12 ms·

Westwood, Origin, Bullfrog, Maxis.... EA's strategy seems to be "Buy studio, make them shovel a couple incomplete games out of the door, close studio, repeat."

Westwood, Origin, Bullfrog, Maxis.... EA's strategy seems to be "Buy studio, make them shovel a couple incomplete games out of the door, close studio, repeat." Okay, they're asshats. What I don't get is, how does this make them any money? They're basically strip-mining the games industry, is this really more profitable than actually making good games?

delinka 12y ago
Eliminating competition.
- bottled_poe 12y ago
  I hope that is EA's strategy, as it will end them. The overhead of entering the games industry is cheaper than ever, and as a result we are seeing more and more independent game developers successfully penetrating the market.
  - delinka 12y ago
    I personally agree. But consider none of this is on the radar of the stereotypical MBA/middle manager/C-level execs/...
  - spiritplumber 12y ago
    EA has been around for 30 years though, so whatever they are doing, it works - what I don't understand is why does it work.
    - interesting_att 12y ago
      EA survive off of Madden and FIFA licenses. They don't have to spend that much money on improving the game year after year, but millions of people purchase them almost religiously.
      - chongli 12y ago
        They don't spend a lot on development but they certainly do on licensing fees.
    - themartorana 12y ago
      Agree with @interesting_att - it's all about EA Sports. As much as I despise EA, even I get sucked into FIFA. Their sports franchise will support one hundred studio fuck-ups - annual minor updates are as good as owning a money printing press.
- ghshephard 12y ago
  Pretty good strategy from a financial perspective if you consider game purchasing to be a zero-sum game. If your average consumer is willing to spend $XX on games, and $YY is going to solid competitor ZZ, then acquiring and shutting down ZZ, removing them from the game industry, frees up that $YY to be spent on EA games. What I don't understand about that strategy is what prevents the acquired employees from re-forming as a new company? Are there non-competes in place? Is it difficult to get financing to form a AAA game company? I'm presuming that, regardless of what happens, it takes a while.
  - interesting_att 12y ago
    It is very difficult to get financing for a AAA game company since the industry is so hit-driven. Moreover, it'd be rather difficult to find investors just after the studio you worked for just shut down due to poor performance.
  - kenrikm 12y ago
    Financing AAA games through a studio is similar to dealing with a record label, the cards are stacked agains you unless you really make it big.
  - pandaman 12y ago
    >What I don't understand about that strategy is what prevents the acquired employees from re-forming as a new company? Nothing prevents this, there had been many studios by former employees of a shut down studio (e.g. Ensemble -> Robot, Pandemic -> Killzone, Incognito -> Lightbox, Big Huge Games -> Impossible etc. etc). However, usually the reason a studio had been shut down was its poor performance and not some evil marketing plan so the respawned studios inherit the problems of the original studio complicated with the talent drain that happens during such a transition.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
cpayne 12y ago
I think that is the point - it isn't making them money! When you think of the brand "Maxis", what do you think? Either the Sims or Sim City. But the brand EA is a far more recognisable (and valuable). Like it or not, EA buys a company, milks it for what its worth, then kill it off.
- bitJericho 12y ago
  I doubt the EA name will continue to be valuable. I've already learned not to buy any EA games as it'll be garbage. I have no doubt that the average consumer will start to see that soon.
  - deciplex 12y ago
    It was a blessing in disguise when EA started Origin and stopped selling their shovelware on Steam. Now I don't need to worry about accidentally purchasing one of their games!
- pekk 12y ago
  I think about old Apple and Amiga games like SimLife... the Sims wasn't really in character for Maxis, it was a perfect EA game
- tsotha 12y ago
  I don't think the EA brand is worth much. It took a big hit to its reputation with the always-on DRM strategy, and it's widely regarded as a crappy place to work.
lmkg 12y ago
