EA Going Live: My Thoughts

SoundX · Tweet this Post! #1 07-22-2004, 03:08 PM

I was reading an article in this months Xbox Official Magazine (August, UK) about what EA plan to do with Live and it brought up a few points.

EA have always been a dominating brand. But when you think about it, it's really kind of a bad thing that their gonna start up a Xbox Live Service. I mean when you think about it, we have all the racers, shooters and online sports games we need. Won't EA's brand name take away credit and gameplay time for games that really deserve it the aplause for bringing sports online first?
I kind of think that it would be sacrificing gameplay for the typical money sucking objectives of EA. They say their considering making charges for their downloadable content, do Microsoft or any other XBL Supporting Developers do that? No. I even read that if they feel a pay to play service needed, they'll do it.

I'm just afraid that they'll turn XBL into a duller and more taxing experience. Players wanting a game of England International Soccer or Microsoft's NFL Games, having to buy Maden because no one is playing that anymore. And then once they get there, it'll be the same all over again next year. Except this time, you'll be shelling out 40 quid and another 10 or so for extra content.

Basicaly I see a duller Xbox Live experience in the making, and I think MS know that. Kind of a suspicious time for them to pull out of their sports brand for a year or two, isn't it?

This is a kind of biased opionion because I hate EA and all, more so for taking my fave arcade racer Burnout 3 away from me and turning it into... shudder... one of them.

But serously, think about it.

Anywayz, see you all on Live later in the summer

wise_panda · Tweet this Post! #2 07-22-2004, 04:02 PM

Blah Blah Blah.....it should go PS2 EA Online...Xbox...ESPN Online.

LTM360 · Tweet this Post! #3 07-22-2004, 07:17 PM

I understand what you mean entirely, and to some extent I agree. However, SEGA is doing alot in trying to make sure their game gets out, and you see the result, the game is selling very well. I'm sure EA would charge money, but will they... don't know. Here's my problem with EA and Micosoft while I'm at it. EA finally gets what they want (their own servers) and they are half assing Xbox Live (connection problem plaguing NCAA) and arn't doing **** about it. Sure they say they will fix it, but remind me, how long has this game been out? And ESPN is out having zero connection problems? Odd to me. And to be quite honest I expect this in the upcomming Xbox Live enabled EA games, Goldeneye, Timesplitters, and Madden '05.

Now, onto Microsoft. Microsoft had a plan, that plan was to run all the servers for Xbox Live by their own ways, and own plans. Electronic Arts didn't like those plans, they complained and complained and finally a big company like Microsoft gave in, and gave that company what they want. And thus have gave servers to a company that, like you said Sound, is to some extent bring down the quality of Xbox Live. I agree, and Panda, I've seen a couple of your posts, and alot of us here hate EA, I am included and feel free to ask why, this whole conection problem is just adding fuel to the "hate EA" fire in my book.

Sega has been handing out quality sports titles such as ESPN NHL, NFL, and NBA just to get overshadowed by EA because of their enourmous popularity. But Sega has had the upper hand for Xbox owners up until now, and they had to do something. Their game is better, and hopefully $20 will be people to buy it and realize it. I hope the best for Sega, and I will support them through this $20 season, for obvious reasons.

EA will hopefully get their asses handed to them, and Sega will finally be king, and two things will happen. EA will actually change their game other than changing the year on the box cover, or they will stop making sports games. I hope they don't stop because I have alot of friends who really like them, and, sad to say, they are good for the buisness, but I just which they would pull out more quality than quanity...

Good thought SoundX.

Darkside · Tweet this Post! #4 07-22-2004, 07:57 PM

EA Sports going online isn't good. but EA going online is good. like Battlefield, that game is a surprisingly good time. and Timesplitters is online this year so that also is good. but EA Sports online isn't good

CharlieHustle · Tweet this Post! #5 07-23-2004, 09:29 AM

One thing EA will notice this year, is how LIVE has us spoiled... We dont like connection problems and slow a.s.s. gameplay. If ea is readin our reviews, then they will know that they sould have let MS run the servers for their games. The gameplay online is intolerable, and is the main reason i returned the ncaa game. Sometimes i felt like im playin someone who has dial-up. If ea was gonna put their games online, then they should have made sure it was up to speed like other live games, and im more than sure that their testers told them that the game plays slow.. Ea probably said "we dont care, ship it anyways"

SoundX · Tweet this Post! #6 07-23-2004, 10:07 AM

Yeah, I think one of the main reasons why EA are gonna find it hard on Live is because of their sluggish attitude towards quality products. They don't really give a damn about how the game plays and if it's gonna run smoothly. As long as they get their money, it's done.

Unlike people like ID or Bungie who would always put quality reasurance first with moto's like "it's done when it's done" EA think the rather opasite of "it's done when people have paid for it".

super_ryu · Tweet this Post! #7 07-23-2004, 07:54 PM

EA will probably make this lame thing like an EA Live fee. Where its a subscription to play EA online games

. Also they probably won't make any free content downloads (like you said)
And I'm sure their going to make Microsoft solve their problems (server, connection etc...) cuz they wanna take advantage of the deal (now that you think about it), and want to make the most money they can
but i think we're at a time when brand names (in gaming) doesn't matter as much. I mean remember Bungie before Halo came out? They weren't as important/spotlighted as much, but as soon as they came out with this killer game (which nobody expected!) the whole gaming industry was shocked. And there are many stories of which games with no name companies made a great impact, and appeal.

so if EA's games end up sucking (and end up being worse then a competing game of that genre/sport) I'm pretty sure the gaming community will make the right decision if they should buy it or not (or if they should buy the other game similar to that one).
Also now adays people look at refrences (like IGN) before they buy a game, so its not really like clothing (where as they buy something because of the brand, instead of a similar (and cheaper) peice of clothing), and I'm pretty sure the user reviews (and staff reviews) will motovate the buyer if they should buy it.

well thats just my 2 cents