PDA

View Full Version : EA Suffers $641 Million Dollar Loss


Solothores
02-04-2009, 01:24 AM
Electronic Arts reported a third quarter loss of $641 million -- significantly wider than its $33 million loss in the same period last year.

Most of the loss, the publisher says, is attributable to various business charges. EA's revenue actually increased about 10 percent year over year to $1.65 billion, plus $88 million in deferred revenue from online games -- but the gains still did not meet analysts' expectations.

The widening losses are prompting EA to expand its restructuring efforts slightly, however. With the company's results announcement today, EA said it now plans to lay off 11 percent of its workforce, or 1,100 employees, and to close 12 of its facilities. On the company's call to investors, it said these closures would favor "high-cost" locations.

The new restructuring details represent some further specifics beyond what the publisher has yet announced. EA had previously announced (http://gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=21611) a 10 percent reduction, 1,000 employees, and 9 facility closures.

EA also revealed it would reduce its slate of planned SKUs by 30 percent -- excluding its EA Partners titles, the publisher will launch 50 titles, or 125 SKUs, in its fiscal 2010, as opposed to 149 SKUs in fiscal 2009.

Although it still enjoys healthy cash reserves and has not incurred any debt, Electronic Arts has struggled to recuperate its share price since it warned of disappointing sales for its holiday portfolio. Analysts have suggested EA's investors are waiting to see results of the restructuring, which CFO Eric Brown says will reduce the company's operating expenses by about $500 million.

"Our holiday quarter came in below our expectations and we have significantly reduced our financial outlook for fiscal 2009, a clear disappointment," says EA CEO John Riccitiello.

Nonetheless, EA says it's still the leading publisher in North America by market share, according to NPD data pegging its share at 20 percent. The publisher also says its quality scores are up -- in 2008 it had 13 titles rated 80 or above on Metacritic, as opposed to 2007's seven.

EA says its best-selling game was FIFA 09, with 7.8 million copies sold. Need For Speed: Undercover, which the company plans to follow with three new titles, sold 5.2 million copies. And Mythic's Warhammer Online now has 300,000 paying subscribers, as of the quarter's end.

"We delivered on game quality and innovation in calendar 2008, with 13 titles rated 80 or above -- more than any third-party publisher. We expect to build on this great quality record in the year ahead while delivering more profitability."




Source:
http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=22150


Related:

As Electronic Arts reported greatly-widened losses (http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=22150) in its fiscal third quarter, CEO John Riccitiello said that in addition to getting its operating expenses way down, the publisher needs to do better on the Wii in order to make a rebound.

EA's goal, he said on the company's call to investors, is to "rival Nintendo on their own platform" and "get noticed [on Wii] in ways that no other third party will."

In addition to focusing EA Sports heavily on the Wii with a new tennis franchise, the publisher plans on "taking advantage of... fascination with fitness" through EA Sports Active.

But Riccitiello also said EA would also be bringing "core intellectual property" such as Dead Space to Wii, in editions custom-designed for the strengths of the platform.

Riccitiello also described how the EA thinks of the industry in terms of three "buckets" (excluding EA's mobile and Pogo businesses): Online games, Wii games, and Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 games. The EA CEO says he places the Xbox 360 and the PS3 in the same "bucket" because "the lion's share of titles developed for those platforms are common."

"We're proud to have great marketing partnerships around key exclusives, but in general, think of us as having those three buckets," he says.

And as the market leader, the Wii will receive as much focus from EA now as both the next-gen systems together. "Nintendo is the leader; they're getting half our emphasis in terms of title counts," said Riccitiello.

"You live, you learn you adjust and improve," he added, explaining why the company's Wii initiatives would be more successful in the coming year than in the previous year. "This year's title slate is a significant improvement from last year."

Source:
http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=22152

Larry_g1s
02-04-2009, 07:04 AM
Man, that is rough. My heart goes out to any EA employees who will be effected.

