150°

How Can EA Win Back Gamers in 2018 and Beyond?

EA is in a bad spot in the eyes of most gamers. Both hardcore and casual fans have become fatigued by their franchises and their greed. But is 2018 the year they can turn it around?

To say that EA has a bad image with players right now would be an understatement. After a year where they ruined franchises like Need for Speed, Star Wars: Battlefront, and Mass Effect, franchises that should be able to sell themselves, and yet underperformed in the market of what was otherwise a stellar year for many other publishers and developers. EA has garnered a lot of criticism over the past several years, and almost every piece of it is deserved, and with their image amongst gamers in a decline, many people might be wondering if EA can bounce back from their blunders in 2018. The answer to that is a strong maybe, but only if they can do a couple of key things in the next year.

Read Full Story >>
gaminginstincts.com
winter_hill2910d ago

They can't and they won't. They will always be a rotten company. F*** EA.

Smitty20202908d ago

When I read the headline I thought NEVER 😂😂

Brian76554922910d ago (Edited 2910d ago )

Easy. Make decent games and give players a full experience without the introduction of microtransactions unless they are just cosmetic. No more pay to win or grinding, that has to go first and foremost. If dlc is coming then make it something extra like Horizon or Witcher III, not something that was held back.

With sports games like Madden which only get marginal updates per year, charge less. Make them $40 not $60.

_-EDMIX-_2908d ago

"make it something extra like Horizon or Witcher III, not something that was held back"

I mean you could only really ask for the quality to be near the level of those games I'm not sure you could ask for the validity of "where the content came from" because I don't even think of you know yourself if that content was held back from Witcher 3 or Horizon and I'm not even sure why that would matter in the first place.

For the most part that is irrelevant to most gamers and the company could choose to do with their content as they feel just. So to be honest there's no real way for a company to really prove that the content they're giving to you post large was always made for post-launch and not taken from the main game.

Also understand that I've never even heard somebody decide to not buy a game because of such a reason especially if you consider how impossible it is to even prove.

UCForce2910d ago

EA will never learn. I can say the same thing to Activision. They are both disgusting.

strayanalog2909d ago

You are giving them far too much credit by making it sound like this happened all at once. In my opinion, EA has been on a downward spiral since, at least, 2005.
This cycle of a topic about making them better is probably eleven years old now, so welcome to the thunderdome.

EA needs to give more creative freedom to their developers, stop marginalizing players, and start thinking with their gut as opposed to the checkbook.
‎Not sure about anyone else these days, but if these three things were to happen I would consider coming back. 

Clearly, we've all got an idea about what Electronic "Arts" should do, whether it is going bankrupt or just making finished products, but they aren't going to do anything until we stop buying and start speaking up.
The community may be mainstream now, but our numbers of the ones who care are larger. You want a better company? Prove it.

staticall2907d ago

I completely agree with your points, except i think 2005 was good for EA, game-wise
I made a little list of games they published that i enjoyed (based on wikipedia's article, all the games EA published):

2005 - Battlefield 2, Black and White 2, Burnout: Revenge, Need for Speed: Most Wanted (26 games released)
2006 - Black, Need for Speed: Carbon, The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle-earth II (not great, but enjoyable, IMO) (20 games released)
2007 - Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars, Crysis, Hellgate: London, The Simpsons Game, skate. (18 games released)
2008 - Army of Two, Battlefield Bad Company, Burnout Paradise, Command & Conquer: Red Alert 3, Dead Space, Mass Effect, Mirror's Edge, Spore (20 games released)
2009 - BattleForge (not great, but i spent around 20 hours in it), Brütal Legend, Dragon Age: Origins, The Saboteur, Skate 2 (20 games released)
2010 - Battlefield Bad Company 2, Dante's Inferno, Mass Effect 2, Skate 3 (20 games released)
2011 - Alice: Madness Returns, Battlefield 3, Bulletstorm, Crysis 2, Dead Space 2, Shadows of the Damned (18 games released)
2012 - Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning, Mass Effect 3, Syndicate (16 games released)
2013 - Battlefield 4, Crysis 3, Dead Space 3, Fuse (13 games released) <-- Here's when Andrew Wilson became CEO
2014 - Dragon Age: Inquisition, Titanfall (7 games released)
2015 - [Nothing interesting] unless you count Battlefield Hardline, Star Wars Battlefront (7 games released)
2016 - Battlefield 1, Mirror's Edge Catalyst, Titanfall 2 (9 games released)
2017 - [Nothing interesting] unless you count Mass Effect: Andromeda, Star Wars Battlefront 2 (6 games released)

I think they started to move downhill since 2012-2013, before that every year the had at least one great game.

