Nintendo does. For example, compare the Sims 1 to the Sims 3. While the base mechanics are the same, there's no denying the two are totally different games. They've made big changes. EA isn't afraid to change something up in a game. Nintendo on the other hand has very little in the way of innovation (besides the waggle waggle sticks and giant game pad that they refuse to get rid of and actually isolate people who play their games and you know... can't use their hands as well as other people due to medical conditions or other such things). Super Mario Brothers on the NES plays near identically to most of the New Super Mario Brothers games. Heck, they made Super Mario Galaxy twice in a row and just added Yoshi. A Link Between Worlds is at least a change to the usual Zelda formula from what I've seen of it though.

I've been playing games for over 20 years, not just nintendo obviously, for me Nintendo embodies fun, imagination and reinvention. And no, ofcourse they aren`t the only gamestudios who can bring that to the table, but I feel they have done it most consistantly. I feel Nintendo has evolved their games a lot, most visible in Mario, Zelda and Metroid games. The way they translate gameplay to new environments and add new gameplay mechanics is exceptional. Not that I don`t see an occasional mis**** from them. I felt Mario Sunshine was fun to play but dissapointing, same goes for that Luigi game on the WiiU. BUt all in all, Mario has starred in a wide diversity of games, like fighting, racing, platforming, RPG, sportsgames, partygames, etc. Definetly not all great games, but they sure all are different. I think Zelda is unique in design. New franchises they start bring complete new experiences to the table, like Pikmin.

Don't get me wrong, I love Nintendo games. But Nintendo is not my favorite company (now that I think about it, I wouldn't know who to call my favorite company). I was cringing through the entire last Nintendo Direct. It was painful all the stuff they were announcing like it was something I should be excited about.

Playing the Devil's advocate is tiring...

I don`t care who makes a game,. if its good, its good. Hindsight shows nintendo has created most of my favorite games, but that doesn`t mean I`ll blindly follow them with every product they toss on the market. Just like I wont dissmiss every EA game without trying it. But I`ve been playing EA games for over 15 years and I felt I earned a right to voice my opinion about them. I say 15 years, cause my earliest memory without factchecking to playing an EA game is Fifa 98, with the blur,.song 2 theme.

When you ask people for opinions on gamestudios, what else do you expect then approaches from a personal angle, depending on what that person likes and dislikes? Thats kinda how this whole game industry works and kinda the reason Sega went down in flames and Sony and Microsoft emerged. THey appealed more to the masses. So i`m not denying EA is very succesful, I`m just saying that personally I dislike most of their products. They don`t have to change for me, I don`t care, gaming is expensive enough as it is.
 
I am so mad at EA right now. For some reason, whenever I enter a pop up, EVERYTHING BLOWS UP. It glitches, it *****es, and it MAKES NO SENSE. Words drift around....I tried removing CC and nothing worked?

;n; So devastated

- - - Post Merge - - -

Its sims, btw
 
I am so mad at EA right now. For some reason, whenever I enter a pop up, EVERYTHING BLOWS UP. It glitches, it *****es, and it MAKES NO SENSE. Words drift around....I tried removing CC and nothing worked?

;n; So devastated

- - - Post Merge - - -

Its sims, btw

Yeah, it's so annoying. Then you ask for help and they have no answers.
 
Just to throw my opinion in:

I'm 32 and seen EA grow from what they were to what they are now and the one thing I'll give them is they always push forward. If it wasn't for EA then many games wouldn't be as good as they are now because EA are always trying to monopolise the market which forces other companies to step up their game and improve in order to compete.

The negatives of EA are out there for all to see, they are too much a business and not enough a gamers company. Now having said that I was invited out to Vancouver Canada to attend EA Canada for a week a few years back to help give feedback for FIFA 11 and upon seeing their studios it's amazing how different they are from the inside.
The people that I met when there were passionate about what they did, the devs who worked on FIFA were massive football fans and really determined to create a great game as were the devs who worked on NHL that I met. I think the real issue with EA is that they hire people to make their games who LOVE what they do and then they restrict them. By restricting them I mean they essentially set goals that they must meet meaning the games that they want to create become warped and distorted in order to make them better to market and financially successful and this is why a lot of their games are buggy or even broken.

EA have amazingly talented staff but that staff has bosses. If the bosses say the game has to be dumbed down in order for the masses to be able to play it then it'll be dumbed down. If the bosses say "we need to hit this profit margin" then in goes micro transactions galore and there is nothing the passionate staff can do but do as they are told or lose their jobs.

The real issue with EA resides at the top and it's a shame EA gets so much hate because most of their staff are passionate gamers who want nothing more but the create the ultimate form of the game they work on.
 
''You either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villain.''
I hate EA with a passion and refuse to buy any of their products.
If I actually want to play a game of theirs like Mass Effect or Dragon Age, I will buy it second hand so that EA won't see a penny from me.
 
Game designers work with EA, and EA works with the game designers. They experiment and if people like what they do, they keep up with that. If they get too much back draft that negatively impacts them, they change it.

-People didn't like how the latest Sim City is always online. Guess what? The Sims 4 is not going to require being online.

Seriously, EA is not video game company Hitler.

They were voted the worst company for a reason.
EA doesn't work with studios, they buy smaller studios, milk their games for all they're worth and then liquidize them while absorbing all their rights to franchises. Essentially killing those games.
If they're only acting as the Publishers, they put so much pressure on the development company that the game is released being either half finished or nowhere near as great as it could've been, had they had enough time and less pressure or EA dictating what they can and can't add.
EA does something and if people don't like it... tough. The only exception to this was the ME3 ending in which they hurriedly cobbled together another ending.
Sims 4 was in development well before the SimCity fiasco.
Sims 4 was never going to require being online aside from it's DRM.

EA does a lot more than Nintendo does. For example, compare the Sims 1 to the Sims 3. While the base mechanics are the same, there's no denying the two are totally different games. They've made big changes. EA isn't afraid to change something up in a game. Nintendo on the other hand has very little in the way of innovation.

Super Mario Brothers on the NES plays near identically to most of the New Super Mario Brothers games. Heck, they made Super Mario Galaxy twice in a row and just added Yoshi. A Link Between Worlds is at least a change to the usual Zelda formula from what I've seen of it though.

Nope, nope it doesn't. The only reason you would think this is because it has bought out so many other smaller companies. Compare Pokemon Red/Blue to Pokemon X/Y aside from the core mechanics blah blah.
Sims 1 and Sims 3 are the same game more than a Nintendo franchise is. Maybe excluding Mario.
Graphics improvement, can't marry your immediate relatives, moods, wishes.
Same expansions, same interactions, same idea re-skinned. You can't rip on one company for doing something when the company you're brown-nosing does exactly the same.
EA is the company that is most scared to 'change something up in a game'. Just look at Battlefield/FIFA/NHL/Rock Band/Sims.
The only one to rival EA in its' horror is Activision which doesn't seem to get quite as much hate.

Only thing I'm tired with from Nintendo is Mario, those games are getting more and more samey.
 
Last edited:
SimCity 2013 customers have been told multiple times that there is no way to have an offline mode of SimCity. Now it's coming. Thoughts?
 
Back
Top