Slashdot Mirror


Electronic Arts on the Future of Gaming

GameDaily.biz has up a discussion they had earlier in the week with Frank Gibeau, EA's Senior Vice President of Marketing, North America. Mr. Gibeau holds forth on where EA is going (and therefore, where the industry is going) as regards next-generation platforms, the prices of future game titles, and the cost of making games. He also comments on Nintendo's position in the market right now. From the article: "I think the Nintendo customer is so entrenched and loyal that the company knows that they have a base of customers that they are building off of. Is it the same size that it was on 8-bit? Certainly not. They definitely have seen their market position erode in the face of market introductions by Sony and Microsoft."

75 comments

  1. EA Speaks by Safety+Cap · · Score: 4, Funny

    "We will burn out wave after wave of our own programmers, until we ship the product!"

    --
    Yeah, right.
  2. Sure... by grub · · Score: 3, Funny

    EA peers into the crystal ball...
    "I see programmers tied to oars in a galley..."
    "Pestilence if you do not row 16 hours per day..."
    "A plague on thee who speaks ill of The Captain..."
    --
    Trolling is a art,
  3. Hopefully . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    We won't need to rely on EA to determine the future of video games. If Nintendo really does plan to attract indy developers with its Revolution console, I look forward to new, innovative titles instead of EA's well-polished, but derivative, hollywood games.

    1. Re:Hopefully . . . by GameSlave · · Score: 1

      unfortunately, they're one of the biggest companies (with software on multiple platforms) with more money to throw around than most (they have exclusive sports licences for crying out loud)...

      and they have some of the most popular games ever (the sims.. all those sports games that i know nothing about..)

      usually it's people like that who have a big say in the way things go.

      --
      God Curse America.
    2. Re:Hopefully . . . by Winterblink · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This might come as a shock to you, but EA is a pretty fucking huge game production machine, and does dominate gaming in much the same way Microsoft dominates the home PC operating system market. Whether you like it or not, being the big boy on the block means that EA *could* conceivably direct the industry how they see fit. They already do, when you think about it.

      I'm not saying it's a GOOD thing considering their shitty practices. I'm as hopeful as you that other entities in the industry step up with real innovations, and we don't see the same games year after year. I'm still shocked they just don't just slap a "2004", "2005", etc. additive to "Medal of Honor" or "Battlefield".

      --
      "I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar."
      -Hoban Washburn
    3. Re:Hopefully . . . by MilenCent · · Score: 2

      This might come as a shock to you, but EA is a pretty fucking huge game production machine, and does dominate gaming in much the same way Microsoft dominates the home PC operating system market.

      Actually, it comes as a pretty big surprise to me.

      I haven't bought an EA game since SimCity 3000, and before that it was the Genesis days. EA is big, but it's not *that* big, it's certainly not a Microsoft level behemoth, for the plain fact that there are substantial other studios that still substantial other products -- and many of them.

      Further, in a way it's apples and oranges, comparing Microsoft to EA. Microsoft is the top OS manufacturer, but that wouldn't matter so much if they weren't the top office suite manufacturer. EA *just* makes games, so they don't have that same kind of synergy, and they are unable to lock-out other game developers from making whatever they want.

      These kinds of anti-competitive measures are what make Microsoft's foothold so difficult to topple, things like purposeful incompatibility with other software, playing games with file formats, embrace and extend, etc. EA may be really big, but they don't have anything like that to secure their own position.

    4. Re:Hopefully . . . by superpulpsicle · · Score: 1

      Don't worry, most athlete gracing the cover of EA sports games have been crippled for the season. Bad sign from god lol.

      In fact, eversince I stopped buying EA games, I got a raise at my job. I won a lottery ticket small prize. I have been living healthier than ever. Hmmm.....

      Anyways, here's a short list of players injured in the past....
      -------------
      Michael Vick
      Daunte Culpepper
      Eddie George
      Marshall Faulk
      Antoine Walker
      Vince Carter
      Dany Heatley
      Tiger Woods ...

  4. Well... by ABaumann · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I can tell you things that weren't in the article...

    "We will continue to screw over our employees"

    "We will continue to try to monopolize the sports games market by getting exclusive rights to every sports video game on the planet."

    "We will continue to ship the same game that we made in 2000 with only minor improvements."

    "We will continue to buyout good companies like Origin, Maxis, and Bullfrog and convince them to make crappy games like we do now."

    Not sure if you got the point of this post, but I hate EA. Ever since the original NHL hockey they've gone downhill (but Shaq-fu was pretty awesome)

    1. Re:Well... by bersl2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The highly ironic thing is in EA, the epitomy of everything that is wrong in gaming, owning Maxis, who are creating something that appears to be the epitomy of everything that is right in gaming (see the story and especially the video on Spore).