As a strategy, it's better than being profitable: it's predictable. The forecasts for the upcoming financial quarters are much more likely to be accurate when you only work with known IP. The CEO is more beholden to analysts and stockholders than to customers. He has more to lose by failing expectations than he has to gain by exceeding expectations. Therefore, EA adopts a strategy that minimizes variance rather than maximizing profit. But yes, it's profitable enough. Games and studios generally have more name-recognition than publishers. EA can take existing name-recognition on a series and generate large revenue from the first bad game they turn out. They launch a large marketing campaign, and by pushing pre-orders they can get more people to spend money on a game before they have an opportunity to find out what the product is that they're actually buying. At this point it's practically a science, and the market is only starting to push back (the latest Assassin's Creed may be doing a number on pre-orders).
- m_mueller 12y ago
  This is pretty much how a deadly virus works, right? Infect a particular game brand (cell) by buying (infecting) it, generate enough new copies of the virus (selling the game), then destroy it and release the virus onto the next cells. If the analogy is correct, the game market will either die, find a cure and eject EA or EA adapts and finds a way to coexist such as not to kill the host cells anymore.
  - Lordo 12y ago
    Hahah excellent analogy.
  - AndyKelley 12y ago
    this is nonsense
    - hueving 12y ago
      Excellent rebuttal. I like how you clearly outlined and explained your counterpoints.
troymc 12y ago
EA has at least one other strategy, with EA Sports: every year they come out with a new and improved Football, Basketball, Hockey, Golf, etc. and people get it. Madden NFL has been going since 1988. To be fair, EA Sports did discontinue some of their less popular games, such as Rugby and Cricket.
- spiritplumber 12y ago
  Sadly that looks like it's enough... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cxhs-GLE29Q https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cxhs-GLE29Q
- omegaham 12y ago
  And despite all of their shiny improvements, Madden 2005 and 2008 are considered the best from a gameplay and mechanics standpoint.
  - fernandotakai 12y ago
    i can't speak for Madden because i'm not a fan/player. But for FIFA (a franchise that i've been playing since Road To World Cup 98), 2014 is easily the best one. They improved a shitton of stuff. Also, they have FIFA Ultimate Team which has a whole meta game of players and cards (which i love).
- thefreeman 12y ago
  Actually the real strategy for those games is to buy exclusive multi-year contracts with the professional sports so that there is 0 competition.
- ryanhuff 12y ago
  They also discontinued Baseball, which pretty much made the Xbox platform crap for a baseball fan (my son).
prewett 12y ago
On the plus side, it looks like there is a vacancy in the simulation game market...
- chao- 12y ago
  Coincidentally I was just looking back into the state of city simulation games the other day. On my list of "Games I have played beyond any reasonable number of hours" is Sim City 4 with the various mods available. I was, like most, disappointed with the 2013 offering. Cities XL never really piqued my interest, and I've also switched entirely to Linux for my desktop needs. Then the other day I heard about an upcoming title called "Cities: Skylines", which seems like it has promise from a gameplay standpoint. Even better, it's cross-platform to both Linux and Mac. Edit: It's interesting that the recommended hardware for Linux is a lower bar than on Windows (see bottom of https://www.paradoxplaza.com/cities-skylines https://www.paradoxplaza.com/cities-skylines). Can anyone with a game dev or graphics background speculate on that?
  - rancur 12y ago
    > I was, like most, disappointed but can you even??
    - pavel_lishin 12y ago
      He wasn't, like, totally most disappointed, duh. pops bubblegum He was disappointed, a sentiment that was shared by many others.
  - poopchute 12y ago
    I quite like sim building games. My most recent favourite is Banished http://www.shiningrocksoftware.com/game/ http://www.shiningrocksoftware.com/game/ Not nearly as complex as sim city but still very enjoyable
    - vetler 12y ago
      Wow, this looks great. I think I've actually seen this earlier sometime, but dismissed it since it was only available on Windows. Now that I actually have a decent Windows laptop, I'll definitely try it out.
davidgay 12y ago
EA bought Maxis in 1997. The Sims was released in 2000. We're now in 2015. I don't think that timeline is compatible with your theory.
- mjn 12y ago