On another note, as a Wii owner, I'm glad they will be improving their focus on the games they make for that platform.

imashination
02-04-2009, 07:25 AM
EA says its best-selling game was FIFA 09, with 7.8 million copies sold. Need For Speed: Undercover

"We delivered on game quality and innovation in calendar 2008"

Company releases 100th boring sequel, claims to be innovative, ponders why it didn't make much money

hakanpersson
02-04-2009, 08:22 AM
Company releases 100th boring sequel, claims to be innovative, ponders why it didn't make much money

You fail to see your own missing logic in that statement? The least innovative titles sold best, and the most innovative sold worst. Not that I keep track of their sale figures, but I know Mirrors Edge sold far less than expected. But they sure did have alot of interesting innovative titles that stands out from the ordinary boring sequels they usually do, such as army of two and dead space.

DecWest
02-04-2009, 10:49 AM
Your sadly very correct.

In an industry that claims to be so wildly innovative the vast majority of our successes are well worn rehashes of iterations.

As an ex EA'er I am concerned for their 'plight' but not necessary suprised, they have the staff and the senior exec/marketing team to genuinely dominate the gaming scene but too many meddle management types fighting selfish political struggles coupled with inane levels of beaurocracy.....

I am also amazed at how the legendary veneer of 'toughness' has been shattered by Activision and Ubisofts rise!

@hakanpersson - love your work man - GRIN are doing some very cool stuff! KUDOS :cool:

lebada
02-04-2009, 04:29 PM
EA's kinda like the McDonalds of games. You know its bad for you but you keep on going back every few months.

Larry_g1s
02-04-2009, 04:42 PM
EA's kinda like the McDonalds of games. You know its bad for you but you keep on going back every few months.That's funny.

SheepFactory
02-04-2009, 04:44 PM
Company releases 100th boring sequel, claims to be innovative, ponders why it didn't make much money


Ea brought more new IP's than any other company this past year. (mirrors edge, spore, Dead space, etc)

leigh
02-04-2009, 04:44 PM
Company releases 100th boring sequel, claims to be innovative, ponders why it didn't make much money

I don't understand how you can say this in response to a quote stating that two titles, which were probably amongst the least innovative, were the biggest sellers.

Or did you simply overlook this detail in your frantic scramble to jump on the EASUCKS!!!111 bandwagon?

Venkman
02-04-2009, 04:59 PM
Company releases 100th boring sequel, claims to be innovative, ponders why it didn't make much money

I feel the opposite, EA really stepped up their quality in 2008. They are the console publisher for Valve, even putting out the Orange Box (the best value for money I ever spent on a 360 game), they published Left 4 Dead, and let their own internal studios turn out great games like Deadspace and Mirror's Edge.

Plus they picked up Brutal Legend after Activision dropped it. Bonus points from me! :)

Are you sure you're not thinking of that guy from Activision?

"With respect to the franchises that don't have the potential to be exploited every year across every platform with clear sequel potential that can meet our objectives of over time becoming $100 million plus franchises, that's a strategy that has worked very well for us."

http://www.joystiq.com/2008/11/06/activision-blizzard-ceo-kotick-vivendi-franchises-lacked-poten/

aesnakes
02-04-2009, 05:20 PM
does anyone know which locations are being targeted for closure or more layoffs. I know quite a few people working in EA's Vancouver studio. With all the studios in the game industry closing around here a lot of people are getting worried for their jobs. Im glad this is not happening in the film and television industry around here yet.

lebada
02-04-2009, 08:00 PM
does anyone know which locations are being targeted for closure or more layoffs. I know quite a few people working in EA's Vancouver studio. With all the studios in the game industry closing around here a lot of people are getting worried for their jobs. Im glad this is not happening in the film and television industry around here yet.

television is probably the cheapest form of entertainment in terms of visuals so i dont think layoffs are going to get AS bad (even though im sure will exist) as others. I find myself watching a lot more "free" TV series than playing a game i spent $60 for...especially if i come tired after work.

As for EA, i agree, 08 was a step in a good direction. That said, theyre notorious for behaving like a corporation rather than a studio (quantity > quality). Last year they had some better results though.

TheWraith
02-04-2009, 08:04 PM
well i remember when you used to get around 10 big titles released a year. now we're getting around 6 big titles a month. it's pretty hard to keep up.

JackZhang
02-04-2009, 08:39 PM
EA's kinda like the McDonalds of games. You know its bad for you but you keep on going back every few months.

