Im starting to think that you down understand how EA works.
they aren't some random company that merely suggests what game developers do. They OWN the game development studios and have executive order over what is produced by said studios.
here's how it works
EA is a producer. Company X is a developer. Company X has no money of their own to finance the production of a game they want to make. They turn to EA. EA gives them all the money they could ever need to develop the game, and handles things like advertising and distribution. In turn, EA can influence production of the game (since, after all, they're paying for it) and I'm sure receives some portion of any profits.
EA never once directly changes development of the game. They may, I'm sure, see the direction a game is taking and say "No, that won't work, not enough people will buy it - if you want our money you'll have to change that." They're just trying to make a smart investment, and who can blame them? They're paying another company millions of dollars to develop a game that could just flop.
So all I'm trying to figure out is if EA was actually the one that ruined games like Spore. I've never seen a single shred of evidence to suggest that.
(And, on another level, you should ask yourself if Spore was actually ruined - sure, it wasn't the game YOU wanted, but it was pretty successful and plenty of people loved it)
