Topic: EA's CEO Jon Riccitiello Stepping Down

[Ceric]

Oh boy here we go

http://consumerist.com/2013/03/18/here-are-your-contestants-for-the-2013-worst-company-in-america-tournament/

wheoever made that list is a huge sprint fanboy

Ironic you say that because Sprint does better then ATT and Verizon on those things.  In fact its normally in order of who has the most customers.

[pokepal148]

Oh boy here we go

http://consumerist.com/2013/03/18/here-are-your-contestants-for-the-2013-worst-company-in-america-tournament/

wheoever made that list is a huge sprint fanboy

Ironic you say that because Sprint does better then ATT and Verizon on those things.  In fact its normally in order of who has the most customers.

except t-mobile made the list as well

[broodwars]

Dead Space 3's microtransactions model may rope in some fans of the first games that didn't know that was in store for them but that is not the intended longterm customerbase.  They want smartphone rubes to become the fanbase of all of EA's products.  They will get some people that bitch but have no self-control but those are just a bonus.

Just to let you know, microtransactions are not shoved in your face on DS3.  If you didn't know they were there beforehand, you may not ever notice them.

Indeed. Having just finished the game recently myself, you can easily clear the game without ever needing to even see the microtransaction menu, & you can even get that stuff w/ in-game currency if you so wish.

[alegoicoe]

^thats not the point, the point is monetizing games that don't need to be monetized in the first place, it's becoming increasingly common to have microtransaction in games now days, a scary practice if you asked me, luckily am not about EA or Activision for that matter, they are all making shitty games while at the same time ripping off players for map packs and stupid **** that in other times would have been free.

[Pixelated Pixies]

To follow up on what alegoicoe said, I think most people find the inclusion of microtransactions in Dead Space 3 to be particularly egregious because the series was once thought to belong to the Survival-Horror genre. The idea of microtransactions just seems antithetical to Survival-Horror's traditional focus on scarcity. I think that's what has rubbed many people the wrong way.

[broodwars]

To follow up on what alegoicoe said, I think most people find the inclusion of microtransactions in Dead Space 3 to be particularly egregious because the series was once thought to belong to the Survival-Horror genre. The idea of microtransactions just seems antithetical to Survival-Horror's traditional focus on scarcity. I think that's what has rubbed many people the wrong way.

Of the MANY problems Dead Space 3 has, the resource aspect is so completely minor it's almost not worth talking about. Compared to the copy & pasted environments & how every goddamn room in the last half of the game is a monster closet (leading to the game just being utterly boring once you reach the Ice Planet), that's NOTHING.

Also, nothing's being locked-off to you in Dead Space 3 outside of the post-game story DLC. All the equipment related to the gun-crafting that the microtransactions are there for can easily be created using the in-game resources.  There's more than enough to go around, & you can use also freely-obtainable ration seals to buy the microtransaction stuff for free anyway.

[Pixelated Pixies]

I should probably say, I have never even played a Dead Space game. The microtransactions being antithetical to resource conservation gripe was just something I must have picked up through osmosis. I honestly don't even know whether or not Dead Space was ever concerned with resource management.

[Shaymin]

My platform for EA CEO is very simple: Two Gamepads in every Madden, three patches for every Sim City.

[Louieturkey]

I should probably say, I have never even played a Dead Space game. The microtransactions being antithetical to resource conservation gripe was just something I must have picked up through osmosis. I honestly don't even know whether or not Dead Space was ever concerned with resource management.

Dead Space is less horror due to resource management (though if you don't aim properly, you can easily run out of ammo) and more about the music and atmosphere and the fact that enemies can pretty much pop out of anywhere.  You can decide to corner yourself so nothing can come up behind you, but then find out the enemies can go through the vents and pop up in the wall behind you.

[TJ Spyke]

Hell, when EA announced they were putting microtransactions in everything

EA later clarified that they were talking about mobile games.

[Pixelated Pixies]

Dead Space is less horror due to resource management (though if you don't aim properly, you can easily run out of ammo) and more about the music and atmosphere and the fact that enemies can pretty much pop out of anywhere.

Oddly, that sounds very much like a survival horror game I might actually enjoy. With the possible exception of Eternal and Shattered Memories, neither of which would be thought of as typical, I haven't enjoyed that many horror games. I enjoy games with good atmosphere and a sense of place though.

