Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Poll: Up hands those who will never buy another game from ..

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
June 1, 2005 11:03:42 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Vote now.

John Lewis

More about : poll hands buy game

June 1, 2005 11:03:43 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"John Lewis" <john.dsl@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:429d5d3f.9899583@news.verizon.net...
> Vote now.

Eh, I may wait on the reviews for Madden and see if they've improved it.
Maybe NHL, too. But I'm getting tired of paying full price for graphical
and roster updates. Gameplay has been stagnant or worse over the last few
years. Besides, I'm still pissed Madden took out the league functions,
wonky as they were, a few years back.

turk
--
My last vestige of "hands off religion" respect disappeared in the smoke and
choking dust of September 11th 2001, followed by the "National Day of
Prayer," when prelates and pastors did their tremulous Martin Luther King
impersonations and urged people of mutually incompatible faiths to hold
hands, united in homage to the very force that caused the problem in the
first place.
-- Richard Dawkins, The Devil's Chaplain (2004)
June 1, 2005 1:36:08 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

John Lewis wrote:
> Vote now.
>
> John Lewis

Hands down. When I buy games I dont look at who publishes them - just
whether I want to play them.

--
It's a bit of a jump isn't it? I mean, er, chartered accountancy to lion
taming in one go.
You don't think it might be better if you worked your way toward lion
taming, say, via banking...
Anonymous
June 1, 2005 2:30:34 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 07:03:42 GMT, john.dsl@verizon.net (John Lewis) wrote:

>Vote now.

Based on their past reputation across TS, RA2 than Generals, I feel that
they probably aren't good game developers.

Honestly, how hard is it to write an AI that's actually a threat? If RoN
can do it (and still have two additional difficulty levels), why couldn't
RA2/Generals?

Might as well stick to engine games. They might not be the best, but at
least you can create your own from scratch.
Anonymous
June 1, 2005 3:23:16 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Thusly john.dsl@verizon.net (John Lewis) Spake Unto All:

>Vote now.

The suits at EA are obnoxious fruitcakes, but I'm not a very moral
guy. If EA publishes a good game* I'll buy it.






* that'll be the day.
Anonymous
June 1, 2005 4:07:52 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"John Lewis" <john.dsl@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:429d5d3f.9899583@news.verizon.net...
> Vote now.
>
> John Lewis


Although people have every right to be mad at EA for their "exclusive deals"
and such and the resulting fallout, I can't say I will be boycotting them.
I do, however, make an effort now not to buy their games when they first
come out. For example, I waited until a couple of months ago to buy NHL
2005 and got it for $10 Canadian. When it was first released, it was $50.
June 1, 2005 4:13:16 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"John Lewis" <john.dsl@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:429d5d3f.9899583@news.verizon.net...
> Vote now.
>
> John Lewis

As they publish the Battlefield series - the best multiplayer experience bar
none IMO - then they have at least one guaranteed sale to me within the next
month.

Beyond that, I don't like EA - who would? - but games aren't really like
many other commodities, there is only one of the top of genre games that I
would buy. If this happens to be published by EA, then they get my money.
June 1, 2005 6:07:20 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

I regard MS as a lot more of an evil empire, but I still use its
products.

EA would have to do something pretty damn nasty to stop me buying BF2,
Madden 2XXX and any other future games they publish that coincide with
my gaming tastes.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
Anonymous
June 1, 2005 7:50:28 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

John Lewis wrote:
> Vote now.
>
> John Lewis

Why not? Aren't some of their sports sims the absolute best in the field?

--
Walter Mitty
-
Useless, waste of money research of the day : http://tinyurl.com/3tdeu
" Format wars could 'confuse users'"
http://www.tinyurl.com
Anonymous
June 1, 2005 9:39:50 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Thusly Andrew <spamtrap@localhost.> Spake Unto All:

>I regard MS as a lot more of an evil empire, but I still use its
>products.

