IGN: Why Do People 'Hate' EA? - Seriously? What is that all about? We asked EA.

[KMFJD]

Their Origin delivery system is flawed with too many problems (took 4 downloads of ME2 along with hacking the files on the 4th download to finally get it to work). I would be fine if they sold their games with Steam which is more stable for dl games.

lol

 

[Jadow]

I hate EA because they killed one of my favorite game companies, Origin.

Their Madden/NBA games IMO really suck too. All graphics, crap gameplay.

Front Page Sports Football Pro now that was a football game.

 

[RPD]

Is the Steam version better?

Couldn't say, I don't use Steam either.

 

[EltonL]

To be honest, I have no personal problem with EA. What I do see as being a problem however is the increasing tendency for people to expect very much out of a game. Not only have development costs skyrocketed recently due to graphics, but as engines get more complex bugfixes get more and more complicated.

Let's start with BF3.

BF3 was obviously an extension of Bad Company 2, it was natural, it was logical. Just take BC2 and increase the scale. It isn't a bad game. However what harms the game is the support. From the offset, Battlelog wasn't entirely efficient. Nor was it very bug-free. Once those got ironed out, we started seeing balancing issues. The problem there is a much more difficult problem to address as QC for game balance is entirely subjective. It didn't help that the developers in this case DICE, didn't exactly listen to the player base. Nor did they apply a logical progression of balancing. (Causing the game to be vastly different every patch iteration for better or worse)

Now we must look at the other problem with EA. They promise too much. A conclusive ending of ME3 (i haven't played but heard about the fiasco), no DLC for BF3 (BF3 premium?) many of these issues were exacerbated by people both buying into it and EA's bafflingly contradictory stance on what they would do.

But we have to factor in sales. Sales are important, they drive the industry forward, they ensure survival. What that also entails though are both sequels and large pushes to move as many units and never care again. This is why you see so many sequels and a reluctance to patch the game. (both of which could be alleviated by modding capabilities but that runs counter to creating more sales for the sequel) It's obvious that they face a difficult problem when they're driven by investors.

They could make a game that releases once every three to four years and allow modding capabilities and occasionally patch it. But then they run the risk of not being able to sell the sequel. It would appease the players though (look at Bethdesa games..). So they are stuck between either appeasing a fanbase that is very stringent and demanding or appeasing the investors that their company relies on. It's a bit of a catch 22. Couple it with bad PR, contradictory stances and generally not very friendly ways of dealing with their customers and we have an ingredient for difficult dealings.

As for the IP buying and never using them, well that's a problem with having a company run by investors and banks. They're not going to release new IPs that's too far high risk. Hence the recycling. Just my thoughts on why EA is EA..