    2. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The highly ironic thing is in EA, the epitomy of everything that is wrong in gaming, owning Maxis, who are creating something that appears to be the epitomy of everything that is right in gaming (see the story and especially the video on Spore).

      Maxis is still behaving like Maxis because it still has Wil Wright and his posse are still involved. Unlike what happened to Origin, were some of the creative talent, like Warren Spector, had already moved on and the those that remained, like Richard Garriot, left not too long after EA's take-over. As long as EA has the since to not be relatively hands-off with Maxis they will continue to to innovate. If they try to exert too much control, the best and brightest will leave and perhaps start their own company.

    3. Re:Well... by chrismcdirty · · Score: 1

      "We will continue to buyout good companies like Origin, Maxis, and Bullfrog and convince them to make crappy games like we do now."

      They don't have to convince them to make crappy games, since they own them. All they have to do is "restructure" until the people in charge of making the good games are assimilated into the rest of EA and no longer have any will to live.

      --
      It's like sex, except I'm having it!
    4. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      epitome

      You're welcome

    5. Re:Well... by bersl2 · · Score: 1

      Indeed...

      Damn you ambiguous English pronunciation!

    6. Re:Well... by MilenCent · · Score: 1

      The highly ironic thing is in EA, the epitomy of everything that is wrong in gaming, owning Maxis, who are creating something that appears to be the epitomy of everything that is right in gaming (see the story and especially the video on Spore).

      But they're also the guys who made Maxis produce *eight* expansions for The Sims, instead of spending that time working on making things like Spore.

    7. Re:Well... by Ailure · · Score: 1

      EA have become the gaming world's Microsoft. I still can't get over how they killed Westwood, and I really hope they do give Will Wright free hands on his games and not restrict what he do. (I hate EA as a company, but I love the Maxis games...)

  5. Paraphrased Interview by CrazyJim1 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Interviewer: Where do you think the future of gaming is going?

    EA: We feel that we'll dominate the market and the competition will fall to the way side. So all in all, we're happy.

    1. Re:Paraphrased Interview by FidelCatsro · · Score: 1

      Interviewer : is that so ? are you planning anything else

      EA : same thing we do every week pinkie, plan to take over the world

      Interviewer : oh dear thats not good

      EA : Crush the rebel scum

      Interviewer : um...

      EA : Target Alderan

      --
      The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
    2. Re:Paraphrased Interview by Rabid_Llama · · Score: 0

      thats what hitler said. anyone else see the paralells with nazi germany and ea? they already invaded poland with all of these licensing deals, they persecute programmers in their labor camps... the resembelance is uncanny.

  6. Executive Decisions by bigdumbyak · · Score: 1

    "Hey EA, Don't forget to use the same music that we always use for the next EA Trax. I hear everyone likes that 'fshizzle ma nizzle' crap"

    Thankfully there's the option of using your own soundtracks in most of the games, otherwise I'd be less inclined to spend my money on EA games.

    --
    Stupid people hurt my head.
  7. mod parent up by solomonrex · · Score: 1

    That Shaq-Fu line was awesome.

  8. how about the developers? by ubrkl · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I don't want to hear about the future of games from the bloody Senior Vice President of Marketing. I'd much rather hear from the developers, engineers and content creators directly, not some corporate mouthpiece.

    1. Re:how about the developers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they're all far too weak to speak.

    2. Re:how about the developers? by FidelCatsro · · Score: 1

      Unfortunatly at a company like EA it is the marketing departments decisions whats going to hapen. unfortunatly loud howard dosnt work for EA so he can't acidently sneaze during a meeting and wipe out the marketing department

      --
      The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
    3. Re:how about the developers? by Lurple · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The developers, engineers, and content creators don't really have any say in the direction EA takes. They generally just do what they are told.

    4. Re:how about the developers? by mister_slim · · Score: 1

      It's hard for EA developers to fit an interview into the 10 hours a week they aren't working or sleeping.

  9. Nintdeno user base size by pluke · · Score: 1
    "I think the Nintendo customer is so entrenched and loyal that the company knows that they have a base of customers that they are building off of. Is it the same size that it was on 8-bit? Certainly not. They definitely have seen their market position erode in the face of market introductions by Sony and Microsoft."
    I'm aware that Nintendo's market share is nothing like waht it was in the 8-bit era. However the market is so much larger nowadays. Are the number of Nintendo users really that much smaller than they were? Anyone out there with some figures they can throw my way?
    --
    "all through my house i set up traps, it seems like the rats have a map, so now i feed the rats crack" - Donald D
  10. RTFA, but still evil because they're big... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    EA has really become the latest /. whipping boy. Sure, they have some suckage. Sure, they have treated employees like trash. Sure, they dominate the market and that's not all good (but not all bad, either).

    They make some great games. Generally, people who want to develop games for a living will give their right nut (or ovary) for the priveledge. It takes two to be exploited. I have a nice, boring development job contracting for the government. The work is good, but when I describe what I do, people's eyes glaze over. And all that market dominance can be good for the consumer (to a degree). Who else is going to be able to release six games for the Xbox 360 at launch?

