EA tries to buy Valve, Gabe laughs

[Red Storm]

EA isn't greedy out of necessity, they're greedy because they're led by a bunch of bankers and business majors whose entire lives revolve around greed. In the high tech industry especially greed and business know how just are not enough. You need actual talent and knowledgeable people in leadership positions as so many others have shown repeatedly.

I say out of necessity because they have to report to share holders. Valve is greedy because I'm sure they like making money, but they don't have to always be on the lookout for corners they can cut to make more, because they don't have to report to anyone.

 

[Golgatha]

Ok, lets try and break this down.

EA buys talent and runs it into the ground 99% of the time. They have ruined many excellent franchises that they have bought. While they are a company and aim to make money, they have become extremely short sighted in about it and doing anything and everything to turn a quick profit now instead of looking more long term.

As for their franchises, lets break it down, starting with the ones you named.

MoH, has been run into the ground and they have tried rebooting it once and failed and are trying again. They want it to be CoD sadly and use BF beta's as incentive to preordering/buying it.

BF, great series, not going to argue, but, BF3 is a step down from its predecessor and now with BF4 announced for next year and they want to do leap frog development with a new MoH one year and a BF the next year, they will quickly wear it out most probable.

Crysis, they don't own it, they are just the publishers or maybe pay for some of the development, but Crytek is not owned by EA.

Mass Effect. Good games that got progressively less RPG and more just action and became a DLC milker with the last holding out an important part of the lore for another $10. Bioware was not bought by EA till ME2 was around half way done.

Need for Speed, seriously, do we even need to get into this? This poor series has become so lost that they actually had you get out of the car and run in the last one. Now because they can figure out how to make a good one again, they are taking the best one they made in some time (Most Wanted) and are already remaking it.

Simcity. Ahh how we all love some city building, now with always on connection to play, you know because you have to have some douchebags city next to yours and you can already tell people will do shit to screw with your city by making their city so bad Detroit looks like paradise. Not to mention it took them over a decade to even touch the franchise again.

Dead Space. Good fun games and a original IP made up all by themselves not long ago.

All their sports games, new roster same price, year after year.

Dragon Age. First one? Amazing. Second one? Horrible. The difference? Bioware was not owned by EA till the first one was 90% done.

Command & Conquer. I'm not even gonna get into this.


On top of just buying talent/IP's and then destroying them for the quick buck with lots of questionable practices. They try to do a bit of everything but in the end, they are just bad to average in it all instead. Look at Origin, it has been out a year and no changes to it despite a lot of stuff on it needing a fix.

There are other bad publishers/devs out there. I agree, Activison is freaking horrid, if it wasn't for a new CoD each year and Blizzard that company would be dead by now. Ubisoft is another, they are about as two faced as it comes. But EA just takes what is bad from other publishers and adds they own crap on top of it to make it all much worst. I guess we did find what EA is good at heh.

Basically it all comes down to this.

EA is not good for gaming.

I approve everything you said here and will only add that both EA and Activision are horrid for gaming in general and need to DIAF. At least I only disagree with Ubisoft because of their draconian DRM schemes, but everything EA or Activision has ever laid hands on shrivels up and dies, leaving only an ashen and almost unrecognizable husk of what it used to be.

 

[JAG87]

I am a consumer. I never asked EA to destroy Command and Conquer, Dragon Age, Mass Effect, etc...

If you bought those games, you sure did. You were the enabler. Next time download the demo, and if it's shit then don't buy it.

If more people did that instead of gobbling up whatever they are fed, EA would have to release better games to make profits.

 

[Barfo]

If you bought those games, you sure did. You were the enabler. Next time download the demo, and if it's shit then don't buy it.

If more people did that instead of gobbling up whatever they are fed, EA would have to release better games to make profits.

By demo you mean torrent? Most of games these days don't have demos.

 

[smackababy]

By demo you mean torrent? Most of games these days don't have demos.

ME3 - Demo, BF3 has a trial pass, and iirc DA2 had a demo as well. Hmm...

 

[surfsatwerk]

If you bought those games, you sure did. You were the enabler. Next time download the demo, and if it's shit then don't buy it.

