5 ms·

Can't speak to EA's motivations then, though I worked with a couple of Origin engineers who worked at Origin post-acquisition and have been at EA in Austin most

Can't speak to EA's motivations then, though I worked with a couple of Origin engineers who worked at Origin post-acquisition and have been at EA in Austin most of my career. The impression I got from the ex-Origin folks is that Origin was a ripe acquisition target: large portfolio of games and franchises; good body of talent in a major game development hub; and a failing business that they could get on the cheap. I've never understood the cynical way certain people view EA from the outside. EA is a large business (~30B market cap) and subject to the same sorts of challenges of any business at that scale. From my perspective EA is a federation of mostly autonomous studios trying to "find the fun" in an increasingly competitive entertainment landscape. Even if you manage to create a compelling core experience, bringing that to market is a challenge even at EA's scale.

chaostheory 7y ago
> I've never understood the cynical way certain people view EA from the outside They're a publicly traded company that needs to continually meet analyst targets or the stock tanks. It's a lot harder to align yourself to customer expectations when the market is constantly pressuring you for more short term revenue, even at the cost of long term goals and motivations.
- canada_dry 7y ago
  > They're a publicly traded company. Period. Few - if any - at the 'C' level are a game developer or likely even a gamer. Their job is to make a profit selling potatoes or car parts - it doesn't matter.
  - EpicEng 7y ago
    Yet even then, you can turn a profit without pushing gambling on children.
    - CaptainBanger 7y ago
      But can you post a profit next quarter, without gambling children?
  - SeanBoocock 7y ago
    The current CEO of the company started as a designer at EA Australia. Many of the people at the (S)VP level had development experience and play games.
    - EpicEng 7y ago
      Too bad their greed outweighs their good will toward the rest of us. Plenty of dev studios turn a profit without exploiting the weaknesses of their customers. EA's actions aren't really defensible.
  - chaostheory 7y ago
    Depends on the company. I could be wrong but both Sony and Nintendo have a decent number of former developers or engineers as high level execs. Even then, it's just really hard to not be reactive to the markets. There are very few CEOs with that superpower
  - mntmoss 7y ago
    Them being a gamer or developer doesn't actually add a great deal of value to their leadership abilities. Many are the examples of management justifying bad decisions as a "one of us" move. What EA and any company of that scale needs most at the top is people who are interested in large-scale workflows, IP management, and labor issues. Some aspects of these things are tied to the creative and intellectual parts of the work, others aren't. But the point of being that big should be to capitalize on unique opportunities to do R&D or push larger-scope experiences. It's not the nickel and diming that makes for lasting success.
EpicEng 7y ago
>I've never understood the cynical way certain people view EA from the outside. EA is a large business (~30B market cap) and subject to the same sorts of challenges of any business at that scale. From my perspective EA is a federation of mostly autonomous studios trying to "find the fun" in an increasingly competitive entertainment landscape. Maybe you should listen to what those outsiders are saying. EA ships half baked games for full price and loads them with the most scummy and deplorable monetization models in existence (looking at you too Activision.) I haven't heard wonderful things about the working conditions come crunch time either. It's not difficult to understand. And let's not forget the now (in)famous "surprise mechanics" debacle. EA deserves every bit of their current public image.
- frenchyatwork 7y ago
  EA certainly deserves their reputation, perhaps several times over. That said, I also suspect they don't care. They make money off their properties, and as long as that is working for them, they can continue to have their jobs.
  - EpicEng 7y ago
    >That said, I also suspect they don't care Oh yeah, that much is obvious.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
Sohcahtoa82 7y ago
> I've never understood the cynical way certain people view EA from the outside. Then you haven't been paying attention. I'm a gamer, so I see the criticisms all over the place. > EA is a large business (~30B market cap) and subject to the same sorts of challenges of any business at that scale. There are plenty of entertainment companies with much larger market caps that have succeeded without relying on getting children to gamble. > From my perspective EA is a federation of mostly autonomous studios trying to "find the fun" in an increasingly competitive entertainment landscape. Replace "find the fun" with "find the money", and completely scratch out anything to do with autonomy, and you'd be correct. > Even if you manage to create a compelling core experience, bringing that to market is a challenge even at EA's scale. The vast number of successful indie developers would like a word with you. Honestly, your comment just reeks of being out-dated. Everything you said may have been true 20 years ago. In the 90's, I would have considered EA to be a respectable studio. But today? They're the most anti-consumer company out there, even worse than Comcast.

