Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Vapourware LOL ELECTRONIC ARTS: The EA Thread

Unkillable Cat

LEST WE FORGET
Patron
Joined
May 13, 2009
Messages
27,088
Codex 2014 Make the Codex Great Again! Grab the Codex by the pussy
There's no "we" here. I'm only a gamer in a strictly technical sense, namely that I play computer games.

In every other meaningful sense, I'm wholly disconnected from the industry and from mainstream gamers and gaming culture. The Codex is nearly my sole window into gaming news and what's going on in Popamole Land, I've never played even a single mobile game in my life, I only skim off the richest cream of the console crop (I'll buy a console after it's been out for years to play the handful of games that are genuinely worthwhile), and I'm extremely choosy about multiplayer games. Most of the games I enjoy are prestigious old skool affairs or their genuinely worthy successors, which is why we're all fucking here to begin with.

I don't feel any sense of membership or responsibility to the tribe known as "gamers."

Realistically, mainstream gamers have a built-in defense to SJWs: indifference. The best way to deal with SJWs is to not pay them any attention at all. The sole reason SJWs are currently causing problems is simply because some people don't follow this rule and actually take SJW gibberish seriously.

There's a 10 billion-post megathread about Gamergate in the gaming subforum and you'll find I have fewer than half a dozen posts in it, because the fact is that gaming "journalists" and SJW game developers were never going to produce anything of value anyway, so no great loss. That ouroboros will finishing eating itself, just give it time.

Yeahyeahyeah, I've heard you spout this nonsense before about how you're all better than the rest of us because of this or that pointless reason that you think is so important.

Your inverted form of virtue signalling isn't fooling anyone, and your denial is only fooling yourself. You're a regular poster on the Codex, therefore you're also a gamer. The handful of posters here that are actually exempt from that are also clinically insane.

Now shut up and get back to it. :)
 

Blaine

Cis-Het Oppressor
Patron
Joined
Oct 6, 2012
Messages
1,874,662
Location
Roanoke, VA
Grab the Codex by the pussy
Yeahyeahyeah, I've heard you spout this nonsense before about how you're all better than the rest of us because of this or that pointless reason that you think is so important.

On the contrary, I believe that my statement applies to the great majority of Codexers to some extent. I initially planned to word it that way, but ultimately decided to speak only for myself, although "which is why we're all fucking here to begin with" is a pretty strong hint that I wasn't thinking only of myself.

You've launched all-out diatribes at me before whenever you've decided that my arrogance and unwarranted sense of self-importance have gotten too out of hand for you to abide, but in each case your reasons for doing so have been misguided or outright wrong. It's a shame, because you're absolutely correct in thinking that I'm an arrogant bastard and misanthropist with a piss-poor attitude. If only you could choose the right battlefield, you might be able to hit one home and shame me into leaving the Codex forever for the first time.

You're a regular poster on the Codex, therefore you're also a gamer.

Nope. I'm not simply trying to escape the negative connotations of "gamer," you dim twat. I simply have only the most tenuous connection with what could reasonably be considered modern gamers and modern gaming culture. Frankly, the word itself makes me cringe a little every time I write, read, or hear it.
 
Last edited:

SwiftCrack

Arcane
Joined
Oct 3, 2012
Messages
1,836
Molyneux is still creative.

He just wants video games to be more than video games now which is kind of shit.

And somewhere down the line he got infected with weasel syndrome.
 

Gragt

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Nov 1, 2007
Messages
1,864,860
Location
Dans Ton Cul
Serpent in the Staglands Divinity: Original Sin
Molyneux had already started by the time he was at Bullfrog, though it got worse after he created Lionhead. He was already giving interviews and making wild claims about their games during the Bullfrog era, but it worked because for the most part Bullfrog made good games and more importantly those were often ground-breaking (think of Populous) so the Molyneux hype worked to their advantage—and there were those stunts such as organising competitions whose winner landed a job offer at Bullfrog. Plus, I believe the rest of the team helped to keep his enthusiasm in check and have him focus on more-or-less realistic goals with a bit of experimentation.

My guess, based on what I read and saw of that time, is that being the boss gave him far too much freedom at Lionhead, plus he was by then considered a legend whose words carried even more influence than during the Bullfrog days. No one was there to really control him and he was free to run wild with all his ground-breaking ideas—and he sure promised a lot! And let’s not forget he also got older, which probably exacerbated his negative behaviours.
 

Immortal

Arcane
In My Safe Space
Joined
Sep 13, 2014
Messages
5,062
Location
Safe Space - Don't Bulli
Molyneux had already started by the time he was at Bullfrog, though it got worse after he created Lionhead. He was already giving interviews and making wild claims about their games during the Bullfrog era, but it worked because for the most part Bullfrog made good games and more importantly those were often ground-breaking (think of Populous) so the Molyneux hype worked to their advantage—and there were those stunts such as organising competitions whose winner landed a job offer at Bullfrog. Plus, I believe the rest of the team helped to keep his enthusiasm in check and have him focus on more-or-less realistic goals with a bit of experimentation.