    1. Re:RTFA, but still evil because they're big... by ABaumann · · Score: 1

      So you're saying that they're great because they've got enough control over the market to be able to release 6 games for XBox 360's launch. I'd like to hear support of your "market dominance can be good for the consumer" idea.

      And what "great games" are you talking about? Certainly not Madden, their NHL series, Fifa, NBA, or MLB games. Cause last I heard, they weren't even tops in the market for those. Sega came out with better, cheaper sports games in the past few years and real soccer fans have been playing Winning Eleven forever.

  11. the future of gaming... by LewieP · · Score: 0

    ...in the year 2050, thinking is a crime punishable by death, EA Big is in totaly control of the video games market. EA big's goal is complete control over every single human mind by narrowing down the complexity of gameplay.

    --
    oxymoron of the day - Xbox gamer
  12. Re:Nintendo user base size by GameSlave · · Score: 4, Informative
    --
    God Curse America.
  13. **Informative, mod parent up** by pluke · · Score: 1

    Wow, I didn't realise it was all that bad. I'd be interested to see game sales and handheld charts as well, but now i'm getting cheeky :)

    --
    "all through my house i set up traps, it seems like the rats have a map, so now i feed the rats crack" - Donald D
    1. Re:**Informative, mod parent up** by GameSlave · · Score: 1

      im not sure about exact figures for handhelds, but i did see this earlier today : http://money.cnn.com/2005/05/26/news/international /nintendo_fy.dj/

      and as far as i know, 'tendo accounts for over 75% of the handheld gaming market

      --
      God Curse America.
    2. Re:**Informative, mod parent up** by rmccann · · Score: 1

      I'm suprised it's not higher. The PSP is new and is their only real competition, there's noone else. Where's the 25%?

    3. Re:**Informative, mod parent up** by Thrakkerzog · · Score: 1

      Mobile phones are quite popular in some countries.

  14. Re:Nintendo user base size by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

    I'm shocked every time I see that piece of uglyness that is the NTSC SNES...

    --
    Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
  15. EA's Crystal Ball by Amaruit · · Score: 1

    The future of gaming? That should be pretty easy for EA to predict. In 2006 they will rerelease all of this year's games by changing the title from (title) 2005 to (title) 2006. In 2007 they will rerelease all of the 2006 games by changing the title from (title) 2006 to (title) 2007...

    1. Re:EA's Crystal Ball by Ailure · · Score: 1

      I'm still waiting for Simcity 2001.

  16. The Vice Prez by Master+Asia · · Score: 3, Funny
    --
    "Death and poverty like me so much, they brought friends!" - Vash the Stampede, Trigun
  17. Great work, detective! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Is it the same size that it was on 8-bit? Certainly not. They definitely have seen their market position erode in the face of market introductions by Sony and Microsoft."

    That is astonishing legwork, Mr. Holmes. I see that your reputation is not unwarranted!

  18. My prediction on the next gen. by CashCarSTAR · · Score: 1

    MS 360 releases for X-Mas. Has a decent but not a huge launch. This X-Mas is ruled by SquareEnix, between Dragon Quest VIII and Kingdom Hearts II. Copies of both titles are in Tickle-Me Elmo territory. (KHII in particular)

    The PS3 is delayed until X-Mas 2006. The Revolution launches in Spring of 2006, and actually has a massive launch. The main selling point is actually the classic game service that Nintendo is putting out. Lot's of people go for it for that reason alone.

    X-Mas 2006, the PS3 is finally released, but the X-Box 360 finally gets its killer apps (Halo 3 anybody?) and the 360 sells the most systems over the holiday period, with Nintendo solidly in second. In regards to total numbers of systems sold, the Rev. and 360 are neck and neck, with the PS3 way behind. PS3 only projects are retooled to go on the 360...but more often than not the Revolution.

    Companies start to realize that development costs are much lower on the Revolution, so they start making games for that. E3 2007, the Revolution has everything, and the other two consoles have relativly little (think where the GameCube is right now)

    Anyway. That's my prediction for the next gen.

    1. Re:My prediction on the next gen. by rAiNsT0rm · · Score: 1

      almost but not exactly, you are missing something though. The Xbox is not going to pull away from Ps3 they will be about equal with the xbox less due to Japan/overseas and PS2 backward compatibility. Also Developers are jumping ship on the Xbox so quick these days that the only thing they will have are the first-party titles and those made by dev houses they buy. The PS3 and Xbox are going to have very few titles over the life-span of these consoles due to the huge costs, barriers to entry, and time needed to produce titles... thats why they are now touting the "it's not just a game machine" line so heavily. The Revolution will have relatively quick development spurred on by the low cost (free? for home dev) initiative for development, built in user-base, backwards compatibility, and the yet-to-be-seen innovative controller.

