EA have improved so much recently. Activision in my eyes is now the big bad guy tbh, they seem to be making the same mistakes the old EA did. Sure enough they are good for profits, but put nobody else first other than themselves.
Now I want to say that I am speaking as an outsider looking in,
But it seems to me that WAR could have been a HUGE cash cow for them, and the amount of talent that got laid off, and the total Rape of Moral that seems to be going on at Mythic is this fools own damn fault. Now it seems to me that the situation at Mythic is only a slice of the problem. From seeing their management of the Mythic studio, I can only imagine the amount of frustration and red tape the other studios have to go through to make something cool.
Speaking for myself, If I had to go through the drudgery and Idea slamming and Dream Killing, some folks have to go through to make some of these EA titles, and then some CEO had the nerve to say that "Our Games aren't good enough" I would be pretty pissed.
Now if some EA folks pipe up and say it's all good now, I'll shut up.
The guy is a douchebag. He's doing more damage right now talking like that than anything else that has happened over the last few years. Instead of pointing the finger down at the talent they've held down they need to think about what they can do to free it up.
A good leader inspires their people to do great things.
I don't know anything about this, so I could be way off, but from that article, it sounds like this guy's plan is a little scattered and self-contradictory. Going solely by the quotes in the article, it sounds like he wants to:
- Release around a dozen best-selling titles in rapid succession or simultaneously.
- Absorb more smaller companies.
- Put out epic blockbuster titles.
- Shift focus to the "casual" market.
Again, I'm not in the industry yet, so I could easily be totally wrong, but it sounds to me like that list is a recipe for spreading funds thin by trying to grow even bigger while also expecting higher quality (whatever that may mean in his eyes-- I suspect nothing specific, because he seems to be looking at games like they're pork bellies or shower heads) work from existing EA teams.
If it's consistent blockbuster hits he's after, it's not going to happen with a shotgun approach or by cracking the whip harder, so to speak. It's not something that's handled by shrewd corporate mergers alone. And if he expects a "better" product to be delivered, he'd probably do well not to shift blame for his own missed goals to the millions of people who do the ground-level work behind the products by saying they just weren't "good enough". I get the impression he's trying to sound personally accountable from the viewpoint of the gameplaying public (specifically the ones who didn't buy any EA titles recently); but what's coming across (at least to me) is an image of a clueless fatcat who's frustrated that he's not getting as increasingly rich as he'd expected and he can't figure out why because he doesn't understand the nature of his products, let alone the multitude of factors that determine how they'll sell, so he comes to the conclusion that they just must not be "good" enough and that he'll have to get some guys who know things to start throwing money around until they get "better", or buy up some companies who are doing really well, or something, but he doesn't know what, because hey, he just runs the place.
One of the people who commented on the article had a good point. I don't think it's as much of the quality of EA games as it is the DRM. No one wants to deal with that. How many people played spore and then talked about the game itself and not the DRM system?
they nerfed spore's potential. it could've been great, but they botched the progression of everything.
it ended up not as a game, but more like a "create a creature workshop".
it gave me the same feel as black and white. both of them were supposed to be epic freedom experiences, but just ended up being really poor games. it was just boring.
there wasn't anything driving you tp do stuff. no real rewards.
and yeah, DRM.
now dead space.. really great game. one of the best i've played in years.
real shame it didn't sell that well, because it definitely deserved better.
i wouldn't mind seeing that become a franchise.
Replies
But it seems to me that WAR could have been a HUGE cash cow for them, and the amount of talent that got laid off, and the total Rape of Moral that seems to be going on at Mythic is this fools own damn fault. Now it seems to me that the situation at Mythic is only a slice of the problem. From seeing their management of the Mythic studio, I can only imagine the amount of frustration and red tape the other studios have to go through to make something cool.
Speaking for myself, If I had to go through the drudgery and Idea slamming and Dream Killing, some folks have to go through to make some of these EA titles, and then some CEO had the nerve to say that "Our Games aren't good enough" I would be pretty pissed.
Now if some EA folks pipe up and say it's all good now, I'll shut up.
A good leader inspires their people to do great things.
henry hatworth anyone ?! god damn BEST ds game so far !
- Release around a dozen best-selling titles in rapid succession or simultaneously.
- Absorb more smaller companies.
- Put out epic blockbuster titles.
- Shift focus to the "casual" market.
Again, I'm not in the industry yet, so I could easily be totally wrong, but it sounds to me like that list is a recipe for spreading funds thin by trying to grow even bigger while also expecting higher quality (whatever that may mean in his eyes-- I suspect nothing specific, because he seems to be looking at games like they're pork bellies or shower heads) work from existing EA teams.
If it's consistent blockbuster hits he's after, it's not going to happen with a shotgun approach or by cracking the whip harder, so to speak. It's not something that's handled by shrewd corporate mergers alone. And if he expects a "better" product to be delivered, he'd probably do well not to shift blame for his own missed goals to the millions of people who do the ground-level work behind the products by saying they just weren't "good enough". I get the impression he's trying to sound personally accountable from the viewpoint of the gameplaying public (specifically the ones who didn't buy any EA titles recently); but what's coming across (at least to me) is an image of a clueless fatcat who's frustrated that he's not getting as increasingly rich as he'd expected and he can't figure out why because he doesn't understand the nature of his products, let alone the multitude of factors that determine how they'll sell, so he comes to the conclusion that they just must not be "good" enough and that he'll have to get some guys who know things to start throwing money around until they get "better", or buy up some companies who are doing really well, or something, but he doesn't know what, because hey, he just runs the place.
as far as Morale, I haven't experienced anything like other polycounters have posted ie: all hands "you guys suck" meetings and stuff like that.
it ended up not as a game, but more like a "create a creature workshop".
it gave me the same feel as black and white. both of them were supposed to be epic freedom experiences, but just ended up being really poor games. it was just boring.
there wasn't anything driving you tp do stuff. no real rewards.
and yeah, DRM.
now dead space.. really great game. one of the best i've played in years.
real shame it didn't sell that well, because it definitely deserved better.
i wouldn't mind seeing that become a franchise.