EA CEO steps down

[Harm94]

for everyone who keeps yelling dlc at their screen, it's only becquse they're called dlcs
hl2 did the same thing with ep1 and 2 and no one gave a stuff

Except the episodes were meant for faster release of sequels. Also you don't need to own the original half-life 2 to play ep1 or 2, so they are there own games. With EA's Expansion packs you got enough content that was equalled to a game. DLC's are just a small fraction of content at the same price as an expansion.   

[Ad Bot]

[TheKid]

reaction song is this

[[Na Pulse]]

Mother of God..
This is amazing!

[TheKid]

Mother of God..
This is amazing!

what? my song?

[[Na Pulse]]

what? my song?

Yeah, that and EA's CEO is now ded(Not really.)

[TheKid]

Yeah, that and EA's CEO is now ded(Not really.)

<3
listen to more eurobeat, my friend.

[-Jetz-]

EA has shareholders, Valve doesn't.

Hardly relevant to the end user. When it comes time to decide which company is the worst, I don't see how the reasoning behind loving the customer should sway any customer's vote.

[devildogelite]

Hardly relevant to the end user. When it comes time to decide which company is the worst, I don't see how the reasoning behind loving the customer should sway any customer's vote.

If Valve had shareholders it would be a very different company.

[-Jetz-]

If Valve had shareholders it would be a very different company.

Who cares? The EA shareholders can go forget themselves for the impact they have on the consumer. If EA decides they want to get every last penny out of the customers in order to appease the shareholders, then the customers have a right to complain. The customers should complain. If the customer pays 60 dollars for a game then cannot play it because EA chose to favor the shareholders via DRM at the expense of the customers, that customer should complain. If that customer is instead saying "Well, the entertainment I paid for is an acceptable loss as long as those shareholders are getting their money," they are loving mental and should not be trusted with the spending of money.

[devildogelite]

Who cares? The EA shareholders can go forget themselves for the impact they have on the consumer. If EA decides they want to get every last penny out of the customers in order to appease the shareholders, then the customers have a right to complain. The customers should complain. If the customer pays 60 dollars for a game then cannot play it because EA chose to favor the shareholders via DRM at the expense of the customers, that customer should complain. If that customer is instead saying "Well, the entertainment I paid for is an acceptable loss as long as those shareholders are getting their money," they are loving mental and should not be trusted with the spending of money.

I never said half of what you're arguing here. I never said EA isn't bad. I never said what they're doing isn't a stuffty system. All I said is that having shareholders would make a difference. EA has no obligation to you, none at all. They have  an obligation to the shareholders to maximize profit. That doesn't mean I think how they go about that is right, I personally think it's bullstuff. None of this changes that Valve would be different if it had shareholders, which is all I said.

Calm down and don't get your panties in a bunch because you think EA is literally Riddler and Valve is the messiah.

[Tudoreleuu]

Except the episodes were meant for faster release of sequels. Also you don't need to own the original half-life 2 to play ep1 or 2, so they are there own games. With EA's Expansion packs you got enough content that was equalled to a game. DLC's are just a small fraction of content at the same price as an expansion.   

well, that IS true
I mean if EA created the aperturemesa universe, you'd probably have to pay a monthly subscription and 5 extra dollars for any plot element you find out about the games. the games would also automatically stretch across long and boring gameplay periods so they actually get to use their monthly subscription

[mariofan09]

The best EA release this year.

[Blooker]

The best EA release this year.

Ba doom chhs

[-Jetz-]

I never said half of what you're arguing here. I never said EA isn't bad. I never said what they're doing isn't a stuffty system. All I said is that having shareholders would make a difference. EA has no obligation to you, none at all. They have  an obligation to the shareholders to maximize profit. That doesn't mean I think how they go about that is right, I personally think it's bullstuff. None of this changes that Valve would be different if it had shareholders, which is all I said.

My original point was that there's no reason for a consumer to defend EA, which I have seen happen. Dunes responded to that with the mention of shareholders, which was hardly a substantial counterpoint. I was getting back to my original claim with most of that text, not directly responding to what you said.

Calm down and don't get your panties in a bunch because you think EA is literally Riddler and Valve is the messiah.

Yeah good point, I probably shouldn't be ranting at 5 AM.

[Tudoreleuu]

The best EA release this year.

OOOOOOOOOOH!