  My second-hand understanding of the arrangement is that from 1997 until roughly the mid 2000s, Maxis's autonomy was mostly protected by Will Wright's personal clout (plus possibly some terms around the acquisition, if there were any). He was high-profile, a charismatic media figure, and very against moving to EA's main campus in Redwood City—partly to retain Maxis's autonomy, and partly just because he lived in the East Bay and didn't want to commute to the Peninsula. It helped that the first post-acquisition new title from Maxis was The Sims, a massive financial success, which allowed EA to feel comfortable taking a hands-off approach and allowing the studio to do weird things, so long as the weird things brought in piles of revenue. From the mid-2000s, though, EA started merging bits of Maxis in, closing the Walnut Creek office and moving those staff to Redwood City, but still leaving a smaller Maxis remaining in Emeryville, which continued to be headed by Wright, with considerable autonomy. He used that autonomy to lead the Spore (2008) development, an ambitious concept that was not a financial success (though it arguably kicked off the current resurgence of procedural content generation in games). And then he left the company in 2009. At that point I think many people in the industry considered it inevitable that the remaining Maxis would be moved to the main EA campus sooner or later.
  - DonHopkins 12y ago
    Your second hand understanding is pretty accurate. In the case of Maxis, it's not accurate or fair for the person to say that EA's strategy is to "Buy studio, make them shovel a couple incomplete games out of the door, close studio, repeat." That ignores the fact that EA buying Maxis enabled Maxis to successfully finish and ship The Sims, which became the best selling PC game of all time. And that The Sims division was a major part of EA (one of three main studios), which made a huge amount of money over a long period of time. You're correct to say that Maxis and The Sims franchise enjoyed autonomy and protection thanks to Will Wright, while he was at the company. But after he left, he didn't have much to do with it, and it was on its own. Many of the people working The Sims and SimCity franchises were the original people from Maxis or the early days of The Sims at EA, and they did a wonderful job of carrying on without Will. The infamous problems of latest SimCity release were actually Origin's fault, which the Maxis people unsuccessfully fought against, and had to take the rap for. Lucy Bradshaw managed The Sims and SimCity since EA acquired Maxis, but EA threw her under the bus by insisting that she make public statements that simply and obviously weren't true, in an attempt to justify Origin's idiotic and non-negotiable mistakes that they pushed on Maxis. Ocean Quigley was the lead artist for SimCity and The Sims at Maxis since before EA acquired us. Ocean invented the beautiful yet practical hybrid z-buffered 2.5D / real time 3D "holodeck" technology that enabled The Sims 1 to run well on non-accelerated low-end PCs in 2000, which enabled it its widespread success and appeal to casual gamers and young kids (who inherit their older sibling's low end PCs). Ocean's technical and artistic contributions were as important as Will's game design contributions, and he stuck around for much longer. He led the ground-up redesign of SimCity (2013), which I think was both true to the original game, and took it into a totally new territory, away from the terrible tiles, and re-oriented around free-form roads. Ocean and other Maxis employees were rightfully frustrated by Origin's interference in SimCity (specifically their insistence on online play, and their initial public pretension that offline play was impossible). After the release, Ocean left to pursue his own projects. After working on Will's ideas for so many years, he has a lot of his own original ideas that he wanted to work on. He explained how it was time to step out of Will's shadow in this article [1], which I empathize with. [1] http://venturebeat.com/2013/07/19/ocean-quigley-steps-out-of-the-shadow-of-will-wright-interview/ http://venturebeat.com/2013/07/19/ocean-quigley-steps-out-of... Maxis hired me in January 1997 to work on The Sims (before it was given that name), then EA bought Maxis in July 1997, then we shipped The Sims 1 in February 2000, and I left soon after the release. Then I did some contracting for EA to develop user created content tools like The Sims Transmogrifier, and I worked for Will's own company, the Stupid Fun Club, while he was still working for EA on The Sims expansion packs and Spore. At the time, SFC was just Will's side project for, well, doing stupid fun stuff. We did things that were outside of EA's scope like robotics and reality TV shows, including Empathy [2] and Servitude [3] (which were never aired), and researched and developed some of his entertainment, toy and game ideas. [2] http://donhopkins.com/home/RobotMovies/Empathy.mpg http://donhopkins.com/home/RobotMovies/Empathy.mpg [3] http://donhopkins.com/home/RobotMovies/Servitude.mpg http://donhopkins.com/home/RobotMovies/Servitude.mpg After Will finished Spore, he left EA in 2009, and EA invested in SFC. Then I joined