Ps4 and madden 14

[CM Hooe]

Quote: Originally Posted by tfctillidie

EA will be announcing some exclusive deal with M$ in April, but not sure if that'll have any effect on sports games. Likely timed exclusives with their "AAA" titles, if you can call them "AAA" without giggling that is.

AAA typically refers to relative scale of development budget and relative quality; for example, an iOS or XBLA game would not be a AAA game.

As to subjective quality compared to peers within a category, Electronic Arts had the highest average metascore for all major video game publishers in calendar year 2012. The assertion that they make enjoyable and high-quality video games isn't ridiculous.

I agree that I doubt that we see EA go completely console-exclusive with Microsoft.

[SickDL]

Quote: Originally Posted by CM Hooe

AAA typically refers to relative scale of development budget and relative quality; for example, an iOS or XBLA game would not be a AAA game. As to subjective quality compared to peers within a category, Electronic Arts had the highest average metascore for all major video game publishers in calendar year 2012. The assertion that they make enjoyable and high-quality video games isn't ridiculous. I agree that I doubt that we see EA go completely console-exclusive with Microsoft.

Mass effect 1 wa xbox exclusive. But i agree. Dont see ea make a xbox or ps exclusive.

[SageInfinite]

Quote: Originally Posted by SickDL

Mass effect 1 wa xbox exclusive. But i agree. Dont see ea make a xbox or ps exclusive.

I believe this was before EA purchased bioware.

[SickDL]

Quote: Originally Posted by SageInfinite

I believe this was before EA purchased bioware.

Ah didnt know that

[tfctillidie]

Quote: Originally Posted by CM Hooe

AAA typically refers to relative scale of development budget and relative quality; for example, an iOS or XBLA game would not be a AAA game. As to subjective quality compared to peers within a category, Electronic Arts had the highest average metascore for all major video game publishers in calendar year 2012. The assertion that they make enjoyable and high-quality video games isn't ridiculous. I agree that I doubt that we see EA go completely console-exclusive with Microsoft.

I put little faith in online reviews.

For starters, how many companies do what EA does, and continually hammer down everyone's throats how great their "metacritic" scores are. Meanwhile you see industry folks ranting about how bloody ridiculous these scoring systems are to begin with. I find it oddly bizarre how much EA loves their scoring.

If you dive deeper into that article's stats, you'll see something noticeably different between EA and the other top contenders...multiplatform games. EA's overall score gets a TWO 93% entries for Mass Effect 3 on PS3 and then again on 360, which merely inflates their score. Remove that element and they wouldn't even be top 5.

Furthermore, the very sites that hand out these ratings, get paid largely by the advertisements of the very companies they review.

Lastly, how on earth do you give kudos to EA for great games Bioware made....just because they bought them? Mass Effect as an example, is a Bioware made franchise...BOUGHT...by EA. They may have provided financial clout to allow the franchise to do more, but really, how do you give EA credit for the successes of franchises that they merely acquired after the fact?


This is very much fact and why I find it incredibly difficult to give a rat's arse about what these folks think of the games and how they are scored. The system is without a doubt broken in my opinion.

[CM Hooe]

Quote: Originally Posted by tfctillidie

I put little faith in online reviews. For starters, how many companies do what EA does, and continually hammer down everyone's throats how great their "metacritic" scores are. Meanwhile you see industry folks ranting about how bloody ridiculous these scoring systems are to begin with. I find it oddly bizarre how much EA loves their scoring.

There's not really an alternative measure by which to measure the quality overall of the games as a whole that EA the publisher is backing. Until a better measure comes along, Metacritic is the least bad available option. I'm not going to try to argue that Metacritic is the be-all end-all when it's not. However, currently Metacritic is the best means available to obtain a cross-section of critical opinion about a given video game.

Quote:

If you dive deeper into that article's stats, you'll see something noticeably different between EA and the other top contenders...multiplatform games. EA's overall score gets a TWO 93% entries for Mass Effect 3 on PS3 and then again on 360, which merely inflates their score. Remove that element and they wouldn't even be top 5.

Why shouldn't multi-platform games count? Each platform version of the game is a different SKU, deployed on a separate piece of hardware to optimize for. Sure, it's the same game high-level, but making the same game run well on different hardware takes unique time and effort. I know this first-hand.

Quote:

Furthermore, the very sites that hand out these ratings, get paid largely by the advertisements of the very companies they review.

Outside of the one Kane & Lynch game which got a Gamespot journalist fired, I'm not sure how much of a leg the implication of this point - that video game reviews are paid off for good publicity - has to stand of. Games for big-money IPs can earn poor reviews - the most recent being Aliens: Colonial Marines, and also Tron, almost every 3D Sonic The Hedgehog game, and Duke Nukem Forever - and new IP games can get great reviews - Portal, Braid, Limbo, Bayonetta, Super Meat Boy, etc. One would expect well-known IPs to consistently score the highest if the publishers with the money always scored highest. Further, well-known game critics such as Adam Sessler wouldn't be as visible and respected as they are if there were any evidence of their being paid off.

Quote:

Lastly, how on earth do you give kudos to EA for great games Bioware made....just because they bought them? Mass Effect as an example, is a Bioware made franchise...BOUGHT...by EA. They may have provided financial clout to allow the franchise to do more, but really, how do you give EA credit for the successes of franchises that they merely acquired after the fact?

This can be made into a fair argument, but be careful to be consistent. By this same token, it is unfair to criticize EA the publisher for publishing any EA Sports title; the publisher just backs the title, the developer makes it. In the case of Madden, EA Sports publishes the title, Tiburon and EA Austin develop it.

A counterargument, however, would be that once Bioware is purchased by EA, they are in fact EA and should be included in the EA envelope.