      This round is not going to be dominated by anyone, what it is going to do is splinter gaming up into smaller factions which is not such a good thing. Gamers will go with the Revolution (and more will flock to it when dry spells hit the other two consoles), the other two will be media centers with a few solid titles, porting will be all but dead due to the MS and Sony hardware and MS restrictions on game design (HD, 4xAA, no slowdown, etc.) this is not going to help the state of gaming. This may just be the last console war, after this the PC and console will continue to blur lines and then the face of gaming is changed. I think it a mistake to try to create these half/pc hybrid consoles and they are going to be rejected by a lot of families and gamers. The Nintendo revolution may just be a true revolution and cause new (maybe old, sega?) blood to enter the console market and standardize on a console and end this all with many companies utilizing the nintendo standard console in TV's, consumer electronics, etc.

      --
      http://teasphere.wordpress.com - A little spot of tea
    2. Re:My prediction on the next gen. by CashCarSTAR · · Score: 1

      Re:Japan, I have one word for that.

      Mistwalker.

      When I talk about the 360 "killer apps" I am talking Halo 3, but I'm also talking Lost Oddessy and Blue Dragon, which are due X-Mas 2006. That actually is going to give the 360 a lot of clout in the Japan market, as well as in North America.

      And that's my feeling as well. The lower development costs on the Revolution combined with the large installed base will result in an ideal platform for MOST smaller projects. And to me, that's what most of the games I play are.

    3. Re:My prediction on the next gen. by drewmca · · Score: 1

      Developers are jumping ship on the xbox? Factor 5 was paid for an exclusivity arrangement. That's not "jumping ship". Other than that, there have been no such announcements. You're dreaming.

      Also, I fail to see how requiring HD and 4xAA on hardware that is designed to do it with little impact is "not going to help the state of gaming". Or how "no slowdown" is such a horrible restriction. Or any similar restrictions that Sony might try to enforce. Setting the bar for certain features higher is a good thing, right? Or will this somehow interfere with "innovative" gaming?

      I think people are dreaming when they predict how well the Revolution will do. It will continue to sell to Nintendo zealots but as time goes by, the expanding market will be more and more new gamers who don't give a shit about games someone played 20 years ago. They'll just see which console gets the most media, the most third party titles, and the most press, and that will be a two-horse race. For better or worse.

    4. Re:My prediction on the next gen. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "X-Mas 2006, the PS3 is finally released, but the X-Box 360 finally gets its killer apps (Halo 3 anybody?) and the 360 sells the most systems over the holiday period, with Nintendo solidly in second. In regards to total numbers of systems sold, the Rev. and 360 are neck and neck, with the PS3 way behind. PS3 only projects are retooled to go on the 360...but more often than not the Revolution."

      I always figured MS would force Bungie to release Halo 3 quickly after the 360 launch if not on launch date. Afterall that is how Halo2 happened, wasn't horrible but could have been a lot better.

      Anyways if you think MS is going to pass PS3 this generation you need to rethink somethings...

    5. Re:My prediction on the next gen. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow. How did you manage to sit down with all of those predictions up your ass?

    6. Re:My prediction on the next gen. by rAiNsT0rm · · Score: 1

      umm aparently your not keeping up well, Midway also announced that they are not even going to try for Xbox 360 launch and called it "a niche player" they also have not stated they will definitely develop any games for it. I have many contacts and there are many developers who are not going to be developing for the Xbox due to the constraints and costs of licencing and required toolsets.

      So many of you are just not in tune with reality and what goes into game design/development. Strict deadlines and budgets rule today's games which are 1/2 to 1/3 as complex as developing for these systems. Budgets get cut, time gets cut, with these new systems all that will make it out is what comes from co.'s like EA and the big fish... Nintendo is going to be the only option for the small-medium dev studio's.

      How in the world do you expect developers to pump out games that meet the requirements of the Xbox 360 (which alone will add to the costs) then add in things like special physics chips that require dedicated code and tools, and the rest of this new hardware everyone throws around like it is nothing... costs and time add up quickly and games take longer to develop and need more money, programmers, and debugging.

      If any of you actually knew what went into this, and ACTUALLY TALK to a game developer, they will tell you the Xbox 360 especially does not have them excited due to a number of issues even besides those I have covered here (and XNA is not the be-all end-all answer either).

      --
      http://teasphere.wordpress.com - A little spot of tea
    7. Re:My prediction on the next gen. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Despite what your fanby mind wants to beleive. Factor5 was not paid off.

    8. Re:My prediction on the next gen. by drewmca · · Score: 1

      Umm, apparently you're not keeping up well (and not very good at spelling, either):

      http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/05/26/news_61265 07.html

      The Midway announcement you are referring to is just that they will not have titles ready for X360 launch. That's a far cry from dropping support for the box. With MS already owning a sizeable portion of a growing market, with a good chance of picking up more with an early launch, no major publisher is foolish enough to drop support for 360. Just to clarify, Midway is a publisher, by the way, not a developer. Big difference.

