EA news

[Sly Reflex]

Packets of cards were in Madden games before he says with FIFA. They were in a game even before the 360/PS3 generation were released. You opened packs and they allowed you to make players less tired or make better throws and stuff. They were actually a part of the main game as well, I think that was maybe the gimmick for that years Madden.

[regemond]

I don't want to start a big debate with this, but I honestly think the MTX/Loot Box market is partly a reaction to the pre-owned/trade-in market. The games devs/publishers see the games stores themselves as a competitor, taking the direct profits of their games away from them with every copy they lose the sale on. The loot boxes are a reaction to that and a way to make some of the money they'd otherwise lose.

 

I think they'd have happened eventually either way, but I don't think it would have happened so fast or be so sinister without preowned pissing all over their profits.

[ThreeFour]

I think it's more to do with moola made in the mobile/social media market with these F2P games and they saw $$ signs.

 

EA didn't respect boundaries and so got what they deserved.

[Sly Reflex]

It's a little from column A and a little from column B.

 

Option C is too hard. That requires making games so good people want to keep ahold of them.

 

I'm not against payment towards a company to support them if they're doing good shit. If you go digging within the depths of this forum you'll find that I said if all DLC was free and they had a 'pack' that was related to that DLC that was totally cosmetic then that is totally fine. It doesn't stop friends playing together if some aren't well off enough to continue buying in, but it allows those that are to pass a bit of cash forwards. Similar to how Rocket League did it, you get some cars but everything else is (or was?) free. none of this blind buying though, a straight up trade. Money for a known quantity.

 

If Overwatch allowed you to buy event stuff for £5 for the lot, I'd have probably done that at some point. The way they've done it is that you could spend £100 and not even get all the event stuff from an event. That's no bueno. That's the thing here, they don't want to sell you a one off purchase that's done and dusted, they want to sell to you over and over with the slight chance that you might get what you want. I can't get behind that.

 

Not that the way Overwatch does payments wrong, they still get what they want from me, and that's me logging in whenever there's an event to plump out server numbers. A healthy game is one where there's a lot of numbers on the servers, being buoyant is critical for the game since if there's nobody on server then eventually everyone that does like the game has nobody to play against and the game dies, MTX and all.

 

This is a factor with SWBFII. There's going to be an imbalance of strength between a new player and a minus one week player that's been on since the game went EA Access. The starting stuff is never going to win against the guy that's had time to build his stats up. The people that are invested up top are going to need the people down below to feast on, if there's no power fantasy for them there then they're going to get frustrated. People justify playing SWBFII online because they're not buying MTX for it. These people feeding into a community that needs them by doing that. These people are the product, that little thing that flashes up on their screen "killed gamertag +100" is what they're paying for when P2W is on the table. If you're not buying, then you're the product. You're the fox let out the traps to be hunted down, and that's a really shitty way to design a supposedly retail game.

 

Here's the thing with the whole debacle that is SWBFII progression. People have already paid to power up before MTX were shut down. People are levelling up now using this silly predatory progression. What are they going to do when a revision comes in? They've painted themselves into a corner. People won't want to lose progression, or god forbid an advantage they paid for. Unless EA decide to give all the cash back and roll everyone back to square one I can't see how they can make a fair level playing field. You cannot have a constant increase in power without some tradeoff.

 

You could level this at games like Battlefield as well, stuff like kit shortcuts are your fast track to getting the gun you prefer, but I think in those instances usually the kits you start out with have some sort of balance to them, you're not just going to naturally get stronger, you're just building into a preference. You're swapping one thing for another where there's pros and cons for each kit choice.

 

EA has an issue. It needs to fucking sort it out or it'll only snowball in the hatred it gets.

[ThreeFour]

Overwatch keeps people coming back because they (Blizzard) run it well. Kaplan and others are in constant contact with the community, they're constantly patching and tweeting the meta and they have regular events and DLC. All 'free'. I say 'free' because it isn't technically. It's provided by the money from those purchasing the loot boxes which are cosmetic so it doesn't impact in game performance. As much as I don't agree with the gambling aspect of these loot boxes, and the exploitative nature we get free DLC from those buying them. Or the fact the reward system it deliberately fucked with to make you reach for that wallet. I'd rather them not be there. It's forgiven because of how it's run.  Nobody missed out because they don't want to pay for the new map or character. Which in a game like this would be an issue if you didn't have a character. 

 

I always say no one would have an issue with appropriately priced DLC. But so often they take the piss with it you tend to distrust it, and not buy any. Especially if it's this season pass shit.

