EA/Bioware destroyed the Starwars and Warhammer IP now its time for Ultima.

I've said it once and I'll say it again. I HATE EA! They ruin everything they touch and as far as I can tell Deadspace 3 is set to go down the drain too. Which stinks cause I love the first one so far...

Why Do People Hate EA? (There may be some minor language but I can't remember if there is or not.)

Why Do People 'Hate' EA? (A more apt title is why EA thinks people hate them)
 
I know each sector of the games industry has its strengths and weaknesses, but I have to say that I'm more fond of the indie PC game scene than EA and Activision.
 
Tek7 said:
I know each sector of the games industry has its strengths and weaknesses, but I have to say that I'm more fond of the indie PC game scene than EA and Activision.
Click to expand...

I really want to say I'm fond of indie games but can't. I don't think games need smanchy graphics or high production values to be good but most indie games I've seen feel mediocre. Bear in mind I'm not interested in samey, EA, Activision games either. It's just the only good indie game I can recommend (off the top of my head) is Minecraft. Even then with the same effort building in Minecraft takes I can, and do, make TF2/source engine maps, learn semi-useful skills, have much more flexibility and have a higher chance people will actual see my work.

I think the problem is I can see much better, feasible to make, games in my head and I am tired of everything coming up short.
Seriously the gameplay I've seen in most games being released recently is so stale.

I can remember when I knew Activision as the company that made lame Nes games and EA was the company that made the slightly cool "The Lost Files of Sherlock Holmes". LOL I googled "The Lost Files of Sherlock Holmes" and the first thing this let's play video says is "created by EA before they became the evil empire" :p . Sigh my floppies are probably degaussed by now...
 
Last edited:
My experience with indie games has been vastly different, but I admit I've probably spent more time reading about and playing PC indie games than most on our forums--for a few reasons:
  1. Indie games tend to be considerably less expensive
  2. Indie games tend to have lower hardware requirements
  3. Indie games remind me of a "golden age" of PC gaming during the mid-1990s, when games were created by smaller teams and games, in general, had more wit and charm than today's AAA blockbuster titles
 
I honestly can't stand indie developers, though sometimes I do enjoy their games. Don't know how many times I've read or heard about indie game developers complaining about how hard it is to get going and how they have no money and all this crap. ID was an indie developer when it first started out and Carmack was a millionaire by the time he was 21. If you want to read about how truly tough they had it read Masters of Doom. There is a part in it that talks about John Romero wading waste deep through an alligator infested swamp to get to there "office" just to work on their games. If they stopped acting like the gaming community owes them something because their games are "cheaper" and "innovative" I may be more inclined to give them a shot.
 
Tek7 said:
My experience with indie games has been vastly different, but I admit I've probably spent more time reading about and playing PC indie games than most on our forums--for a few reasons:
  1. Indie games tend to be considerably less expensive
  2. Indie games tend to have lower hardware requirements
  3. Indie games remind me of a "golden age" of PC gaming during the mid-1990s, when games were created by smaller teams and games, in general, had more wit and charm than today's AAA blockbuster titles
Click to expand...

All valid reasons I just don't see any titles that grab me.

I think the few good indie titles out there inevitably get lost in the shadow of big corporation mass marketing. So many CoD/Mass Effect/Battlefield/ ads out it blocks out the sun.
 
Last edited:
The Mighty Gerbil said:
All valid reasons I just don't see any titles that grab me.

I think the few good indie titles out there inevitably get lost in the shadow of big corporation mass marketing. So many CoD/Mass Effect/Battlefield/ ads out it blocks out the sun.
Click to expand...

Yet again ID faced the same challenges if not more, and they became one of the "big corporations". They didn't advertise on TV, Radio or anything. It was all word of mouth and some magazine ads. Heck there was barely even an internet when DooM II came out.
 
I don't like "indie" games because most people who play them have this aura that says "I have a more distinguished taste in games than you do!" (Although I feel the same way about indie music...)

Anyway, I'm no video game snob - I'll play it if it's fun, but not if companies like EA, Bioware, Activision, etc do a sub-par job and wreck a perfectly good game.
 
[toj.cc]phantom;457296 said:
Yet again ID faced the same challenges if not more, and they became one of the "big corporations". They didn't advertise on TV, Radio or anything. It was all word of mouth and some magazine ads. Heck there was barely even an internet when DooM II came out.
Click to expand...

