Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Ioric Kittencuddler]

quote:Originally posted by umiman:
<STRONG>I think the only time I'll play sports games is when they use full body motion control so I can suck as much in game as I do in real life and kick the ball at the referee. Unless it's tennis or badminton or squash or something like that. Other than that, I've only played Need for Speed 2... if that counts for a sports game.

Ooooo, maybe wushu! Fucking wushu simulator. Would be awesome...

Anyway, like I said, have you played every single one of the sports games? I don't think you're really qualified to have that opinion unless you've played a huge number of sports games from the oldest (1995 isn't exactly old) to the latest ones. If we're on the same page arguing concerning whether the game is crap, then here's the double-bladed question. If you have, then why on earth did you buy them? If you haven't, how can you justify that it isn't pure bias blinding your insight?

EDIT: By the way, real men call it the Megadrive. Do you know what real men play on the Megadrive? Not some pansy ass NHL game you little worm. It's Michael Jackson: Moonwalker! Get it right!   :mad:

[ June 13, 2008: Message edited by: umiman ]</STRONG>

Your argument is ridiculous.  Have you played every single game in the series?  If not how can you justify defending them?  All we can say is that whatever they're making sells.  A game they made in 95 is extremely similar to the games they're making now.  Both that game, and these games are only really improved in graphics and they have new rosters.  That's the only evidence we have either way and it supports the argument that they DO just do the same thing over and over.

I don't know how the heck you got the idea that we're trying to argue that EA makes games crappy just for the hell of it.  No one said anything like that as far as I remember.  All I've been saying is that EA doesn't give a flying fuck-weasel whether the game is good or not.  All they care about is profit.  They control the development of games in order to increase the guaranteed profits at the expense of creativity, because the best way to guarantee profits is to do something that has already been profitable.

[Cthulhu]

quote: They control the development of games in order to increase the guaranteed profits at the expense of creativity, because the best way to guarantee profits is to do something that has already been profitable.

Cue 700 Pokemon.

[umiman]

Ioric: You need to calm down. No one is attacking you. You don't have to flail about on your tether.

I'm sure if you reread the thread without that mask of burning, crusading fury you have on right now you'll see that:

1. That post wasn't addressed to you, but rather Cthulu concerning EA's sports games. He said they were just re-releases of the same thing, and I asked why he can say that. He didn't answer, so I assume the point is moot. That's it.

2. I was defending my opinion that I like certain EA games. I was defending them from you who went out of your way to state that EA didn't make the games I like (I have no idea what your motivation for that was). This post is a page back and is addressed to you.

3. As for the "where did I get defending against EA making crap games" hoo hah. Just read the thread. It's even on the first page. There's the blatant connection between how people correlate EA with pretty graphics and poor gameplay ergo crap. Even you said it just now. If they keep making similar games and you have a problem with it, why? It can't be because they are all awesome and good or whatever. Obviously you wouldn't have a problem if they made good games even if they were remakes. So... the obvious observation would be...? If you can't see that then this conversation is really over for all reasons and purposes.

I still have no idea why you're so hostile since I don't know what you're arguing for. Just that you're arguing against everything I say. And you keep bringing up the EA likes money agenda which I don't care for since, like I said, it's all conjecture and personal beliefs. Someone going around claiming a company is evil or a company is a saint has more similarities with an evangelist running around a mall praising whatever he believes in than a logical debate. Everyone knows how well a religious debate goes, and that's why I don't pursue it. Anything else you want me to clarify?

TL/DR;
If you just agree that EA doesn't necessarily make crap games, then we'll all be good and dandy. Everything else, I don't care. Does that sound simplistic after all this time? Yes...

[ June 13, 2008: Message edited by: umiman ]

[Cthulhu]

Except I did answer.  My dad buys the games, I don't, he hasn't bought them in a while, the last game I played was an '07, but I've played enough to know that they never really changed.  I put this earlier, but it was kind of hidden.

[umiman]

quote:Originally posted by Cthulhu:
<STRONG>Except I did answer.  My dad buys the games, I don't, he hasn't bought them in a while, the last game I played was an '07, but I've played enough to know that they never really changed.  I put this earlier, but it was kind of hidden.</STRONG>

Okay, well. I guess your opinion is better than mine since I don't play sports games either. I dunno... never got why people like virtual sports games when they can just go outside.

[martinuzz]

Is it me, or are we getting more and more edgy the closer the forum-move gets?
It will be allright, and all done before we know it. I have full confidence.

[MuonDecay]

quote:Originally posted by Ioric Kittencuddler:
<STRONG>

It's a good metaphor but flawed.  A better description of EA would be that it is a sentient pile of money that's only goal and reason for existence is to increase it's own size by whatever means necessary.</STRONG>

Aye, I neglected to address the whole profit-obsessed-sentience aspect for the sake of being lazy and not complicating my metaphor.

I like piles of money. I will use them in analogies whenever possible. Unless I could be gaining or rolling in them instead.

[Ioric Kittencuddler]

quote:Originally posted by umiman:
<STRONG>Ioric: You need to calm down. No one is attacking you. You don't have to flail about on your tether.

I'm sure if you reread the thread without that mask of burning, crusading fury you have on right now you'll see that:

1. That post wasn't addressed to you, but rather Cthulu concerning EA's sports games. He said they were just re-releases of the same thing, and I asked why he can say that. He didn't answer, so I assume the point is moot. That's it.

