G-pinions

Did you really just write another post telling about the many virtues of Electronic Arts?

Somehow you still can’t understand why I don’t like them so I’ll spell it out in very simple terms.

1) EA is the biggest publisher in the world.

2) They are content making games that fit into nice, neat little genres. They do not push their games. They do not strive to innovate or push the industry forward. The simply make sequels to all of their games every year and rely on big names and marketing to sell the rest. Their cash cow is the Madden series, a franchise that was not the best football series on the market for a stretch. Remember when they didn’t release Madden ’97 because 989’s Gameday ’97 was so far beyond theirs? And Sega’s NFL2K was far better than Madden 00. Just because it didn’t sell as well doesn’t mean it wasn’t as good. Gamers generally are stupid, that’s why sequels and licensed crap sells better than good, original games.

3) As the biggest publisher in the world I expect them to push the industry forward. I expect them to create games that are timeless. That will appear on Top 100 Games of All Time lists 5 years from now. I expect them to create genres and push old genres farther than anyone thought possible.

For an example of how a publisher can both be the largest in the world and an innovator, look at the company EA unseated: Nintendo. Nintendo published games like Mario, Zelda, Goldeneye and Super Mario Kart. These games are so good that when Nintendo ports them to the Gameboy Advance people buy them, even though they came out a decade ago. Do you think people would buy SSX Tricky in 10 years?

EA does not make bad games. I never said all of their games were bad. Some of their sports games, like MVP Baseball and NCAA Football, are the best in their genres. But they don’t do anything different. They don’t create anything that can be considered art. Do you understand what I’m talking about?

For a reference here, let’s look at what games Penny Arcade said were the best of 2003. They chose 12 games, surely some would have to be made by EA, right? Right? Wrong. Not like PA is the ultimate source in the world, but they are trustworthy and reliable, they own every system and play just about every genre. They seem like a source to trust if one can trust a source. And yet, they didn’t include 1 EA game on their list… I wonder if it’s because EA just doesn’t make great games… Oh, and if you’re wondering, there were 3 Nintendo games on their list.

So, while you may not understand, still, why I don’t like EA, I think most other people can. I want great games. EA does not make great games.

A few responses to what you wrote:

Just because I played Bond for 5 hours on Saturday doesn’t mean it is a great game. Remember that I’m the guy who played 3 hours of Crash Test Dummies with my friend one day… and we didn’t even pass the first level.

About Everything or Nothing:

"gadgets are all fun and actually useful for a change."

The spider cam was fun the first time, but how often did we really use it? And was it really fun to have to stop the action, switch to the rapel gun, look up, and shoot a ledge to advance in levels all the time? I know I got sick of it after a while.

"but the switch to third person here is more immersive"

So, are all 3rd person shooters more immersive than 1st person shooters? That's weird... See, I always thought Goldeneye was more immersive because, while I might not have been able to see my character, I actually had full control over him. I don't remember you pulling off headshots with ease in Everything or Nothing, yet in Goldneye's control scheme it was easy to shoot whatever part of the body you wanted.

"allows for more dynamic level design"

I might have missed something. It seemed like every level that you are on foot was pretty much the same. Box to hid behind here. Wall to shoot around here. Ledge to repel up/down here. Did I miss a level?

I could see how it would be hard to play Goldeneye with only one stick. I mean, Everything or Nothing truly makes full use of that right analog stick to, um, do something very important.

I'm not going to argue PCs here, but MS must be doing something right. My Windows 95 in my apartment and XP at home never crash and I can run every program I want quickly and easily. Plus they clearly made Apple the red headed step child of the industry. Sure, if you want to edit film you can buy a Mac, but if you want to do anything else, especially play games, you're better off with the cheaper PC.