My Rant Against EA

[Professor S]

Well, not JUST Electronic Arts, but any publishers that have taken the availability of seelling content on-line and twisted it into something it never should be.

Here is what I'm talking about:

In some cases I like how they use the expansion packs in consoles, but it's companies like EA that hold back content that would normally be in the game so they can sell it piecemeal that piss me off.

I'm never buying Madden again. Last year I bought the game only to learn I needed the expensive Head Coach option to get create-a-play... a feature that used to be included with the regular game. Now EA has repeated this atrocity by having no less than 4 different content packs that were available the day of release... and STILL not create-a-play feature, a feature that is now somehow inexplicably gone. I'm waiting for the next downloadable content pack with it included... for another unearned $10.

The real culprit in this is not the system of downloading content on-line... many games like Fable do it right by releasing content to extend gameplay. The real culprit is EA's monopoly of the NFL brand. They are the only game in town and they are milking every dollar from that fact. It's no coincidence that EA started these tactics shortly after locking down the brand.

This is nothing less than price gouging, and perhaps one of the best examples of how a lack of comptetition causes the consumer to suffer at the expense of the monopoly.

[Angrist]

I totally agree.

Remember the day of patches? You would download a patch which included new stuff. For free.

Now they charge €4 for a new custome in Final Fantasy: My Life as a King.

[TheGame]

I agree, purposely leaving content out of a game just so you can charge for it later is lame. Eventually they're probably aiming to turn most of their games into the Sims... just endless charged updates.

It ok sometimes, but for a game that's released once per year.. its not acceptable.

[Combine 017]

Haha, I bet they will make a game that only has one level in it, and nothing else.
Then you have to buy the other levels if you want to keep playing it, and buy the "options" menu if you want to change the options.

But yeah, I hated EA before it was cool.
The only good thing they ever did was publish HL2.

[KillerGremlin]

Welcome to free market gaming. EA fucking blows. But then I have passionately been saying that for years. Online console gaming has improved a bit, but even back when Xbox Live first came out I was really perplexed that people were willing to pay for content (well...and a service like Xbox Live...which is like AOL for console gaming). As a long-time PC gamer I am pretty appalled. But this is capitalism at work. Developers have found a market. People who buy console games are willing to spend money on software upgrades or buy a new Madden every year or sink money into a a patch that provides content that should have been available at launch for free.

EA has fucked up in the PC community too. The latest Sims title apparently has a ton of unavailable content that you need to purchase separately. Totally unacceptable, especially when you consider the Sims niche...a bunch of 10-year old girls who will have their parents pay tons of money for content. Therefore I fully support pirating the latest Sims title, and fuck EA.

But I have always said fuck EA. I have a long history of saying that. EA is good as a publisher, but when they develop games 99% of them are shit. They also have implemented some of the lamest DRM as of late.

[TheGame]

I'm down to only one game I like from EA, and that's Madden. And even Madden has been suspect as of late. I think on the gameplay side of things it has barely caught up to the Ps2 version now, but on the interface side of things its still worse.. that's pretty sad imo.

[Bube]

I totally agree.

And something that really pisses me off is that they're charging console gamers money for expansions and new maps and costumes and stuff, when PC gamers get the game for bit cheaper (if they even pay at all) and get every extra for free.

People liked consoles because they were cheaper overall, with no need for hardware upgrades and stuff, but they're taking it out on us with these "software upgrades".

If, for example, they sold Madden (not that I've bought a Madden game in my life :)) for $30 instead of $60, then I'd be ok with paying for the extras.

They could sell a core game for a lower price, and charge us for other components.

[Thespis721]

At least they aren't Activision..........

But seriously, EA sucks.

[BreakABone]

Yeah a couple of companies is doing this, Capcom is another offender, who forced you to pay for alternate costumes in Street Fighter IV, the day it came out, and people were able to trace that the content was already on the disc so in essence you were paying only for a key to unlock something that is already there.

Developers enjoy the nickle and diming because sadly people will pay for it.

[Vampyr]

I don't mind paying for content if it's released a good amount of time after the initial release of the game, and I know that it has been developed during that time. I point to the same example Prof S. pointed to : I think the extra content for Fable 2 has been really good, and very reasonably priced. And it has been released in stages as they finished it.

I completely agree that with this rant though...purposefully making a game not as good as it could be by withholding features already available just to sell them separately is ridiculous. I feel the same way towards exclusive content that is released on one system and not another, or bonus content only available to people who buy a "special" version of the game, such as the extra costumes and such that were in the Soul Caliber game that cost $10 more.

However, I wouldn't say this completely hurts the customer, since I will just refuse to buy such a game. :)


Remember the day of patches? You would download a patch which included new stuff. For free.

Now they charge €4 for a new custome in Final Fantasy: My Life as a King.

