Read more.Quote:
Voted worst company in America
Printable View
Read more.Quote:
Voted worst company in America
2 day old news
http://forums.hexus.net/general-disc...y-america.html
Sure that BF3 hasn't helped them either...
Are people so selfish now that they're more concerned about the fictional ending of a completely non-essential luxury item than actions which affect the well-being of other people in the world? What a sad world we inhabit :(
Or maybe it is that you have to install Origin to play new titles.
That customer support is poor (have you seen some of the logs).
Day 1 DLC with Mass Effect.
Sim City will be Origin Only and again day 1 DLC.
I hardly play games any more but the author of this article is even more out of touch than I.
Agree not the worst company and emo rage from the gaming crowd, but the share price tells you it is not a company going in the correct direction.
Im pretty sure it\'s not just the one game people are annoyed about at EA for. Not that there aren\'t worse companiesQuote:
Originally Posted by kalniel
Then I don't get why people are continuing to buy the games? Fair enough buying a game you thought was good only for it to turn out to be bad, but why would you continue to play games from the same studio if that was the case? That's the thing about both superfluous products and a competitive market - there's absolutely no need to go play a game from the same studio if you didn't like their last game.Quote:
Originally Posted by FRISH
I initially thought yeah stick it to the man, stuff you EA!
Then I saw Bulletstorm for £3.75 on steam, bought it and on loading saw the big EA logo... oops.
Because if you want to avoid the bad guys you basically have about 1% of all games left to play? What are we supposed to do when the likes of EA and Activision buy up all the great software companies of yesteryear?Quote:
Originally Posted by kalniel
Not buy their games.
Or do what thousands of other people have done and vote them as the worst companies around?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob_B
I'll never get my head around why people feel the need to defend these companies who are guilty of every anti-consumer act possible. If you don't like it that they got voted worst company then go and start your own "best company" award and vote for them in that. That's just as absurd as you telling us not to play their games when they basically own the entire industry.
They still have your money, they'll get over it.
Who's defending them? People are, quite rightly, pointing out shoddy games are not even in the same league as what some companies get away with.
That's certainly no excuse and to clarify, I think EA are a bunch of scumbags, but if people want to boycott them then do so, saying "they own the market" and "what else am I supposed to do?" is just an excuse so people can carry on playing games and pretend to be doing something about it.
A shining example of what people should be doing is Saracen, he doesn't buy a LOT of games for reasons like this & I applaud that, I certainly don't have the willpower to avoid a game I think I'll love, if even half of the folk who act outraged did that then EA would sit up and take notice, a piddly little 'worst company' award that will blow over soon enough is not going to bother them while people are still buying their games in droves
What makes you think it's only shoddy games that got them this award? You really believe it's just because of ME3?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob_B
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...lectronic_Arts
Look at the names on that list that are gone. Bought out to be shut down so as not to be competition. This "award" is not due to ME3, it's due to years of abusing the industry and consumers and it's getting worse.
The only difference between people like you and others like me is, they haven't reached your limit. Yet. You sound a lot like my best mate who up till the ME3 prothean DLC was happily buying their games - that was the final straw for him. What will your limit be? Trust me you'll find out one day because it's you who is letting them push further.
Saw this post on kotaku
http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/17ik...cmt-medium.jpg
Well sure, Bank of America took muh house, but Mass Effect 3's ending didn't reflect my choices!
@ Iron Sights
That sums up my thoughts on the award. I don't care how bad EA is, it's not possible for them to be worse than the banks.
I didn't say it was ME3, I hinted at shoddy games, I should have also specified shoddy business practice. I've never even played ME2/ME3 and I thought ME 1 was rubbish after buying it 2nd hand for 99p (never finished it)Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo75
From your posts you haven't explicitly said whether you still do/don't buy their games, although from reading between the lines I'd say you do (?)
My limit may well be reached at some point but at least I'm being honest and not slating them in one breath while still buying their games like a lot of people (maybe not you, you haven't said yet)
As for my gaming habits, without knowing me, or my purchase history, you're making a lot of asumptions. EA have certainly not made a lot of money from me, ever, in fact I enjoy grabbing free/<£5 (that should be waaay more) games from the EA store when they have their frequent voucher/reduction/glitch days.
