As you might remember, I actually am an Xbox 360 gamer, but I'm not really an EA gamer specifically. Of course you get the odd EA title in there, because some of the games on the box were actually quite good or entertaining, but I most definitely don't have all of them.
@ThanosReXXX Haha, yeah. Well X360 tilted that way (I had X360 as well) but X1 really went into the whole EA model of digital + sports + GaaS. I honestly haven't seen much from EA in recent years. I loved Bioware in the past....but the recent stuff has been yucky. I don't do sports games or MMO shooters overall. Mirrors Edge last year was.....eh... Back in the PS days I had the full C&C stack, Crysis, Sim City, SW games, etc. They weren't a great company back then either, but it was a whole lot better.
@NEStalgia Yeah, for me it was the C&C games as well, got nearly all of them on the 360, and besides that, I've got all of the 360's Burnout games, a couple of Need for Speeds, the Dragon Age series, got Crysis as well, Dead Space, Mass Effect, and then the odd shooter, such as Medal of Honor (actually two of those: a WW2 and a modern one) and a Battlefield game.
But agreed, they were less aggravating back then. Sometimes, reinventing your business model might be more profitable, but most certainly not the most user-friendly thing to do...
Oh well, I suppose that "we" the gamers created an environment where this is possible and acceptable, so they'll probably keep on doing it anyway...
EDIT:
Damn, forgot to mention that I also own a Tiger Woods game, Army of Two, Kingdoms of Amalur, Dante's Inferno, the first Mirror's Edge and SSX. Guess I'm more of an EA supporter than I hoped to be...
@ThanosReXXX Technically I don't think "gamers" (i.e. the people that have been buying games for a long time) really made that environment acceptable. I think it's EA's own "Wii" moment.....they discovered the larger market of "casual" gamers and realized it's larger than the market of dedicated gamers and decided that's a market they can milk heavily borrowing from the mobile model. They've always been exploitative, but the actual gamers always kept them at least somewhat in check via spending habits and PR outcries. But that new market that loves football (either variety) and doesn't really know a thing about the world of gaming beyond that isn't going to complain because it's just like those mobile games (that EA was exploitative on.)
That's probably a big reason their true traditional games seem to fail so hard and those sports franchises and "eSports" attempts remain cash cows. In a sense, no console really "needs" EA...the new EA is more a bottom feeder of the broad market of non-gamers (more profits, less real influence, in a way), not the drivers of an actual console ecosystem (Sony/Nintendo could really care less about hardware sales so long as they're bathing in massive software sales, while Microsoft is more about controlling the platform than the actual unit sales of hardware or software, so it's more aligned with EA.)
Edit: I don't have as many EA games as you have, though I have a lot of the really old days ones....think large box PC with a big printed manual. But EA of the era you were buying games........actually made games. I think the last "real" game EA really put out there was The Saboteur. Awesome stealth/open world game. They shut down the studio the week it launched. That was about when they started shifting.
@NEStalgia I hope you're not saying that the Wii crowd is more or less responsible for monetization/micro-transactions of EA games, because I don't agree with that. It was definitely the Xbox360/PS3 "dudebro" twins and their online registration and season pass initiatives, that aligned nicely with EA's Origin platform back then, and all the other shenanigans that followed.
But I do agree that we don't really need EA on any platform, even though I would like to think that they can still churn out the odd gem here and there, and I don't buy the others anyway. I won't be caught dead playing any of there previous or current gen sports games, other than that Xbox 360 Tiger Woods game, but for my football needs, I'm thoroughly invested in Pro Evo. I always saw Fifa as the lesser one with the better licenses...
'The console wars are like boobs: Sony and Microsoft fight over which ones look the nicest and Nintendo's are the most fun to play with.'