If more people did that instead of gobbling up whatever they are fed, EA would have to release better games to make profits.

I did not purchase them.

 

[wuliheron]

I say out of necessity because they have to report to share holders. Valve is greedy because I'm sure they like making money, but they don't have to always be on the lookout for corners they can cut to make more, because they don't have to report to anyone.

It isn't just because they have to report to shareholders. Other publicly traded high tech corporations like MS and Apple, etc. are lead by people who are experts in the technical side of the business. It's just business as usual with opportunistic bankers and business majors looking to worm their way into the business and make a quick buck. Nowhere is that more possible for them to do than the publishing and sales end of the business.

 

[Kalmah]

Ok, lets try and break this down.

EA buys talent and runs it into the ground 99% of the time. They have ruined many excellent franchises that they have bought. While they are a company and aim to make money, they have become extremely short sighted in about it and doing anything and everything to turn a quick profit now instead of looking more long term.

As for their franchises, lets break it down, starting with the ones you named.

MoH, has been run into the ground and they have tried rebooting it once and failed and are trying again. They want it to be CoD sadly and use BF beta's as incentive to preordering/buying it.

BF, great series, not going to argue, but, BF3 is a step down from its predecessor and now with BF4 announced for next year and they want to do leap frog development with a new MoH one year and a BF the next year, they will quickly wear it out most probable.

Crysis, they don't own it, they are just the publishers or maybe pay for some of the development, but Crytek is not owned by EA.

Mass Effect. Good games that got progressively less RPG and more just action and became a DLC milker with the last holding out an important part of the lore for another $10. Bioware was not bought by EA till ME2 was around half way done.

Need for Speed, seriously, do we even need to get into this? This poor series has become so lost that they actually had you get out of the car and run in the last one. Now because they can figure out how to make a good one again, they are taking the best one they made in some time (Most Wanted) and are already remaking it.

Simcity. Ahh how we all love some city building, now with always on connection to play, you know because you have to have some douchebags city next to yours and you can already tell people will do shit to screw with your city by making their city so bad Detroit looks like paradise. Not to mention it took them over a decade to even touch the franchise again.

Dead Space. Good fun games and a original IP made up all by themselves not long ago.

All their sports games, new roster same price, year after year.

Dragon Age. First one? Amazing. Second one? Horrible. The difference? Bioware was not owned by EA till the first one was 90% done.

Command & Conquer. I'm not even gonna get into this.


On top of just buying talent/IP's and then destroying them for the quick buck with lots of questionable practices. They try to do a bit of everything but in the end, they are just bad to average in it all instead. Look at Origin, it has been out a year and no changes to it despite a lot of stuff on it needing a fix.

There are other bad publishers/devs out there. I agree, Activison is freaking horrid, if it wasn't for a new CoD each year and Blizzard that company would be dead by now. Ubisoft is another, they are about as two faced as it comes. But EA just takes what is bad from other publishers and adds they own crap on top of it to make it all much worst. I guess we did find what EA is good at heh.

Basically it all comes down to this.

EA is not good for gaming.

I agree with this and would also like to add that EA purchased Bullfrog for the only purpose of shutting them down so that Dungeon Keeper 3 wouldn't compete with a harry potter and lord of the rings game that EA were publishing.

Instead of competing with the competition, they shut a developer down and gave everybody a big middle finger.

I don't know how to express my anger for this properly without torching their headquarters and sticking my foot all the way up somebody's ass.

 

[crownjules]

If you bought those games, you sure did. You were the enabler. Next time download the demo, and if it's shit then don't buy it.

Good luck with that. The big name publishers (EA!) realized many years ago that the video game demo has the same potential to dissuade a purchase as it does at convincing you to buy it. That's why we see less and less demos today when back in the 90s practically every game had one.

Consumers have some say in propping up these companies. But the lack of demo combined with the "once you buy it you can't return it" policy that governs most software purchases only helps to serve EA's practices. The casual gamer isn't on internet forums monitoring who's bought up Franchise ABC's developer. He just sees that the sequel to one of his favorite games is coming out and if there's no way to try before you buy then he's likely going to buy it based on past experience. He doesn't know that the dev team that made the first one great have been gutted in favor of lower paid substitutes. Or that that game was pushed on an aggressive timetable rather then let things progress naturally.