AFAIK Microsoft has quite decent conditions for their employees. I
believe that's the main beef people have with EA, they treat their
workforce as expendable, like McDonalds does.
June 1, 2005 9:39:51 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 17:39:50 +0200, Mean_Chlorine
<mike_noren2002@NOSPAMyahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>AFAIK Microsoft has quite decent conditions for their employees. I
>believe that's the main beef people have with EA, they treat their
>workforce as expendable, like McDonalds does.

That is pretty much a global concept these days, people are no longer
employees, they are resources that can be hired or fired at the whim
of a suit with a spreadsheet and a profit margin to chase.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
Anonymous
June 2, 2005 12:34:17 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

John Lewis wrote:
> Vote now.

If they release a game that looks good, I'll buy it. I couldn't care less
who publishes it.

--

(O) e n o n e
June 2, 2005 2:27:03 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Wed, 1 Jun 2005 12:07:52 -0600, "NightSky 421"
<nightsky421@yahoo.ca> wrote:

>Although people have every right to be mad at EA for their "exclusive deals"
>and such and the resulting fallout, I can't say I will be boycotting them.

Why do people blame EA for securing "exclusive deals" and not the
people who sell them the exclusive licenses?
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
Anonymous
June 2, 2005 2:55:17 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Andrew" <spamtrap@localhost.> wrote in message
news:7fds91pcg4edsctv1bdsjgnd5fnk9tf4sn@4ax.com...
>
> Why do people blame EA for securing "exclusive deals" and not the
> people who sell them the exclusive licenses?


I can't speak for other people, but for me, it's the fact that EA was a
willing participant. It's come to my attention as well now that EA cannot
make Major League Baseball games now because someone else got an exclusive
deal. It's unfortunate in the first place that such offers were made to
companies by sports leagues because the end result is that there is less (or
no) competition in the marketplace, but the trend has reared it's ugly head.
I don't play the Madden NFL games, but there's no doubt that EA was coming
up against some heavy competition for their NFL games. I don't know what
the status of the NBA is in this regard, but I doubt the NHL will ever see
such an exclusive deal since hockey is not a big thing in the United States.
Anonymous
June 2, 2005 3:31:15 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"John Lewis" <john.dsl@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:429d5d3f.9899583@news.verizon.net...
> Vote now.
>
> John Lewis

I vote yes but I will very likely buy Battlefield 2 assuming it lives up to
the hype (BFV did not) and they release a demo. That's the only EA game I
will buy in the foreseeable future.
Anonymous
June 2, 2005 11:25:36 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"John Lewis" <john.dsl@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:429d5d3f.9899583@news.verizon.net...
> Vote now.
>
> John Lewis

What's the issue with EA?
June 2, 2005 11:34:31 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Thu, 02 Jun 2005 19:25:36 GMT, "OldDog" <OldDog@city.pound> wrote:

>What's the issue with EA?

They want to make money, apparently that makes them the root of all
evil.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
Anonymous
June 3, 2005 1:27:36 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 22:27:03 GMT, Andrew <spamtrap@localhost.> wrote:

>On Wed, 1 Jun 2005 12:07:52 -0600, "NightSky 421"
><nightsky421@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>
>>Although people have every right to be mad at EA for their "exclusive deals"
>>and such and the resulting fallout, I can't say I will be boycotting them.
>
>Why do people blame EA for securing "exclusive deals" and not the
>people who sell them the exclusive licenses?

EA has a reputation of releasing low-quality games, or games lacking
polish. When I've been peeking in the BF:V forums, there have been many
complaints about some user coming onto the server, walking in front of a
plane about to take off and using PTK to kill the pilot (and thus be able
to fly the plane on next respawn.)

Even if EA isn't didn't do anything wrong, they get blamed. That's a sign
of bad PR.