That said I do have to reiterate my point, they are by no means the 'worst' company in the USA, there are far more dodgy/backroom dealing/illegal activities going on but those companies happen to not make video games which for some reason people don't seem so vocal about (?)
That's largely nonsense to be honest. Just look at the number of studios that have closed down outside of EA - its just as many, if not many times more. The games business is not a kind one - players tastes can and do vary over time and as a for profit business EA are acting ethically by closing down studios if they don't think the market is there for them - to do otherwise would be being dishonest/incompetent with their investors' money.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo75
I bought star wars the old republic which was a piece of crap. I really should have known better but you still hope that Bioware has enough integrity at least to not release such a pathetic excuse for a game. They don't because they have been infected by EA's practices. Everything EA touches turns to ****.
I bought ME1 and ME2 but I will not be buying ME3 until it hits rock bottom pricing where it deserves to be. I for one am completely sick of this company and I'm definitely not the only one. That's why their share price is in freefall (lost 40% in the last 6 months) - people ARE boycotting their games and "awards" like this should help them to reconsider what the reasons for that are.
Do you think they'll change or do you think they'll try to squeeze even more out of who is left? I believe they'll choose the latter. What will make you stop buying? DLC guns in BF4?
I haven't played a single BF game - not my kind of thing. On the other hand I'm pleased they are investing in new studios and new IP - I'm enjoying Kingdoms of Amalur, and Popcap make great casual games. I really enjoyed the Mass Effect series too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo75
But each to their own. I doubt I'd ever play SW:TOR.
I can't say I liked EA much before ME3, and I still haven't played ME3 yet so I can't comment on that. In fact, the reason I haven't played ME3 yet is because of Origin, but that's a whole different story again. Point is, I think blaming it all on ME3 is way over the top.
As for the criticism of the award, agreed, they aren't really the worst company in the USA, but does anybody genuinely think they are? It's a backlash against EA from angry consumers, and a massive one at that.
The big story is A) How many people are upset, and B) How nonchalant EA are about it.
Sure, they'll carry on, and sure, they'll probably keep hold of their success despite the award. The MW2 boycott shows how powerful the gaming protest movement is (that was sarcastic, people of the internet).
I am surprised though at how little they are pretending to care. It would be very easy for them to put out an announcement saying that they are sorry to have attracted so much ire and will be working with consumers to improve the relationship, even if they proceeded to do nothing of the sort. To just stand there and say "Well, they're all wrong" isn't exactly progressive.
It just shows how irrelevant popular opinion is in the gaming industry at the moment, and I guess I reluctantly agree with them.
and EA`s reply? `its because they are anti-gay`.... srsly....
Actually, I've always found EA's support to be pretty good on the whole - I particularly remember having an email exchange over the course of two weeks about MoH: PA crashing badly. And yes, support did actually manage to get it running.
Activision, on the hand, was "read the FAQ's you effing moron" and Ubisoft's who's was "well it works for us". The last being particularly galling because I was actually trying to buy something from their store - although their incompetence did save me from picking up a copy of HAWX2, so maybe I should be grateful? ;)
Translation of EA's statement being "f--- you a--holes!" presumably? :mad:Quote:
Chris Morran, Deputy Editor of The Consumerist, said: “Some may look down their noses at the idea of voters picking a video game publisher as the Worst Company In America, but that is the exact kind of attitude that has allowed EA and its ilk to nickel and dime devoted customers for a decade.” He continued: “This is not just a few people complaining about bad games - this vote represents a large group of consumers who have grown sick and tired of being ignored and taken advantage of.”
EA has responded to its 'winning' of the Golden Poo: “We’re sure that bank presidents, oil, tobacco, and weapons companies are all relieved they weren’t on the list this year. We’re going to continue making award-winning games and services played by more than 300 million people worldwide.”
Don't know about other folks but I'm getting pretty disheartened by games publishers - so much so that the way things are going they're going to be lucky if I buy as many as 6 games for XBox and PC this year. I guess others are the same - otherwise why are EA apparently pushing into "mobile" gaming so hard?