Very interesting statement you've got here. Could you explain why you keep on going back?

lebada
02-04-2009, 09:02 PM
Very interesting statement you've got here. Could you explain why you keep on going back?

Sure.

NHL is a good example. the last very good version of the game was back in early 2000 to 2002..forgot the exact year, i think it was 02. Prior to that i remember 98 was the best from what my then high school friends told me.

Then every game past that 1 year slowly got degraded in quality and for quite a few years the 2k series was crowned as best.

i reluctantly played 08 on PC prior to getting a PS3 and it was worse than 07 (how does a goalie take out 3 players?)also in the 05 version i remember scoring 35 goals a game at the hardest difficulty setting and it wasnt for my excellent skills by any chance. The fact that i was being blocked by my own players didnt help either.

with 09 all the badness from prior years changed somehow and with the intro of be a pro mode, it made it actually more fun than any previous version to date (delving into that innovation notion).

so there you go. 98 -> 2002? -> 2009

Fifa was a bit more of a different animal. I loved the arcadey 2000 version, past that i hevtn enjoyed anythign amazingly good about it until 06 or 07? Now 09 providing finally a bigger stepo forward yet again.

That and having monopoly on the pc market didnt give any other options (and still doesnt) for sporting games.

hakanpersson
02-04-2009, 09:05 PM
Very interesting statement you've got here. Could you explain why you keep on going back?

Oh my, If I were you, I'd avoid that question, and focus on making clear that EA and mcdonalds are not good for comparison. But you might just be warming up the discussion:D

lebada
02-04-2009, 09:21 PM
Oh my, If I were you, I'd avoid that question, and focus on making clear that EA and mcdonalds are not good for comparison. But you might just be warming up the discussion:D

lol, theyd have it worse if people didnt care at all.

JackZhang
02-04-2009, 09:52 PM
Oh my, If I were you, I'd avoid that question, and focus on making clear that EA and mcdonalds are not good for comparison. But you might just be warming up the discussion:D

hehe. maybe it is a good comparison, maybe it's not. I'm interested more in the psychology behind the "coming back".

My own thinking towards the "coming back": You had some good time before. You keep coming back because of that good experience you had and you wish to experience the good again.

If you agree with me on that, then I have my next question.
everyone has their own definition of what good is. Sometimes the measuring of good or bad has certain sentimental value in it. Do you come back for the the quality of the product, or you come back to revisit your memory?

it's kinda goes off the topic of the this thread. ha ha ha...

lebada
02-04-2009, 10:11 PM
well the nostalgia is part of that but even then i draw some lines. i loved playing star wars galaxies back in the day even though it sucked beyond any other mmo...i left at one point...then i came back to something even worse (they tried to copy the newly launched WoW at the time and revamped the game into complete crap) and left forever.

Now..i sitll miss those days...but unless something much much better comes along, ill more than likely never play something like that again (hopefully bioware's mmo is gonna be better than what current games offer).

with EA consistency has been the problem. They offer something really good 1 year and then the 2nd year after that its like their entire production got hit my a truck and they were coding the game when they were on heavy medication. Im exaggerating but you get the idea.

as for McDs...well...those fries are like crack. Great when you taste them, bad when you realize what you have just done to yourself. :D

JackZhang
02-04-2009, 10:17 PM
LOL. yah i know what you mean.

anyway, hey thanks a ton for answering. Those are awesome feedback, for a humble artist.

AndrewRaZ
02-05-2009, 02:24 AM
Not sure if it affects your argument, but the NHL series isn't an EA franchise, it's 2K Sports.

Sure.

NHL is a good example. the last very good version of the game was back in early 2000 to 2002..forgot the exact year, i think it was 02. Prior to that i remember 98 was the best from what my then high school friends told me.

Then every game past that 1 year slowly got degraded in quality and for quite a few years the 2k series was crowned as best.
{.....}
so there you go. 98 -> 2002? -> 2009

Fifa was a bit more of a different animal. I loved the arcadey 2000 version, past that i hevtn enjoyed anythign amazingly good about it until 06 or 07? Now 09 providing finally a bigger stepo forward yet again.

That and having monopoly on the pc market didnt give any other options (and still doesnt) for sporting games.