(Of course, ESPN was said to be shooting itself in the foot by permanently
associating itself with a shoddy product. In a way, that's still blaming
EA...)
Anonymous
June 3, 2005 5:01:35 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

x-no-archive: yes

Andrew wrote:

<snip>

wrong demo man as always!
ea is a failed publisher
no innovation! no creativity! nothing! except redoing the same
titles over and over again, and that's why last quarter they
had profits dropping to record levels cause they simply don't
have what it takes to be a great publisher... but that's not
the problem
the problem is cause they are totally INCAPABLE of becoming
a successful publisher they BUY other companies that are and
the last victim is ubisoft a historical independent company
that has given us many innovative titles and with ea HOSTILE,
let me repeat HOSTILE TAKE OVER will be a big loss for us
all pc gamers
ea trying to monopolize the market by buying other publisher
in a HOSTILE take over shows their true colors
ea is incapable of growing by their own, they can only do it
by buying innovative companies but after being bought those
companies stop being innovative and become just like mother ea
why did dice needed to be bought by ea?
why didn't dice remain independent like id software and others?
why does ea need to SWALLOW everything they see!!!!! why????
ea is a monopolistic company! ea is the microsoft of games!
fight against ea monopolistic intentions!
we want a free independent ubisoft!
no to ubisoft hostile take over by ea!

--
post made in a steam-free computer
i said "NO" to valve and steam

to check authenticity of the real "steamKILLER" reassure that
the post came from a google server and that the email address
is the now legendary sayNO2steam@yahoo.com
June 3, 2005 9:42:21 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Thu, 02 Jun 2005 21:27:36 -0400, bk039@ncf.ca (Raymond Martineau)
wrote:

>EA has a reputation of releasing low-quality games, or games lacking
>polish.

I have been buying their products for years and that isn't a
description I recognise. My buying decisions are done on a per game
basis, I couldn't give a hoot who the publisher is. I am not an EA
fanboy, but I have always been pretty satisfied with their products.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
Anonymous
June 3, 2005 4:10:12 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Fri, 03 Jun 2005 05:42:21 GMT, Andrew <spamtrap@localhost.> wrote:

>On Thu, 02 Jun 2005 21:27:36 -0400, bk039@ncf.ca (Raymond Martineau)
>wrote:
>
>>EA has a reputation of releasing low-quality games, or games lacking
>>polish.
>
>I have been buying their products for years and that isn't a
>description I recognise. My buying decisions are done on a per game
>basis, I couldn't give a hoot who the publisher is. I am not an EA
>fanboy, but I have always been pretty satisfied with their products.

I wouldn't recognise that descriptiuon either years ago. But for some
reason, there's a large chunk of haters that didn't like a few of the
recent offerings.

For example, the PlanetCNC community was stating months ago that EA has
abandoned Zero Hour, at a state were cheaters would constantly mess up the
game with the Scud Storm glitch. They eventually released a patch to 1.04,
but the damage was already done.

(Of course, this doesn't mean that all EA games are bad... IIRC, Need For
Speed Underground seems to be on the good side. However, the RA2/Generals
combo seemed to do the most damage.)
June 6, 2005 6:45:37 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

3 words for ya.... NEED FOR SPEED.

Thanks, have a nice day.
JMoney


"steamKILLER" <sayNO2steam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1117784697.565663.150690@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> Andrew wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> wrong demo man as always!
> ea is a failed publisher
> no innovation! no creativity! nothing! except redoing the same
> titles over and over again, and that's why last quarter they
> had profits dropping to record levels cause they simply don't
> have what it takes to be a great publisher... but that's not
> the problem
> the problem is cause they are totally INCAPABLE of becoming
> a successful publisher they BUY other companies that are and
> the last victim is ubisoft a historical independent company
> that has given us many innovative titles and with ea HOSTILE,
> let me repeat HOSTILE TAKE OVER will be a big loss for us
> all pc gamers
> ea trying to monopolize the market by buying other publisher
> in a HOSTILE take over shows their true colors
> ea is incapable of growing by their own, they can only do it
> by buying innovative companies but after being bought those
> companies stop being innovative and become just like mother ea
> why did dice needed to be bought by ea?
> why didn't dice remain independent like id software and others?
> why does ea need to SWALLOW everything they see!!!!! why????
> ea is a monopolistic company! ea is the microsoft of games!
> fight against ea monopolistic intentions!
> we want a free independent ubisoft!
> no to ubisoft hostile take over by ea!
>
> --
> post made in a steam-free computer
> i said "NO" to valve and steam
>
> to check authenticity of the real "steamKILLER" reassure that
> the post came from a google server and that the email address
> is the now legendary sayNO2steam@yahoo.com
>
Anonymous
June 6, 2005 9:13:59 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Hi,