PS EA's mobile games (for Android at least) seem to be truly awful - some incredibly bad ratings!
I love how everybody is blaming EA for mass effect 3 ending but nobody is blaming the guys who wrote it
I really hope that these games companies start to listen to their customers.
BF3 is just beyond a joke now. They get your money then they're not bothered.
And they wonder why folk pirate games... :laugh:
Not sure it's just Mass Effect, it's probably more down to a combination of things:
EA killing all servers for slightly older games (such as Burnout: Revenge and last years EA Sports title) instead of releasing code to allow user-run servers (or even updates to use the standard P2P "server" on the 360/PS3);
Removal of games from Steam (even if it's more Steam's fault for saying that they won't sell them unless it gets an equal footing with EA's digital platform for updates/expansions - most gamer's won't make the distinction on that one, just that they can no longer get EA games on Steam);
Day 1 DLC for games (more often than not included on the disc);
Project $10 DLC for used games;
The "EA"ification of games, such as adding unnecessary multi-player content into previously single player games (Looking at Mass Effect here);
EA are seen to have killed off (or caused a steep decline in quality in) a number of fan favourite games after buying out the developer (including refusal to patch games that have game breaking bugs in them);
and probably a few more points that I can't remember...
Gotta say, I try and avoid EA where possible nowadays. It used to be pretty difficult, but it's got a lot easier since the Origin/Steam shenanigans started up ;)
Still - the worst company award clearly should not be for EA. As Kalniel said, it's pretty ridiculous considering it's a "luxury item" company.
Browsing and saw another example (if its real) that made me laugh
http://i.imgur.com/sURQd.jpg
Great company :)
Mike & Nick from North Korea.. realistic.
Crikey.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob_B
I've been called .... erm .... a few things on forums, over the years, but I think that's a first. :D
But I think I'd characterise my stance more as a cross of pig-headedness and laziness. Oh sure, I do object to what they do, and I will not sign up either for Steam or Origin, just to play a game. But at least in part, my not buying almost any games any more is because I'm too lazy to work out which ones require what. I've spent too much time deciding what games I'm interested in, and prepared to pay for, only to find that they require Steam, or Origin, or even a permanent net connection. In the end, I'm spending too much time just trying to wade through the "gotcha's" to be bothered any more.
I'm also under no illusions that many people, even when they agree with me about Steam or Origin (and especially the former does have a significant upside, but not one that appeals to me), agree to the point of denying themselves the game entirely. I think it's a growing number of people, but growing from vanishingly minuscule to just incredibly tiny. Until or unless it gets to be significant proportion, it'll make no difference to EAs policy, and I'm not holding my breath.
So ..... in an ideal world, yeah, people should boycott if they aren't happy about it. But people can be very unhappy about it but still want the game .... in which case, that kind of public vote does send EA a message. The question is .... are they listening and do they care? My guess is "no" to both.
Thank god someone else who thought the same as I did!Quote:
Originally Posted by kalniel
That's a good point. The fact that they aren't doing that almost suggests they have taken notice of it and it's irked them.Quote:
Originally Posted by snootyjim
I think that's relating to a different matter, namely the huge amount of abuse some individuals at EA and Bioware are getting from certain fringe groups because they include same sex relationships in their games.Quote:
Originally Posted by HalloweenJack
I've been waiting for a comment like this. If the games are of such low quality why pirate them? Or is it because we're rapidly evolving into a society whereby people feel that they're entitled to anything that they want?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoonigan
Sigh, it\'s a shame there\'s so many dense people with that sentiment over this. Maybe if you stopped to think for a second you\'d realise the Golden Poo Award isn\'t intended for things like multinational arms/oil/tobacco/finance corporations, obviously. It\'s a tongue in cheek bit of insolence intended to humorously make fun of a company for it\'s anti-consumer practices, that would be utterly inappropriate for something that has serious implications like weapons dealing.Quote:
Originally Posted by kalniel
Not only that, but it would be completely pointless; the kind of interests you\'re talking about are already receiving a much higher deal of serious criticism from recognised groups, like charities and governments, which they continuously brush off - a "Golden Poo" isn\'t even going to register on their radar. EA on the other hand are clearly affected to some extent by this, as evidenced from their butthurt comment.