SFC full time, where we worked on various projects including producing a viewer-scripted TV show, Bar Karma, with Current TV. [4] [4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bar_Karma http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bar_Karma SFC was shut down after problems spinning off a company called HiveMind, that ended in lawsuits due to the melt-down and failure of a self-described "Serial Hackerpreneur" (cough, cough), who neglected to pay the rent, let alone secure the investments he was contractually obliged to, after which he baselessly accused Will of "atrocity" and "genocide", then failed to deliver on his blustering threat that he tweeted: "Looking for PR professionals to build awareness for "THE INCONVENIENT TRUTH ABOUT WILL", an exposé documentary, releasing on YouTube 6/2012." >HiveMind [5] [5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiveMind http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiveMind >It was announced in early June 2012 that the entire project was on hold due to ongoing legal disputes between company executives. Said Wright, "Hivemind is still a company. But it has no money. No nothing. It's just sitting there because of the litigation. It is frozen. It's so complex and there's quite a bit of disappointment... We have to find out where this is going in the near term." On October 26, Wright and HiveMind co-founder Jawad Ansari stated they had settled their disagreements regarding the company. Wright said, "We are pleased to have reached a friendly and respectful resolution. Jawad’s entrepreneurial energy, passion for the expansion of the online game industry and tenacious execution brought the necessary elements together to build Hive Mind to where the operating team can take the Company forward." >Game pioneer Will Wright’s personal gaming startup falls apart in litigation (exclusive) [6] [6] http://venturebeat.com/2012/06/03/game-pioneer-will-wrights-personal-gaming-startup-falls-apart-in-litigation-exclusive/ http://venturebeat.com/2012/06/03/game-pioneer-will-wrights-... >“It didn’t work out at all,” Wright said. “Hive Mind is still a company. But it has no money. No nothing. It’s just sitting there because of the litigation. It is frozen. It’s so complex and there’s quite a bit of disappointment.” >Ansari withdrew his lawsuit in Alameda, Calif., and in Delaware, the court appointed Wright, Randy Breen and Ansari as the board of Hive Mind. The litigation is still ongoing. >Will Wright's Social Game Is In Legal Limbo [7] [7] http://uproxx.com/gammasquad/2012/06/will-wrights-social-game-is-in-legal-limbo/ http://uproxx.com/gammasquad/2012/06/will-wrights-social-gam... >To give you an idea of just how ugly this is getting, the guy who started all this, Jawad Ansari, recently tweeted that he’s looking for PR professionals to help him plug a YouTube “documentary” called “The Inconvenient Truth about Will”. Yeah, Jawad, if you have to start with the smear tactics, we’re just going to go ahead and assume you don’t have much of a case and are a bit of an ass. >SimCity creator Will Wright settles lawsuit over Hive Mind studio control [8] [8] http://www.polygon.com/2012/11/2/3589520/simcity-creator-will-wright-settles-lawsuit-over-hive-mind-studio http://www.polygon.com/2012/11/2/3589520/simcity-creator-wil... >Ansari released his own statement, adding: "During my 18 years in the business I have never met anyone who has the creativity and vision of Will Wright. Over the period of several months working with Will Wright, Will's mentorship helped me develop a deep understanding of players' psychology and thus the ability to see the world in dimensions that I did not know even existed. For this I would always be thankful to Will!" Yeeeeeah, and he's sooooo sorry he took the money. [9] [9] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XA8PXbTb7OQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XA8PXbTb7OQ
frik 12y ago
The SimCity reboot and The Sims 4 were a bad joke. So it's not surprising. It was definitely EA's fault to guide SimCity and Sims 4 in the wrong direction. Less content, fake simulation, even more DLCs, always-on-DRM, smaller game worlds, more casual gameplay. EA was also named the worst company to work for in the U.S.
- guncheck 12y ago
  EA did a fairly poor job with SimCity, I agree. A very, very poor job. EA was named the worst company to work for in the US, but that was years and years ago. They've really done a better job at keeping their developers happy (I worked there two years ago as a dev). I mean sure, Alpha and Beta can still be brutal, but what game studio isn't like this? Overall, I enjoyed working at EA and would work there again if they didn't offer me such a shitty salary. A shitty, shitty salary. Pretty much the only thing I can complain about. Oh, and no free food.