In article <3clr91td1u6mp4q5tcpcbc60u8605ssetp@4ax.com>,
Mean_Chlorine <mike_noren2002@NOSPAMyahoo.co.uk> wrote:
#AFAIK Microsoft has quite decent conditions for their employees. I
#believe that's the main beef people have with EA, they treat their
#workforce as expendable, like McDonalds does.

Yup. But most of their workers are now contractors, who have filed some
lawsuits as to how THEY have been treated.

Ken.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mail: kmarsh at charm dot net | Just say "no" to liars SCO and Soyo
WWW: http://www.charm.net/~kmarsh | Return services to local CIS offices!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anonymous
June 15, 2005 9:35:16 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

> some user coming onto the server, walking in front of a
> plane about to take off and using PTK to kill the pilot

I've never seen that or even heard of it happening. It's never happened
to me. People team kill to get planes, but a well admin'd server will
have the person kicked and/or banned pretty soonish.

> Even if EA isn't didn't do anything wrong, they get blamed. That's a sign
> of bad PR.

EA didn't do anything wrong. It's a waste of time a company like EA
rebutting every single posting any idiot can be bothered to type. BFV
was developed by Dice in Sweden, and only published by EA. Let's be
honst - EA's sales, share price etc is unlikely to be affected by
unfounded criticism on some fanboy forum site.
Anonymous
June 15, 2005 9:38:01 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

>> Why do people blame EA for securing "exclusive deals" and not the
>> people who sell them the exclusive licenses?

>I can't speak for other people, but for me, it's the fact that EA was a
>willing participant.

Both parties were willing participants. So, the question again:

Why do people blame EA for securing "exclusive deals" and not the
people who sell them the exclusive licenses?
Anonymous
June 15, 2005 3:55:46 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On 15 Jun 2005 05:35:16 -0700, mrfredbloggs@altavista.co.uk wrote:

>> some user coming onto the server, walking in front of a
>> plane about to take off and using PTK to kill the pilot
>
>I've never seen that or even heard of it happening. It's never happened
>to me. People team kill to get planes, but a well admin'd server will
>have the person kicked and/or banned pretty soonish.

That's here-say, actually - I've read about it on a forum where a person
claimed it happened to him.

Besides, most pubs are not well admined, and generally rely on call-votes
or an admin to come after an hour of a single person trashing up gameplay
on a server that disables votes.

>
>> Even if EA isn't didn't do anything wrong, they get blamed. That's a sign
>> of bad PR.
>
>EA didn't do anything wrong. It's a waste of time a company like EA
>rebutting every single posting any idiot can be bothered to type.

That is true, but they need to have at least a minimalist presence to give
an illusion about them caring for their fan base.

As an example, Valve appears to have better PR, as they post to their own
forum, and appear to have close enough ties with the active PHL moderators.
(They don't, but it's an illusion for those who aren't as experienced.)
Compare this to EA, where PlanetCNC has a higher number of posters
complaining about gameplay quality of RA2/Generals (where they are
considered the publisher, since they owned the studio).

ForumPlanet isn't really considered fanboy - it's major enough to be
significant. In fact, I use it to pick up on some new developments
(especially as the most active topics include the off-topic forums.)

> BFV
>was developed by Dice in Sweden, and only published by EA. Let's be
>honst - EA's sales, share price etc is unlikely to be affected by
>unfounded criticism on some fanboy forum site.

True - stocks aren't really significantly affected by small scale events.
But chaos theory states that a hurricane can theoretically be created by a
butterfly flapping its wings.
!