Team Fortress 2. So far we have received 21 new weapons, a ton of new maps, several new game modes, a slew of hats to customize your character with, and tons upon tons of balance fixes and bug fixes. I have never payed anything beyond the initial $20 price tag of the game.

Now, this won't be true for the Xbox version whenever those updates finally come out, but that isn't really Valve's fault. They want to provide the content for free, but Microsoft said no.

Online console gaming has improved a bit, but even back when Xbox Live first came out I was really perplexed that people were willing to pay for content (well...and a service like Xbox Live...which is like AOL for console gaming).

I don't really get everything you're saying here. I think Xbox Live is a fantastic system, first of all, and I'm not sure how you can compare it to AOL. Live gives you a very easy way to keep up with friends and interact with them, as well as access to tons of demo's, a central hub for playing games online with other people (instead of having an incoherent server list for every multi-player pc game you have), access to the arcade, and netflix streaming among other things.

And yes, you do have to pay for some of this content, like the arcade games for example. But these games are being developed by separate groups who deserve to earn money for their product, I'm not sure why you think the content should be given away for free (and some of it actually is).

[Thespis721]

Wouldn't bother me so much if it wasn't for the fact that games already cost $60.

[Thespis721]

Well, not JUST Electronic Arts, but any publishers that have taken the availability of seelling content on-line and twisted it into something it never should be.

Here is what I'm talking about:

In some cases I like how they use the expansion packs in consoles, but it's companies like EA that hold back content that would normally be in the game so they can sell it piecemeal that piss me off.

I'm never buying Madden again. Last year I bought the game only to learn I needed the expensive Head Coach option to get create-a-play... a feature that used to be included with the regular game. Now EA has repeated this atrocity by having no less than 4 different content packs that were available the day of release... and STILL not create-a-play feature, a feature that is now somehow inexplicably gone. I'm waiting for the next downloadable content pack with it included... for another unearned $10.

The real culprit in this is not the system of downloading content on-line... many games like Fable do it right by releasing content to extend gameplay. The real culprit is EA's monopoly of the NFL brand. They are the only game in town and they are milking every dollar from that fact. It's no coincidence that EA started these tactics shortly after locking down the brand.

This is nothing less than price gouging, and perhaps one of the best examples of how a lack of comptetition causes the consumer to suffer at the expense of the monopoly.

What I find very interesting is that you posted this five minutes after you posted how Dr. Strange is probably going to be offered later for $10 in Ultimate Alliance 2.

Coincidence? I think not.

[Professor S]

What I find very interesting is that you posted this five minutes after you posted how Dr. Strange is probably going to be offered later for $10 in Ultimate Alliance 2.

Coincidence? I think not.

LOL! Not a coincidence at all. My reply quickly turned into a rant against EA for even more egregious tactics, and it was to the point it took the thread off topic so I created a new one.

[Typhoid]

While I agree that that type of price gouging is pretty weak and ultimately utterly lame, Microsoft (via XBL) does it all the time, and it's no big deal by anyone. Granted, EA bought the rights to the NFL games, however they definitely didn't "start" the price gouging. They just joined in. Take games like Halo (just for example). How many map packs and add-ons go into games like that? While you may sit there and say "But yeah, that changes the game, and adds a new element", I will counter that with "The create-a-play mode also entirely changes the game and adds an element to it."


Marvel Ultimate Alliance had you buying extra characters which should have been in the original game itself, characters who are (as far as I know) in MA2 - yet I wouldn't doubt that they will release more character packs.

Heaven forbid you want new songs for Rock Band or Guitar Hero. You better break out the credit card for that, too.

Let alone paying for online play in itself. You pay for the system, game, add-ons, internet connection and the ability to play via XBL.



Now, I'm not saying that what EA did was super fantastic and not gouging, but they didn't start the trend. They just realized people will pay.

[Professor S]

While I agree that that type of price gouging is pretty weak and ultimately utterly lame, Microsoft (via XBL) does it all the time, and it's no big deal by anyone. Granted, EA bought the rights to the NFL games, however they definitely didn't "start" the price gouging. They just joined in. Take games like Halo (just for example). How many map packs and add-ons go into games like that? While you may sit there and say "But yeah, that changes the game, and adds a new element", I will counter that with "The create-a-play mode also entirely changes the game and adds an element to it." .

I agree in most cases, and overall I like the option of paying for additional content for games I love, but in the case you used as an example that is content that was included in previous games and has been removed to be sold for additional profit at a later date. To me, that's the equivalent of Fable 2 being released, but without any weapons... they're an extra $10.

Also, I think timing is a big thing. If EA just held onto the content for a little while, their gauging wouldn't be quite so... brazen I guess. I suppose part of my issue is with the sheer hubris EA displays.

[Typhoid]

I agree in most cases

Can I get that in writing?