FreakWizz
02-05-2009, 02:33 AM
I don't understand how you can say this in response to a quote stating that two titles, which were probably amongst the least innovative, were the biggest sellers.

Or did you simply overlook this detail in your frantic scramble to jump on the EASUCKS!!!111 bandwagon?

No simply he is correct. As a long time EA fan the games aren't innovative and their continual ability ignore and insult PC owners who get poor sports ports games designed for a PS2, and look and run as well as PS1, on a 5K PC.

NBA09 was and is simply SOOOOO SOOOOO BAD and I will never support a company, for the exact reasons the poster refers. Take2Interactive on the other hand who don't dominate the sports/game industry turned it's Xbox basketball (Live2K9)games into a terrific port for the PC, which shows just how bad EA treat PC users.

Add to that the continual buy-up of development houses like Pandemic, only to sack and remove them from the scene. And if EA wants to treat us all like numbers, than confuse me if i don't feel badly for them losing theirs, based on their bad business decisions.

How about the refusal to support games servers outside the USA... Hey world we want you to buy our games on a WordWide market, we will charge you more, but deliver far less, with no online or local server support. Way to GO EA!

Or did you simply overlook this detail in your frantic scramble to jump on the EARULES!!!111 bandwagon?

khendar
02-05-2009, 02:46 AM
Isn't it funny how everyone is so quick to jump on the EA-Hate bandwagon, while conveniently forgetting that the company has released some of the best selling games franchises ever produced (Sims, FIFA, Madden, Need for Speed). If they're so crap, why do people keep buying them ?

lebada
02-05-2009, 03:23 AM
Isn't it funny how everyone is so quick to jump on the EA-Hate bandwagon, while conveniently forgetting that the company has released some of the best selling games franchises ever produced (Sims, FIFA, Madden, Need for Speed). If they're so crap, why do people keep buying them ?

thing is though..the big dog on the scene is blizzard and the quality between games is astronomical thus far.

lebada
02-05-2009, 03:25 AM
Not sure if it affects your argument, but the NHL series isn't an EA franchise, it's 2K Sports.

wha?

http://thexboxlife.com/downloads/nhl09/nhl_09_01.jpghttp://www.gamingnexus.com/Images/News/8932/1.jpg

khendar
02-05-2009, 03:34 AM
thing is though..the big dog on the scene is blizzard and the quality between games is astronomical thus far.

Depends on your perspective. Blizzard make certain types of games. EA make certain different types of games. Realistically (with the recent exception of maybe Warhammer) they're not competing for the same market.

DuttyFoot
02-05-2009, 03:39 AM
i heard that the tiburon location is laying off a few people too. have a classmate that started there back in 05. as far as games go, i think all companies have there good and bad games. just like movies or anything else.

24% of THQ staff cut after $192 million Q4 loss

The three months saw the Saints Row 2 publisher suffer a net loss of $191.8 million ($2.86 per share), way down from the $15.5 million profit ($0.23 cents per share) that it reported during the same period in 2007. Overall, THQ's October-December revenue fell 30 percent year-on-year from $509.6 million (2007) to $357.3 million (2008).

As a result of its financial shortfall, THQ plans to lay off 24 percent of its worldwide workforce, or 600 people. The announcement comes three months after THQ closed five internal studios (http://www.gamespot.com/news/6200527.html) and streamlined another two. Just 10 days later, it announced that it was trimming back its release schedule to just one or two games for the hardcore market each year (http://www.gamespot.com/news/6201052.html).

"We delivered high-quality games to market this holiday season, but fell short of our revenue and profit targets in this challenging environment," said Farrell in a statement. "We are taking highly targeted actions with the objective of investing in games with the highest franchise potential and returning to profitability. We have executed on our previously announced plan to reduce our cost structure by $120 million. Given continued economic weakness, we plan to reduce costs by an additional $100 million."