      If a developer like Factor 5 signs on for PS3 exclusivity, that to me is not a major sea change of support. That just means one small developer responsible for one major game has switched exclusivity from one system to another. They are obviously happy with an exclusivity arrangement, so there is no way you could read into their move as some sort of indictment of X360, other than that they expect PS3 to have a larger market share (and offer them more $$ on the exclusivity arrangement). I think it's pretty easy to predict that PS3 will have a larger market share than competitors, the big question is how much larger this time around as opposed to last time.

      Oh, and please quit with the made up connections to developers, and the implication that none of us have the inside info that you do. It's insulting to "our" intelligence. Everything you are saying is based on misread news headlines, flavored with your own personal view of "how things are".

    9. Re:My prediction on the next gen. by rAiNsT0rm · · Score: 1

      You sure have room to talk linking to a gamespot article that came from summarizing a news.com article. The original announcement was covered by News.com and clearly states exactly what I said. I have been an editor for a number of publications and online gaming sites, as well as a reviewer. (so yeah my spelling must be horrid, I'm at work, typing fast, and on /. not publishing my work... I'm replying to assclowns like you)

      Fact of the matter is I do have a number of friends who are developers, and contacts with a number of dev studios, and *gasP* I've even programmed for the SNES... a truly hard piece of hardware to program for. I know what I speak about, have full credentials, and you can believe what you want... when the chips fall you will see who knows whats going on and who doesn't.

      --
      http://teasphere.wordpress.com - A little spot of tea
    10. Re:My prediction on the next gen. by CaseM · · Score: 1

      Quite easy, actually - he pulled them out.

    11. Re:My prediction on the next gen. by drewmca · · Score: 1

      So wait a minute: declaring 7 new titles for a platform is somehow now perceived as dropping support for them? I don't care who you know or what platforms you've programmed for, or what your editing skills are, your original statement that developers are leaving x360 in droves is still patently false, because:
      1. Midway is a publisher, not a developer
      2. Midway is not withdrawing any support for x360, has in fact announced 7 new titles for the platform, and is only "faulty" in not having any launch titles for it.

    12. Re:My prediction on the next gen. by rAiNsT0rm · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Once again you show your ignorance while trying to find holes that aren't there in my argument. Ya know, sometimes people do actually know what they are talking about, and yes sometimes it is counter to your beliefs. I know I took the low road first with the assclown comment but I truly want you to understand where you are wrong here.

      You again are basing your 7 titles and points 1 and 2 on a *summary* of the real article that leaves out huge chunks of what Midway Actually said. Here is the real article: Midway to support PS3 at launch, but not Xbox 360 The amazing thing is the article was edited after the first day to take out the stament where the CEO of Midway calls the Xbox 360 "a niche player" and replaced it with: "pretty small install base..." removing the niche comment. To also puncture your attempt to make it seem as if I'm not up on Midway or the game industry... from your article it states: "Midway is fully supporting the Xbox 360 and we have games in development at all of our internal studios," (emphasis added) The first part also was never actually said by Midway, it was claimed by an update on the gamespot article, I spoke with a rep. (its funny too that they state this statement comes from an un-named "rep.")from Midway and they stated no one would be authorized to make that statement at this time

      I have been in contact with five developers for five different studios - one being owned by MS, and he is the only one that had anything good to say but also stated there were issues he was aware of at the moment that he couldn't go into. The others all openly stated their displeasure with the architecture of the 360, the toolsets so far, the costs and time involvement. One even went as far as to breakdown a current game development cycle and approximated a 360 title and the cost rose by over 50%.

      Again, I understand that /. is filled with B.S. and B.S.'ers but I am not one and I can back up all of may claims quite easily, my game and game industry knowledge goes back to the Atari 2600, I wouldn't make a statement if it wasn't fact or couldn't be backed with fact and claim it to be so.

      --
      http://teasphere.wordpress.com - A little spot of tea
  19. Re:Nintendo user base size by karnal · · Score: 1

    Come on.

    There's not a lot of stuff from that time period that we all look fondly back on. Mullets? Clothes? You name it, most of it was bad.

    --
    Karnal
  20. Bye bye inovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "They definitely have seen their market position erode in the face of market introductions by Sony and Microsoft"

    I always am a bit disturbed by how people seem to take pleasure that Nintendo is loosing market share. I think that it is a shame that the only major videogame developer that is run by developers (and not some mindless marketing drones) is the company that so many people want to dissapear. Can anyone imagine how stagnant the industry will become if Nintendo isn't allowed to continue to push the industry to try different genres like Nintendo has been trying to do with games like Nintendogs, Pikmin, Animal Crossing, Electroplanktin, etc.