  - yoklov 12y ago
    Worse than average for the game industry? I'm making less than 60k over here :( (But honestly I'd rather do something I enjoy and make less than something I don't even if it pays more)
    - guncheck 12y ago
      yeah :( they offered me starting pay of 60k, which granted is not the worst. It's alot more than other jobs, but I just had a better offer somewhere else that I couldn't say no to (though not in games). I had other priorities that had to come first than my love for games :(
  - frik 12y ago
    > EA was named the worst company to work for in the US, but that was years and years ago Apr 09, 2013: EA wins Consumerist's Worst Company in America poll for second year in a row http://www.polygon.com/2013/4/9/4205402/ea-wins-consumerists-worst-company-in-america-poll-again http://www.polygon.com/2013/4/9/4205402/ea-wins-consumerists...
Qwertious 12y ago
Some people think this is happening to Bioware, too. See: http://i.imgur.com/e8Wp0yZ.jpg http://i.imgur.com/e8Wp0yZ.jpg
- anon4 12y ago
  Bioware have successfully pivoted from rich story-driven RPG territory into modern military shooter (butwithlasers!) territory, which seems like it will be predictably profitable for at least another decade.
randomname2 12y ago
Interesting how no one has mentioned stock buybacks yet. These job cuts are a cost cutting exercise, giving the company more funds to buy back stock with, making the stock price go up, meaning the executives get heftier bonuses. The "fire people to buy back stock in order to make the stock price go up" strategy is extremely popular in this economic environment.
- randomname2 12y ago
  This story about their $750M stock buyback plan supports the assertion: http://www.streetinsider.com/Stock+Buybacks/Electronic+Arts,+Inc.+%28EA%29+Announces+$750M+Stock+Buyback+Plan/9451466.html http://www.streetinsider.com/Stock+Buybacks/Electronic+Arts,...
SixSigma 12y ago
Business says "we exist to make a profit". People don't tend to be profit maximisers in their actual work. I don't know many workers who think "which one of these choices is most profitable for the company"
- blumkvist 12y ago
  Is this a joke?
  - SixSigma 12y ago
    No. It's one of the core beliefs of Behavioral Science
    - blumkvist 12y ago
      Sales, Marketing and Accounting departments are filled with people whose only job is to think how to make more money for the company. Is that covered in the core beliefs of Behavioral Science?
      - SixSigma 12y ago
        You're missing the point. They don't think about how to maximise profit. They think about how to hit their sales target, how to run successful marketing and how to perform their accounting function. Assuming they even do that. Their daily thoughts are more likely to be : How can I make sure my superiors notice I perform my role. How can I make sure I don't fuck this up. What do I need to do to get a promotion. I don't feel fulfilled, I think I'll go find a job elsewhere, I wonder where I should start looking. etc. etc. When you posted these comments were you thinking : how does posting on HN maximise my profit ?
        blumkvist 12y ago
        The fastest way to show that you don't understand what you're talking about is through analogy. I'm paraphrasing heavily, not to hurt your feelings. Less voodoo science, more thinking.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
plikan13 12y ago
> is this really more profitable than actually making good games? I know I'm going to sound like a terrible elitist snob, but the target audience for today's mainstream video games are not exactly the top layer of humanity. It's pretty much a tale of milking the stupid, i'm afraid.
ricree 12y ago
Maxis had a nearly 18 year run after the EA purchase. A lot of independent studios die over that sort of timeframe. They released every entry in the fairly successful Sims series, as well as two well regarded entries for SimCity. It's been a while since they put out anything special, but overall the company seems to have done well by EA.
TheCondor 12y ago
Is it EA or just how game studios work? Historically, studios either put out zero games or one game. I think it's the fairly extreme outliers that do it over and over and most of them deal in sequels. If you look inside the game industry, I think I would be hard pressed to do a second game if I made games. It doesn't look like an easy feat to keep the team magic working. Likewise, there seems to be no shortage of up and comers that want to make a new game. The studio might not be as valuable as we want to think. Which would you bet more money on: Maxis coming up with a new hit game concept or the masses going ape over sim city 2015 on ps4? And by "ape" I mean willing to buy it for over $30. I have a hard time with both options, just like ea.