@ThanosReXXX No, no, I don't mean the Wii's audience did it. What I mean is that EA's new model did similarly what the Wii did in terms of a "blue ocean" of discovering, tapping, and attracting a new audience other than "gamers", their old customers. They pulled different (or potentially overlapping) audiences of "casual", or "clueless" or "otherwise non-gamers" into their very non-gamer franchises, recognizing that was a bigger market than the gamer market was and a more easily exploitable market than the gamer market is. Gamers are complainers in general.....remember the 1-star reviews for Spore clogging Amazon? That was beautiful. But the Wii-turned-mobile-turned-slotmachine addicts-on-mobile demographic were a great market for them to tap with sports and Star Wars broad appeal (and later eSports which is more general audience acceptable than, say, Skyrim.) For the most part, the EA customer 10, 20 years ago was "gamers." If you look at most of their games now, I'd say the typical EA customer is a non-gamer. People who buy a console to play some sports games. Maybe play some battlefield/front with some buddies....not somebody who has shelves full of games and treats it as their primary hobby. (Ubisoft for example, I would say is the opposite, even though they follow some of the same exploitation. The Ubisoft customer is a fairly dedicated gamer.) That "non-gamer" market is going to be a lot easier to goad into those micro-transactions, and many will be used to it form mobile.
@NEStalgia Ah, okay. Guess we're largely on the same page, then. Although I do take into account a percentage of people that actually buy EA games, as I have done in the recent past, to genuinely play the games, and play them as they are, on the disc, without ever dipping into any of their micro-transaction possibilities.
I've never taken part in any pay-to-win plan either, and I only play online with friends and family, so I couldn't care less for any better armor or car components to win from them, and neither could they, so I'm perfectly fine with getting what might in EA's eyes be the incomplete experience of those games.
'The console wars are like boobs: Sony and Microsoft fight over which ones look the nicest and Nintendo's are the most fun to play with.'
@SKTTR Rocket League in no way deserves to be called an "abomination of a game". It's one of the finest and most addictive sports games I've ever played, I've already put 55 hours into it and it cost me less than $20. The loot boxes contents are nothing more than cosmetic stuff for those who want it. Nothing is forced on us. The DLC cars are also cosmetic and are cheap. Considering the price of the game, the superb online connections, cross play and free customization I don't think anyone can grudge the developers from trying to make a little more from it.
@Nintendoforlife I do acknowledge they exist. However, I think PC is the best platform for the series by and far. Even when they've made the game more like the PC version (The Sims 4 is a bad game, anyway. It's already so watered down compared to the past TS games), the lack of ability to mod and have custom content makes it less exciting for me. Mods are pretty much necessary for The Sims games.
@Nintendoforlife I do acknowledge they exist. However, I think PC is the best platform for the series by and far. Even when they've made the game more like the PC version (The Sims 4 is a bad game, anyway. It's already so watered down compared to the past TS games), the lack of ability to mod and have custom content makes it less exciting for me. Mods are pretty much necessary for The Sims games.
Ahhh I might have misread that, I took you saying "would ruin it" to mean it's not on consoles but if it ever was it wouldn't work. Now I see it's more like it's happened the past, so if they brought it over to the Switch you would get the same results. What mods do you personally think you would need for the game to feel complete to you?
I dont buy any ea or ubi games - kingdom battle notwithstanding. And I actually dont care if those two companies live or die. But more games are always agood thing - its up to the consumer to decide what to buy or not. If people wouldnt buy stupid games we wouldnt see them anymore.
I dont buy any ea or ubi games - kingdom battle notwithstanding. And I actually dont care if those two companies live or die. But more games are always agood thing - its up to the consumer to decide what to buy or not. If people wouldnt buy stupid games we wouldnt see them anymore.
I dont buy any ea or ubi games - kingdom battle notwithstanding. And I actually dont care if those two companies live or die. But more games are always agood thing - its up to the consumer to decide what to buy or not. If people wouldnt buy stupid games we wouldnt see them anymore.
UBISOFT makes some really good games though.
Assassins Creed Origins
Far Cry
The Crew
The Division
South Park
Ghost Recon
Forums
Topic: We don`t need EA on Switch !!!
Posts 141 to 160 of 224
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.