Replies: 499 (Who?), Viewed: 62011 times.
Page 19 of 20
Lab Assistant
#451 Old 15th Jun 2021 at 3:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by daisylee
I am fairly certain 5 is in the works and coming, and it is just a matter of when? And what it will be? Who knows?


Yes, who knows.
But why promote and present to the world a new (is she president? or something like that?) who says she looks forward to 4 lasting another 8 or more years? That doesn't sound to me like 5 is somewhere around the corner. Doesn't sound like its even started its engine yet.

People seldom do what they believe in. They do what is convenient, then repent. - Bob Dylan
Field Researcher
#452 Old 16th Jun 2021 at 10:08 AM
Unless they plan to run both. People are still buying TS3 after all.
Instructor
#453 Old 16th Jun 2021 at 4:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dikosay
Yes, who knows.
But why promote and present to the world a new (is she president? or something like that?) who says she looks forward to 4 lasting another 8 or more years? That doesn't sound to me like 5 is somewhere around the corner. Doesn't sound like its even started its engine yet.


Because EA understands the only thing keeping the game alive is the hope that future packs will finally raise the bar enough that the game is fun.

It would not be the first time a game dev has lied to fans before. I mean let's be real here: this engine CANNOT handle 8 more years of Sims packs.
Scholar
#454 Old 16th Jun 2021 at 5:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeservedCriticism
Because EA understands the only thing keeping the game alive is the hope that future packs will finally raise the bar enough that the game is fun.

It would not be the first time a game dev has lied to fans before. I mean let's be real here: this engine CANNOT handle 8 more years of Sims packs.

With these sparse watered down packs that seem to be little more than stuff packs, maybe they can.
Field Researcher
#455 Old 18th Jun 2021 at 2:54 AM
They can do it, the game has always been broken and it never mattered.
Mad Poster
#456 Old 19th Jun 2021 at 12:11 PM
FIFA Ultimate Team tries out loot box previews
Limited-time event using "preview packs" where players can see which cards they'll get before they pay for them

Electronic Arts is trying out a tweak to its FIFA Ultimate Team loot boxes, as the company today launched a limited-time event replacing the mode's standard loot boxes with new "preview packs" that will let players see what a pack contains before purchasing it.

For the duration of the Festival of FUTball event, the in-game FUT Store will only sell preview packs. Users will be able to see which cards each pack contains before buying it, and if they decide not to go through with a purchase, a countdown timer appears on the preview pack.

Users will not have the option to preview a new pack until they either purchase the pack they have previewed or wait until the refresh timer runs out.

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/artic...ot-box-previews

Okay, EA. You've been pounding your drums about how FIFA isn't gambling even though one out of three dollars you make is from gambling in FIFA, then you pull this. Say that people can preview packs, but they either have to buy the pack they previewed even if they don't like it or wait out a timer. Certainly you can come up with better crapola than this.
Scholar
#457 Old 24th Jun 2021 at 9:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gargoyle Cat

Okay, EA. You've been pounding your drums about how FIFA isn't gambling even though one out of three dollars you make is from gambling in FIFA, then you pull this. Say that people can preview packs, but they either have to buy the pack they previewed even if they don't like it or wait out a timer. Certainly you can come up with better crapola than this.


Smart (but dirty) trick. It looks like transparency, but it still promotes gambling. The lottery ticket here is the pack that you can preview. As it is highly unlikely it will contain what you want, so you still have to buy it to see the next pack's contents if you don't want to wait 24hrs. Technically it is probably not seen as gambling according to any law, but I suspect it still has the same pull for anyone that is susceptible for gambling. Very sleazy imo.
Mad Poster
#458 Old 24th Jun 2021 at 3:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mithrak_nl
Smart (but dirty) trick. It looks like transparency, but it still promotes gambling. The lottery ticket here is the pack that you can preview. As it is highly unlikely it will contain what you want, so you still have to buy it to see the next pack's contents if you don't want to wait 24hrs. Technically it is probably not seen as gambling according to any law, but I suspect it still has the same pull for anyone that is susceptible for gambling. Very sleazy imo.


FIFA is programmed to keep people that are susceptible to gambling, hooked. Anybody that is prone to that kind of behavior could spend a lot of money whether they have it or not on these stupid packs because EA is dangling proverbial carrots in front of them. I'm sure the odds of a person getting the pack they want this way is the same as those of packs that people can't see.