Oh, okay, so it's not like any of the previous winners where in the above categories...Quote:
Originally Posted by Malphas
the same sex relationships in their games make me cringe, i dont appose them but its funny as hell when playing say ME and ive literally just talked to the person and then their reactions are essentially as if i took it as a romance option :L.
I personally am disappointed with the ending of ME3, enough for me to say something about it and enough for me to research the next bioware game and NOT buy it day one like i have all their previous games :(. I think ME is a bit of a special case, for me personally it was much harder to ignore as it seemed good, i had played ME1 and 2 alot and it was a conclusion to that trilogy so avoiding the game all together was a bit like cutting nose off to spite the face...
I wanted to play ME3 and it was a relatively good ride, well worth playing but the ending reaked of EA intervention and the fact the lead writer was put onto TOR, now that is both biowares and EA fault you should NEVER change writers at the end of a series!
I wouldnt call EA the worst company ever but its the worst publisher ever, thats the more fitting title.
And now that ME has finished, i can continue avoiding alot of EA published games, its only due to being caught in a middle of an epic adventure that its hard to turn away. Obviously if its really cheap and i fancy a game and its relatively good i will pick it up in the future but no rush!.
Only occasionally when it's part of the zeitgeist, like last year BP got it because of the oil spill and PR debacle affecting the Gulf Coast. The year before that it was Comcast, which is more par for the course. The clue is in the organisation giving the award, "The Consumerist" if you weren't aware.Quote:
Originally Posted by kalniel
It's mainly due to a slew of poor coding, shoddy QA and almost non-existent after-sales support.Quote:
Originally Posted by Splash
As I said in another thread, FIFA 12 was the last FIFA I buy. Sick of paying for shoddy work. But you know what? I do want next seasons teams and I do want whatever gfx upgrade they perform......but do I want to pay for yet another release in the franchise where 2-3 things are bugged and annoy the hell out of me AGAIN?
So it's more a case of the consumer getting some of their money back because Steam and Origin are near impossible to get refunds from when your purchase is full of bugs......
So don't give them your money in the first place. That way you have no complaint to make when their next game sucks, and they either *have* to listen and make the changes that the consumers are demanding or fold.Quote:
Originally Posted by shaithis
All you suggest does is make them get away with it, while causing people to whine more. If you're not paying them for their work then why should they care what you think?
Splash, your rigid idealism is all well in good, but in the real world there's plenty reasons why you might still want to play EA products whilst having negative opinion of the company. For example, I'd still quite like to play Mass Effect 3, I'm sure overall it's a decent game and I'd enjoy it, but I utterly resent being nickel and dimed for day 1 DLC which forms a significant part of the story if it's included. I also resent having to use Origin.
Fair enough, in my case I am actually declining to play the game for these reasons, but understandably others with the same concerns may not. That's a legitimate issue with EA, what you seem to be suggesting is that everyone should just refuse to buy EA products and shut up, because the products don't affect you anymore which is obviously a false and irrational argument. Yes, it would be wonderful if tomorrow everyone dissatisfied with EA's practices boycotted their games until they changed, but that isn't a realistic scenario and it's immature to keep debating your points as though it is. That's why people feel the need to complain about EA, and vote for them in polls such as this one, whilst still playing games they publish. In this instance I think it's accurate to say EA are encouraging piracy, regardless of what your ethical stance on copyright infringement is (which is a whole other debate).
When regulars stop shopping, the shop owner wants to know why......or at least should.Quote:
Originally Posted by Splash
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malphas
Not at all: I'm implying that EA will not change their business practises unless they start to impact on their bottom line. They have an obligation to their shareholders to maximise their profit, and if enough people don't buy their products it will negatively affect their profits.
They've already pretty much said that they don't care about some whining on an internet forum, anyone continuing to do so is only wasting their time.
I repeat: the only way that they're going to change their business practises is if you choose not to use their product (and if you pirate it then all you're doing is adding to their excuses for draconian DRM, regardless of any idea you might have that their games "deserve" to be pirated because you somehow need to play them despite them being a ripoff).