 

But every game is different and I talk about them differently. Destiny has loot boxes but they're benign and harmless because the game is about loot and the meaningful stuff isn't in the loot boxes. But I keep an eye on it. There's free to play games with loot boxes or MTX but that's fine because that's how that model works. Warframe being a good example. It's when it's in premium AAA I have issues.

 

It's about being vigilant. Constantly keeping the conversation going about any new games or practices, and voicing our concerns when boundaries are pushed. 

[Sly Reflex]

 

So why is this in the EA thread? Because the game in question is Anthem. Oh dear.

[Sambob]

They really are the Trump of video games. 

[Sly Reflex]

I've been reading through it and I'm not sure of the validity of some of it. It seems a bit far fetched. But then again putting P2W in a full  priced game sounded mental and they still pushed for that so fuck knows.

[Sambob]

They were advertising for a dev that successfully implemented this exact thing a while back but took the advert off their site when all the shit went down with BF2.

[Sly Reflex]

This bit is straight up Minority Report

 

 

And this, is this even possible? I'm not entirely sure how this would work, life isn't like The Dark Knight.

 

 

Some of the other pages read like malware. It's all very dystopian.

[DANGERMAN]

16 minutes ago, Sly Reflex said:

I've been reading through it and I'm not sure of the validity of some of it. It seems a bit far fetched. But then again putting P2W in a full  priced game sounded mental and they still pushed for that so fuck knows.

it's a bit... on the nose. If you're trying to sell something to someone, you don't tell them they're the bad guy. Phrases like "social engineering" and "psychological manipulation tactics" would, if I was making a pitch, be called something less pin-point accurate

 

 

edit: also that first bit you posted there ^  that would be insanely expensive to run. Altering a billboard when a particular person is looking at it. That would require a huge number of servers and CPU

[Sly Reflex]

Means fuck all really. Strauss Zelnick said we were wood to chop. You don't need to limit your language when you have people by the balls for their favourite games. I know he's not EA but you get the point.

 

I think it most likely is bogus, but in all honesty I wouldn't put it past EA to roll with something like this.

[DisturbedSwan]

Possible because EA are EA and EA are the worst.

 

But screams shenanigans to me, the slide with Anthem and pen written over it straight up made me

 

May be able to tell you more about the validity of it tomorrow

[Sly Reflex]

https://www.gamespot.com/articles/ea-loses-pga-tour-license-for-golf-games-new-compa/1100-6459111/

 

Quote

Electronic Arts was once a big-time player in the world of licensed golf games, but those days now appear to be over. Independent developer HB Studios announced today that it has reached an agreement with the PGA Tour to add officially licensed courses to The Golf Club 19

.

The PS4, Xbox One, and PC game will have a Career Mode that begins with players progressing as a real player would. This includes going through Q-School, then the Web.com tour, and eventually to the PGA Tour--including the FedExCup Playoffs. A press release explains that sponsorships will be unlocked through career mode, so the licensing may apply to more than just courses. Those courses include: TPC Summerlin, TPC Scottsdale, TPC Sawgrass, TPC Southwind, TPC Deere Run, and TPC Boston. More courses may be added as DLC later on.

 

The deal between HB Studios and the PGA Tour appears to only cover courses and potentially sponsors, but not players themselves. The financial terms of the licensing agreement were not disclosed. The deal was brokered by CAA Sports, which is the sports division of the mega-talent agency.

 

The first Golf Club game launched in 2014, with a sequel arriving in 2017. Those games were praised in particular for their course-creation tools, but as mentioned, they lacked a wider appeal due to how they did not have the PGA Tour license. The third game is coming out in August.

 

The PGA Tour's licensing director Matt Iofredo told GolfChannel.com that the tour enjoyed a "long-term successful partnership" with EA, adding that the split was amicable. He told the site that video games are a good way to help grow golf as a sport, and that's why he's happy to see the PGA Tour's licensing deal go to a new company.

"The hope is that you start playing the video game and it piques your interest in golf in general and then maybe you want to attend an event, maybe you want to tune in on TV or one of the digital platforms, or maybe you want to go out to a driving range and hit balls and eventually go play," Iofredo said.

 

EA once enjoyed a lot of success in the licensed golf game market, thanks in part to Tiger Woods. But after losing Woods, the franchise went on a mini hiatus before getting resurrected in 2015 with a new game called Rory McIlroy PGA Tour. The game received generally poor reviews, and EA never released another major licensed home console game. Rory McIlroy PGA Tour will be removed from digital marketplaces this week, presumably due to its expired licensing deal.

 

So this is really good news.

