Even EA beats Sega.I thought people at least liked Sonic…
Remember that the GameFAQs population is not necessarily an accurate cross-section of the actual gaming population.
I really don’t see what’s so special about most of EA’s games.
The sad thing is that it IS.
No, it really isn’t. As you can tell from the poll (and pretty much all polls on the site), GameFAQs is dominated by Squaresoft and Nintendo fans.
As you can tell by estatistics a huge precentage of gamers wordlwide plays games because those two companies continue spawning games.
What the hell is wrong with people!?!
They probably bought Mega CD’s/32X’s/Saturn’s and never forgave Sega for messing it up.
As for Square fanboys, I’ll quote Comic Book Guy.
“There is no emoticon for how I am feeling!”
“Messing it up” can mean a lot of things but I don’t think the Saturn was a mess up.The other were tho…
Of course I noticed you dind’t include the DC…why?
Mainly because the majority of people who bought Dreamcasts were people who would stand beside Sega regardless of mistakes they made, like us on this board, after the less-than-spectacular other consoles.
But the DC had better sales than the Saturn still,right?
EA has some popular franchises. They have the Sims, Lord of the Rings, NBA/NFL/NHL titles up the wazoo, and others I’m certainly forgetting as my brain shuts down for the evening (oh yeah, and Harry Potter for the kiddie set). They’re the largest game publisher in the US (world?) for a reason. I don’t think anyone has a fanboy mentality for the company as a whole, its games are too varied for that, but you’ll definitely find fans of particular series that belong to EA.
If you’d asked me that GameFAQs poll five, ten years years ago my answer would have been Sega without a doubt. Nowadays I’m much less company-loyal. I would’ve put down Aruze, out of my love of the Shadow Hearts games, but they weren’t an option and they don’t publish outside of Japan anyway.
FAQ polls. Why people get so bent out of shape for them. FAQ em all.
It’s just that I can’t think of anything overally original from EA Games, besides the franchises that they bought out. The Lord of the Rings games were good, but nothing groundbreaking, just generic hack and slash games with great cinematics - at their core they were simply licensed material (I haven’t played The Third Age though…).
I suppose there’s the Sims which is quite innovate at the time, but we’ll never see games like NiGHTS and Jet Set Radio from EA. With their bank balance, I’m not sure why they can’t afford to take the risk… does anyone know?
I do : the EA developers are computer mercenaries!
Actually, it is a semi-accurate cross-section of the gaming population, but if it was fully accurate, Square’s percentage should be like 5-7%, and EA’s should be 25% (and Nintendo’s closer to 10%).
EA has a lot of quality games: Burnout 3, NFS: Underground, Madden, Fight Night (best. boxing game. evar.), the LOTR series, plenty of FPS’, and the list goes on. EA may be all about games-as-games-and-not-art, but you can’t deny the quality of their major franchises. And the reason why they don’t take risks? Well, if playing it safe got them this far, why fix something if it ain’t broke? They know that people come to them for a good gaming experience… not necessarily for innovation. I don’t see what’s wrong with that.
And Nintendo? It’s been a loooong time since I played a bad Nintendo game. There’s been games that weren’t particularly my style, but you can’t say that their games are bad. They make some of the best in the industry. Just look at Zelda and Metroid: Prime… and Paper Mario 2. And Pikmin. And the list goes on.
I just read that Dopefish and that is really sickening.I’m not gonna say “I knew it” but when I try to imagine how can a company such as EA develop so many agmes so fast I start thinking…
Abadd: I don’t dislike EA in anyway.But I never understood money-makers in art driven industries.
Do they feel pleasure?I’m one of those persons who would just feel miserable beeing rich and not doing something (work) for love.
It’s not an art-driven industry. It’s an entertainment industry. It’s not an art-driven industry unless the majority of the people consuming the products are buying them for artistic reasons. Movies are definitely “more art-y” than games, but it’s still considered an entertainment industry, too.
As for the EA article, there are some teams that are driven like slaves like that. But, I also know people whose experiences were much different. There’s “crunch time” at every developer (and not just in the game industry), but a few teams just got pushed unreasonably hard, or so I hear. However, my friend worked his butt off during the day, and finished his stuff ahead of schedule all the time. And when asked to work on the weekends, he simply asked for a specific reason. If they couldn’t think of one, he’d say, “See you on Monday.”
And he’s still working there, so apparently, it’s not everyone who gets worked that hard.