 

[smackababy]

I agree with this and would also like to add that EA purchased Bullfrog for the only purpose of shutting them down so that Dungeon Keeper 3 wouldn't compete with a harry potter and lord of the rings game that EA were publishing.

Instead of competing with the competition, they shut a developer down and gave everybody a big middle finger.

I don't know how to express my anger for this properly without torching their headquarters and sticking my foot all the way up somebody's ass.

EA acquired Bullfrog in 1995. Dungeon Keeper came out in 1997 and Dungeon Keeper 2 in 1999. Also, I thought it was Black and White 2 that was going to be the competitor for Dungeon Keeper 3. That might not be correct though because LionHead Studios wasn't owned by EA, they just published the games.

 

[shortylickens]

EA left bullfrog alone to make Dungeon Keeper. Then they closed the doors.

 

[tydas]

I'll blame the pimply nose teenagers, dumb mom's and dad's and other assorted idiots who shell out money to EA for shite games...what do we expect them to do when they put little effort and get great return...

 

[Kalmah]

EA acquired Bullfrog in 1995. Dungeon Keeper came out in 1997 and Dungeon Keeper 2 in 1999. Also, I thought it was Black and White 2 that was going to be the competitor for Dungeon Keeper 3. That might not be correct though because LionHead Studios wasn't owned by EA, they just published the games.

I heard that as well but pulled my info from wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungeon_Keeper_3

The projects that provoked Dungeon Keeper 3's cancellation were EA's Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings games.

 

[Dominato3r]

If you really don't think EA has had a hand in how things have turned out, then give me what you're smoking.

Yup. They're sports division is a great example. People bought NHL11 because it had a broken hockey sticks feature. They're buying NHL13 now because it has 3 or 4 new body checks.

There is no reasoning with people like this.

 

[Olikan]

but as i said... D3 from blizzard, HL3 from valve (maybe), C&C, ME, SWTOR, DA2, MOH from EA

i really doubt that HL3 is going to cause a have massive disappointment like D3 or DNF...even with HL3 beeing the most hyped game ever

valve games have a insane quality, just look at dota 2... the game already supports e-sports better than SC2, yet it is still in beta state

actually dota 2 is a just a good example...valve had everything to lose there, dota comunity is just full of haters, yet they got a very big respect by the comunity

 

[Zenoth]

Now the question is...

Why in the Great Heck couldn't BioWare wish to see themselves disintegrated rather than being bought by EA. Meh, stupid greed (I know, it's my own answer). To me Valve is the "last light" for PC gaming (I'm speaking of a big company that remains, not Indie developers whom also try their best at it). If Valve is bought by anyone (name it I don't care) I'm giving up on PC gaming and I'm dusting off my 16-Bit and 32-Bit consoles again and stick with that... and maybe World of Goo every now and then.

Seriously... Steam getting bought by EA? Anyone else had actual emotion-driven physical symptoms of strong discomfort bordering on the nauseating after thinking that something like that could happen?

 

[Kalmah]

Now the question is...

Why in the Great Heck couldn't BioWare wish to see themselves disintegrated rather than being bought by EA. Meh, stupid greed (I know, it's my own answer). To me Valve is the "last light" for PC gaming (I'm speaking of a big company that remains, not Indie developers whom also try their best at it). If Valve is bought by anyone (name it I don't care) I'm giving up on PC gaming and I'm dusting off my 16-Bit and 32-Bit consoles again and stick with that... and maybe World of Goo every now and then.

Seriously... Steam getting bought by EA? Anyone else had actual emotion-driven physical symptoms of strong discomfort bordering on the nauseating after thinking that something like that could happen?

The first thing I would do is send EA a refund request for every game I have in Steam.

 

[Red Hawk]

Now the question is...