chaostheory 7y ago

> I've never understood the cynical way certain people view EA from the outside They're a publicly traded company that needs to continually meet analyst targets or the stock tanks. It's a lot harder to align yourself to customer expectations when the market is constantly pressuring you for more short term revenue, even at the cost of long term goals and motivations.

canada_dry 7y ago
> They're a publicly traded company. Period. Few - if any - at the 'C' level are a game developer or likely even a gamer. Their job is to make a profit selling potatoes or car parts - it doesn't matter.
- EpicEng 7y ago
  Yet even then, you can turn a profit without pushing gambling on children.
  - CaptainBanger 7y ago
    But can you post a profit next quarter, without gambling children?
- SeanBoocock 7y ago
  The current CEO of the company started as a designer at EA Australia. Many of the people at the (S)VP level had development experience and play games.
  - EpicEng 7y ago
    Too bad their greed outweighs their good will toward the rest of us. Plenty of dev studios turn a profit without exploiting the weaknesses of their customers. EA's actions aren't really defensible.
- chaostheory 7y ago
  Depends on the company. I could be wrong but both Sony and Nintendo have a decent number of former developers or engineers as high level execs. Even then, it's just really hard to not be reactive to the markets. There are very few CEOs with that superpower
- mntmoss 7y ago
  Them being a gamer or developer doesn't actually add a great deal of value to their leadership abilities. Many are the examples of management justifying bad decisions as a "one of us" move. What EA and any company of that scale needs most at the top is people who are interested in large-scale workflows, IP management, and labor issues. Some aspects of these things are tied to the creative and intellectual parts of the work, others aren't. But the point of being that big should be to capitalize on unique opportunities to do R&D or push larger-scope experiences. It's not the nickel and diming that makes for lasting success.

EpicEng 7y ago

>I've never understood the cynical way certain people view EA from the outside. EA is a large business (~30B market cap) and subject to the same sorts of challenges of any business at that scale. From my perspective EA is a federation of mostly autonomous studios trying to "find the fun" in an increasingly competitive entertainment landscape. Maybe you should listen to what those outsiders are saying. EA ships half baked games for full price and loads them with the most scummy and deplorable monetization models in existence (looking at you too Activision.) I haven't heard wonderful things about the working conditions come crunch time either. It's not difficult to understand. And let's not forget the now (in)famous "surprise mechanics" debacle. EA deserves every bit of their current public image.

frenchyatwork 7y ago
EA certainly deserves their reputation, perhaps several times over. That said, I also suspect they don't care. They make money off their properties, and as long as that is working for them, they can continue to have their jobs.
- EpicEng 7y ago
  >That said, I also suspect they don't care Oh yeah, that much is obvious.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

Sohcahtoa82 7y ago

> I've never understood the cynical way certain people view EA from the outside. Then you haven't been paying attention. I'm a gamer, so I see the criticisms all over the place. > EA is a large business (~30B market cap) and subject to the same sorts of challenges of any business at that scale. There are plenty of entertainment companies with much larger market caps that have succeeded without relying on getting children to gamble. > From my perspective EA is a federation of mostly autonomous studios trying to "find the fun" in an increasingly competitive entertainment landscape. Replace "find the fun" with "find the money", and completely scratch out anything to do with autonomy, and you'd be correct. > Even if you manage to create a compelling core experience, bringing that to market is a challenge even at EA's scale. The vast number of successful indie developers would like a word with you. Honestly, your comment just reeks of being out-dated. Everything you said may have been true 20 years ago. In the 90's, I would have considered EA to be a respectable studio. But today? They're the most anti-consumer company out there, even worse than Comcast.