Slashdot Mirror
EA Aiming For 50% Innovation
Talking to 'The Street.com' EA Worldwide Studios president Paul Lee gets grilled on game delays and industry stagnation, and reaffirms EA's commitment to new IP. From the article: "There [have] been countless games in our industry that have looked great and didn't play particularly well. Going forward, there's going to be a lot of me-too products that look great -- because they all look great -- that aren't necessarily going to do great. But if you take a look at what we have -- you know, Spore is innovative game-play, and at the same time it's got great graphics. And I think that's what really knocks it out of the park. Innovative game-play helps drive [the cause] of gaming. And if you can do that, and you can have great graphics, I think that the market is bigger than just having one of the two."
but when I RTFA I found he mostly talked about how he was sinking a lot of resources into Sony and Microsoft, which means they may have missed the boat since all of my peeps are buying the Wii when it comes out.
It's the games. Seriously, I don't care how the investors think about it. I was looking at investing in EA or Nintendo, but after reading this I just don't think they get it and will miss the wave that will dominate gaming for the next two years.
I'll still buy Spore and other Will Wright projects, of course.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
And it has a very great danger of doing a whole bunch of stuff Not Very Well. Sort of reminds me of City of Heroes, in everything I've seen about it - great costume designer (creature creator) but the gameplay doesn't live up to it.
Naturally, this speculation isn't that valid as I haven't played it either. But I'm not asserting it's "knocking it out of the park" or even that it will fail. I am simply skeptical that it's going to be the Only Game I Ever Play because of all the uniquely combined elements.
You better watch out, there may be dogs about . .
It sounds to me like the basic premise for their 'innovations' is that they plan on tacking GTA-style emergent gameplay onto ever title they can. Granted, it's a nice touch in certain titles but for God's sake, don't just shove it into games where it has no purpose. Going from one marketing gimmick (yearly sequels) to another (go wherever, do whatever) just because your original tactic is failing miserably doesn't make you save any face in my book.
What will they think of next!
"Johnson, you're not innovating enough! You gotta get your innovation up another 8% by the end of the month, or I'm kicking you back down to playtesting!"
--R.J.
Electric-Escape.net
subject said it all. i loved that game and would love to pay $60 for the chance to pass the experience on to my own son. ea: don't let this 'innovation' stuff go to your heads.
Burst into laughter when they read the headline? Thought not.
It's not just seeing "EA" and "innovation" in the same sentence, it's the fact they seem to be aiming for a specific percentage of "innovation" in their games. It all seems very accountanty.
Developer: I've got this great new idea for our game! It'll be revolutionary!
Boss: Sorry, I'm not sure if we've got enough innovation left in our budget for revolutionary, can you scale it down to a neat twist on an existing idea?
10 PRINT "LOOK AROUND YOU ";
20 GOTO 10
- American Mcgee's NHL 2007
- Madden 007 2007: Goldenpunt
- Lord Of the Sims: Hobbit Date
- Harry Potter and the Milking of Franchise
- Need for Medal of Honor: Third Reich Racing
- The Burbz: Virtual Emo
- Burnout Soviet Russia: Cars Blow Up You!
- Lord of the Rings: Street
- Command and Conquer: Dubya vs. Everybody
And of course,...just a half-assed attempt at being completely innovative.
Half empty, half full - ad naseum.
You are in a maze of little twisting passages, all different.
How can the game be even an evolution simulation while leaving out the possibility of fur. From what we've seen so far they seemed to have left out any possibility of creating MAMMALS of any kind. No live birth (only eggs), no hair, no mammary glands.
If I can't evolve my creature to look like any REAL creature as well as imaginary, then what's the point of giving me constrained freedom. If I can't evolve a mouse into an ape into a human, then why play an evolving game.
Seriously, the scale bump mapping looks great, but if the PS2 can do great fur for Shadow of the Collosus and the XBox 360 can do fur for Kameo, then the average 2007 gamer PC should be able to do fur no problem. I just hope that Will Wright rectifies this design error before the game ships - and doesn't make it a Mammals expansion. Just so you know I am looking forward to this game, I just thought I would cut through the irrational exuberance surrounding it.
In the end, games primarily provide entertainment . If it's not novel or new, it eventually gets relegated to second tier things- things you do to while the time away and have nothing better to do.
For them to keep moving forward, they have to have people want to have their games and to schedule part of their time for them. I just don't see the bulk of the stuff EA's producing of late doing that for the most part. I mean, how many more NFL/NHL/NBA 200x games are people going to be willing to keep plunking down $50 or so for? That's their bread and butter right at the moment- sequels of "hit" games with "cooler, more realistic gameplay" than the previous versions.
Hmph... Like with Clear Channel and the RIAA labels and music, EA's more the cause of the current malaise than anything else. Unfortunately, entertainment can only be mass-produced so far before it's no longer really entertainment and more mere killing of time.
But hey, if you're willing to plunk down $50 for the equivalent of doing the crossword puzzle on the Sunday paper (which is what most of EA's offerings have become...), then more power to ya!
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
As will all future releases by him.
It's very simple, he appeared on the cover of Wired.
Push technology, SEGA, Smell-o-Vision over IP, the New Economy, Newt Gingritch, all cratered after appearing on the cover of Wired. It's sort of a Karmic slashdotting effect.
Here is one you will like:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungeon_Keeper
I played the demo years ago - you play the guy who owns
a dungeon, and heros try to come in and take your gold.
.50*0=?
"Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
...when current innovation is 0.
"I may be full of crap about this game, and I may be wrong, and that's fine." -Jack Thompson
Maybe they should readjust their numbers.
Like, why 50%? We don't need that much. They could cut it down to, say, 38.3% Innovation, 90% profit whoring.
Note: The discrepancy in the numbers is best explain by the same math that convinces EA they make a profit.
Tell me something...it's still "We, the people"... right?