    Oh wait, I can imagine, it will eventually become just like the movie and music industry.

    1. Re:Bye bye inovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I always am a bit disturbed by how people seem to take pleasure that Nintendo is loosing market share.

      It's because instead of giving gamers what they want, Nintendo tells them what they should want.

    2. Re:Bye bye inovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "It's because instead of giving gamers what they want, Nintendo tells them what they should want."

      Certainly, they could give video game players exactly what they want just like EA does; and then we can have no real developments in the industry. EA represents all that is wrong with the industry today; they essentially re-release the exact same game year in year out without ever considering taking a new direction with anything.

      Nintendo shows more creativity, and produces a game that is far more fun, in Mario Tenis than the entire EA sports line-up; the same can be said about Metroid Prime compared to all of EA's Bond and Metal of Honor games.

    3. Re:Bye bye inovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Nintendo are all about buy-in and as they article says "fanboys" or at least people with some investment in the brand. Rather like Apple really. All I can say is I've been playing computer games for 23 or 24 years now (with the odd toilet break obviously) and I've never "got" Nintendo. The artificial creation of cuddly 'icons' by Japanese companies has never appealed to me. That said I've owned Nintendo hardware, bought their games -- Mario cart was fun and clearly in their time Zelda64 and Mario64 were great -- but their continued success puzzles the hell out of me to be honest. They bring a few good games to the table each time but then so did quite a lot of now disappeared and forgotten software houses. What I mean to say is, their stuff isn't that good . Its not worth the price of the titles and the hardware for the honour of playing when you can get a PSX, PS2 or even Sega Mastersysem(Genesis) and have more choice over all. But then I live in Europe, I do understand that in America "Nintendo" is a more respected brand. Perhaps that has something to do with it.

    4. Re:Bye bye inovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe you haven't played their games - there has never been a better platformer or even one that is half of what Mario 64 was. All you get dished up on the XBox/Ps2 are rubbish copies that completely miss the point.

      Most of their other games are similar - in the end its supreme quality - quality that you really struggle to get on any other platform. Thats why they've sold 2 billion games.

  21. how sad. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think its pretty funny that a big next-gen questions from EA is 'Can we get Shaun Alexander's scar on his chin?'

    WOW!! A SCAR!!! THATS TOTALLY NEXT-GEN!! NOBODY COULD DO THAT BEFORE!!

    oh, that EA creativity is quite amazing.

    My humble prediction: EA will ultimately crash just as the studios did back in the day. If you have stock in them, dump it after 2008!!

  22. slEAshdot by SillyHatsOnly · · Score: 1
    Here's a thought...everyone is probably more tired of reading the same EA flame postings than you think players are of buying sports games each year. At least the players game 1 new feature.

    Remember, at the core of every game company are developers, artists, qa, production members, etc... who love making games. It's very competitive within the industry and some people are willing to devote their lives to their work. When they set the working standard, there are bound to be people who can't or don't want to keep up.

    Three words create a very fine line...Employment At Will.

    1. Re:slEAshdot by MilenCent · · Score: 1

      Here's a thought...everyone is probably more tired of reading the same EA flame postings than you think players are of buying sports games each year. At least the players game 1 new feature.

      But you pay 50 bucks, soon probably 60, for that one new feature, while anti-EA postings are gratis, with our compliments.

      At the core of the company are the workers, true, but at the core of a human being are intestines. The core matters less than the thing that directs it, the head, and EA's head is what's rotten, and what gives us interminable updates of sports games year after year.

      Also, I'm unsure why you bring up "at will employment." All I've ever seen the term used is by is employers holding it over the heads of employees like a guillotine -- do what we say, whatever that may be, or it's curtains for you, mate, and instantly.

    2. Re:slEAshdot by SillyHatsOnly · · Score: 1
      True, games probably will go up to $60. New things are apparently a great way to justify raising prices for just about any product.

      imo, the core (meaning mission critical) of a game company would be its heart (dev and artists). Without them, the head would have nothing. No point in being a CEO if you don't have employees who make your products.

      Pinpointing a single game company is a bit narrow minded when it comes to business. Not that this justifies the process, but most products go through small or miniscule upgrades before being re-released. Some cars use the same engines as 5 years ago or more. Then again, the PS3/Xbox360/Rev are far more advanced than the last gen. But what gamer wants to wait 4 or so years for a new product to be released?

      Perhaps I should have clarified the "at will" comment. It was basically, if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. I don't advocate poor treatment of employees or insane hours, but until the industry matures and develops efficient processes, this will probably be the case. Too many people just go along with the way things are instead of pushing for reasonable change. Lawsuits or some kind of lash back will just make this worse.

    3. Re:slEAshdot by MilenCent · · Score: 1

      True, games probably will go up to $60. New things are apparently a great way to justify raising prices for just about any product.