THQ's losses came despite what looked like solid numbers for some of the holiday releases to which Farrell referred. The decently received WWE SmackDown vs. Raw 2009 (http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/sports/wwesmackdownvsraw2009/review.html) shipped--not sold--more than 4 million units, followed by the better-regarded Saints Row 2 (http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/action/saintsrow2/review.html) with 2.6 million units. The critically praised de Blob (http://www.gamespot.com/wii/action/deblob/review.html) shipped some 700,000 units.

salmonmoose
02-05-2009, 04:19 AM
Isn't it funny how everyone is so quick to jump on the EA-Hate bandwagon, while conveniently forgetting that the company has released some of the best selling games franchises ever produced (Sims, FIFA, Madden, Need for Speed). If they're so crap, why do people keep buying them ?

People essentially have no taste and enjoy mindless drivel :)

Sims is, let's face it, a virtual doll house. People keep buying it for to add to it. The sports titles are a sham, with many instances of a new full priced version just being an upgrade to a player list, and the less said about NFS the better :)

That said, it's true, EA did pump out some decent new IPs last year.

heavyness
02-05-2009, 05:26 AM
i'm not going to knock people who play the EA sports games (some of the best selling games year after year) or the people who like to play house with The Sims... they aren't my type of games, but i see why people love them.

this has been the best year for EA in a looooong time. Dead Space and Mirror's Edge don't feel like EA games, but they are. and i hope they continue to support those two IPs. their NBA game introduced the DNA system which was ground breaking, and Madden continues to look better and better every year.

personally, EA is turning into the Ubisoft of past years, Ubisoft is turning into Activision of past, and Activision is becoming more and more like EA. it is a cycle that these large comapnies will repeat. you take some gambles, some pay off, some don't... so you go back to making safe sequels. it's a business. they need to have money to pay their emoployees at the end of the day.

and if everyone was sick of playing sequels and the same old same old, why do games like Madden 08, Halo 3, GoW2, MGS04 sell like crazy while new break through titles suffer (Mirror's Edge, Okami, Psychonauts, Ico...).

lebada
02-05-2009, 12:57 PM
Depends on your perspective. Blizzard make certain types of games. EA make certain different types of games. Realistically (with the recent exception of maybe Warhammer) they're not competing for the same market.

thus far yes...but EA's coming into the fray now that they bought bioware and theyre doing the star wars mmo. it'll be a few interesting years ahead.

imashination
02-05-2009, 02:19 PM
For the various responders, im not hopping on any bandwagon Im entirely capable of making my own decisions, and mine is that Im not a fan of EA. In my experience they release two types of game:

Non-innovative boring sequels to cash in on new season player names or selling addon tat for the sims.

Bug ridden rushed new games

I bought sim city 4. Crash after crash, corrupted game files. Even with numerous patches, it remains to this day a waste of time on any moderately complex city. You just get bombed back to the desktop, and this is across a number of machines ive owned and used.

Warhammer online, its an empty shell of a game. Its got great backup and reference material, its been in production longer than wow, but theres nothing there. Plus the expected by now, random crashes.

Army of two, the lost vikings in 3d, or am I the only one with a memory longer than 5 years?

I dont tend to take too much notice of whos produced or published the games I buy, but every time Ive bought a lemon its had the EA badge proudly displayed on the front.

leigh
02-05-2009, 02:21 PM
Or did you simply overlook this detail in your frantic scramble to jump on the EARULES!!!111 bandwagon?

You seem to have missed the entire point of my post. Congratulations.

Zoober
02-05-2009, 03:52 PM
thus far yes...but EA's coming into the fray now that they bought bioware and theyre doing the star wars mmo. it'll be a few interesting years ahead.

EA has been in the mmo biz for a long time. Ultima Online, Motor City Online, Earth and Beyond and most recently, Warhammer Online. I don't think that TOR counts as them entering into the fray.

JackZhang
02-05-2009, 03:53 PM
For the various responders, im not hopping on any bandwagon Im entirely capable of making my own decisions, and mine is that Im not a fan of EA. In my experience they release two types of game:

Non-innovative boring sequels to cash in on new season player names or selling addon tat for the sims.

Bug ridden rushed new games

I bought sim city 4. Crash after crash, corrupted game files. Even with numerous patches, it remains to this day a waste of time on any moderately complex city. You just get bombed back to the desktop, and this is across a number of machines ive owned and used.

Warhammer online, its an empty shell of a game. Its got great backup and reference material, its been in production longer than wow, but theres nothing there. Plus the expected by now, random crashes.