[Oblivion]

Dead Space 1 and 2 are very good horror games, and if you want it to be more of a survival horror game, amp up the difficulty. Atmosphere is everything for Dead Space.


Just don't buy the third one.

[Louieturkey]

First two are definitely great.  I highly recommend those as well.  I've decided to wait to buy the third one until it's either $20 or they release an SE version with all the DLC included for $30.

[Ian Sane]

All I heard was that microtransactions are now in Dead Space and that "it sucks now" entirely because of the sheer existence of them.

I gotta say that if a series I was really into, like Zelda, had them put into it, I would be so instinctively against it that I wouldn't really want to take the chance that they're not intrusive or won't hurt my personal experience if I don't pay for them.  But then while the first game with them might not be intrusiv,e as they become accepted and take off they may become intrusive in later sequels.  If Zelda started having them I would be afraid that by purchasing the game Nintendo would interpret that as me endorsing and supporting microtransactions, when at best I'm merely tolerating them in a context where they don't outright ruin the game.  I would rather they get the message of "no microtransactions in Zelda in ANY context", even if that is realistically overkill, to make sure that things never do take a turn for the worst.  Don't give them an inch or they'll take a mile, right?

So I can see Dead Space fans wanting to say the same to EA, that they don't want microtransactions in Dead Space in any context, even if done well, so that the concept is not abused in the future.  Of course EA always plays a rigged game so they interpreted the low sales as "no one likes Dead Space" and are rumoured to have cancelled the Dead Space 4.

[alegoicoe]

http://www.gamespot.com/news/ubisoft-free-to-play-microtransactions-essential-to-future-of-aaa-games-6405869


I am starting to see a trend here, and an ugly I may say. Damn, the video game industry is going down a dark path.

[TJ Spyke]

There is nothing wrong with microtransactions if they are done right (i.e it's option stuff, like cosmetic skins for multiplayer) or free-to-play.

[Shaymin]

>implying that anyone knows how to do microtransactions right
ISHYGDDT

[alegoicoe]

There is nothing wrong with microtransactions if they are done right (i.e it's option stuff, like cosmetic skins for multiplayer) or free-to-play.

So you are alright with companies charging for things that in previous generation would have been free, i cant really see the logic in that.

[TJ Spyke]

Wow, you ignored what I wrote. Take LittleBigPlanet for example, Sony continued adding new characters long after the game came out. Under your way of thinking, gamers would only get what is on the disc when its released, and no more updates.

[alegoicoe]

Wow, you ignored what I wrote. Take LittleBigPlanet for example, Sony continued adding new characters long after the game came out. Under your way of thinking, gamers would only get what is on the disc when its released, and no more updates.

Am not talking about post game content, which by the way i dont buy, i am talking about mundane in game stuff like clothing and health packs, if you get my meaning.

[TJ Spyke]

Those things are usually optional, they don't effect the game and you are not losing anything by not buying them. They are there for those who want them. Nobody loses by them existing, and it doesn't make a game worse, so what is the problem?

[Halbred]

The thing that killed DS3 was its reliance on multiplayer. Even the single-player campaign is basically built around the assumed inclusion of a second player. I'd argue that the entire time you're wandering around the snow-covered canyons of Tau Volantis (there's more than just that), it's supposed to be a multiplayer errand-and-frag-fest. I thought I read somewhere that Riccitiello proudly proclaimed that no single-player games had been approved on his watch, so I assume he marched into Visceral's offices and said "it's gotta have multiplayer. Figure it out."

[broodwars]

The thing that killed DS3 was its reliance on multiplayer. Even the single-player campaign is basically built around the assumed inclusion of a second player. I'd argue that the entire time you're wandering around the snow-covered canyons of Tau Volantis (there's more than just that), it's supposed to be a multiplayer errand-and-frag-fest. I thought I read somewhere that Riccitiello proudly proclaimed that no single-player games had been approved on his watch, so I assume he marched into Visceral's offices and said "it's gotta have multiplayer. Figure it out."

That wasn't Jon Riccitiello. That was Frank Gibeau, head of EA Labels and a person who is still at EA in charge of deciding what games get greenlit and with what features.

Link