I'm just as sure there were people that read the same article I did, but didn't read the whole thing so they jeered EA for being transparent where there was no transparency. It is another disgusting self-inflicted smear on EA's record for talking out of their mouth and ass at the same time.
Mad Poster
#459 Old 25th Jun 2021 at 12:22 AM
EA changes executive compensation scheme, cuts execs' 2021 pay
CEO Andrew Wilson still set to earn $39.2 million, was awarded $48 million since May 2020 as retention incentive

In the opening to the report, CEO Andrew Wilson wrote: "This year, we scaled our engagement efforts, and gained valuable insights from conversations with you about our compensation programs and other matters. We appreciate the time and feedback you shared with us. We are implementing changes to our compensation programs based on that feedback."

The proposals for FY2021 put Wilson on course to earn $39.2 million -- which is still an 83% increase on the $21.4 million he received last year.

Several executives will see their compensation drop. Blake Jorgensen, chief operating and financial officers, drops 39% from $19.5 million to $11.8 million. Chief studios officer Laura Miele is set to be down 30% from $16.1 million to $11.2 million. Finally, chief technology officer Kenneth Moss will go from $14.3 million to $9.7 million, a decrease of 32% year-on-year.

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/artic...-execs-2021-pay

Is anybody really still confused why EA is the way it is? This alone should clear things up.
Alchemist
#460 Old 25th Jun 2021 at 2:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gargoyle Cat
EA changes executive compensation scheme, cuts execs' 2021 pay
CEO Andrew Wilson still set to earn $39.2 million, was awarded $48 million since May 2020 as retention incentive ...


39 million! Poor baby! How will he manage? This is a problem across US big corporations. The exec to worker pay ratios are insane. Japan has a better ratio but still bad. I really think it is disgusting. Nobody deserves that kind of compensation IMO. And IMO that applies also to some fields such as athletes, and so on. Priorities are totally off in way too many cases IMO.

The rich get richer and the poor get poorer...every day.
Mad Poster
#461 Old 25th Jun 2021 at 2:12 PM
This post is more interesting to read if you have the original PacMan sound effects playing in your head. It is fitting because that is what EA is doing. They are buying up studios as fast as they can because they want all of the money. This is how business monopolies are made.

PacMan: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=len7tCx3Kc0

EA acquires Playdemic for $1.4bn
WB Games studio behind Golf Clash finds new home ahead of WarnerMedia-Discovery merger

Electronic Arts has agreed to purchase Playdemic from WarnerMedia for $1.4 billion in an all-cash deal, the companies announced today.

Founded in 2010, the Manchester, UK-based Playdemic is best known as the developer of the mobile and Facebook game Golf Clash.

"We have enjoyed working with the talented team at Playdemic as they have grown Golf Clash beyond all expectations into a hit mobile game with tremendous longevity," WB Games president David Haddad said. "While we have great respect for the Playdemic team, our decision to divest is a part of our overall strategy to build games based on Warner Bros. storied franchises."

Last month, WB Games parent WarnerMedia announced that it would be spun off of parent company AT&T and merge with Discovery in a $43 billion deal, but it was reported that not all of the publisher's operation would be going along, raising questions about the fate of the remaining studios. The Playdemic acquisition announcement specified that the rest of the WB Games portfolio is included in the deal with Discovery.

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/artic...ic-for-usd1-4bn

US has spent $650m on mobile sports games in the past year
Golf Clash alone accounts for 20% of all revenue at $132.8 million

Spending by US mobile games rose to $648.8 million in the last twelve months, boosted in part by the ongoing effects of the pandemic.

That's according to a new report by Sensor Tower, which estimates that revenues for June 2020 to May 2021 increased by 19% when compared to the same period a year before.

Playdemic's Golf Clash drove much of that spending, accounting for one in every five dollars at $132.8 million.

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/artic...n-the-past-year
Mad Poster
#462 Old 3rd Jul 2021 at 1:27 PM
Quote:
EA and Hi-Rez partner with in-game advertising platform
New service lets companies place ads inside free-to-play PC and console titles

Electronic Arts and Tencent-backed Hi-Rez Studios are among the first to partner with a new in-game advertising platform.

The platform is titled PlayerWON and is owned by US TV advertising company Simulmedia. It is designed to showcase video advertisements inside PC and console games.

Speaking to Axios, Simulmedia EVP of gaming Dave Madden commented on the acceleration of free-to-play titles across console and PC, and claims that "over 90%" of players never spend money on them.


https://www.gamesindustry.biz/artic...tising-platform

I'm not sure what world Dave Madden lives in, but it comes as no surprise that he and Android Wilson are now business partners. Most, if not all of EA's free to play games are loaded with microtransactions. Dave Madden didn't mention mobile games, but people are paying over two dollars for basic items in Sims Mobile and yet he's going to tell the masses that 90% of people never spend money on free games? Sure, and pigs sprouted wings and are now able to fly.