      Now that's just laughable in this case. Paying $50 for the same game with updated rosters and minor new features each year isn't enough now, now the typical yearly upgrade will cost $60.

      imo, the core (meaning mission critical) of a game company would be its heart (dev and artists). Without them, the head would have nothing. No point in being a CEO if you don't have employees who make your products.

      And yet, the CEO is what directs all the others, the CEO has control of the direction of the company (along witht the board of directors). And EA's developers are well-known for being over-worked and underpaid.

      Not that this justifies the process, but most products go through small or miniscule upgrades before being re-released.

      But they are not then advertised as entirely new products, the minor updates and bug-fixes are usually not selling points, and game software doesn't wear out like material products. Most people would not pay full price all over again for that kind of excessively minor update, not if they weren't under some sort of duress.

      Lawsuits or some kind of lash back will just make this worse.

      But lawsuits are the specific remedy our society provides for the redress of grievances. It's not like, if you have a personal beef, you can lobby Congress to pass a law just for you. (Unless you're the Schivao family, that is.)

    4. Re:slEAshdot by SillyHatsOnly · · Score: 1
      Paying $50 for the same game with updated rosters and minor new features each year isn't enough now, now the typical yearly upgrade will cost $60.

      So the question would be, who is it that decides what is enough for a new release? Certainly not consumers. Some changes may also not be blatantly apparent to the user. When working with 500k to 1 million lines of code, seemingly simple changes can take a while to perfect.

      ...CEO has control of the direction of the company.

      Agreed that the CEO determines the direction of the company, but at a very high level. I would be very surprised if a CEO of a mid-large corporation has much knowledge of the inner workings.

      ... developers...over-worked and underpaid

      The industry is very cyclical, just like college. One day you're out having fun, the next you're cramming 24/7 for a final. If things are so bad, enough people will leave EA rendering it unable to produce games. Seeing that doesn't seem to be the case, there must be a reason why EA can still produce games. Personally I take most dramatic news with a grain of salt since to get some attention, one needs to make a really big bang.

      But lawsuits are the specific remedy our society provides for the redress of grievances

      It may be effective in some manor, but that doesn't make it the best solution. Employees are people managed by people. Reason combine with processes(usually with some office politics or spinning) can make a change in how things are done. Personally, I don't know too many developers who are especially adept at this skill. It's usually the manager who is good at this which can create a difficult situation.

    5. Re:slEAshdot by MilenCent · · Score: 1

      So the question would be, who is it that decides what is enough for a new release? Certainly not consumers. Some changes may also not be blatantly apparent to the user. When working with 500k to 1 million lines of code, seemingly simple changes can take a while to perfect.

      My point here is that consumers won't be fooled by this forever. (Though some of the people I know who buy sports games, well, let's just say they are not the most discriminating customers.)

      Agreed that the CEO determines the direction of the company, but at a very high level. I would be very surprised if a CEO of a mid-large corporation has much knowledge of the inner workings.

      That's irrelevant, indeed it can make the problem worse. For it's those guys who make the ultimate decisions as to which trends to follow, or more likely, beat into the ground.

  23. EA Meeting... by Zeussy · · Score: 1

    1st Guy: "You know that game, umm Red something, where you like are in an alternate realility a bit like the cold war with the soviets vs the allied."

    2nd Guy: "Oh, Red Alert?"

    1st Guy: "Yeah thats the one, about time we made a sequel for that. Oh and while your at it, make a new Tiberian Sun and Sim City 5. Oh don't forget we need it done in 6 months, so crack out those whips we got off ebay, 10,000 lines of code a day or a lash for every 100 lines short."

  24. Here's what it comes down to by buffer-overflowed · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Whether or not people realize what they really want. Hardware or Software.

    I feel sorry for Sony fans. They have nothing to really be fans of except bad laser assemblies and a bad controller that's been around so long we're so used to it that it doesn't matter how bad it is anymore. Certainly not games, because outside of a few titles(notably Gran Turismo), Sony doesn't make games, they make platforms. The games have only been coming because most people buy the platform to get the games that haven't come out yet. You could just as easily substitute a 360, or a Revolution for that PS3 and the exact same thing would happen. PS3 projects would be retooled to go to whichever system has the marketshare.

    The games are also why Nintendo is always a safe bet, if you like their stuff that is. Because you know over the course of the hardware's life you're going to get a certain set of titles, as well as some new ones, and if you enjoy those titles you've justified your cost of admission. Third party titles are a bonus.

    That's also why Microsoft is a safe bet if you love Live and Halo enough. If you like console ports of PC properties. Any third party titles from the old boys are a bonus.

    Imagine the best piece of computing hardware on the planet coming out, but there's no software for it, and it's released by a company that isn't known for their software. Would you buy it? I wouldn't, it's a sucker's purchase.

