×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

EA Posts $16 Million Loss, Looks to Next-Gen Games

Zonk posted more than 7 years ago | from the big-get-smaller dept.

The Almighty Buck 85

kukyfrope writes "Electronic Arts recently released its preliminary financial results for the fourth quarter and fiscal year ended March 31, 2006. While net revenue was up 16 percent to $641 million for the fourth quarter, the leading video game publisher suffered a net loss of $16 million. During the same period last year EA posted net income of $8 million. 'We are well into the console transition and now have more than 30 next generation games in development,' said Warren Jenson, Chief Financial and Administrative Officer."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

85 comments

GNAA (0, Troll)

BisexualPuppy (914772) | more than 7 years ago | (#15265065)

About GNAA: GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the first organization which gathers GAY NIGGERS from all over America and abroad for one common goal - being GAY NIGGERS. Are you GAY? Are you a NIGGER? Are you a GAY NIGGER? If you answered "Yes" to all of the above questions, then GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) might be exactly what you've been looking for! Join GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) today, and enjoy all the benefits of being a full-time GNAA member. GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the fastest-growing GAY NIGGER community with THOUSANDS of members all over United States of America and the World! You, too, can be a part of GNAA if you join today! Why not? It's quick and easy - only 3 simple steps! * First, you have to obtain a copy of GAYNIGGERS FROM OUTER SPACE THE MOVIE and watch it. You can download the movie (~130mb) using BitTorrent. * Second, you need to succeed in posting a GNAA First Post on slashdot.org, a popular "news for trolls" website. * Third, you need to join the official GNAA irc channel #GNAA on irc.gnaa.us, and apply for membership. Talk to one of the ops or any of the other members in the channel to sign up today! Upon submitting your application, you will be required to submit links to your successful First Post, and you will be tested on your knowledge of GAYNIGGERS FROM OUTER SPACE. If you are having trouble locating #GNAA, the official GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA irc channel, you might be on a wrong irc network. The correct network is NiggerNET, and you can connect to irc.gnaa.us as our official server. Follow this link if you are using an irc client such as mIRC. If you have mod points and would like to support GNAA, please moderate this post up. .________________________________________________. | ______________________________________._a,____ | Press contact: | _______a_._______a_______aj#0s_____aWY!400.___ | Gary Niger | __ad#7!!*P____a.d#0a____#!-_#0i___.#!__W#0#___ | gary_niger@gnaa.us | _j#'_.00#,___4#dP_"#,__j#,__0#Wi___*00P!_"#L,_ | GNAA Corporate Headquarters | _"#ga#9!01___"#01__40,_"4Lj#!_4#g_________"01_ | 143 Rolloffle Avenue | ________"#,___*@`__-N#____`___-!^_____________ | Tarzana, California 91356 | _________#1__________?________________________ | | _________j1___________________________________ | All other inquiries: | ____a,___jk_GAY_NIGGER_ASSOCIATION_OF_AMERICA_ | Enid TBD | ____!4yaa#l___________________________________ | enid_tbd@gnaa.us | ______-"!^____________________________________ | GNAA World Headquarters ` _______________________________________________' 160-0023 Japan Tokyo-to Shinjuku-ku Nishi-Shinjuku 3-20-2

Re:GNAA (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15265108)

YOU FAIL IT

Re:GNAA (0, Redundant)

SSCGWLB (956147) | more than 7 years ago | (#15265446)

Wow, he has a perfect score of -1s. Is there any way the taco master can boot this moron?

~nate

Contributors (4, Insightful)

Kelz (611260) | more than 7 years ago | (#15265091)

A couple factors probably contributed to this:

The lack of an established next-gen console: The X360 had shortages across the board from manufacturing, and EA didn't have enough launch titles. People with the system bought a very high percentage of the games that were availible, but EA didn't have enough to really take advantage of that.

The labor lawsuit. The settlement probably put them back quite a bit, as well as hurting their "efficiency" by having to let developers work less hours, and paying for the settlement.

Re:Contributors (1)

Jarnis (266190) | more than 7 years ago | (#15265128)

Plus the fact that EA released a lot of crappy (and buggy) shit last year.

Re:Contributors (1)

thaerin (937575) | more than 7 years ago | (#15265248)

I completely agree. Me and my wallet will never be lured by any EA title again, so long as they don't go and buy out somebody like Blizzard. The problem is that there seems to be a lot of companies now following in EA's footsteps when it comes to release quality and time to patch serious flaws (i.e. Activision / Ininity Ward for Call of Duty 2).

