EA you’re already known as the worst, you don’t need to prove the point any more…
Between them, Ubisoft, and Blizzard/Activision, it’s been a frantic race to the bottom.
EA to my knowledge just has shitty business practices. Ubisoft at a minimum had a culture of sexual harrassers, possibly assaulters. Blizzard certainly had rapists. Ubisoft also with the pioneering always online DRM for single player games getting back to the games portion of their evils
Bethesda still manages to stay in the “honorable mention” category.
Man, EA just fully doesn’t give a shit about making games anymore, eh?
They care very much about making games that get bought.
Years ago there was an rpg based around skittles. Yes skittles. It was a banger, fun as hell. It also flopped because absolutely-fucking no one wants to play an advertisement.
Listen here EA - the world fucking sucks, no one is fucking happy. Can you just focus on making fun fucking things and not take a giant enshitification all over the one things most of us have to keep us from being on top of a water tower with a high powered rifle? Can we have ONE FUCKING THING??!
Weirdly enough, there’s been A FEW of these types of games that were based either on a specific product or a specific brand, and they were for the most part, weirdly well done for the times they released in and actually sorta fun.
Off the top of my head, Pepsiman for a specific product and the whole lot of Lego games if we’re talking about a whole product line.
I think that whole genre is called advergames
Candystand.com games went crazy back in the early 2000’s
I am genuinely surprised none of the freaks around here have mentioned the KFC dating sim yet.
Sometimes I forget that the LEGO games are just really fancy ads.
That Nerf clone of Unreal Tournament was dope
The Dungeons and Dragons idle game has a champion that is composed of Nerds candy pieces. It’s actually a fun character concept because you can switch the nerds around to different colors, each one with a different class that changes how their mechanics work. But it’s just so weird seeing candy you can eat alongside Drizzt Do’urden that I never use them.
Unfortunately, Andrew Wilson needs more money to purchase more kidnapped children from Asia.
Ventrue Princes gotta Ventrue Prince.
The packaging for the game really tried to hide it was an advertisement game. Title is Darkened Skye which says nothing about it being a skittles game.
Apparently the singular of skittles is “Skittles” according to that game
Cool Spot was my jam but I still drank Sprite
If the game is not good on its own and requires ads to be profitable… Then it’s not worth buying anyway
Thinking in terms of “need” is wrong for a business. They aren’t there to make a good product and the money is just to cover all the costs. Their goal is profit maximization. If there’s profit they could be extracting, but aren’t, they won’t make the numbers bigger and the shareholders will be sad.
Ads are a gas. They expand to fill all available space. If there’s a place an ad COULD go, then it WILL go there eventually.
They could offer it for free instead with that.
Free games with MTX and ads and shit are all the rage anyway
Im still baffled by all the money some games make off cosmetics.
Cosmetics in paid loot boxes are a serious issue, but if you can make money to help pay for your game with non paid lootbox cosmetics, all the more power to ya, but i don’t understand it hah.
I can’t wait to shoot my way around war torn half destroyed cities with pristine advertising signs in the next Battlefield.
“I love it! That’s what’s been missing the whole time!” --EA Shareholders
Honestly, anyone buying EA games deserve it.
Running through a bombed out kitchen in a ‘call of battle strike’ game, hesitate when I see the oven is full of condoms and the cabinets full of luxury watches.
You now have 300 condoms in your inventory and an intriguing side mission with your fellow soldiers.
Fitgirlblockorigin
Finally!
If there’s one thing EA’s gaming lacked, it was an opportunity to accidentally click on something that tried to charge my credit card.
Whenever they do something like this it’s just a nail in the coffin for me and I am that much less incentivized to ever buy their games
TV timeouts during the quarters of Madden games. They’ll do a skippable halftime recap then 5 minutes of unskippable ads. Make it like a real NFL broadcast.
Didn’t we stop allowing overt advertising in movies and music videos for a reason?
When did that happen?
So we sort of did but not for the reasons you’d think. Not for the reasons I thought at least.
Specifically there used to be a time when there was ad placement in movies and tv literally all the time. But more often than not now a days this doesn’t happen that way because companies that have trade marked logos or symbols don’t want to allow their products to be used without getting paid a licensing fee and companies that would use this kind of product placement don’t want to pay the licensing fee which is why in the late 80’s and early 90’s there was a rise in blurring logos and brand names in media. There’s also the risk of certain licensing agreements not being legitimate for certain markets which can lead to blurring of the same type or it’s newer counterpart which involves using stickers or off brand styling instead.
But also some other countries do ban it. China apparently instituted such a ban in 2011.
But anyway I got confused because around the same time there was a ban on certain products being allowed to advertise in movies and directly in tv shows (cigarettes/tabacco products, alcoholic beverage brands, guns etc). I was exhausted and wrong and that’s on me.
“Fun” to see them go for it again. I remember they had ads in Battlefield 2 for Nvidia and Intel. I can’t quite remember if they said they wanted the ads to be dynamic all the way back then as well or if the one-and-done billboard were intended.
I remember when EA was the Goat back in the Commodore 64 days. How far they’ve fallen.
Greatest Offering Around Then?
Because “greatest of all time” implies it’s also great now… which is a time.
It does not. “Greatest of all time back in the day” does not imply it’s still the greatest. By your logic the future is also a time. As we don’t know it yet, nothing can ever be the greatest of all time, making the term meaningless.
“All time.”
So the term is meaningless for you? That’s fine.
Again, if something was the greatest of all time, it does not mean it still has to be. Otherwise the term is meaningless as even greater things might come in the future.
Your definition in your own words defines it as meaningless.
If you only take it in the most literal sense, sure. A pointless exercise, don’t you think? Sometimes words have a funny way of meaning more than one thing. For most this concept works and GOAT can be meaningful. No, I’m not talking about the animal. Just to be clear.
GOAT = Greatest of All Time, right?
Why not just say “great?”
Makes “of all time” meaningless if you overuse it.
Allow me to invoke Eddie Izzard… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rYT0YvQ3hs
It’s only meaningless if you’re pedantic.
It obviously means the greatest of all time so far because at the time you make the statement you cannot judge what hasn’t happened yet.
It gets more complicated when you’re saying it about a company or game in the past but I still think that it has meaning. It could mean that at the time, they were the greatest of all time (up until that point in time) but it could also mean that at this point in time that past version of EA was the greatest of all time (up until now, which is beyond the time that that version of EA existed).
We can’t know what’s going to be the greatest of all time in the future, only what’s the greatest of all time so far.
Does our knowledge of a thing preclude it from being? Is reality subjective or objective? If Bill Smithers of 34 Poplar Way in Schenectady, NY (sorry, Bill) said Ms. Pac-Man was the GOAT of video games make it true because he said it before his passing in 2011 after playing a 49 hour raiding session in World of Warcraft?
Who’s got that award?
Very hot take but maybe Nintendo? I know, I know. They suck in some regards. But some of their games are still innovative.
Fun take but considering how they treat their fans I wouldn’t give them that award.
A game developer with a consistently high hit rate in their output? Kojima, maybe? FromSoft? We’ve seen a lot of empires fall in recent years.
I’d add Don’t Nod, at least from what I’ve seen.
Really? They’ve been mostly misses from what I can tell. They don’t review very well or sell many copies for most of their games. Recent reporting indicates that Tencent no longer wants to finance them, and their future is shaky.
Seriously? I’m only about halfway through the Life is Strange series, but it’s been fantastic so far and Lost Records just came out last year and looks amazing. To each his own, but I hope they are able to crowdfund or some other alternative if Tencent drops them.