2. I was defending my opinion that I like certain EA games. I was defending them from you who went out of your way to state that EA didn't make the games I like (I have no idea what your motivation for that was). This post is a page back and is addressed to you.

3. As for the "where did I get defending against EA making crap games" hoo hah. Just read the thread. It's even on the first page. There's the blatant connection between how people correlate EA with pretty graphics and poor gameplay ergo crap. Even you said it just now. If they keep making similar games and you have a problem with it, why? It can't be because they are all awesome and good or whatever. Obviously you wouldn't have a problem if they made good games even if they were remakes. So... the obvious observation would be...? If you can't see that then this conversation is really over for all reasons and purposes.

I still have no idea why you're so hostile since I don't know what you're arguing for. Just that you're arguing against everything I say. And you keep bringing up the EA likes money agenda which I don't care for since, like I said, it's all conjecture and personal beliefs. Someone going around claiming a company is evil or a company is a saint has more similarities with an evangelist running around a mall praising whatever he believes in than a logical debate. Everyone knows how well a religious debate goes, and that's why I don't pursue it. Anything else you want me to clarify?

TL/DR;
If you just agree that EA doesn't necessarily make crap games, then we'll all be good and dandy. Everything else, I don't care. Does that sound simplistic after all this time? Yes...

[ June 13, 2008: Message edited by: umiman ]</STRONG>

I am calm.  I think you need to chill since you're the one who's resorting to personal attacks.

Your original post was something along the lines of 'EA isn't a bad company because they made Dungeon Keeper, Rock Band, and Burnout.'  I pointed out that they hadn't made any of those games.  Rock Band was developed Harmonix, the guys who made Guitar Hero 1 and 2, and Published by MTV.  EA was only the distributor.  Burnout 1 and 2 were published by Acclaim.  It was already an established series when EA got a hold of it, and Criterion the developer.  Dungeon Keeper is the only real exception.  It's strange.  Bullfrog worked for EA for years making fairly unique games.  Then one day EA just shut them down for reasons I'm not sure of.  I guess they weren't making a big enough profit.  

EA makes a habit of buying up developers just to get ahold of their intellectual properties or just because they are a threat to EA's dominance, then shutting them down.  They constantly engage in unethical anti-competitive behavior like this.  They once laid off an entire dev team just after project completion.

They edited their own Wikipedia page to make it reflect on them more favorably, and even downplayed the significance of the founder, Trip Hawkins, who no longer works there.

What more do you need me to say?

[Rictus]

<BLOCKQUOTE>What more do you need me to say?

What about "long live the revolution, comrades!"?

I am, of course, kidding.

[Tylui]

Dude, no.  Revolution sounds wonderful.

[umiman]

Ioric: Evidently you don't have a problem with the games then, as I keep telling you I don't care if they're juiced up whores or corporate scum. I already said I don't care about your personal values or ideas on how a business should be run. Just that they do make nice games even if your interpretation of "do" is different from mine, you can't deny the fact that they had their hand in "do"-ing the game. So long as their logo sits there, I couldn't care less how their corporate structure is formed.

Do we have a problem now? There's nothing to discuss if you intentionally misread my statements. Again, so you understand clearly. I don't care if the company is sick and mean. The games are good. Yes? Maybe again, just in case. I don't care if the company sucks. The games are good. That should drill it in. In other words, very, very simple okay: you are preaching to the wrong crowd UNLESS you think the games suck. I said very clearly in that post, "in any case, I enjoyed quite a few EA games." That does not translate to "EA isn't a bad company because they made Dungeon Keeper, Rock Band, and Burnout". It translates to, "anyway, I liked some EA games" or "regardless of anything else, I had fun playing some EA games". Do you fully understand now? Shall I bring out the hammer of knocking-truth-into-brain?

I wonder if that's enough... If you're aiming to have the last word, go for it. Preach all you like about how EA is corporate scum and is the bottom of the barrel. Just don't drag me into it.

[Ioric Kittencuddler]

So we go back to the very start of the arguement?  EA didn't make those games.  Whatever, if you really don't care, there is no point in talking to you.

Well I guess it's true what they say(at least for some people), you can lead a person to truth but you can't make him care, until it figuratively bashes him over the back of the head and takes something he cares about deeply.

[subject name here]

"Well I guess it's true what they say(at least for some people), you can lead a person to truth but you can't make him care, until it figuratively bashes him over the back of the head and takes something he cares about deeply."

That is the most sickeningly arrogant thing I've ever read and the context just makes it worse, I think you just gave me terminal cancer.

You're like a TV pundit so convinced of his righteousness that he can't help but talk down to everyone on his show.

[Ioric Kittencuddler]

SNH, your criticism would hold a bit more weight if you weren't well known as a troll here.

It's hard not to end up looking a little self righteous when the person you're talking to openly admits that they don't care how bad a company is as long as they like some of the products they sell.

[Asheron]

Dude, no.  Revolution sounds wonderful.

AK47's for the masses!

To add a point to the discussion, though, not all EA games suck. Many of them are blatant rip-offs or copyrighted crap, but they are able to create games that are acceptable and a few good games. What makes me so pissed off about those games, though, is that yet mostly are sequels of real classics they ruined *cough Westwood Studios cough*. But, if you really are honest and put aside the fact that they are money-grabbing imperialistic beepers, you can honestly say their games are enjoyable.
Well then, if you will excuse me, I'm off starting a rebellion.
*starts singing the internationale*