delinka 12y ago

Eliminating competition.

bottled_poe 12y ago
I hope that is EA's strategy, as it will end them. The overhead of entering the games industry is cheaper than ever, and as a result we are seeing more and more independent game developers successfully penetrating the market.
- delinka 12y ago
  I personally agree. But consider none of this is on the radar of the stereotypical MBA/middle manager/C-level execs/...
- spiritplumber 12y ago
  EA has been around for 30 years though, so whatever they are doing, it works - what I don't understand is why does it work.
  - interesting_att 12y ago
    EA survive off of Madden and FIFA licenses. They don't have to spend that much money on improving the game year after year, but millions of people purchase them almost religiously.
    - chongli 12y ago
      They don't spend a lot on development but they certainly do on licensing fees.
  - themartorana 12y ago
    Agree with @interesting_att - it's all about EA Sports. As much as I despise EA, even I get sucked into FIFA. Their sports franchise will support one hundred studio fuck-ups - annual minor updates are as good as owning a money printing press.
ghshephard 12y ago
Pretty good strategy from a financial perspective if you consider game purchasing to be a zero-sum game. If your average consumer is willing to spend $XX on games, and $YY is going to solid competitor ZZ, then acquiring and shutting down ZZ, removing them from the game industry, frees up that $YY to be spent on EA games. What I don't understand about that strategy is what prevents the acquired employees from re-forming as a new company? Are there non-competes in place? Is it difficult to get financing to form a AAA game company? I'm presuming that, regardless of what happens, it takes a while.
- interesting_att 12y ago
  It is very difficult to get financing for a AAA game company since the industry is so hit-driven. Moreover, it'd be rather difficult to find investors just after the studio you worked for just shut down due to poor performance.
- kenrikm 12y ago
  Financing AAA games through a studio is similar to dealing with a record label, the cards are stacked agains you unless you really make it big.
- pandaman 12y ago
  >What I don't understand about that strategy is what prevents the acquired employees from re-forming as a new company? Nothing prevents this, there had been many studios by former employees of a shut down studio (e.g. Ensemble -> Robot, Pandemic -> Killzone, Incognito -> Lightbox, Big Huge Games -> Impossible etc. etc). However, usually the reason a studio had been shut down was its poor performance and not some evil marketing plan so the respawned studios inherit the problems of the original studio complicated with the talent drain that happens during such a transition.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

cpayne 12y ago

I think that is the point - it isn't making them money! When you think of the brand "Maxis", what do you think? Either the Sims or Sim City. But the brand EA is a far more recognisable (and valuable). Like it or not, EA buys a company, milks it for what its worth, then kill it off.

bitJericho 12y ago
I doubt the EA name will continue to be valuable. I've already learned not to buy any EA games as it'll be garbage. I have no doubt that the average consumer will start to see that soon.
- deciplex 12y ago
  It was a blessing in disguise when EA started Origin and stopped selling their shovelware on Steam. Now I don't need to worry about accidentally purchasing one of their games!
pekk 12y ago
I think about old Apple and Amiga games like SimLife... the Sims wasn't really in character for Maxis, it was a perfect EA game
tsotha 12y ago
I don't think the EA brand is worth much. It took a big hit to its reputation with the always-on DRM strategy, and it's widely regarded as a crappy place to work.

lmkg 12y ago

As a strategy, it's better than being profitable: it's predictable. The forecasts for the upcoming financial quarters are much more likely to be accurate when you only work with known IP. The CEO is more beholden to analysts and stockholders than to customers. He has more to lose by failing expectations than he has to gain by exceeding expectations. Therefore, EA adopts a strategy that minimizes variance rather than maximizing profit. But yes, it's profitable enough. Games and studios generally have more name-recognition than publishers. EA can take existing name-recognition on a series and generate large revenue from the first bad game they turn out. They launch a large marketing campaign, and by pushing pre-orders they can get more people to spend money on a game before they have an opportunity to find out what the product is that they're actually buying. At this point it's practically a science, and the market is only starting to push back (the latest Assassin's Creed may be doing a number on pre-orders).

m_mueller 12y ago
This is pretty much how a deadly virus works, right? Infect a particular game brand (cell) by buying (infecting) it, generate enough new copies of the virus (selling the game), then destroy it and release the virus onto the next cells. If the analogy is correct, the game market will either die, find a cure and eject EA or EA adapts and finds a way to coexist such as not to kill the host cells anymore.
- Lordo 12y ago
  Hahah excellent analogy.
- AndyKelley 12y ago
  this is nonsense
  - hueving 12y ago
    Excellent rebuttal. I like how you clearly outlined and explained your counterpoints.

