EA\'s Future Plans for Sony\'s Shiny Black Box !

Uhhh, I said selling well doesnt = good games. I never said people can\'t like things I don\'t like. And I stand by it cause I\'m right. And EA milks franchises as much as ANY company. I can critisize them for it as much as I want.

Originally posted by EThugg
Uhhh, I said selling well doesnt = good games. I never said people can\'t like things I don\'t like. And I stand by it cause I\'m right. And EA milks franchises as much as ANY company. I can critisize them for it as much as I want.

yes you can, and I can explain to you the business model and the reasoning why comapnies do this without having it suggested that,

have you been inhaling toxic gases lately? Your logic is moronic at best

which I may add I do not appreciate, especially since I did no such thing to you.

and any game that sells well is a good game in the eyes of a Dev or Publisher. Not everygame is designed to meet Ethugg\'s target audience.  Your opinion is noted, but I don\'t think your really grasping what I\'m saying about certain franchises and the reasons they don\'t get these massive upgrades this early in the PS2\'s life.

Lets see how EA does in their 2nd gen PS2 games and 3rd gen PS2 games. The 1st batch was merely and upgrade form the last batch of PS1 games. EA had a learning curve and resource investment which sucked up alot of the money and time needed to implement all these great next gen upgrades your expecting.

and all I am saying is there is a Business logic that plays into the reasoning.

So no I\'m not huffin glue or anything, I\'m just thinking outside the box

So no I\'m not huffin glue or anything, I\'m just thinking outside the box

You\'re going out on a limb, not many people can think outside the box.

- dm
- what\'s in the f\'cking box?

You originally said: \'Actually it does make them good, becuase if your not good people won\'t buy your games.

It may not appeal to you or a few others but it sure as hell appeals to alot and that is all that counts. \'

You did not say that companies think that way until l8er posts. You just said \'Actually it does make them good, becuase if your not good people won\'t buy your games.\' And that was WRONG. I still meant everything I said, and if you took \'inhaling\' comments personally, you aren\'t fit to be a mod, cause your way too sensitive. It was a obvious exaggeration, like if I had asked if you were on crack or something... lighten up.

Originally posted by EThugg
I still meant everything I said, and if you took \'inhaling\' comments personally, you aren\'t fit to be a mod, cause your way too sensitive. It was a obvious exaggeration, like if I had asked if you were on crack or something... lighten up.

Basically you threw an insult at me in regards to my latest posts. I felt you could have just made comments in a more productive matter then to suggest my debate is the result of my addiction to Elmers


I also figured since you we\'re familiar with my last 2 days rants on my reasonings for lots of games not gatting a full package of upgrades you already understood my position and what I was getting onto earlier in this debate

I did understand what you said, just cause you were more specific later on, doesnt mean your \'sales=quality\' original argument was right. Maybe you meant something else, but I dissed you for what you originally said, not what you meant to say.


Damn you and your post editing! I don\'t know what to say even...

well I didn\'t make myself as clear as I had too

I think EA will have a much better go around in regards to franchise upgrades with 2nd gen versions on the PS2.

I don\'t think EA is "the best" in the business, but I do think alot of people are attacking EA for there 1st gen PS2 games that did not get the amount of upgrades expected for the PS2. So my rants are an effort to explain why I think EA has come up short on a solid handful of its yearly sport franchises and why I believe its just a generational thing do to resources and sales expectations for each franchise.

Originally posted by ddaryl
well I didn\'t make myself as clear as I had too

I think EA will have a much better go around in regards to franchise upgrades with 2nd gen versions on the PS2.

I don\'t think EA is "the best" in the business, but I do think alot of people are attacking EA for there 1st gen PS2 games that did not get the amount of upgrades expected for the PS2. So my rants are an effort to explain why I think EA has come up short on a solid handful of its yearly sport franchises and why I believe its just a generational thing do to resources and sales expectations for each franchise.

EA was doing what I\'m complaining about long before PS2. Small Soldiers anyone?

Originally posted by EThugg
Yup. King of the uninspired licensed sequels and franchises they are.

I don\'t always agree with what you say, but there I think you hit the nail on the head. EA Sports are the perpetual sh!t shovellers of the gaming industry, with the exception of a few franchises, and a few specific games, their release list over the past few years has been indeed cluttered with uninspired sequels. They basically live off their marketing, their licences, the fact that the gaming press loves them off, and in many instances exclusivity.

Look at three staple franchises:

NBA Live: Since NBA Live 98 how has this franchise changed in terms of the game engine and control? Answer: It hasn\'t.
Every incarnation has updated rosters, graphics, new comentary, and throw in a crossover button. The AI is STILL as asinine now as it was then, with players who have a clear lane to the basket taking jump shots.

NHL: I have a lot of problems with this series, even though I have bought every PC incarnation since \'93. Sure the newest version has better options (I like the sliders) but really has the game changed? It\'s still no where NEAR a representation of true NHL hockey.

Fifa: Since Fifa RTWC 98 this series has been the most overrated computer software product in the history of mankind. Fifa 2001 is the biggest pile of dog cr@p since, well, Fifa 2000. I have the PSX, PS2, and PC versions (thank God I didn\'t have to buy them), but they\'re basically the same game engine since Fifa 99, tack on some new graphics, a new intro sequence, sell a couple more million copies.

I\'ll give Madden 2001 PS2 a break because it was an excellent game, and I\'m hopefull for EA Sports BIG because SSX was the most original and inspired title EA Sports have released since Fifa 96.

A lot of their success also comes thanks to marketing, and exclusivity. If you want a basketball game on the PC what other option do you have? Same goes for hockey and soccer. Thanks to the terminal retards at 989 Sports, EA Sports also practically have a monopoly in sports games on the consoles.

Even when a game of pure genius like ISS Pro Evolution (never heard of it? it was a top seller in Japan, and that\'s about it) comes out the EA Sports cheerleaders at IGN give the game a 4.9 out of 10.0 complaining about the difficulty level and lack of a licence.

Honestly, I appreciate what EA Sports did for sports gaming in the early 90s, but now they\'re living off their name and the lack of competition. I can\'t wait for Visual Concepts to come in and show EA Sports that gameplay doesn\'t = graphics. Of course EA will probably just counter with a new marketing blitz, celebrity endorsement, inept reviewing at DR, IGN etc.

I can\'t wait for N\'Sync to be announced as the guys doing the soundtrack for Fifa 2002.

/Rant