Army of two, the lost vikings in 3d, or am I the only one with a memory longer than 5 years?

I dont tend to take too much notice of whos produced or published the games I buy, but every time Ive bought a lemon its had the EA badge proudly displayed on the front.


In my experience they release two types of game:

Non-innovative boring sequels to cash in on new season player names or selling addon tat for the sims.

So ...warhammer online,AO2,deadspace, spore, mirror's edge, Left 4 Dead... Those are non-innovative boring sequels to cash in on new season players names? or addon that for the sims?
With all the respect I think there's more to experience.


Warhammer online, its an empty shell of a game. Its got great backup and reference material, its been in production longer than wow, but theres nothing there. Plus the expected by now, random crashes.

This is very interesting. How do you define "nothing". It's really easy for someone to say such a word irresponsibly. Is nothing refering to a blank DVD?

So many people commenting on how bad the sequals are and how boring the sims is. What about casual games like EA playground and Boom Blox on the wii? what about zubo on DS? Do you not know or do you think those game should not be given a damn because you don't play those type of game or not owning those console? Do you judge a company's product based on the "hot titles" or the titles only you care about?

If I don't want to be a gangster running around with prostitude, should I shoot R* down?
If I don't like music games or war action games, should I give a finger to activision?
If I don't like how they keep making the same story base on a pair sexy legs, should I push eidos off the table?
and what about ubisoft, thq?


I dont tend to take too much notice of whos produced or published the games I buy, but every time Ive bought a lemon its had the EA badge proudly displayed on the front.

Sorry to hear that. Truely sorry. I don't buy many EA games yet the ones I got aren't half as bad as yours.

stevopolis
02-05-2009, 04:01 PM
Maybe they should stop paying their middle management so much and start spending on making innovative games. EA games have become predictable and so boring.

salmonmoose
02-06-2009, 12:41 AM
For the various responders, im not hopping on any bandwagon Im entirely capable of making my own decisions, and mine is that Im not a fan of EA. In my experience they release two types of game:

Non-innovative boring sequels to cash in on new season player names or selling addon tat for the sims.

Bug ridden rushed new games

I bought sim city 4. Crash after crash, corrupted game files. Even with numerous patches, it remains to this day a waste of time on any moderately complex city. You just get bombed back to the desktop, and this is across a number of machines ive owned and used.

Warhammer online, its an empty shell of a game. Its got great backup and reference material, its been in production longer than wow, but theres nothing there. Plus the expected by now, random crashes.

Army of two, the lost vikings in 3d, or am I the only one with a memory longer than 5 years?

I dont tend to take too much notice of whos produced or published the games I buy, but every time Ive bought a lemon its had the EA badge proudly displayed on the front.

Dude something is wrong with your computers - or other software is conflicting.

I've never had either of those games crash - even with the usually fatal alt-tabbing or running multiple instances of the same game.

imashination
02-06-2009, 02:40 AM
So ...warhammer online,AO2,deadspace, spore, mirror's edge, Left 4 Dead... Those are non-innovative boring sequels to cash in on new season players names? or addon that for the sims?

I said their games are either cash-in sequels with new names/sims furniture, or theyre buggy new games. Much of the above goes in category #2

Left 4 Dead is a great game, but falls very very firmly into the buggy as hell section. On all 4 machines I have here (desktops, laptops, vista 64, vista 32, winxp 32) the game crashes on exit. Theres a 50/50 chance that when you select a difficulty level, it will silently revert you back to normal difficulty.

A quarter of games ive tried, the server bombs out before we finish. You join an 8 player vs server, you magically appear on a 4 player campaign map. You get halfway through a campaign, you get dumped onto an 8 player map at random

You hit quickmatch, the button you press when you just want to join a damn game
- server full
- this is a local game
- your country not allowed

This is very interesting. How do you define "nothing". It's really easy for someone to say such a word irresponsibly. Is nothing refering to a blank DVD?

The crafting professions, basically arent there, and the ones which are have impossible to make recipes (unimplemented ingredients) and the items they make are useless.

The mass pvp zone has nobody in it. the game was billed as having its main feature being mass pvp

no end game raids or instances implemented. ie you reach the end, and then theres nothing to do. age of conan was the same, reach lvl 30, find out they didnt bother implementing the quests past that lvl and get stuck with nothing to do but kill a million boars to reach the end.