 

First of all it's removing a golden goose from EA. Now if only they'd lose the FIFA or NFL licenses they might actually have to start making games that will sell based on their quality rather than outright depend on the licenses to fleece people interested in those specific sports.

 

Second of all it's going to someone with some dev that has a passion for making the games as well as pushing the boundaries of what to expect from a golf game. Creating golf courses and sharing them to be played by other players for example.

 

Thirdly, if you look at the text, it says that the license does not include golf personalities. This means that we're likely to see Justin Thomas Golf or whatever deals can be struck. More golf games means more innovation.

 

I'm under no illusion that FIFA or NFL are suddenly going to break ties with EA because they're making bank from those games, but how one company has held a monoploy for so long without been challenged is kind of crazy. I think it's stupid that you can't make a sports game with real names and likenesses without having the license. It stymies and stagnates the market because people are always going to buy the one that has Messi or Brady on the boxart, even if it's not really any good. When you look back to when there were lots of sports games (PS1 seemed to be like the last hurrah that used all the stuff I'm talking about, I might be wrong there?) when you had Actua, Virtua, Power, Three Lions and a few others as well as FIFA and ISS. The monopoly the FIFA license has on gaming has killed it like it's killed the NFL, NHL, NBA games.

 

Not that I give a shit about playing any of these sports games, but I care for the quality and choice for people that choose to play them. Competition drives innovation and overall quality. When you don't have that, you can just rest on your laurels and watch the cash roll in like EA have. Hopefully this changing of hands for the PGA will reinvigorate the market in that particular field.

[DisturbedSwan]

Origin Access Premier Launching July 30th

 

Quote

 

EA is launching Origin Access Premier, its new unlimited PC gaming subscription service, next week. The service will go live on Monday July 30th, CFO Blake Jorgensen said during the company’s quarterly earnings call (via Variety), and will cost $14.99 a month or $99.99 a year.

 

EA already has a $29.99-a-year PC downloads service called Origin Access, as well as the similar EA Access plan for Xbox One, but subscribers to those have to wait several months for new titles to come to the “vault” of available EA games. (FIFA 18, for example, still hasn’t been added.) Origin Access Premier, on the other hand, will let subscribers download every new EA title five days before its official release date, as well as all the titles from the back catalog. 

 

The service may make sense, then, for anyone who expects to play two or more EA PC titles at launch over the course of a year and is unconcerned with traditional notions of “ownership,” since you lose access to the titles once your subscription lapses. This is perhaps a better fit for EA than anyone else, given the company’s focus on annual or biennial series like FIFA, Madden, and Battlefield where the majority of the player base migrates to each new release. 

 

The $14.99 monthly fee could also be a good way to test games that you’re unsure you’d want to play for more than a few weeks. If all you want out of Battlefield V is to blast through its presumably short single-player campaign, for example, or if you don’t think you’ll be playing Anthem long-term, you could sign up to Origin Access Premier for a month and save $45 while checking out everything else on the service. Origin Access also recently started to add titles from publishers other than EA, such as Warner Bros’ Batman Arkham series.

 

EA remains the only major third-party publisher to offer a subscription like this, though Microsoft is doing essentially the same thing within its Xbox Game Pass, which now includes day-one access to every new Microsoft first-party title. The new business model could either attract extra revenue from customers that would normally spend less than the subscription fee on the company’s games in a given year, or expand DLC and microtransaction revenue by increasing the player base of each title.

 

 

[DisturbedSwan]

Jade Raymond leaves EA

 

Quote

Electronic Arts has a new shake-up in its Montreal studio today, as Motive studio founder Jade Raymond is leaving EA and a new executive is taking over.

Samantha Ryan, who runs EA’s mobile, Maxis, and BioWare studios, will now add responsibility for Motive in Montreal as well. She will oversee all of EA’s North American studios, with the exception of Respawn and EA Sports.

 

[DisturbedSwan]

 

You’ve gotta doff your cap to EA and Respawn for that, incredibly impressive. ?

[mmmark]

When it goes back down are they also responsible for that?

 

It’s good for them but that’s how the market works..

[Hendo]

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2019-03-26-ea-confirms-its-laying-off-around-350-employees

 

”Anything Activision can do, we have to copy”.

[Sly Reflex]

https://www.gamesradar.com/dragon-age-4-becomes-biowares-next-big-focus-as-anthem-loses-its-lead-creators/

 

Bad news. Both for Anthem and Dragon Age. Dragon Age especially doesn't need to be a live service game. EA seem to be super blinkered on what players want out of those franchises.