The genres were not as packed back then. It becomes increasingly difficult to do new things with a technology the longer it exists. That's not to say there are no new genres and ideas yet to be implemented, there are, but as time has gone on the choices have increased but not people's time to go through it all. Consider at the time of Wolfenstein's shareware (yes ID's advertising was releasing the first part as shareware) days I can't even remember seeing another FPS at least not one so graphically violent. Today game trials are everywhere. Once ID had Wolfenstein they became known as the FPS guys. You don't have to advertise as much when you have so few direct competitors. I can't remember any PC games advertised on TV back then anyway. Systems yes, PCs yes, console games yes, specific PC games no.

Compare to the free to play market today. The more similar choices you have the more the consumer base spreads and the more you struggle getting the word out you are "different". Everybody says they have new and interesting things but few do and the one who does gets drowned out.

I take solace in the fact we will eventually reach the limit graphics improvements can show us. Once we hit photo realism the game industry, indie and mainstream, will be forced to innovate game play or die.
 
Last edited:
I was going to say that the PC game market is far more saturated today than it was during the days of Wolf3D and Doom, but Gerbil already summed that up nicely.

As for indie developers complaining about how hard it is to make it in the industry: Sure, some indie developers do, but others just make a great game and sell it. There are teams like Final Form Games (developers of the fantastic indie shoot-em-up Jamestown) that took great financial risks to do what they love to do and make the game they wanted to make. I have a lot of respect for teams like that--moreso than giants like EA and Activision that keep regurgitating the same game with a fresh coat of paint year in and year out and make billions every year.

I'll play AAA games if they're fun (Super Mario Galaxy 2 being a great example of a mainstream release that I purchased shortly after release and thoroughly enjoyed), but I tend not to purchase games from companies with sleazy business practices, which include intrusive DRM (i.e. SecuROM or requiring a constant Internet connection). I just don't want to reward bad behavior with my money. It's bad enough shopping at Walmart for groceries is the only financially feasible option where I live, but EA and Activision make entertainment. No matter how badly I may want to play a game published by either company, neither is essential to my survival and my backlog is long enough that I could never purchase another of their games and still have plenty of excellent titles to play.

TL;DR: Indie developers are a very diverse group and while some of them may whine, most of them just make great games. I'll buy a AAA game if it's fun and published by a company that isn't sleazy.

EDIT: Also, I play Pokemon games and I enjoy them. So when it comes to being an indie game "elitist," I don't think I qualify. Indie game promoter, though? Yes, probably. :)
 
Last edited:
Tek7 said:
As for indie developers complaining about how hard it is to make it in the industry: Sure, some indie developers do, but others just make a great game and sell it. There are teams like Final Form Games (developers of the fantastic indie shoot-em-up Jamestown) that took great financial risks to do what they love to do and make the game they wanted to make. I have a lot of respect for teams like that--moreso than giants like EA and Activision that keep regurgitating the same game with a fresh coat of paint year in and year out and make billions every year.
Click to expand...

I have a lot of respect for people like that too. Unfortunately I believe some of the complaints indies have may be insurmountable without some new laws protecting them. I can't remember the specific names (and I just read it recently too XD) but there was a case of a small game company being sued by a big game company over a name. Here is the clincher the small company offered to change the name and the big company STILL continued the suit resulting in thousands of dollars of legal fees and the small company closing. It wasn't the Mojang and Bethesda Scrolls case although that was stupid too. For that I expect Mojang was big enough or at least popular to defend itself by then.

I expect some of the behind the door company acquisitions go like this...

Small company "We don't want to sell we are happy being indie and small."
Large company "Well we feel your game is to similar to ours so we are suing you. Of course if we bought your company you could continue your game with increased funding..."

Rambling side thought: The internet is a weird creature when you think about it. Based around giving information it gives so much occasionally it results in the exact opposite in obscuring it. It's like before it you had a couple guys shouting in a room but you could still discern each. Now you have a lot of guys each shouting louder to be heard over the other. I've also read that the actual source of much of the current events information on the net is still the same news organizations we had before the net, newpaper/tv reporters etc. . Same guys in the field providing the source information not individuals blogging, grass roots reporting or something new and independent (yes there are some I am talking about the majority). What you get is the same source info cut and pasted over and over. The same source validating itself instead of an outside one. In fact newspaper/TV reporting is on the decline meaning you could perhaps have fewer sources to draw the net's information from. I still think the internet can used for more good than bad just it's not all good. I still hate cell phones though, handy yes, but I don't want to be found 24/7 and I don't want to be the guy who never looks around him because he always has to be app'ing.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top