My guess, based on what I read and saw of that time, is that being the boss gave him far too much freedom at Lionhead, plus he was by then considered a legend whose words carried even more influence than during the Bullfrog days. No one was there to really control him and he was free to run wild with all his ground-breaking ideas—and he sure promised a lot! And let’s not forget he also got older, which probably exacerbated his negative behaviours.

He wasn't nearly as pompous and self-indignant. Everyone loves a passionate developer.
It was the snark that came with him being toted as a mastermind that really drove him over the deep end.
 

Gragt

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Nov 1, 2007
Messages
1,864,860
Location
Dans Ton Cul
Serpent in the Staglands Divinity: Original Sin
Heh, he still had a tendency to exaggerate during those early years, though he always did appear passionate. Even then he later still managed to keep the public’s sympathies by apologising after each game’s release. So even though his reputation took a hit, he still came out okay from his time at Lionhead. He even had the excuse of wanting to start afresh after his company was bought by Microsoft—and back then he was one of the big names for Microsoft Europe, which did give him an air of legitimacy for leaving such a position in order to start small again. What really pushed him down to the level of a used car salesman in the eye of the public were all the 22cans shenanigans with that stupid cube, Godus, or the guy who was supposed to be in charge of the project after opening the aforementioned stupid cube.
 
Last edited:

Lahey

Laheyist
Patron
Joined
Jun 10, 2017
Messages
1,467
Grab the Codex by the pussy
Realistically, mainstream gamers have a built-in defense to SJWs: indifference. The best way to deal with SJWs is to not pay them any attention at all. The sole reason SJWs are currently causing problems is simply because some people don't follow this rule and actually take SJW gibberish seriously.
Indifference isn't a defence, it's the beachhead.

Past is prologue; ignoring cultural marxism over a half-century is what led to the present. Like the boiling frog, we sat patiently as the temperature steadily rose to the point where mainstream culture denies biology, purges wrongthink, and celebrates the destruction of western civilization in every form.

And no, I don't mean "we" as in some silly "gamer identity". An SJW mob forcing a company to censor boobplate is irrelevant when open borders are destroying nations and freedom of speech online is under constant attack from multinational tech giants.
There's a 10 billion-post megathread about Gamergate in the gaming subforum and you'll find I have fewer than half a dozen posts in it, because the fact is that gaming "journalists" and SJW game developers were never going to produce anything of value anyway, so no great loss.
You misunderstand their intent. Creation is not their goal, but rather subversion and destruction in order to rebuild from the ashes. Their permanent revolution doesn't end.

Apathy is a perfectly natural reaction to such overwhelming malice. You're free to indulge in it, but that freedom isn't free, and I know you care despite the posturing.

On a lighter and more on-topic note, EA terminates memes with the same extreme prejudice shown to devs:

DJtT43TVoAEqDMn.jpg
 

DragoFireheart

all caps, rainbow colors, SOMETHING.
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
23,731
Until people are willing to make sacrifices and do what is necessary to pull the rug out from under EA, EA will continue to thrive. Modern history has shown us that there will always be plenty of idiots to prop up evil megacorps unless something truly profound happens (example: the meteoric rise of digital delivery and online sales killing off Blockbuster and several major brick-and-mortar electronics retailers like CompUSA and Circuit City), so we'll most likely be able to continue to enjoy circlejerking about EA for decades to come.

I think the problem is gamers,

The average gamer is a little bitch
 

DemonKing

Arcane
Joined
Dec 5, 2003
Messages
5,958
I recently took out a one month subscription to EA Access for AUD$7 because my kids tried a demo for Plants vs Zombies and wanted to keep playing beyond the trial period.

Consequently I downloaded Titanfall 2 to play for myself because it's apparently an OK single player game with one extremely good "must play" level. There's also some other games on Access that I never got around to and might trial if I find the time, plus some classics like all the Ultima series, Crusader No Remorse/Regret etc.

After this experience I can't see the point in buying any EA game anymore. Given their multiplayer games tend to use P2P servers and usually die pretty quick on PC (with the possible exception of Battlefield) you're not losing much by holding off until anything you're vaguely interested goes into Access.
 

RapineDel

Augur
Joined
Jan 11, 2017
Messages
423
I recently took out a one month subscription to EA Access for AUD$7 because my kids tried a demo for Plants vs Zombies and wanted to keep playing beyond the trial period.

Consequently I downloaded Titanfall 2 to play for myself because it's apparently an OK single player game with one extremely good "must play" level. There's also some other games on Access that I never got around to and might trial if I find the time, plus some classics like all the Ultima series, Crusader No Remorse/Regret etc.