Re:Contributors (1)

GundamFan (848341) | more than 7 years ago | (#15269241)

Don't worry Blizzard was bought by Vivendi Universal so EA can't have them... of course that means they will be driven into unprofitability by bad management an turned into a brand for releasing buggy and uninspired first day abandonware(see Serra).

Yeah... the PC gameing industry is in trouble right now and the sucess of WoW will only lower the amount of creativity.

Even now people (and not a minortiy) look at a game like Oblivion and say "why would you play a single player game? You can't PvP or show off your loot." It is really sad when carefully (hur hur bugs... I know) crafted content is less demanded that "Pwning newbs".

Sorry for the rant... at least these mega developers seem to be colapsing under there own weight... maybe that will snap everyone out of this manditory sequel nonsense.

Re:Contributors (1)

objwiz (166131) | more than 7 years ago | (#15265715)

plus they have shitty customer service. BF2 I had to buy the European maps to get the latest patch. If I didnt get the latest patch I wasnt able to play online on ranked servers anymore because they had the latest patch.

Re:Contributors (1)

cluke (30394) | more than 7 years ago | (#15269005)

Yeah, their latest wheeze is turning off the servers for their online console games as soon as the new version is released (and being EA, this is only a year). Despite the fact that the games are hosted peer-to-peer anyway, they just provided a (crappy) matching game lobby service.

For example - Burnout 3, no longer playable online.
SSX 3 - No longer playable online. Best one about this is, SSX On Tour (the sequel) does not even have an online element!

These are the actions of a company that doesn't give a toss about their customers.

Re:Contributors (3, Insightful)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 7 years ago | (#15265183)

I think it has more to do with the quality of games produced. They can't expect to make money year after year releasing Madden, NHL games, and Movie spinoffs which don't really bring anything new to the gaming world.

Re:Contributors (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15265319)

Problem is "Madden, NHL games, and Movie spinoffs" have been enormously profitable even up to last year. So you need a better reason than "everyone suddenly and uninmously got sick of them". Especially when there's very obvious external factors like the next-gen consoles.

Sony has basically Osborned themselves with all their BS about the Playstation 3 being out in Spring 06 (and now it might be Spring 07).

Re:Contributors (1)

supabeast! (84658) | more than 7 years ago | (#15268439)

"They can't expect to make money year after year releasing Madden, NHL games, and Movie spinoffs which don't really bring anything new to the gaming world."

EA could make money on those games if they did a good job making them - hell, EA was one of the companies that proved how well sequels can do, and good movie tie-in games have a historuy of success going back to the beginnings of the game industry. EAs problems stem from relying on hype from gaming publications to sell games - but consumers are quickly catching on that the gaming press will lavish accolades and awards on some truly shitty games to keep big advertisers happy, so it's time for EA to wake up and start hiring better designers.

Re:Contributors (1)

The-Bus (138060) | more than 7 years ago | (#15270773)

I think it has more to do with the quality of games produced. They can't expect to make money year after year releasing Madden...

Except Madden is consistently one of the best-selling console games. It's a cash-cow for EA. If anything makes them money, it's Madden.

The question is, will they capture the players who plaid only the NFL2K series previously? From the stats I looked at I didn't see a marked increase.

Re:Contributors (1)

otis wildflower (4889) | more than 7 years ago | (#15265223)

I wonder how much money WoW and other MMORPGs have siphoned out of the gaming market...

Re:Contributors (1)

ThosLives (686517) | more than 7 years ago | (#15265972)

Uhh...can you rephrase the statment? WoW and other MMORPGs are *part of* the gaming market, so they can't siphon money out of it.

If you mean, how much market share did they take from console game producers due to a market advantange, then your statement makes sense. Or, if you asked how much higher energy prices took out of the gaming market, that would make sense.

Re:Contributors (1)

Mursk (928595) | more than 7 years ago | (#15266561)

Look at it this way: if you spend $15 for a subscription fee (or however much) instead of buying a $60 game that month, then that's $45 that could be considered "siphoned off."

I have no idea how widespread this is (I don't play WoW myself), but that's how I interpret the question, and I think it makes a valid point.

