The pathetic state of EA

  • 59 results
  • 1
  • 2
Avatar image for quististrepe
QuistisTrepe

633

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#51  Edited By QuistisTrepe

It's a good thing that only EA does this. I can think of worse DLC distribution methods, such as Capcom's infamous on-disc DLC. Like others ITT have already stated in numerous ways, DLC is out of the bottle and there's no putting it back in.

Meanwhile, I'll get angry at Valve for suggestive selling DLC by posting the available add-ons with its respective game title on Steam.

EDIT: By the way, in another thread I do believe I asked EA bashers to fully describe why EA is so awful. Not surprising, no one stepped up.

Avatar image for bwheeeler
bwheeeler

967

Forum Posts

7

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#52  Edited By bwheeeler

Hey, guys? I think this is it. This is going to be the forum thread that finally closes the book on EA. Congratulations everyone.

Avatar image for darthorange
DarthOrange

4232

Forum Posts

998

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 19

#53  Edited By DarthOrange

@twigger89 said:

@DarthOrange said:

FIFA is pretty damn fun you guys, and that new Need for Speed game looks good so I wouldn't say they completely suck, but shit like this is completely disgusting. Why the hell are they trying to take advantage of their most loyal players? It reminds me a lot of the new DLC they just rolled out for Uncharted 3. Why can't I buy a bundle that comes with all the costume add-ons? Why do they need to fuck players in the ass and charged .99 cents to buy jak goggles, or .99 cents to have a crown, and not have any way of unlocking all that in game. The most loyal of fans (like me) bought the collecters addition as well as the season pass. Why the hell are they still trying to nickel and dime people? And then there is that tournament system they added where every week you get ten tickets and you can buy more in the store. I really wish the out cry for shit like this was louder, but is seems like most people don't care. Just look at the comments on the joystiq article or the assholes in this thread. :(

Unless it is a free to play game there should not be micro-transactions.

Even if we take all opinion out of it, your view on this is horribly out dated. The price of games has actually gone down over the years, where as the cost of making games has gone up exponentially. DLC is the only reasonable way for developers and publishers to recoup their initial expenses and keep the team together after the game has shipped. Many companies fuck up this system in practice, but to argue against this system in theory is both antiquated and naive.

I'm not arguing about the system though. I felt that Resident Evil 5 had some of the best DLC of any game this generation. There wasn't the nickel and dimming micro-transactions of buying a hat or a chair or some damn goggles. I am against micro-transactions in big games where there is no real substance to what they are charging for, it is just content they are ripping out of the game. People said that about RE5 selling versus mode but I disagree. That game had a full co-op campaign and mercenaries mode. I don't care if the versus mode was ripped out at the last minute to make more money, what you got from the full game was worth the $60, and the versus DLC added in 4 new game modes for 5 bucks, which comes out to $1.25 per game mode, a fair price. Next they rolled out the two additional side story's with two new characters for mercenaries each, followed by two packs that came with two costumes and two characters for mercenaries mode each. They did not sell a hat for your character to wear, or some glasses or some shoes. Once again, it was nothing that felt like it was ripped out of the game. In the case of the Sims 3 as mentioned by the OP, I am fine with them making some extra money by selling locations, but why the hell are they also selling each individual piece of furniture? As you said, sometimes companies fuck up the system, and I would argue that both Naughty Dog and EA are guilty of this.

Avatar image for freakache
FreakAche

3102

Forum Posts

114

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 8

#54  Edited By FreakAche

EA does kind of suck, but The Sims has been like that for years.

Avatar image for wmoyer83
wmoyer83

1166

Forum Posts

1119

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 6

#55  Edited By wmoyer83

I don't know bro, those extra uniforms in Madden 13 are really sweet. EA RULES!

Avatar image for dagbiker
Dagbiker

7057

Forum Posts

1019

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 16

#56  Edited By Dagbiker

To be fair... your playing the Sims.

While I may be part of the problem, as for the fact that I have:

  • Ambitions
  • Fastlane Stuff
  • Generations
  • High End Loft Stuff
  • Late Night
  • Outdoor Living Stuff
  • Pets
  • Showtime
  • World Adventures

As well as some of the DLC. I have never bought Sims points. And I have always bought these games on steam sales.

Avatar image for iam3green
iam3green

14368

Forum Posts

350

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#57  Edited By iam3green

that's stupid. EA is desperate to get money, as they are doing bad. i don't understand how anyone can buy DLC, like furniture(sims), hats(team fortress 2). i just feel like it's not worth it as it doesn't do anything to it.

i think free 2 play is annoying. i don't spend money on xp bonus, or weapon for like 24 hour thing.

Avatar image for the_nubster
The_Nubster

5058

Forum Posts

21

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 1

#58  Edited By The_Nubster

@Brodehouse said:

@The_Nubster I don't want to be callous or anything, but like... That's what happens in every industry when you don't do the research. When I was 15 and getting into music, I can't tell you how many guitar store clerks abused my naïveté and sold me overpriced horseshit that I had to replace a year later. You can say EA did the same thing, sure. But... at a certain point you have to protect yourself. I'm reasonable about it, I understand your girlfriend being upset that she got taken for a ride... But there's limits to what's reasonable. Being upset that something is on sale for a bad price just doesn't jive.

And now she doesn't buy Sims expansions. It's perfectly reasonable to be upset that something is overpriced, especially when its counterpart, which advertised the same things, has much more content in it. EA is selling less for more and riding on the success that uninformed buyers have given them. How is it unreasonable to be upset about that? It isn't the price, it's the value proposition of the expansion. There's very little in there for what the price would suggest, and a shitty exchange is plenty of reason to be upset about a product. A business should be held accountable for the pricing of its goods and services, and EA has, in regards to the Sims, priced things too high.

Avatar image for rjayb89
rjayb89

7813

Forum Posts

9437

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 17

#59  Edited By rjayb89

You know, when The Sims 4 comes around, or whatever they're going to call it, I wouldn't be surprised if it was free-to-play and had the same business model in place.

Avatar image for irish_giant_bomber
Irish_Giant_Bomber

210

Forum Posts

124

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Isn't this irrelevant because the sims is known for having a huge, free modding community anyway? I apologize if I'm wrong but I just seem to recall the sims 2 having a lot of free stuff out there in the community.