EDIT - you ninja-edited while I was replying. Pretty certain my response is still fair.
And when regulars start taking the goods without paying for them? Your analogy, not mine.Quote:
Originally Posted by shaithis
And why would they even bother saying it? To try and stop people doing it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Splash
Word of mouth. It works.
If you want to play analogy games (rather then adding something to the conversation :P ) it would be like regulars starting to take copies of your goods without paying for them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Splash
And a certain famous warez site has already started hosting files for the start of that new era of IP infringement....
I disagree, I doubt even EA are as dense as to not notice spikes in piracy (which they can't entirely measure anyway, so they'll still record it largely as a drop in sales) coinciding with anti-consumer activities (e.g. day 1 DRM, mandatory Origin) especially when there's consumers vocalising this as the reason for resorting to piracy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Splash
But... if you're actively saying that you had no intention to buy it (but pirate it instead), all that tells them is that they need to make the game harder to pirate. It doesn't tell them that they need to not release day 1 DLC.
Clearly I'm fighting a losing battle here. I disagree with their business practise, I don't buy the games. If they ask me why I bought ME1 and 2, but not 3 I can tell them why. I don't need the game to exist, so I'll quite happily live without.
(and for the record: I didn't start the analogy game: Shaithis did)
Don't oversimplify the debate to support your argument. People are making their reasons for resorting to piracy quite clear, it's not hard for analysts to understand how it's related to DLC, etc. If what they take from that is that the course of action needed is tougher DRM (despite it being one of the things complained about), then that's their own (in my opinion, very flawed) conclusion. However, I don't think either of us is in a position to truly determine what EA's response would be, and I'd imagine it's hardly on their list of priorities anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by Splash
I'm simply saying that an increase in piracy is a natural response to EA's behaviour. In addition to creating ill-will within the customer base with nickel and diming, they're actually making piracy a less hassle-filled option than buying the game legitimately - as oppose to Valve, for instance, who combat piracy by treating it as a competition and offering a better alternative. I just think your argument that everyone should boycott EA games is detached from reality. People are frustrated with EA's practices, they still want to play the game however, and there's a rather obvious option there that still allows them to play without financially supporting EA. It's pretty simple.
...and against the law, too. I was brought up to believe that if something was for sale and I wouldn't pay for it (for whatever reason) then I'd do without. A significant part of society seems to disagree with that, but I'll stick with my values, if you don't mind.Quote:
Originally Posted by Malphas
As I said earlier that's a whole other debate. The ethics of filesharing are a whole other issue, but generally morality is an relative individual thing, rather than something you can be correct/incorrect about. Which is why I was arguing based on the practicalities.
Interesting debate but something was completely ignored when talking about the market and that is the underlying dynamic that governs the market, scarcity. Digital goods are not scarce so I think its not acceptable to use values developed around scarce objects, that are tangible, for digital information that is infinite in quantity.
There was mention of people feeling "entitled" to get anything they want, I think this is backwards logic. We've always had a situation where we put up with not getting something because it is scarce and not everyone can have it anyway. That is not the case for digital goods so thinking about it the same way is a mistake.
A better analogy would be to think of games, or any digital goods, as water. It's abundant but we need to pay for it to be moved and treated and as such we are happy to pay a fair amount for it. The same with games, we are happy to pay a fair amount for it as long as it is of acceptable quality. The difference then comes in getting games illegally; when you take water illegally you actually cost supply companies money but when you copy a game you cost no-one nothing. Never has cost anyone anything and never will. The legalities of intellectual property are there to ensure people can earn a living from developing digital goods and I think they've gone too far in trying to enforce artificial scarcity on digital goods.
Trying to use scarcity values to judge actions that pertain to abundant goods is only going to cause problems. People don't feel entitled to playing a game any more than they feel entitled to the air they breath; games are more infinitely available than air is and as such I don't see why they should be artificially restricted in order for companies to make a profit. They are welcome to earn a living off of their work but I feel after a certain amount of time(say 6-12 months) games should drop significantly in price to allow those unwilling to support shoddy work to still experience the good parts of a game without having to resort to piracy to obtain an abundant good.