Mobile games alone have raked in almost 45 billion with a B in 6 months. Dave Madden can fug off with his BS that over 90% of people don't spend money on free games.

Quote:
Mobile gamers have spent nearly $45bn in 2021 so far
That accounts for almost 70% of all month generated by apps in the first six months of the year

Global consumers spending on mobile games reached $44.7 billion in the first half of 2021.

That's according to Sensor Tower estimates shared with GamesIndustry.biz and marks a 17.9% increase when compared to the first six months of 2020.

Apple's App Store accounted for more than half of this at $26 billion, up 13.5% year-on-year, while games spending on Google Play rose 24.7% to $18.7 billion.

The highest grossing games for H1 2021 were Honor of Kings, PUBG Mobile, Genshim Impact, Roblox and Coin Master respectively. PUBG Mobile revenues include those of Game For Peace, the iOS version released specifically for China.

Overall consumer spending across both Apple and Google's stores reached $64.9 billion, meaning games accounted for 68.9% of all dollars spent. Total spending was 24.8% higher than the $52 billion recorded in H1 2020.


https://www.gamesindustry.biz/artic...-in-2021-so-far
Mad Poster
#463 Old 3rd Jul 2021 at 8:21 PM
Ain't that depressing!
Scholar
#464 Old 3rd Jul 2021 at 10:18 PM
Really feels like gaming has become gambling.
Mad Poster
#465 Old 4th Jul 2021 at 12:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 310175
Really feels like gaming has become gambling.


It isn't just with video games either. My son plays a card game called Magic. On the surface, it looks innocent enough, until you realize that it is nothing more than than loot boxes in a physical, tangible form.

Instead of buying a virtual pack of cards, a person buys actual cards, like baseball cards in which people build 'decks' with them. The point of the game is of course to have the best deck but in order to do that, you have to purchase a lot of crap cards with a chance that you might get the cards you want or need.

Long story short, there was a two hour conversation at the kitchen table the other day about this game when I found out that The Boy spent $130.00 on a box of cards, none of which made the decks he has been building any better. Like virtual loot boxes, he got lots of duplicates and nonsense that he didn't want / care about. At first he got mad at me, accused me of trying to ruin his fun until I asked him what the difference was between what he was doing with these cards and loot boxes as he hates the virtual kind. That point was greeted with a long pause and a light off over his head. I went on to explain that if there was no money to be had with this game, people wouldn't buy cards and or play the game. The dude at the card store that wants to play Let's Make a Deal is not looking out for the best interest of his customers. If he can sell a single card for $50.00, he's going to do it. A card is only worth what a person is willing to pay for it, not because it has that value attached to it. I don't know of any piece of cardboard worth $50.00.

Only time will tell if he really learned the lesson. The Boy was told that it is okay to buy a pack of cards for $5.00 once in a while, but he's not going to blow his entire paycheck on them. He doesn't have piles of bills to pay, but he does have financial responsibilities to take care of and a savings account to maintain as a emergency fund for when his car has issues or whatever.
Alchemist
#466 Old 4th Jul 2021 at 1:45 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gargoyle Cat
...The Boy spent $130.00 on a box of cards ...He doesn't have piles of bills to pay, but he does have financial responsibilities to take care of and a savings account to maintain as a emergency fund for when his car has issues or whatever.


I do not really have a problem with loot boxes as feel people need to be responsible for their own actions, and it sounds like you gave your son some good advice about doing just that and managing his money. As you said, hope he has learned something.
Scholar
#467 Old 4th Jul 2021 at 8:04 PM
I'm apparently old and old-fashioned. I pay for a game and that's the end of me spending money on it. If I can't play without spending money during game play, then nope. I guess I can count myself lucky that I grew up during a time when gambling and gaming were very different things.
I'm even side-eying subscription services like Netflix and Amazon since I keep paying while never owning. Meanwhile I have no control over the moment when a movie or TV show isn't available anymore. At some point, I should sit down and do the math and see if actually buying a show or movie that I actually want to see wouldn't end up saving me money over one year. I'm not there yet. And Amazon Prime owns my soul with the free shipping. At least I'm keeping to the two streaming services. Otherwise, I'm just a sucker who replaced overpriced cable packages with 10 streaming services.
Getting back to topic: I do hope smaller game comanies don't follow this trend. Not that I game all that much but it's jsut sad to see all that potential for really good games go to waste.
Alchemist
#468 Old 5th Jul 2021 at 2:47 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 310175
I'm apparently old and old-fashioned. I pay for a game and that's the end of me spending money on it. If I can't play without spending money during game play, then nope.