I agree in most cases, and overall I like the option of paying for additional content for games I love, but in the case you used as an example that is content that was included in previous games and has been removed to be sold for additional profit at a later date.


As far as I know for Rock Band, in order to get your Rock Band 1 songs on Rock Band 2, you needed to pay. Then again I don't have either of those games, so I'm not entirely sure.


I mean, I see what the big kafuffle is about. Something that was in a game previously was removed and sold as an add-on. There could be reasons for that. Most likely the chance of getting extra money. Or possibly they didn't finish it in time for launch, so they released them extra. But then again, it's most likely the chance of getting extra money.

The reason I don't see it as a big deal is because I never create plays for any game, be it hockey or football. I wouldn't have even noticed the option wasn't there. But if you ever remove my fantasy draft option, there will be hell to pay.

[Vampyr]

As far as I know for Rock Band, in order to get your Rock Band 1 songs on Rock Band 2, you needed to pay. Then again I don't have either of those games, so I'm not entirely sure.

True, but it was cheap and there was at least a more logical reason behind that - they couldn't offer all of those songs on a new game without paying the right holders for it.

[TheGame]

Let alone paying for online play in itself. You pay for the system, game, add-ons, internet connection and the ability to play via XBL.

Now, I'm not saying that what EA did was super fantastic and not gouging, but they didn't start the trend. They just realized people will pay.

Yeah, I don't think its nessicarily EA's fault for starting it. It just that a lot of EA games suck so they're easy to pick on (plus they have the best selling PC game of all time and its ridled with add ons), but I agree completly with you. That's one of the things that turns me off about Xbox 360 in general too. (Yeah I know now I'll make some enemies~)

But on Ps3 out of the box you're getting a good wireless controler, 120 Gig HD, full internet features, a wireless router, and a Blu ray player (which for the sake of comparision, lets call it a "HD Movie player").. All of which I utilize. And all of which come in the $299 package.

If I bought a 360 with all of those features, I'd be spending over $500 to get it rolling, then another $50 per year.. Not that I think its horrible to buy a watered down package to make it cheaper, but when Ps4 ends up being worse then Ps3 out of the box to make it cheaper.. we can't really blame Sony.

[BreakABone]

While I agree that that type of price gouging is pretty weak and ultimately utterly lame, Microsoft (via XBL) does it all the time, and it's no big deal by anyone. Granted, EA bought the rights to the NFL games, however they definitely didn't "start" the price gouging. They just joined in. Take games like Halo (just for example). How many map packs and add-ons go into games like that? While you may sit there and say "But yeah, that changes the game, and adds a new element", I will counter that with "The create-a-play mode also entirely changes the game and adds an element to it."
Glad someone bought up Halo, which IMO goes a step further into DLC bullying.
As it currently stands, I believe you can only play 2 online modes if you do not have 3 of the 4 DLC map packs released with friends, and maybe 3 by yourself.

Forcing you to buy some combination of the 3 to get access to the majority of modes.



But on Ps3 out of the box you're getting a good wireless controler, 120 Gig HD, full internet features, a wireless router, and a Blu ray player (which for the sake of comparision, lets call it a "HD Movie player").. All of which I utilize. And all of which come in the $299 package.

If I bought a 360 with all of those features, I'd be spending over $500 to get it rolling, then another $50 per year.. Not that I think its horrible to buy a watered down package to make it cheaper, but when Ps4 ends up being worse then Ps3 out of the box to make it cheaper.. we can't really blame Sony.

Well, you are looking at it in the current spectrum, but you got to realize in order to get all those features, the Ps3 had to come out 200-300 dollars ahead of the Xbox.. a year after the Xbox released.

So now it looks like a fine package, but up until the start of this month, it would have pretty much even out.

[TheGame]

Well, you are looking at it in the current spectrum, but you got to realize in order to get all those features, the Ps3 had to come out 200-300 dollars ahead of the Xbox.. a year after the Xbox released.

So now it looks like a fine package, but up until the start of this month, it would have pretty much even out.

True, though I think the HD DVD player was $150 around Ps3's launch, the wireless router was still $100, and Xbox live was still $50. Though I don't know the price of the base unit that came with a hard drive back then.

[BreakABone]

True, though I think the HD DVD player was $150 around Ps3's launch, the wireless router was still $100, and Xbox live was still $50. Though I don't know the price of the base unit that came with a hard drive back then.

Well we could also add 40-50 for a mic for the PS3 as it still doesn't come with one, and 50 bucks for the DualShock 3 controller, which I assume is the ones that comes with the PS3 now and not the SixAxis?

But we are getting off the talking point... though think one of the few times, the forum pretty much agrees down the line...:ohreilly:

[TheGame]

Well we could also add 40-50 for a mic for the PS3 as it still doesn't come with one, and 50 bucks for the DualShock 3 controller, which I assume is the ones that comes with the PS3 now and not the SixAxis?