Efficiency (1)

Null Nihils (965047) | more than 7 years ago | (#15265456)

"as well as hurting their "efficiency" by having to let developers work less hours"

I think you are being sarcastic here, but I felt I should point out: As I've heard from the ea_spouse blog and many other places, the way that EA uses their employees is not "efficient". Just because they had them working like dogs from 9am - 10pm all week long does not mean that they were being efficient. There are quite a few reasons for this, such as the fact that an employee is only really worth their wage when they are rested and energetic enough to be fully productive. Also several things to do with the environment (or lack thereof) EA provided for their employees, and their style of management, are factors that I would think lead to poor efficiency.

What EA did with their employees may have worked had whips and granite blocks been involved, but these are creative and intellectual workers, so EA's attempt to maximize how much they get from an employee was extremely counterproductive.

Perhaps now that the lawsuit has clued them in, EA will change their employee management style to something that is actually efficient, as opposed to just unnecessary brutality. For the sake of their employees, let us hope so.

Re:Efficiency (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15265637)

As someone who has worked at EA for a long, long time I can only stare blankly at dimwits like you.

Buy/play or don't buy/don't play EA games. No one fucking cares. But give your moronic lectures on game company management based on 'stuff you read on teh Net' a rest.

Re:Efficiency (1)

Null Nihils (965047) | more than 7 years ago | (#15265760)

No need to be rude. I'm not claiming I know how to run EA or anything. I'm just saying what I've heard and how it makes sense from my perspective: Treating employees like slave labor probably won't get you huge productivity gains in the long run. According to the well-known ea_spouse blog, EA can be very rough on its employees. And according to the recent lawsuit, it has been found by the court that EA hasn't been treating their employees fairly.

If you work at EA and think your experiences say something to the contrary, please feel free to elaborate and enlighten us. But don't insult me for putting in my two cents.

Re:Efficiency (1)

Mistshadow2k4 (748958) | more than 7 years ago | (#15266938)

If you are an EA representative, then the attitude towards a potential custoemr you displayed in your post proved his point spectacularly.

Profit. Loss. So what? (1)

onion2k (203094) | more than 7 years ago | (#15265098)

There's far too much emphasis places on whether a company recorded a profit or a loss in any one year by the media. By itself a profit or a loss is largely meaningless. In this example there's a clear justifiable reason why EA posted a loss. It was expected. The time to worry is when a company posts an unexpected loss, or a series of losses. This is not "stuff that matters".

Re:Profit. Loss. So what? (2, Funny)

iocat (572367) | more than 7 years ago | (#15265195)

By itself a profit or a loss is largely meaningless.

I keep trying to decide... do you work for General Motors or the Federal Government?

Re:Profit. Loss. So what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15265549)

Besides, it is net loss and not gross which does not necessarily mean they are in trouble. I have always been told that it is better to look in trouble, you don't have everyone on your back (feds, employees, etc).

Re:Profit. Loss. So what? (1)

Gannoc (210256) | more than 7 years ago | (#15265730)

There's far too much emphasis places on whether a company recorded a profit or a loss in any one year by the media. By itself a profit or a loss is largely meaningless.

Someone grew up during the .com boom...

Re:Profit. Loss. So what? (3, Interesting)

hambonewilkins (739531) | more than 7 years ago | (#15265806)

I agree. And even worse is attention focused on earnings per share (EPS). Both factors the company can completely tweak at will, in a way. Revenue and growth in revenue is far, far more important.

For example, lets say halfway through the quarter EA realizes its R&D costs are way too high and that their profits will be lower because of it. If investors are all jazzed about profit/loss, they could fire their work force or stop R&D in order to show a profit.

It's a relatively meaningless number unless, as was stated, it is a long trend of losses or it was completely unexpected (and without a decent explanation).

Re:Profit. Loss. So what? (1)

Breakfast Pants (323698) | more than 7 years ago | (#15276001)

Wow, so as long as I run a company that never expects anything but losses I'm on top of my game? Whether the company expected it or not is not the only factor.

That's strange... (3, Informative)

dalmiroy2k (768278) | more than 7 years ago | (#15265173)

I readed the article and they don't seem to blame piracy about their loses...

Re:That's strange... (1)

Winterblink (575267) | more than 7 years ago | (#15265216)

Does that matter? They're still blaming everything else, except for what counts. That is, their complete inability to develop new and interesting games, and their focus on regurgitating the same game every year and/or looking to movie franchises to help them out.

I'm sure EA's still a great company, they have a lot of awesome technical ability and the ability to wield it on all different platforms. But someone there needs to remember that technical prowess is useless without creativity in this industry.