P. S.: I didn't include sports games, because i do not play them, so have no opinion about them. For total count of games, i only count unique releases (for instance, if same game released on 10 platforms, i'll count it as 1), i didn't count mobile games and addons

munchmiller2908d ago

Let's see here. We have about 35 years of EA to look back on.

They were a genuinely good and well likely game developer and publisher for about 10 of those years, as they were trying to build themselves up. That leaves about 25 years now, of them getting progressively worse, and worse, and worse.

So, I'm inclined to say, no, they will not "Win Back Gamers in 2018", nor any other year in the foreseeable future. I also genuinely hope to see this company tank and be driven straight into the dirt. Yes, sounds harsh, no more harsh than what EA continues to do to people's wallets by exploiting them in a manner that really, should be illegal. This is the world we live in though.

Show all comments (31)
60°

Rockstar launches official marketplace for mods

Rockstar has launched an official marketplace for "every server and every player" to buy mods: Cfx Marketplace.

Read Full Story >>
gamesindustry.biz
Christopher2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

I wonder how much of this isn't just taken work of others who have modded for free.

Edit: Also, great way for R* to take popular ideas and build them into GTAVI based on demand.

fr0sty10h ago

What I see happening here is, R* is going to ban mods in GTA6 UNLESS you buy them from the marketplace and R* then gets a cut of that sale.

ActualWhiteMan12h ago

Ah, perfect timing with them taking down the Bully online fan mod. Greedy a$$ company.

Christopher10h ago

It's okay as long as they get a cut of the money.

fr0sty10h ago

Expect R* to force it on you.

Snookies124h ago

Yep, right there with you. I'll happily donate to a mod creator if it looks really cool, or if I enjoy it. But expecting payment up front? Nope, not touching it.

IanTH9h ago(Edited 9h ago)

I'm not entirely sure how to read this, as it doesn't seem exactly like an exact parallel to Bethesda's paid mods shenanigans.

Rather than single player stuff, this appears to be aimed solely on Cfx Servers. From what I've gleaned, apparently Rockstar bought the Cfx mod team several years ago, coming a few years after weird contentions led them to ban a few of their members. Ultimately, the question is if they plan to keep this contained to only online/servers.

I have to guess to a degree yes. It'd be pretty hard to "force" paid mods for single player when modding files locally on your own machine, but much easier for servers they'll control. So perhaps this is their soft launch ahead of GTA6 online and they'll clamp down more tightly on non-official servers going forward? Ever since they've become a 1 or 2 property studio, I haven't really cared much for Rockstar stuff, so I'm not entirely up on everything surrounding this. Sounds like it has the potential to be problematic further down the line, but right now fairly easy to ignore...I think lol.

Show all comments (10)
50°

Kotick claims lawsuit objecting to MS-Activision deal was "tied to Embracer's desire to boost sales"

Former CEO describes lawsuit filed by Swedish pension fund as a "collateral attack" on Activision Blizzard.

Read Full Story >>
gamesindustry.biz
OpenGL1d 6h ago

Yeah, the Microsoft deal has DEFINITELY worked out for everyone.

galgor1d 3h ago

Can this mother fucker just get lost already

PRIMORDUS1d 2h ago

He belongs in here ⚰️, hopefully sooner than later.

MrDead11h ago(Edited 11h ago)

Kotick Made $155 million from MS in the buyout, the little b*tch needs to stop whining. Thanks to this Microslop deal and massive industry consolidation thousands upon thousands of devs and other workers lost their livelihoods. This greedy piggie pervert needs shut up and f-off.

40°

Could Anthem live on? Tech allowing local server hosting existed, former executive producer says

BioWare's multiplayer shooter Anthem was terminated this week because EA no longer wanted to maintain servers for people to play the game on, and without them, no one can play the game. But the former executive producer of Anthem has revealed that BioWare had technology working, close to the game's release, that would enable us to host our own servers to play the game on.

Read Full Story >>
eurogamer.net
elJoker51d 12h ago

EA/Bioware should allow us to host our own servers to let this game live on.

Christopher1d 8h ago

I'd be fine just playing it as a localhost and dumb as rocks AI bots. Just give me the choice.