Do you judge a company's product based on the "hot titles" or the titles only you care about?

I judge them based on the titles I care about and have bought, what else would you want me to judge them by? If I think ford cars are crap, itll be based on my experience of ford cars. If I think macdonalds tastes of brown grease with ketchup in a sugary bun, itll be based on my experience of their cheeseburgers.

Of course they publish some good games, but if most of the ones ive bought turn out to be duds, what do you expect me to say as a paying customer? "Oh well, maybe the next one wont be as crap" ?

If youve bought some great games from them then awesome, tell us about them. But dont complain when I mention the ones ive bought have been 1980's skodas.

Julius
02-06-2009, 06:05 AM
I am no expert with any facts on the titles however this is something to think about entirely.

At the end of the day they've dug their own hole from greed. Like many other companies out of the game industry at the moment are having huge losses because their wealth can tip at any moment. Some people jump onto certain reasons to quickly like bandwagon this bandwagon that. Those comments are tiring for those looking past the first door. Here is an example:

Blizzard is like the guy who only spends 10% of what they create. EA on the other hand draws a fine line between win and lose every year because they pump out to many titles to even keep track of whether its about sales or just game quality. It is the inevitable when you are a massive company doing too much.

I guess it's like getting a mortgage up to your eyeballs and figure you only have $10 for food every week. It is that morons fault for failure.

I am just looking at the big picture here.

sorry edit here: Quality over quantity everybody!

JackZhang
02-06-2009, 02:55 PM
with all the respect sir. I'm not sure if you follow your own saying of "either cash-in sequels with new names/sims furniture, or theyre buggy new games. "

AO2: you said it's "lost vikings in 3d". It's not sequel (yet), it's not sims furniture. So how's this fall into the buggy category?

warhammer: crafting profession/items useless/mass pvp zone empty/no end game raids. those are game design issues. I'm surprised you put warhammer in buggy category. If that's called buggy, I can tell you whole lot about how buggy world of warcraft is.

left4dead: I'm sorry to hear your experience. my colleague's been playing for months now. From what he experienced, it doesn't crashes on exit. But hey, you tell me it crashes, fair enough, i'm just gonna take it as real.

so we mentioned games like warhammer online,AO2,deadspace, spore, mirror's edge, Left 4 Dead, bloom blox and zubo. You spoke of warhammer, ao2, left 4 dead. That's 3 out of 8 titles. how's 3 out of 8 titles helps support your saying of "Much of the above goes in buggy category"? Not mentioning that you forcably put ao2 and warhammer in the "buggy" category when they are not. The only example you used and really help to support your saying is left4dead crashes. And that's buggy. And that's 1 out of 8 titles here. And 1 out 8 titles doesn't make "Much of the above goes in the buggy category" sounds convincing.

Bharris
02-06-2009, 03:07 PM
that will always be the problem with Incorporated companies that sell stock. It's a great way to generate cash fast, but you always get screwed in the end. Investors will want to make a certain amount of money and if you don't meet their demands you have to cut people. The article makes it very clear that EA has not lost any money or gotten into any debt. They just didn't make nearly as much as they wanted to. I can bet money that most of the companies cutting large amounts of employees are all in the same boat. Sony and Microsoft are both this way.

I would prefer that game studios (and special fx houses for that matter) would remain privately owned and operated. It allows the company to put money away for rainy days and the company can always take several stabs at a problem before immediately diving into the layoffs.

Though I know that this same issue happens in private houses as well. Occruing too much debt and not saving any will always lead you to this end.

leigh
02-06-2009, 04:59 PM
Army of two, the lost vikings in 3d, or am I the only one with a memory longer than 5 years?


Have you actually played Army of Two, or are you basing this on the simple fact that it's a co-op game? I don't remember the Vikings fighting with modern weaponry, using an Aggro system, base jumping or going into bullet time.

As for the rest of your post, it seems your computer probably has hardware problems. Then again, I gave up on PC gaming years ago because the constant need for upgrades is retarded. Consoles FTW.

CGTalk Moderation
02-06-2009, 04:59 PM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.