Re:That's strange... (1)

Shadarr (11622) | more than 7 years ago | (#15266773)

I'm sure EA's still a great company...
How so? They make crappy games, they aren't making money and their employees hate them enough to sue. What could possibly qualify them as a "great" company? EA has absorbed some great companies (Westwood, Bullfrog, etc) but they didn't rub off.

Re:That's strange... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15266195)

Sorry, you seem to be confusing extortionist crime rings with games companies. The two rarely overlap.

Who would want to pirate Madden 2036? (1)

Myria (562655) | more than 7 years ago | (#15268656)

Who would want to even pirate Madden 2036? Sure, warez collectors have everything, but most pirates tend to copy good games =)

Melissa

EA Blew It This Time Around (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15265241)

Back when the Dreamcast was just about to launch to a few months before the PS2 was to hit the shelves the word throughout EA was essentially "We're not wasting our time with the Dreamcast".

No matter what people think of EA's management they know how to stick with the winners in the console market over the past decade plus. They really blew it this time around by devoting resources to what everyone here knows is just another Dreamcast in the Xbox 360.

Thankfully E3 is about here and the PS3 will hit the shelves a few months later and we can finally move on to the real start of next gen and making money. Pity about the Revolution naming fiasco - that hit us by surprise. One console future make our lives simpler with the PS3.

Re:EA Blew It This Time Around (1)

caffeinatedOnline (926067) | more than 7 years ago | (#15265431)

...what everyone here knows is just another Dreamcast in the Xbox 360 Yeah, we all know how Microsoft throws billions into a product only to go bankrupt by it...

Re:EA Blew It This Time Around (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15265587)

"Yeah, we all know how Microsoft throws billions into a product only to go bankrupt by it..."

Wow, that was dumb.

Re:EA Blew It This Time Around (1)

Jearil (154455) | more than 7 years ago | (#15271545)

not really. MS has over $14 billion [wikipedia.org] in operating income. They might not be making a profit, but they're far from going bankrupt.

MS makes a shit load of money off of windows and office. They actually do have money to throw around getting into other markets if they want without going broke.

Re:EA Blew It This Time Around (1)

bigman2003 (671309) | more than 7 years ago | (#15266286)

It's amazing how many anonymous cowards post bad things about the 360.

But, if our good friend the A/C would actually read the articles he may have noticed the Gamefly 'most popular rentals' chart next to the story.

The chart lists the 10 top rentals for the week ending May 1. 6 of those games are for the 360.

There must be some interest...

Re:EA Blew It This Time Around (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15267271)

No serious competition for months and the best they can do is 6 out of 10?

Video Games Crash 2.0 (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15265244)

I predict that we are heading for a crash like the one that occurred in the 1983, and killed off most games publishers.

Back then, games had got too staid and predictable, being nothing but cash-ins on existing IP (E.T. is the prime example). Competition within the business was fierce, with home computers such as the C64 slashing their prices and console prices being slashed to compete.

We are now seeing a similar situation. There is a ridiculous price-war going on, with Microsoft and Sony both selling their next-gen consoles at below-cost. They are predicting to lose $1 Billion each on hardware sales and marketing next year.

Also, games are losing their mass appeal. Surveys show that the number of gamers is no longer increasing, and may actually be decreasing, while the cost of producing games is skyrocketing. Games that are based on original I.P. are rare, with sequels, movie cash-ins and sports games comprising the bulk of products.

Microsoft and Sony can't keep cutting each others' throats forever, and the games industry definitely needs to expand and capture new audiences if it is to survive.

Interestingly, it was Nintendo who saved the industry last time, by coming up with a product that was different, and by conceiving a revolutionary (but controversial) business model. I think it is worth watching them at E3 to see what their plans are for the next console generation.

Re:Video Games Crash 2.0 (1)

Pulse_Instance (698417) | more than 7 years ago | (#15265990)

I had to undo my moderation for this topic because I need to find out if you have been under a rock for the past few months or just don't pay attention to anything that has the word Nintendo in it. They have this product that is now called the Wii which is their planned "Revolution" with which they plan on make a massive change to the way that games are being played, this is the next generation plan from Nintendo. It would make sense that they wouldn't change their current business model too much, as it has worked for them for years. They have consistently made profits and if I remember correctly they haven't sold consoles at a loss (I could be wrong on that though).