The problem I see is that we are trying to jam an abundant good into a market paradigm that depends upon scarcity and then we complain when that good is treated as if it were abundant. Part of the outrage is that the price asked for and the quality provided is unacceptable and the other problem is that despite games being digital, and therefore of infinite quantity, there are ridiculous restrictions artificially placed on them to extract as much profit from them as possible. The consumer is being treated terribly and I totally agree that the only way to make a change is to prevent publishers/developers making money from shoddy games and to support worth while developers and publishers but some people are unable to enact the discipline required to resist the temptation to take something that has an infinite quantity. I don't think it is right to view them the same way you view thieves because it's a completely different situation.
Moral and ethical values do not adequately apply when a good is of infinite quantity because the values are dependant on the market paradigm of scarcity; if you somehow manage to develop, and have widely accepted, a set of values that do not depend upon scarcity then I think the conclusions arrived at with scenarios like these will be very different.
/rant
Had to get that off my chest, sorry if it grates you but I think it is important to remember the referents being used when debating values that depend on them. It is self evident that conventional wisdom with regards to situations like these are woefully inadequate because they are based on something fundamentally different, scarcity as opposed to abundance.
If the companies producing digital goods cannot make a profit then when would they continue to make them? To take the logic elsewhere in the thread of someone who states that they have no intention to buy the next FIFA game because the latest was so terrible and packed with bugs, but then declare that they want the next one anyway: I just can't follow that. If it's so bad, why would you want it? Perhaps don't buy it until the bugs have been fixed?
And as for game prices dropping significantly: games seem to drop in price a lot sooner than 6-12 months. My last few purchases have all been at least 30% off RRP (which I assume to be launch price). When ME3 gets released as a GOTY with all the DLC I might pick it up in Steam (or similar digital shopfront) sale for maybe £15, but I can live without for now. I've a whole raft of games that I bought in past Steam sales that I've yet to play, and I quite fancy another playthrough of The Witcher 2.
In my personal experience you're 100% right - I was in a GAME store (yes, one of the ones they didn't close) and they had some pretty good deals running on ME/ME2. Now, while I've read some pretty positive reviews of these games, I thought "no, I remember EA got that customer disservice award, so sod 'em" and ended up buying a just-over-a-tenner copy of the last Assassin's Creed for the PC*, (Collectors Edition with the soundtrack CD and DLC - nice!).Quote:
Originally Posted by shaithis
(*Lovely looking game - many times nicer looking than the XBox equivalent - just wish it didn't BSOD so often).
I'll also be avoiding ME3 - from what I've heard you really need to play the other two to get the best from it, and the furore about endings, etc has really put me off.
Because free makes even low quality a viable value assessment.Quote:
Originally Posted by Splash
They deserved it...............
the golden poo award haha its so shiny.
Golden Poo Award LOL
With the recent developments, this award is definitely in place. The unsuccessful end of Mass Effect 3 and there recent productions aren't the best on the market. They might need some new inspiration to develop the better games. But in the end it is always someone's opinion about a game, so understand it, but it is not totally objective.
Whilst EA have done some pretty bad things for gamers, they are by far not the worst company in the USA. In fact, if it weren't for the Bioware backlash over ME3 and a bit of discontent over SWTOR, I doubt they would have even made the list.
Yes, I'm aware of how much people are throwing hatred for Origin around and how people dislike DLC, especially when that same DLC is actually on the physical disc but needs a code to unlock, but that doesn't make a company bad, just greedy.
Personally I'm currently rooting FOR EA as they've allowed Bioware to champion LGBT rights by working to put SGRA (same gender romance arcs) in SWTOR and already having them in ME3.
Its funny from reading the EA comment talking about complaints about mass effect 3 ending and award winning games... what about their award winning joke Origin?! No mention of that?
Not really, you can still play the game you will just get a different story arc. Everything in the other games is pretty much touched up on in this one which is pretty nice cos I couldnt remember half the stuff I did in ME1 and ME2.Quote:
Originally Posted by anselhelm