Why in the Great Heck couldn't BioWare wish to see themselves disintegrated rather than being bought by EA. Meh, stupid greed (I know, it's my own answer). To me Valve is the "last light" for PC gaming (I'm speaking of a big company that remains, not Indie developers whom also try their best at it). If Valve is bought by anyone (name it I don't care) I'm giving up on PC gaming and I'm dusting off my 16-Bit and 32-Bit consoles again and stick with that... and maybe World of Goo every now and then.

Seriously... Steam getting bought by EA? Anyone else had actual emotion-driven physical symptoms of strong discomfort bordering on the nauseating after thinking that something like that could happen?

BioWare wasn't really an autonomous developer like Valve is even before EA bought them. A private equity firm called Elevation Partners owned BioWare and ultimately it was their call to sell BioWare to EA (they sold BioWare along with Pandemic, and EA paid $860 million for the lot).

In any case, good on Valve. EA swallowing Valve would be good for EA, of course, but it would be bad for Valve, for Valve's IPs, for Steam, and for the PC game industry, and for the gaming industry in general.

 

[JTsyo]

I think you are giving him too much altruistic credit.

If his company was valued at 3B, and EA offers 1 Billion, he is encouraged to say what he did. Why agree to sell your company for less than what the market thinks it is worth?

If EA offered more than 3B, I promise he would be thinking differently, unless he felt strongly that in the near term he could increase of the value considerably, or 3B was just the tip of the iceberg.

doubt it. If Valve is making him enough money he might just be happier making games than spending $3 billion. It's not like Valve is bleeding money, I'm sure he's already living the good life.

 

[RPD]

Wow so there are EA defenders now? The industry is doomed I see.

 

[DucatiMonster696]

It isn't just because they have to report to shareholders. Other publicly traded high tech corporations like MS and Apple, etc. are lead by people who are experts in the technical side of the business. It's just business as usual with opportunistic bankers and business majors looking to worm their way into the business and make a quick buck. Nowhere is that more possible for them to do than the publishing and sales end of the business.

Bill Gates is still the primary owner of the majority of stock for Microsoft and heads the board of directors. Steve Jobs also held a majority interest in stock when he ran Apple and he also was part of the board of directors. So your point is not factual when you take into context that your examples have individuals who owned the majority of stock for their publicly traded companies and thus were the biggest stock holders who had the most say in the companies they ran and partially owned.

 

[TakeNoPrisoners]

If EA bought Valve HL3 would become CoD, and the entire gaming world would cry.

If that happened Freeman would talk in a game, ruining the entire series and making the character itself worthless. EA has no idea how to run Valve, Period.

 

[Blitzvogel]

Gabe I think is actually passionate about his company, what they do, and the quality work they put it out. He's smart enough to know that by not cutting corners, respecting employees and customers only improves the end quality of the products Valve puts out, building better, long-lasting rapport and in the end makes more money for Valve.

When you think things through, and dedicate yourself to a win-win scenario, everyone benefits and your success only builds. Cutting corners at best gets you short term success.

 

[-Slacker-]

I honestly don't get all the hate for EA these days. They have some of the best franchises in the business at the moment. MoH, BF, Crysis, and mass effect are all great.

I honestly can't think of anything good that Activision has currently. The blizzard stuff is decent, but not my cup of tea. EA's developers are doing more innovation than any of the other dev's out there, but that's just my opinion.

Valve is obviously the best, but they don't release games that frequently.

Posting something ridiculous and then stating the obvious, that it's your opinion, does not absolve you from criticism, ever. It may be "just your opinion" (who's else would it be?), but it's still wrong.

 

[wuliheron]

Bill Gates is still the primary owner of the majority of stock for Microsoft and heads the board of directors. Steve Jobs also held a majority interest in stock when he ran Apple and he also was part of the board of directors. So your point is not factual when you take into context that your examples have individuals who owned the majority of stock for their publicly traded companies and thus were the biggest stock holders who had the most say in the companies they ran and partially owned.

That's a straw man argument. They're both publicly traded companies no matter how you slice it. EA could have done the same thing, but their CEO started out working for Sara Lee of all places and when he left the company he went straight into banking. If they don't own a majority of the stock in their own company it's because they obviously don't know the business, don't care about the business, and all they want is to make as much money as fast as possible.