Re:Video Games Crash 2.0 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15268434)

Yes, I know. But I didn't want to overstate that fact, lest I be called a shill.

Re:Video Games Crash 2.0 (1)

revlayle (964221) | more than 7 years ago | (#15266159)

The first video game crash's circumstances are, however, very different than what is going on now.

Originally, Atari was the only publisher of games for their 2600 console. When disgruntled developers from Atari wanted to start their own game company (this company being Activision), they just went ahead and did just that and made games for the 2600. Atari attempted to sue Activision for making carts for their system (reason being that it was supposedly be proprietary specification - not intended for 3rd party development - etc.. etc... blah blah). Atari lost the case, which opened up the flood gates for every basement programmer jockey to release all sort fo games. Games flooded onto the market, some were good (like from Imagic, for example) and some were just terrible AND some were even just rip-off or pirate copies with a few graphic changes in the game assets. Shit appeared on the market, everyone was trying to undercut everyone, and no one wanted to buy any of the games anymore.

There are *some* similarities going on here. Disintrest is some of the games. Lack of some quality control. However, quality control is arguably better than slew of crap released for the 2600 in its later days before the crash. Games that are relased have to be approved for development though the console manufacturer (dev kit licensings, media purchasing... depends on the console maker), something that Nintendo spear-headed with the NES which solved the problem of anyone releasing ANYTHING they wanted.

Will we have a crash? Maybe, but it will be NOTHING like it was in 83. Video games were still a pricey and "new-fangled" luxury 20+ years ago. Now it a very commonplace activity and part of the current social tech culture. I think it might be a temporary slump.

Re:Video Games Crash 2.0 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15267153)

Dvorack, is that you?

Re:Video Games Crash 2.0 (2, Insightful)

badasscat (563442) | more than 7 years ago | (#15268273)

I predict that we are heading for a crash like the one that occurred in the 1983, and killed off most games publishers.

Yeah, you and every other naysayer since 1985.

Back then, games had got too staid and predictable, being nothing but cash-ins on existing IP (E.T. is the prime example). Competition within the business was fierce, with home computers such as the C64 slashing their prices and console prices being slashed to compete.

We are now seeing a similar situation.


Huh? So Dell is is slashing their prices and MS and Sony are slashing their console prices to compete?

There is very little going on now that is similar to what was happening in 1983. Back then, there was a mass migration away from game consoles to cheap computer systems to play games. The exact opposite is occurring now.

Interestingly, it was Nintendo who saved the industry last time, by coming up with a product that was different, and by conceiving a revolutionary (but controversial) business model.

What "revolutionary" business model was this? Selling video games and systems?

Nintendo came in and did exactly what Atari, Coleco and Mattel had been doing just 2 years before. They just did it with a new product that hadn't yet become stale, and that had new games on it - including the ace up their sleeve, Super Mario Bros. But there was nothing at all revolutionary about the Famicom or NES. The only innovation Nintendo put into the NES was in realizing that there was still a video game market in the US at all.

Let's not forget that Atari survived the crash of 1983-84 and in fact continued selling the Atari 2600 until 1991, alongside the 7800. It's kind of disengenuous to say the crash "killed off" most game publishers, because there were really only about six or seven at the time. Atari, Coleco, Mattel, Activision, Imagic, Sega, and some other, smaller publishers. Of those, Atari, Activision and Imagic survived, and Activision came out of the crash stronger than it had ever been. They gobbled up Imagic and a few smaller companies, released a little PC game called Mechwarrior and the rest is history.

Which is not to belittle the crash. But there are a lot of misconceptions surrounding it and one of those is that it completely destroyed the game industry. It didn't. Japanese publishers like Sega came out of it basically unscathed, and both the largest first-party and third-party publishers also survived.

These days, the companies involved in the game industry are so large that a downturn like that of 1983-1984 would basically be a blip on the radar. MS has already absorbed losses with their Xbox division that are far larger than anything Atari ever went through during the crash. Atari lost $500 million in 1983 - Microsoft has lost $4 billion so far on Xbox (including $388 million in the last quarter alone - 75% of what Atari lost in the entire first year of the great video game crash). We are dealing now with corporations that are both willing and able to weather these sorts of storms, whereas the industry in the early days was not nearly as hardy.

That's not to say things won't ever be difficult for certain developers or manufacturers. But that's true of any industry. The strong survive; the weak die or get absorbed by larger competitors. This is just the way business works; it is not unique to the game industry.

