You Won't Have John Riccitiello to Kick Around Anymore

Goodbye John Risotto~

I know there was plenty of coverage of the deal, what I mean is that I haven't seen it mentioned in write-ups like the one in Forbes that have brief accounts of his mistakes. They all talk about the investment in ToR, the getting voted worst company thing, some mention buying PopCap and Playfish - but I haven't seen anything indicating that EA overpaid for Bioware and Pandemic.

I mean maybe they didn't overpay, what do I know, but I'd they'd have to ship a heck of a lot of games at a substantial profit over their normal development cost to recoup $800 million and they already dissolved one of the studios...

"The Simpsons: Tapped Out" lol

Well I certainly am going to miss kicking him around. Oh and new IP'S. I would say if Peter Moore wants to do it LET HIM!

OK, seriously, a game company is not entitled to sell tens of millions of copies of new IPs.

Assassin's Creed was a successful new IP this gen. Lots and lots of people liked it.

Uncharted was a successful new IP this gen. Lots and lots of people liked it.

Gears of War was a successful new IP this gen. Lots and lots of people liked it.

Borderlands ...

Demon Souls ...

Mass Effect ...

etc. etc. etc.

Just because a new IP has been released doesn't mean it automatically has to sell well. Just take the example of Assassin's Creed. The first game was met with a lot of criticism and even scored well below AAA game average on review sites but Ubisoft persevered and two years later tried to address many of the issues surrounding it by releasing AC2. Even though it has become an annualized franchise, think of where Ubisoft might have been this gen had it given up on AC after the first game?

Skate, Mirror's Edge and Dead Space were released right around the time EA was getting a lot of flak for its business practices. Now I loved Skate but the sequels weren't much of an improvement, I hate survival horror and Mirror's Edge could have well become the AC killer if EA just had the courage to actually put time into developing it.

EDIT: And Mass Effect doesn't count. The first game was already out when EA bought Bioware, correct? But good on them from bringing ME1 to the PS3 though.

@tpoppapuff said:

I agree, it was a very disappointing year for games. That was your point, right?

I'll give them credit for trying new IP, but how many of those you listed were actually successful at all? Not many, which is why they promptly gave up on that strategy and went back to running proven franchises into the ground.

I think he actually did a decent job of turning the EA supertanker around if you look at how they were hemorrhaging money a few years ago, but at the same time they have managed to fuck up games which should have been almost impossible to fuck up. Mass Effect and Dragon Age franchises in particular should have been twice as successful as they were, imo. They also decided to go aggressively against Activision on Acti's turf (MMO, FPS) and bounced right off every time they tried.

"The progress EA has made on transitioning to digital games and services is something I’m extremely proud of. However, it currently looks like we will come in at the low end of, or slightly below"

Yeah, just slightly.

@tangoup: You do realize that these companies have to make money, right?

And Assassin's Creed the first actually sold pretty well, and UBI still did some very nasty anti-consumer things with the sequels (the DRM).

Bottom of it all, yes, they could persevere and make sequels - what if those don't sell? That's the problem with shareholders and open stock companies.

That true, he gets flack for doing his job the way he is supposed to do it. It was his job to get maximum benefit/return for investors in a way that is aligned with how the board of directors views how that should be done. If EA has a Google like policy of "don't be evil" he might have had latitude, but that not how investor in EA saw it.

There is more and more talk about how investors should not be able to shape for corporation comply with laws - environmental, regulatory, etc. And, that the 'expectation of return on investment' cannot outweigh fair and honest business practices or the corporation's employees goals to be more fair, affordable, green or whatever...if they choose to be that way. It may seem dangerous in investors minds, to lose some control, but we have seen too much corporate greed caused by the only overriding goal to be maximum return quickly instead of sustainable return over the long term.

I think people need to remember that many CEO's are directed to operate in certain ways, or must please those they answer to by performing in a favorable manner. When Riccitiello was hired by Electronic Arts in 2007, EA bought both Bioware and Pandemic Studios from Elevation Partners, a company Riccitiello co-founded after leaving EA the first time. As CEO of EA he presided over games like Mass Effect 2, Dragon Age: Origins, Battlefield: Bad Company 2, Mirrors' Edge and Dead Space. Granted games like DA:O had long been in development, but 3 years of development fell under his watch at EA.

So why did everything go so sour with Dragon Age II, Mass Effect 3 and Battlefield 3? Who was really pushing for Star Wars: The Old Republic? The way games and customers were treated was actually improving and then it fell through the floor again. This incredible need to control and micro transaction the hell out of products. Releasing games unfinished, or cutting development time down to get a quick turnaround. This all looks like a big u-turn from what people were coming to expect from this "new" Electronic Arts.

And now Riccitiello resigns? Following resignations by Ray Muzyka and Greg Zeschuk? That's just weird.

I'm not surprised. At the end of the day, it's about money. And this guy's mistakes over the years were starting to ruin the reputation of EA to the point where they might start losing money. So they had to take action to make it seem like they're addressing the problems that now has many people in the gaming industry looking at EA as an evil game developer. Will this change eliminate the problems with the developer? Probably not, but it's about saving face by looking as if action has been taken.

Did anyone else enjoy the irony of Origin putting damn near EA's entire library on a huge sale coinciding with this announcement? Can't imagine that's an accident, no matter how much EA wants to insist this departure isn't at least partly a PR move.

Yea, this has been a long time coming and im surprised it took this long. Still, i'll be amazed if whoever gets his job makes any noticeable difference in the reputation and overall quality of things at EA.

Leonardo leads Riccitiello does machines.

@blackout62: Sorry to be that guy, but cardinals conclave not enclave. That is all.

Quoted for Teenage Mutant Ninja-tellos.

EA has made some stupid mistakes, but a world without EA Games is not a world I want to live in. EA has some great titles and releases more games then any other publishers out there. Just in 2012 they gave us SSX, Syndicate, Kingdoms of Amalur, NFS MW, BF3 expansions, NHL13, etc...

Wow a Nixon quote as the article headline. Harsh.

But, but, I like kicking John Riccitiello. Especially in the nuts.

<p>Even though he's a millionaire I truly feel bad for Mr. Riccitiello. He tried with the EA partners thing and gave us some great games like Mirrors Edge, Dead Space Series and Saboteur. Unfortunately, they did not do well and he tried to copy the Activision / Blizzard model and that failed miserably.</p>