    Anyway, here's what I see happening, and it's all because of the PSP. Everyone who wanted a PSP probably has one by now, but not enough people bought them to overturn the DS's 2:1 lead(which in turn is wayyy behind the GBA). In turn, we aren't seeing many exciting games coming out for the PSP, nor have we heard much about new in-development games of any magnitude. We are seeing some cool toys hitting the DS. So the wait and see people will likely gravitate over there if they go anywahere. If this cements itself, and continues up until the PS3 launch(I'd say this is a safe bet), all of the early adopter, "Sony's totally gonna get all those great 3rd party games," people are gonna be a bit gun-shy about the PS3, on the tail of the relative failure of the PSP.

    Toss in Sony muscling devs to make PSP games if they want to make PS2/PS3 games, and boom, the game is Microsoft's and Nintendo's to lose. And that's a SEGA v. Nintendo style battle right there. It's gonna all come down to marketshare, development difficulty, and licensing cost. It's wayyy too early to call it, but if I'm not overestimating my fellow gamers, Sony's gonna wind up the loser.

    If I'm wrong, and if Sony wins round three mainly because Square wanted more space for FMV 10 years ago, I'm going to be a sad sad panda.

    Oh and as to EA. Who cares what they have to say? So they're the #1 publisher? Nintendo's #2(sometimes even surpassing EA by hitting the #1 slot) and no one seems to listen to them because of that.

    --
    The key to the enjoyment of pop music is to replace any instance of "love" with "C.H.U.D."
    1. Re:Here's what it comes down to by Lehk228 · · Score: 2, Funny

      All Nintendo has to do to get my money is make another Super Smash Bro's game, that is all, if the revolution ships with Smash in the drive and the drive glued shut i would still buy it.

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    2. Re:Here's what it comes down to by Gothic_Walrus · · Score: 1
      This seems like a tangent to me, albiet a damn interesting one.

      That said...I think you're underestimating name recognition.

      People loved the PS1 and PS2, and they're going to have fond memories of the hours spent with those systems and their libraries of games. On top of that, Sony has a reputation for quality products (they do here for their audio equipment, if nothing else; I'm not sure how many people know about the problems that the PS2 has had over the years).

      And it's not like the library of Sony-exclusives is completely empty. Ratchet and Clank, Jak and Daxter, and Sly Cooper are all damn good platformers. Gran Turismo is still one of the best racing series available. The Grand Theft Auto games have been huge hits, and Sony has a relatively long period of exclusitivity for them. In fact, my sister would have chosen a GameCube if it weren't for the fact that there was no DDR available for it as of last Christmas. That's why we have a PS2 in the house.

      To be fair, I know that that could all shift with the market share. At the moment, though, it seems like Sony is in a damn good position.

      I don't see the PS3 outright failing. I just see it losing a lot of its market share. Sony could last in the market long enough for a PS4, but who knows what will happen?

      --
      Goo goo g'joob.
  25. Oh, EA. You big silly... by DeanMeister · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So long as the games industry remains what it is (aside from hardware and technological improvements, or even the money going into the industry) EA will not be the top of the gaming industry, now or in the future. They can swallow up as many companies as they want, and they can aquire as many liscenses as they feel like. At the end of the day though, a company of a couple hundred dedicated people with an original idea will always, ALWAYS, beat out a giant corporation. Especially one like EA. EA is like the Wal-Mart of the videogame industry, and I'm getting sick of it.

    --
    Society never gets more or less violent, the definition of violent just keeps changing.
  26. grain of salt PLEASE! by JimTheta · · Score: 1

    You just cited pointlesswasteoftime.com as a source for some console sales data.

    THEY PROVIDED NO SOURCE. THEY MAKE SHIT UP.

    Don't get me wrong. I love PWOT.com, I've been reading it since college, like, back in '99 when its web design sucked and nobody read it. It's hilarious and the articles are often well-done. But IT'S NOT A NEWS SOURCE.

    Unless, of course, you refer to their tagline "The only news source you'll never need."

    1. Re:grain of salt PLEASE! by GameSlave · · Score: 1

      i know it's not a news source, but that graph they have is accurate. i know this because i've seen those figures elsewhere... and besides, the graph is hosted on some other site (which im not going to bother looking for now, because this right here is a complete waste of my time.. )

      --
      God Curse America.
  27. The "other" site by JimTheta · · Score: 1

    The host site is "johndiesattheend.com". "John Dies at the End" is the title of a popular serial horror story feature on pointlesswasteoftime.com. Thus, the URL, which has no site yet, is probably owned by the same guys.

    the graph is hosted on some other site (which im not going to bother looking for now, because this right here is a complete waste of my time.. )

    In other words, you gladly repeat information without wasting any time critical thinking or confirming a source.

    1. Re:The "other" site by GameSlave · · Score: 1
      In other words, you gladly repeat information without wasting any time critical thinking or confirming a source.

      yes, because this is just slashdot. not a fucking journalism site.
      --
      God Curse America.