Re:Video Games Crash 2.0 (1)

Hylis (956571) | more than 7 years ago | (#15281001)

People play more online on the only real massively networked device: the PC. People play longer to PC games than the 10 hours next gen style You are reading this from a computer where you can download a good game next gen is old stuff, crash is coming

Licensing? (1)

NJVil (154697) | more than 7 years ago | (#15265485)

I wonder just how much of it had to do with EA's various sports-related deals. The rumors of a $1B exclusivity contract with the NFL a few years back certainly raised some eyebrows at the time. Could this small bump in their fiscal affairs have anything to do with it?

Re:Licensing? (1)

BlackRookSix (943957) | more than 7 years ago | (#15265558)

From what I have seen and heard, a lot of people are boycotting their sports games that have an exclusive license. Why? Because it is anti-competition, and most gamers I know won't put up with that crap.

Maybe, just maybe, this industry is starting to vote with it's wallet a bit more, and the bigger players are feeling the heat.

Re:Licensing? (1)

drsquare (530038) | more than 7 years ago | (#15268650)

You're joking right?

Exclusive licences INCREASE sales.

Re:Licensing? (1)

k_187 (61692) | more than 7 years ago | (#15268673)

yes, but if the sales increase is less than what the license cost, whoops... I dont' know which is the case here, but it is possible that it hurt them.

Games sales drop dramatically because of Wars... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15265506)

Why play FPS games when you can enlist and go over to Iraq?

Surround Sound, real realism, no worries about GPUs not keeping up with the rendering details...

EA has been out gunned by Reality.

EA Sports... (1)

192939495969798999 (58312) | more than 7 years ago | (#15265510)

I guess the '07 lineup of sports games just wasnt that markedly different from the '06 lineup, and none of their fanbase bought it. I am a bit surprised it took this long to happen, but I'm not surprised at all, it should happen to any company that revises essentially the same set of games over and over again.

Re:EA Sports... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15265627)

I guess the '07 lineup of sports games just wasnt that markedly different from the '06 lineup..

Yes it was! They have updated the team rosters and players statistics! If you don't think that is innovation, then please explain to me what is.

Re:EA Sports... (1)

93,000 (150453) | more than 7 years ago | (#15265659)

Don't forget the more impressively rendered arm-hair on the players. Few things can enhance a game like well-rendered arm hair.

Re:EA Sports... (1)

Pulse_Instance (698417) | more than 7 years ago | (#15266024)

With the new online consoles they should release the next line of Sports games updates with the ability to have the rosters for new years downloaded. I bet they could even sell them for less than $10 and make way more profit this way than through developing a whole new game and all the costs associated with that. Will they do this, probably not, but it would I hope they do as it would free up some of their developers to create better games.

Maybe it's time for an original game? (1)

malsdavis (542216) | more than 7 years ago | (#15265521)

How about EA produce an original, decently funded, game?

You know, like the ones all those companies that EA has eaten up use to make!
I think it's strange how a company with so much cash behind it (far more than almost anyone else), can't find a few bucks to produce a game which hasn't been done at least 10,000 times before.

EA seem to suffer from a problem similar to the "Too many cooks spoil the broth" one, except in EA's case it's too many shareholders spoil the game!

..or a sports game that really reflects the sport? (1)

master_p (608214) | more than 7 years ago | (#15265721)

As a European, I love soccer. Well, I never had a good soccer game in PC, thanks to EA. Their interpretations of the sport was mediocre at best. They forced me to buy a PS2 so as that I could play ISS Pro.

Re:Maybe it's time for an original game? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15266471)

Its funny it used to be if you picked up an EA game you *KNEW* it would be *AWSOME*. These days you have about a 1 in 10 chance of it being just 'ok'. With the other 9 being crap or a remake of another 'ok' game.

Re:Maybe it's time for an original game? (1)

Mistshadow2k4 (748958) | more than 7 years ago | (#15266996)

Agreed. My husbad and I keep a long, long wish-list of games we want and buy one off that list generally once a month, in addition to an annual game shopping-spree when he gets his vacation pay. I noticed just two days that there wasn't a single EA game on that list. I'd buy an EA game if they put out a decent one, but none of them that sounded even slightly interesting stood up the harshest critics -- user reviews. We're the people they're aiming at, but they seem to be shooting blind.

Re:Maybe it's time for an original game? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15269073)

"How about EA produce an original, decently funded, game?"