But we are getting off the talking point... though think one of the few times, the forum pretty much agrees down the line...:ohreilly:

Yup, comes with DS3 now. And neither system comes with a mic.

But, setting all that aside, my point was more that, the gaming industry is going to (if it already hasn't) move towards selling watered down products and charging extra fees for little things that could have been included in the package int he first place.

MMORPGs might be the trail blazer for this one, now that I think about it. The mix of having monthly fees and tossing on expansions.. and charging for things like server changes, and character recustomizations.. And making the begining product so watered down that it needs countless updates just to make it feel like a solid game..

[BreakABone]

Yup, comes with DS3 now. And neither system comes with a mic.
The Xbox comes with a mic unless that has changed recently?

[TheGame]

The Xbox comes with a mic unless that has changed recently?

Hmm, actually you're right it does come with a mic. I thought the mic was part of the Xbox live package like with the older xbox.

[KillerGremlin]

I don't really get everything you're saying here. I think Xbox Live is a fantastic system, first of all, and I'm not sure how you can compare it to AOL. Live gives you a very easy way to keep up with friends and interact with them, as well as access to tons of demo's, a central hub for playing games online with other people (instead of having an incoherent server list for every multi-player pc game you have), access to the arcade, and netflix streaming among other things.

And yes, you do have to pay for some of this content, like the arcade games for example. But these games are being developed by separate groups who deserve to earn money for their product, I'm not sure why you think the content should be given away for free (and some of it actually is).

The original Xbox Live (and Gold Membership) cost a yearly fee. You don't pay for the broadband or bandwidth (*coughAOLcough*) and many of the tiered services offered that you have to pay additional for have been offered for free on other platforms (*coughPCcough*) for ages. I'm not totally undermining Xbox Live, I think many of the services SHOULD cost money, including the arcade.

(instead of having an incoherent server list for every multi-player pc game you have)

Have you seen STEAM? It gives you one Friend's List for ALL the games available through STEAM. And STEAM is free.

Also, PC gaming isn't quite as archaic as you are making it out to be. Sure, some games had pretty lame Multiplayer GUIs back in the day, but PC gaming for the most part is "with it."

Edit:
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/live/joinlive.htm

Like, the fact that the SILVER EDITION of XBox Live doesn't include "Online Mutliplayer Gaming" is pretty pathetic. Perhaps Microsoft should take 5% off your monthly bandwidth bill when you subscribe to the Gold Service.

[Angrist]

I've been playing Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne lately. I love all the new neutral heroes they added months and even years later. The new maps, the bug and balance fixes. I think I might have wanted to pay a euro per new hero or something. But it was all for free.
TF2 is another good example.

Makes me wonder how Blizzard will handle Starcraft 2. Will they keep providing free content updates? Or does their new market system mean that they'll now charge for their stuff? We'll see.

Oh and I've never paid for DLC. Unless you count transferring my WoW character from my brothers to my own account.

[Thespis721]

While I agree that that type of price gouging is pretty weak and ultimately utterly lame, Microsoft (via XBL) does it all the time, and it's no big deal by anyone. Granted, EA bought the rights to the NFL games, however they definitely didn't "start" the price gouging. They just joined in. Take games like Halo (just for example). How many map packs and add-ons go into games like that? While you may sit there and say "But yeah, that changes the game, and adds a new element", I will counter that with "The create-a-play mode also entirely changes the game and adds an element to it."


Marvel Ultimate Alliance had you buying extra characters which should have been in the original game itself, characters who are (as far as I know) in MA2 - yet I wouldn't doubt that they will release more character packs.

Heaven forbid you want new songs for Rock Band or Guitar Hero. You better break out the credit card for that, too.


I agree about that EA didn't start it. The nickle and diming started well before! However like Professor S said, EA took a feature that was previously in the game and turned it into additional paid content, which is different then a map pack. A lot of times you see "classic maps" unlockable in a game (and unless there is a new engine for the game, you should never have to pay for classic maps).

In MUA, the issue was that the characters were already IN the game and EA was just unlocking them for you. If a month later, they added additional characters to the game, that'd be different. In fact, I wouldn't mind them introducing new characters all the time assuming it's a good price point.

And those RB/GH songs also weren't in the game originally and are priced quite well.

I think there are some good examples of nickle and diming (Fable 2, RB/GH, SOME map packs) but usually the stuff is either ridiculous that you have to buy it or is WAY overpriced.

[Thespis721]

Hmm, actually you're right it does come with a mic. I thought the mic was part of the Xbox live package like with the older xbox.

The Arcade doesn't come with a Mic but that makes sense since it has no HDD and therefore not the BEST online gaming console.

They should have removed the Arcade and dropped the Pro to the Arcade's price. But that's getting off topic.