Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Electronic Arts' Domination Of The Market - Bad?

Posted by simoniker on from the if-i-ruled-the-world dept.

Will writes "A recent article at Gamemethod makes claims about how big companies can squash the little guy, and good gaming along with it: 'With almost 600 million dollars in sales in 2003(not including December), and 20% of the entire market, Electronic Arts is a developing and publishing powerhouse... Why should you be worried that EA rules the American gaming market and dominates sales? Well, if EA becomes too large of a force in the industry, it has some potentially damaging side effects that will hurt us, the consumers.'" It goes on to specify that "competition breeds creativity", suggesting "there's a problem when EA has enough money to buy out any studios that bring out a hit game", and concluding that "the progress of games as a medium will continue, but at a snail's pace in comparison to the previous years of fierce competition."

3 of 83 comments (clear)

  1. 20% isn't enough... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    20% isn't enough of a market share for EA to truly dominate the videogame industy. Compare this to the 90% share of the OS market that Microsoft has... or the 50+% share of the console market that Sony has. While EA is a 900 pound gorilla, we're nowhere close to them 0wn1n9 us all. As far as I can recall EA has never stifled the creativity of the industry... (and no, I don't work for EA)

    1. Re:20% isn't enough... by SandSpider · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, I have worked for EA. They bought out the company I worked for, then put us out of business. And that was because they liked what we were doing. Imagine what they'd do if they didn't like us.

      It's not necessary to have 90% market share in order to dominate the industry. No, they can't buy out Microsoft, but they can cause problems for the small developer.

      =Brian

      --
      There is nothing so good that someone, somewhere, will not hate it.
  2. Re:EA is all that is wrong in the market by Xian97 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I have to agree. Origin was one of the most innovative companies around with the Ultima series, Wing Commander, and one of my favorites, Crusader No Remorse/Regret. After being assimilated by EA, the third in the Crusader series was shelved, and the Ultima series had two very bad releases which were rushed out the door and very buggy to the point of being nearly unplayable.

    Another casualty was Looking Glass Studios, a real innovator in the industry. They practically created the entire genre of modern stealth games with their Thief series. They showed what could be done with a 3D engine besides just making another FPS with Ultima Underworld and System Shock. Both games would really draw you into the story and had serveral innovations over anything out at that time, features like looking up and down while Doom and it's clones just had 2D vision.

    These days I look to Europe for innovation. Most of the new developments I am excited about are coming from smaller studios there, Arx Fatalis, Gothic II, and the upcoming Sacred in the RPG genre to name a few. Serious Sam was another good effort from a small studio. It used the same tried and true formula as many others but somehow managed to bring the fun back to the genre.

    EA tries to dumb down everything they touch to appeal to the lowest common denominator and leaves the real gamers lacking.