They do! Black, for one. I'm guessing you'll complain that it's yet-another-FPS, but how about this: EA is also publishing Spore.

They make so many games that they can't fail to produce a few that anyone will like. Their average output may by crap but there's some gems mixed in there.

Re:Maybe it's time for an original game? (1)

malsdavis (542216) | more than 7 years ago | (#15269170)

Although I haven't actually played Black , it does appear to be just another 'latest graphics' Doom clone, with a highly interactive game enviroment (i.e. a half-life/Sin clone).

This is exactly what I mean, every FPS based game they produce is simply shoot the slightly more realistic baddies, and watch the slightly more realistic 'glass breaking after being shot' effects. Not to mention some of the idiotic weapons that get chucked in to try and seem original because every realistic weapon has been in literally hundreds of other similar FPS games.

Re:Maybe it's time for an original game? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15269414)

That's true of all FPSes though - it's a mature (aka stale) genre. It's not EAs fault any more than anyone else's... Same with racing games. It's been a problem with chess sims for even longer. Black was at least different enough to qualify as an interesting member of the genre.

I notice you didn't talk about Spore.

Re:Maybe it's time for an original game? (1)

malsdavis (542216) | more than 7 years ago | (#15269519)

But that is my point, the genre is stale, yet they pump all their big budgets and best teams at FPSs and Sports Sims (although I'm not complaining about sports sims because the genre still has a long way to go imho).

The new genre games however pretty much never get the sort of investment from EA that a game like Black gets.

Re:Maybe it's time for an original game? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15273671)

Fair enough.

30 games (4, Funny)

payndz (589033) | more than 7 years ago | (#15265551)

We are well into the console transition and now have more than 30 next generation games in development

Madden 2007, Madden 2008, Madden 2009, Madden 2010, Madden 2011...

Good. Fuck 'em. (1, Insightful)

Gannoc (210256) | more than 7 years ago | (#15265664)


I have nothing really insightful to say. I just hate EA.

Re:Good. Fuck 'em. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15266258)

Since The Godfather was featuring a sad version of gta3 engine, (i bought it since i like the movies) and LOTR 2 (Worst game ever, im 100% sure of it).
I feel pretty confident saying:

Game market is not crashing, EA is just getting what they deserve, they should be bankrupt, casterated, and forced to play their own shitty games, I know i sound like somone who made POSTAL, but seriously, try LOTR 2, im sure you will agree.

Re:Good. Fuck 'em. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15270004)

Yes, Fuck 'em. I also hate EA and the crap they produce.

Re:Good. Fuck 'em. (1)

code-e255 (670104) | more than 7 years ago | (#15271047)

Agreed.

EA don't make high-quality games, they just re-release the same old sh*t every year for the sake of making money. I bet none of the managers at EA are gamers or have a clue about games. They're just businessmen who are in it for the big bucks.

Re:Good. Fuck 'em. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15271739)

Case and point look at Ultima Online...

duh? (1)

joshetc (955226) | more than 7 years ago | (#15266990)

Who didn't see this coming? Over the summer / early autumn is usually when they release their plethora of sports titles. Not to mention the gazillion people holding out for the next gen consoles, why buy the game for PS2 when you can have it for xbox 360 / Wii / PS3? Right now is development season for the 2007 series of their titles, they are paying people to work on the games but not selling the games. I'd imagine they were at a loss or damn-close around this time in previous years.

Pricing (1)

BenjyD (316700) | more than 7 years ago | (#15268901)

Is the $60 (£50 here in the UK inc VAT!) price point really not affecting their sales as they claim? I don't own an XBox360, but I have a reasonable gaming budget and there is no way I'd pay that much for a game.

Curse you, EASpouse (2)

realinvalidname (529939) | more than 7 years ago | (#15269534)

You know what it is, it's those damn lazy programmers, only putting in 70 hour weeks, because they insist on having time for their precious little families... or sleep.

I Suggest (2, Funny)

Taulin (569009) | more than 7 years ago | (#15269654)

I suggest that EA does two things to make up the money. First, get rid of some programmers. They have way too many. Second, the programmers that stay should work a little over time. I mean, they are so lucky working for a oompany that puts out so many great games.

Thanks for your 20 hour days and your weekends (1)

heroine (1220) | more than 7 years ago | (#15271818)

Hope they're happy with the result of their sacrifices for their company.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...