After this experience I can't see the point in buying any EA game anymore. Given their multiplayer games tend to use P2P servers and usually die pretty quick on PC (with the possible exception of Battlefield) you're not losing much by holding off until anything you're vaguely interested goes into Access.

It's nothing memorable. The shooting mechanics are bare bones, the sections in the Titans are far too easy and the 'must play' level is basically the same as one in Dishonored 2 and seen in older games before. It's incredibly short as well and while it's a pass for a modern shooter it's fairly boring compared to any of the classics.
 

MicoSelva

backlog digger
Patron
Joined
Sep 10, 2010
Messages
7,480
Location
Vigil's Keep
Codex 2012 Codex 2013 Codex 2014 PC RPG Website of the Year, 2015 Codex 2016 - The Age of Grimoire Make the Codex Great Again! Grab the Codex by the pussy Insert Title Here RPG Wokedex Strap Yourselves In Codex Year of the Donut Codex+ Now Streaming! Enjoy the Revolution! Another revolution around the sun that is. Serpent in the Staglands Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Divinity: Original Sin 2 Bubbles In Memoria A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag. Pathfinder: Wrath I helped put crap in Monomyth
EA works its magic yet again.

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2017/10/ea-shuts-down-fan-run-servers-for-older-battlefield-games/

EA shuts down fan-run servers for older Battlefield games
Modified game clients were being used to get around defunct GameSpy servers.

KYLE ORLAND - 10/27/2017, 5:53 PM

reviveheroes-800x448.png

Enlarge / After a brief fan revival, online Battlefield Heroes is once again dead.
Since 2014, a group of volunteers going by the name Revive Network have been working to keep online game servers running for Battlefield 2, Battlefield 2142, and Battlefield Heroes. As of this week, the team is shutting down that effort thanks to a legal request from publisher Electronic Arts.

"We will get right to the point: Electronic Arts Inc.' legal team has contacted us and nicely asked us to stop distributing and using their intellectual property," the Revive Network team writes in a note on their site. "As diehard fans of the franchise, we will respect these stipulations."

EA's older Battlefield titles were a victim of the 2014 GameSpy shutdown, which disabled the online infrastructure for plenty of classic PC and console games. To get around that, Revive was distributing modified versions of the older Battlefield titles along with a launcher that allowed access to its own, rewritten server infrastructure. The process started with Battlefield 2 in 2014, then expanded to Battlefield 2142 last year, and Battlefield Heroes a few month ago.

It's the distribution of modified copies of these now-defunct games that seems to have drawn the ire of EA's legal department. "Please stop distributing copies of our game clients and using our trademarks, logos, and artwork on your sites," EA's counsel writes in a note republished on the Revive website. "Your websites may easily mislead visitors to believe that you are associated or affiliated with EA—we're the only ones that get to wear the 'Official EA' dog tag."

Revive claimed over 900,000 registered accounts across its games, including nearly 175,000 players for the recently revived Battlefield Heroes.

EA's approach is the polar opposite to that of Disney, which recently worked with GOG to officially bring back online multiplayer support for classic Star Wars Battlefront 2. The move is more reminiscent of Blizzard, which has recently shut down numerous fan servers devoted to restoring classic versions of World of Warcraft as it existed a decade ago.

In 2015, the Librarian of Congress denied a request by the EFF and others that would have allowed Revive's method of restoring online gameplay to "abandoned" games under a DMCA exception. Game publishers and trade groups fought hard against that request, with ESA president Mike Gallagher arguing "there's no such thing as an obsolete game when you can revive it on any platform at any time" in an Ars interview. The Library of Congress can take up the issue again in 2018.
 
Joined
Aug 10, 2012
Messages
5,869
Pretty sure it will sell like hotcakes regardless of being shit and having pay to win lootboxes up the ass. It might not sell up to their projected sales numbers, but those are ridiculous anyway (8+ million).
 

fantadomat

Arcane
Edgy Vatnik Wumao
Joined
Jun 2, 2017
Messages
37,083
Location
Bulgaria
Pretty sure it will sell like hotcakes regardless of being shit and having pay to win lootboxes up the ass. It might not sell up to their projected sales numbers, but those are ridiculous anyway (8+ million).
Well there is a big difference between selling well,making profit and making acceptable profit. From what i see the past year or two AAA games are not selling well. Many of them flop and very few make an acceptable profit. Most game have unrealistically high budget that needs to sell million only to be a not a loss. And still is a loss because all the wasted time and the inflation.
 

The Old Kiwi

Educated
Joined
Nov 9, 2017
Messages
63
The last game I bought that was "theirs" was from what was once Bioware, before they bought it, I'm fairly certain (yes, the first "Dragon Age"). Once they created their Origin sales and apron strings system, I shoved them into the Valve box of unacceptable products due to the distribution limitations, which is why I stopped buying Bethesda products as well.
 
Last edited:

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom