4 ms·

Like them or not, EA has been a major force in gaming for over 40 years (I used to work there). They invented the term "Game Producer". Their early vision for p

Like them or not, EA has been a major force in gaming for over 40 years (I used to work there). They invented the term "Game Producer". Their early vision for promoting Game Designers like hollywood Directors was ahead of its time. They have a hallway lined with gold discs of million seller hit games. They basically created the casual gaming industry (The Sims Division, Pogo, Casual Divisions) in a time when games were mostly marketed to boys. I respect this company a lot, even though they always seem to do things that embitter the gaming community against them. Unfortunately these types of buyouts usually come with layoffs, after a year of tough layoffs in games. I hope anyone who will be affected can land somewhere safe. The campus has a labyrinth with a plaque that's always inspired me: "As in life, the walls are only in your mind."

mlindner 1y ago
Except the entire idea that games should be promoted like hollywood movies is _exactly_ what precipitated this whole downfall. Games are not movies nor should they be like movies. Personally I hope there are tons of layoffs. The entire industry needs to be rinsed clean and refreshed, especially the US gaming industry.
- falcor84 1y ago
  Would you mind saying more about this? Why does promoting games as if they were movies is an issue? Is this just about the rising development costs of AAA games, or is there something else here that you're alluding to?
  - mlindner 1y ago
    A movie is something you watch, a game is something you play. It's not there to tell you a grand story. It's there to wrap some good gameplay in some storytelling packaging. A game is closer to a novel than it is to a hollywood movie. The most loved games (high replayability is a key component) often have quite lacking "story" if any story at all. What makes them shine is how they feel to play, even better if they encourage your own imagination to invent your own story. When you try to make a game into a movie the true focus is lost. If your game can only be played "once" (not including tacking-on achievements/side-quests/etc) then your game is a movie and not a game.
    - falcor84 1y ago
      Thanks for clarifying. I understand your perspective now, but just want to say that this is really different from mine, which might be influenced by my having a relatively strong Need for Closure[0]. I've been a life-long gamer, and have almost never had any interest in replaying a game (at least not until it's been perhaps a decade). When I finish a good game and get to the credits, I have a very strong sense of catharsis, which leads me then to enjoy clicking on that Delete button and starting on the next game. And just to be clear - it's not that I am trying to rush things and be done with the games; I take my time with most games, and I do think a lot about the good ones after, but it's pleasant memories of my time with them, rather than any desire to go back into the fray. As you can imagine, I mostly enjoy single-player narrative games with exploration and some RPG elements, rather than multi-player ones, or open-ended ones with infinite-replayability mechanics. For reference, some of my favorite game franchises include: LBA, Zelda, The Last of Us, Mass Effect, The Witcher, Portal, Talos Principle, GTA, Kotor, Final Fantasy and Kingdom Hearts. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closure_(psychology) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closure_(psychology)
- lentil_soup 1y ago
  >> Personally I hope there are tons of layoffs Wow, I guess empathy is not a thing anymore
  - johnnyanmac 1y ago
    Sadly a thing us devs are used to compared to more coporate jobs. We'll take the blame for a lot of issues leadership actively forced the development to go down. We don't set prices or DLC/MTX schemes, and can only push back so much on release dates (especially in the day of "we'll fix it with a Day One Patch"). As a dirty open secret: most "unexpected bugs" found day one are probably on some Jira sheet, been there for months, and were triaged as such to "will fix later". Only magically being prioritized after public feedback that QA teams already expected.
- johnnyanmac 1y ago
  I believe the GP's point was not "games need to focus on cinematics and mind breaking graphics over gameplay". It was how you make brands based on people, not teams. Jane's Combat Simulator, American McGee's Alice in Wonderland, Sid Meier's Games (when Fireaxis had closer relations with them), Clive Barker's Undying. We have indies who embody their games, but EA was doing this well before that. And AAA companies never really tried doing this since (though some directors did market themselves very well despite that. Like Kojima or Romero). It's a shame we have husks walking under a brand when all the personality has long left.
- SillyUsername 1y ago
  Won't happen. They'll buy the next indie game studio that is successful, chew on their profits, then tank that, rinse repeat.
fidotron 1y ago
Yeah, I worked there too and share this sentiment: > I respect this company a lot, even though they always seem to do things that embitter the gaming community against them. What I saw, more often than not, was most of the company consisted of the biggest genuine fans of their own products, and it was a few well placed ultra cynical bad apples that persisted in causing such enormous antagonism.
- johnnyanmac 1y ago
  >it was a few well placed ultra cynical bad apples that persisted in causing such enormous antagonism. Too bad those bad apples were the ones all the way at the top. Kotick's "we'll charge for reloads during an online match" statements really were a harbinger on what those in power thought of gaming as. (I had him as CEO too, I understand).
this_user 1y ago
It seems likely that they will consolidate their studios and streamline the headcoputn. Bioware may be dead for good, at least to the extent that it is still alive at this point. And there are probably other acquired studios like that.
- jsbisviewtiful 1y ago
  If Bioware can squeak out one more good Mass Effect it would make for a great swan song. I don't really know what the last EA game I bought was other than the Mass Effect trilogy on Steam. I started avoiding Ubisoft games after Assassin's Creed 3 and EA followed a few years after that- so maybe 2015ish?
chubot 1y ago
I worked there too (2002-2004), but didn't that all happen when the founder Trip Hawkins was there? It looks like he left in 1991 I don't think you can meaningfully call EA the same company -- it's more like a different company with the same name, and doesn't deserve respect for its past achievements By the time I was there, over 20 years ago now, the management was already shitty. The people were great, but the management took advantage of employees' love for games. (I was part of the "EA Spouse" settlement) --- In fact I now remember an utterly bizarre experience when I was an intern at EA. The CFO spoke in front of 20 interns, and reminded us that our jobs was to make the stock price go up. Like whenever you do anything, you should think about the stock price as your ultimate goal. So the company isn't really about making games? I mean I can appreciate his honesty, compared to later big tech "make the world a better place" slogans, while also just trying to make the number go up But it's a weird thing to say to a bunch of 22 year olds, since they have little influence on the stock price, other than trying to increase their knowledge of the craft There were a number of other shady characters in EA management. They were often brought in from outside Even though I criticized "don't be evil", I have to say that by and large Google management was much more competent, and they came off as kinder, even though the company changed eventually too --- I do think it has to do with whether the founder still leads the company -- there has to be someone mission-driven, not just money-driven I think Trip Hawkins was mission-driven. Larry Page was to an extent, but I think he got sick of managing the company, so he let the optimizers take over And private equity are almost universally short-term optimizers, in favor of themselves and against customers, which tends to ruin the company in the long term. So I see this as a continuation of a multi-decade trend with EA. Though I'd be interested in any counterexamples, i.e. private equity that actually made the company better in the long term
ddtaylor 1y ago
There was a time in the earlier days of EA where the company had value. That time has passed. The company mainly sits on exclusive licenses and makes minimal changes to the franchises in an attempt to milk cash. The cash milking part has gone downhill recently. I genuinely hope they lose ALL of their exclusive sports licenses. They shouldn't be exclusive to begin with, but enabling these companies to hold the entire place hostage with their inferior and poorly crafted games just drives away competition and makes everyone play something else. I have zero interest in football, soccer, basketball games, etc. but I did play them as a kid and I know young kids play sports games more. The fact that Madden has been re-publishing that game with the same Groundhogs Day release notes for 20+ years speaks volumes.
- mvdtnz 1y ago
  > There was a time in the earlier days of EA where the company had value. That time has passed. The company that just sold for $55 billion?
  - sph 1y ago
    Shareholder value != artistic value. In fact, in videogaming, they tend to be inversely correlated.
  - ddtaylor 1y ago
    If we're comparing large companies that buy stuff up and milk profits etc. they are losing to other better executed giants like Tencent and Embracer Group.
jerf 1y ago
I am old enough to remember a time when I had positive associations with being an "EA game". The games in question were on my Commodore 64. But still, there was such a time. EA has a reputation for buying companies and draining all of their reputation for money. The first company that the EA of today did that to was EA itself. There was a time it was just a gaming company. Actually it was about up to the Origin acquisition that I still had at least some positive feelings for them, before the pattern really settled in. After that, though, I got nothin'.
- fidotron 1y ago
  > EA has a reputation for buying companies and draining all of their reputation for money If you saw this from the other side you'd see just how much the reverse was true. This was one of the great mysteries of the place. It's one of those situations where in the public perception the blame all flows up to EA, but the credit is always with the studios. The truth is somewhere else.
  - Aeolun 1y ago
    I think this is because the credit can never be with those that purely provide money and dictate terms. Nobody thinks the investors are what make the company. It’s the founders.
    - fidotron 1y ago
      I spent time as a TD on both the dev and publishing sides - the perception all EA (the publisher) is doing is money and terms is very much mistaken. To take the case of Bioware, the SW:TOR launch was a notable disaster. There is no way in hell Bioware by themselves could have recovered from that, and it took a lot of "external" firefighting to get that under control. OTOH various decisions many people assume came from EA were actually made by studio heads, against EA wishes, because the studio head thought it would increase their revenue and thus bonus. One of the reasons Activision outperformed EA was they have a better culture of co-operation between departments. Efforts to improve this at EA never ceased to actually make it worse.
paxys 1y ago
The company you admire died a long time ago. Their focus today isn't on these historic franchises but releasing the same FIFA every year with new forms of microtransactions to hook a new generation of teenagers. And they have already laid off several thousand employees in the last 2-3 years.
- johnnyanmac 1y ago
  This move will only lay off thousands more, sadly. Like the gaming industry needed even more veterans kicked out. It's definitely not good times at all, no matter how you feel about the companies. Three of the largest 3rd party western studios in the last 3 years are being bought out. This doesn't bode well no matter where you are or what you consume in the industry.
  - hackernewds 1y ago
    The nice part about this is when employees get laid off they distribute their talents to other companies. And now the barrier to entry to starting a small indie outfit is so much lower. They don't just simply disappear
    - meheleventyone 1y ago
      That’s a very rosey interpretation when lots of veteran game devs are struggling to find work or capital for small studios.
spixy 1y ago
Isn't The Sims Division just rebranded Maxis?
EasyMark 1y ago
It seems like these types of buys are often associated with offloading debt to the bought company so that it can be shed to a company that they can then let bankrupt and then pay pennies on the dollar of their debt, if they have to pay anything. EA seems like a prime candidate for that.

mlindner 1y ago

Except the entire idea that games should be promoted like hollywood movies is _exactly_ what precipitated this whole downfall. Games are not movies nor should they be like movies. Personally I hope there are tons of layoffs. The entire industry needs to be rinsed clean and refreshed, especially the US gaming industry.

falcor84 1y ago
Would you mind saying more about this? Why does promoting games as if they were movies is an issue? Is this just about the rising development costs of AAA games, or is there something else here that you're alluding to?
- mlindner 1y ago
  A movie is something you watch, a game is something you play. It's not there to tell you a grand story. It's there to wrap some good gameplay in some storytelling packaging. A game is closer to a novel than it is to a hollywood movie. The most loved games (high replayability is a key component) often have quite lacking "story" if any story at all. What makes them shine is how they feel to play, even better if they encourage your own imagination to invent your own story. When you try to make a game into a movie the true focus is lost. If your game can only be played "once" (not including tacking-on achievements/side-quests/etc) then your game is a movie and not a game.
  - falcor84 1y ago
    Thanks for clarifying. I understand your perspective now, but just want to say that this is really different from mine, which might be influenced by my having a relatively strong Need for Closure[0]. I've been a life-long gamer, and have almost never had any interest in replaying a game (at least not until it's been perhaps a decade). When I finish a good game and get to the credits, I have a very strong sense of catharsis, which leads me then to enjoy clicking on that Delete button and starting on the next game. And just to be clear - it's not that I am trying to rush things and be done with the games; I take my time with most games, and I do think a lot about the good ones after, but it's pleasant memories of my time with them, rather than any desire to go back into the fray. As you can imagine, I mostly enjoy single-player narrative games with exploration and some RPG elements, rather than multi-player ones, or open-ended ones with infinite-replayability mechanics. For reference, some of my favorite game franchises include: LBA, Zelda, The Last of Us, Mass Effect, The Witcher, Portal, Talos Principle, GTA, Kotor, Final Fantasy and Kingdom Hearts. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closure_(psychology) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closure_(psychology)
lentil_soup 1y ago
>> Personally I hope there are tons of layoffs Wow, I guess empathy is not a thing anymore
- johnnyanmac 1y ago
  Sadly a thing us devs are used to compared to more coporate jobs. We'll take the blame for a lot of issues leadership actively forced the development to go down. We don't set prices or DLC/MTX schemes, and can only push back so much on release dates (especially in the day of "we'll fix it with a Day One Patch"). As a dirty open secret: most "unexpected bugs" found day one are probably on some Jira sheet, been there for months, and were triaged as such to "will fix later". Only magically being prioritized after public feedback that QA teams already expected.
johnnyanmac 1y ago
I believe the GP's point was not "games need to focus on cinematics and mind breaking graphics over gameplay". It was how you make brands based on people, not teams. Jane's Combat Simulator, American McGee's Alice in Wonderland, Sid Meier's Games (when Fireaxis had closer relations with them), Clive Barker's Undying. We have indies who embody their games, but EA was doing this well before that. And AAA companies never really tried doing this since (though some directors did market themselves very well despite that. Like Kojima or Romero). It's a shame we have husks walking under a brand when all the personality has long left.
SillyUsername 1y ago
Won't happen. They'll buy the next indie game studio that is successful, chew on their profits, then tank that, rinse repeat.

fidotron 1y ago

Yeah, I worked there too and share this sentiment: > I respect this company a lot, even though they always seem to do things that embitter the gaming community against them. What I saw, more often than not, was most of the company consisted of the biggest genuine fans of their own products, and it was a few well placed ultra cynical bad apples that persisted in causing such enormous antagonism.

johnnyanmac 1y ago
>it was a few well placed ultra cynical bad apples that persisted in causing such enormous antagonism. Too bad those bad apples were the ones all the way at the top. Kotick's "we'll charge for reloads during an online match" statements really were a harbinger on what those in power thought of gaming as. (I had him as CEO too, I understand).

this_user 1y ago

It seems likely that they will consolidate their studios and streamline the headcoputn. Bioware may be dead for good, at least to the extent that it is still alive at this point. And there are probably other acquired studios like that.

jsbisviewtiful 1y ago
If Bioware can squeak out one more good Mass Effect it would make for a great swan song. I don't really know what the last EA game I bought was other than the Mass Effect trilogy on Steam. I started avoiding Ubisoft games after Assassin's Creed 3 and EA followed a few years after that- so maybe 2015ish?

chubot 1y ago

I worked there too (2002-2004), but didn't that all happen when the founder Trip Hawkins was there? It looks like he left in 1991 I don't think you can meaningfully call EA the same company -- it's more like a different company with the same name, and doesn't deserve respect for its past achievements By the time I was there, over 20 years ago now, the management was already shitty. The people were great, but the management took advantage of employees' love for games. (I was part of the "EA Spouse" settlement) --- In fact I now remember an utterly bizarre experience when I was an intern at EA. The CFO spoke in front of 20 interns, and reminded us that our jobs was to make the stock price go up. Like whenever you do anything, you should think about the stock price as your ultimate goal. So the company isn't really about making games? I mean I can appreciate his honesty, compared to later big tech "make the world a better place" slogans, while also just trying to make the number go up But it's a weird thing to say to a bunch of 22 year olds, since they have little influence on the stock price, other than trying to increase their knowledge of the craft There were a number of other shady characters in EA management. They were often brought in from outside Even though I criticized "don't be evil", I have to say that by and large Google management was much more competent, and they came off as kinder, even though the company changed eventually too --- I do think it has to do with whether the founder still leads the company -- there has to be someone mission-driven, not just money-driven I think Trip Hawkins was mission-driven. Larry Page was to an extent, but I think he got sick of managing the company, so he let the optimizers take over And private equity are almost universally short-term optimizers, in favor of themselves and against customers, which tends to ruin the company in the long term. So I see this as a continuation of a multi-decade trend with EA. Though I'd be interested in any counterexamples, i.e. private equity that actually made the company better in the long term

ddtaylor 1y ago

There was a time in the earlier days of EA where the company had value. That time has passed. The company mainly sits on exclusive licenses and makes minimal changes to the franchises in an attempt to milk cash. The cash milking part has gone downhill recently. I genuinely hope they lose ALL of their exclusive sports licenses. They shouldn't be exclusive to begin with, but enabling these companies to hold the entire place hostage with their inferior and poorly crafted games just drives away competition and makes everyone play something else. I have zero interest in football, soccer, basketball games, etc. but I did play them as a kid and I know young kids play sports games more. The fact that Madden has been re-publishing that game with the same Groundhogs Day release notes for 20+ years speaks volumes.

mvdtnz 1y ago
> There was a time in the earlier days of EA where the company had value. That time has passed. The company that just sold for $55 billion?
- sph 1y ago
  Shareholder value != artistic value. In fact, in videogaming, they tend to be inversely correlated.
- ddtaylor 1y ago
  If we're comparing large companies that buy stuff up and milk profits etc. they are losing to other better executed giants like Tencent and Embracer Group.

jerf 1y ago

I am old enough to remember a time when I had positive associations with being an "EA game". The games in question were on my Commodore 64. But still, there was such a time. EA has a reputation for buying companies and draining all of their reputation for money. The first company that the EA of today did that to was EA itself. There was a time it was just a gaming company. Actually it was about up to the Origin acquisition that I still had at least some positive feelings for them, before the pattern really settled in. After that, though, I got nothin'.

fidotron 1y ago
> EA has a reputation for buying companies and draining all of their reputation for money If you saw this from the other side you'd see just how much the reverse was true. This was one of the great mysteries of the place. It's one of those situations where in the public perception the blame all flows up to EA, but the credit is always with the studios. The truth is somewhere else.
- Aeolun 1y ago
  I think this is because the credit can never be with those that purely provide money and dictate terms. Nobody thinks the investors are what make the company. It’s the founders.
  - fidotron 1y ago
    I spent time as a TD on both the dev and publishing sides - the perception all EA (the publisher) is doing is money and terms is very much mistaken. To take the case of Bioware, the SW:TOR launch was a notable disaster. There is no way in hell Bioware by themselves could have recovered from that, and it took a lot of "external" firefighting to get that under control. OTOH various decisions many people assume came from EA were actually made by studio heads, against EA wishes, because the studio head thought it would increase their revenue and thus bonus. One of the reasons Activision outperformed EA was they have a better culture of co-operation between departments. Efforts to improve this at EA never ceased to actually make it worse.

paxys 1y ago

The company you admire died a long time ago. Their focus today isn't on these historic franchises but releasing the same FIFA every year with new forms of microtransactions to hook a new generation of teenagers. And they have already laid off several thousand employees in the last 2-3 years.

johnnyanmac 1y ago
This move will only lay off thousands more, sadly. Like the gaming industry needed even more veterans kicked out. It's definitely not good times at all, no matter how you feel about the companies. Three of the largest 3rd party western studios in the last 3 years are being bought out. This doesn't bode well no matter where you are or what you consume in the industry.
- hackernewds 1y ago
  The nice part about this is when employees get laid off they distribute their talents to other companies. And now the barrier to entry to starting a small indie outfit is so much lower. They don't just simply disappear
  - meheleventyone 1y ago
    That’s a very rosey interpretation when lots of veteran game devs are struggling to find work or capital for small studios.

spixy 1y ago

Isn't The Sims Division just rebranded Maxis?

EasyMark 1y ago

It seems like these types of buys are often associated with offloading debt to the bought company so that it can be shed to a company that they can then let bankrupt and then pay pennies on the dollar of their debt, if they have to pay anything. EA seems like a prime candidate for that.