I am old also and much prefer the PC games or apps you buy outright, rather than the pay to play apps nowadays. But they make big money for the developers and that is why they are done and will continue. As long as people will pay, and many, many do, and pay more than they should, it will not change.
Mad Poster
#469 Old 5th Jul 2021 at 5:25 AM
I like EA. Without EA, we wouldn't have Sims. It's just the fans are most entitled and ungrateful brats, lulz.

P.S. Sorry for my bad english.
Mad Poster
#470 Old 5th Jul 2021 at 11:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SneakyWingPhoenix
I like EA. Without EA, we wouldn't have Sims. It's just the fans are most entitled and ungrateful brats, lulz.


This brat sez that if sims was never a thing, all the ungrateful wouldn't know the difference because there would be nothing to miss. People that prattle about being entitled and ungrateful can chew on that for awhile.
Lab Assistant
#471 Old 5th Jul 2021 at 4:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SneakyWingPhoenix
I like EA. Without EA, we wouldn't have Sims. It's just the fans are most entitled and ungrateful brats, lulz.


Without their fans, EA would cease to exist, yet we would still have games to play.

Yet, they still treat their customers like shit.

Who are the ungrateful ones?

Getting a little sick of corporate defenders.
Forum Resident
#472 Old 5th Jul 2021 at 6:49 PM
EA might've historically been the reason The Sims was kept afloat after Maxis laughed Will Wright's ass right out the door for the concept, but that absolutely doesn't give them any goodwill from me with how they've treated it since. Especially nowadays.

As soon as The Sims stopped being profitable for them, you can be guaranteed that "Maxis" would be going the way of any of the other EA ventures. They should count themselves lucky they basically have a monopoly currently on life simulation since it's such a difficult thing to get just right. And I'm aware others are in the process of developing. But something as big as The Sims, what it's become? I'll believe it when I see it. Hopefully one will at some point and if EA can't be bothered to take their collective heads out of their asses then maybe the torch will be passed to a developer who gives a damn.

You have been chosen. They will come soon.
Instructor
#473 Old 5th Jul 2021 at 8:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jathom95
EA might've historically been the reason The Sims was kept afloat after Maxis laughed Will Wright's ass right out the door for the concept, but that absolutely doesn't give them any goodwill from me with how they've treated it since. Especially nowadays.

As soon as The Sims stopped being profitable for them, you can be guaranteed that "Maxis" would be going the way of any of the other EA ventures. They should count themselves lucky they basically have a monopoly currently on life simulation since it's such a difficult thing to get just right. And I'm aware others are in the process of developing. But something as big as The Sims, what it's become? I'll believe it when I see it. Hopefully one will at some point and if EA can't be bothered to take their collective heads out of their asses then maybe the torch will be passed to a developer who gives a damn.


Doubt if The Sims would have got far until there was an unexpected lesbian kiss when they showed the original version "The Sims" off at a Game show and made it the talk of the show. It took off from there.
Mad Poster
#474 Old 5th Jul 2021 at 9:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jathom95
EA might've historically been the reason The Sims was kept afloat after Maxis laughed Will Wright's ass right out the door for the concept, but that absolutely doesn't give them any goodwill from me with how they've treated it since. Especially nowadays.


This, if I am not the same person I was years ago, then surely a corporation with a rotating door of staff and CEOs will encounter the same issues, if not worse.
Forum Resident
#475 Old 7th Jul 2021 at 6:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by daisylee
I am old also and much prefer the PC games or apps you buy outright, rather than the pay to play apps nowadays. But they make big money for the developers and that is why they are done and will continue. As long as people will pay, and many, many do, and pay more than they should, it will not change.


When there is so much psychological predation in that way loot boxes are implemented, when they are using literal psychological trickery and brainwashing techniques to make people inclined to spend, it isn't their fault! It's literally trying to tap into the same addictive personalities casinos exploit, and make more while they are at it! They even call them "whales". The whole socioeconomic system is corrupt beyond repair, and lootboxes are one of many symptoms of this! As is your defense of such blatantly unethical practices!

Individuals do not live in a bubble, the human brain is not a perfect machine, everyone is ultimately dependant on eachother, and you are not always in full control!
Page 19 of 20
Back to top