troymc 12y ago

EA has at least one other strategy, with EA Sports: every year they come out with a new and improved Football, Basketball, Hockey, Golf, etc. and people get it. Madden NFL has been going since 1988. To be fair, EA Sports did discontinue some of their less popular games, such as Rugby and Cricket.

spiritplumber 12y ago
Sadly that looks like it's enough... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cxhs-GLE29Q https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cxhs-GLE29Q
omegaham 12y ago
And despite all of their shiny improvements, Madden 2005 and 2008 are considered the best from a gameplay and mechanics standpoint.
- fernandotakai 12y ago
  i can't speak for Madden because i'm not a fan/player. But for FIFA (a franchise that i've been playing since Road To World Cup 98), 2014 is easily the best one. They improved a shitton of stuff. Also, they have FIFA Ultimate Team which has a whole meta game of players and cards (which i love).
thefreeman 12y ago
Actually the real strategy for those games is to buy exclusive multi-year contracts with the professional sports so that there is 0 competition.
ryanhuff 12y ago
They also discontinued Baseball, which pretty much made the Xbox platform crap for a baseball fan (my son).

prewett 12y ago

On the plus side, it looks like there is a vacancy in the simulation game market...

chao- 12y ago
Coincidentally I was just looking back into the state of city simulation games the other day. On my list of "Games I have played beyond any reasonable number of hours" is Sim City 4 with the various mods available. I was, like most, disappointed with the 2013 offering. Cities XL never really piqued my interest, and I've also switched entirely to Linux for my desktop needs. Then the other day I heard about an upcoming title called "Cities: Skylines", which seems like it has promise from a gameplay standpoint. Even better, it's cross-platform to both Linux and Mac. Edit: It's interesting that the recommended hardware for Linux is a lower bar than on Windows (see bottom of https://www.paradoxplaza.com/cities-skylines https://www.paradoxplaza.com/cities-skylines). Can anyone with a game dev or graphics background speculate on that?
- rancur 12y ago
  > I was, like most, disappointed but can you even??
  - pavel_lishin 12y ago
    He wasn't, like, totally most disappointed, duh. pops bubblegum He was disappointed, a sentiment that was shared by many others.
- poopchute 12y ago
  I quite like sim building games. My most recent favourite is Banished http://www.shiningrocksoftware.com/game/ http://www.shiningrocksoftware.com/game/ Not nearly as complex as sim city but still very enjoyable
  - vetler 12y ago
    Wow, this looks great. I think I've actually seen this earlier sometime, but dismissed it since it was only available on Windows. Now that I actually have a decent Windows laptop, I'll definitely try it out.

davidgay 12y ago

EA bought Maxis in 1997. The Sims was released in 2000. We're now in 2015. I don't think that timeline is compatible with your theory.

mjn 12y ago
My second-hand understanding of the arrangement is that from 1997 until roughly the mid 2000s, Maxis's autonomy was mostly protected by Will Wright's personal clout (plus possibly some terms around the acquisition, if there were any). He was high-profile, a charismatic media figure, and very against moving to EA's main campus in Redwood City—partly to retain Maxis's autonomy, and partly just because he lived in the East Bay and didn't want to commute to the Peninsula. It helped that the first post-acquisition new title from Maxis was The Sims, a massive financial success, which allowed EA to feel comfortable taking a hands-off approach and allowing the studio to do weird things, so long as the weird things brought in piles of revenue. From the mid-2000s, though, EA started merging bits of Maxis in, closing the Walnut Creek office and moving those staff to Redwood City, but still leaving a smaller Maxis remaining in Emeryville, which continued to be headed by Wright, with considerable autonomy. He used that autonomy to lead the Spore (2008) development, an ambitious concept that was not a financial success (though it arguably kicked off the current resurgence of procedural content generation in games). And then he left the company in 2009. At that point I think many people in the industry considered it inevitable that the remaining Maxis would be moved to the main EA campus sooner or later.
- DonHopkins 12y ago
  Your second hand understanding is pretty accurate. In the case of Maxis, it's not accurate or fair for the person to say that EA's strategy is to "Buy studio, make them shovel a couple incomplete games out of the door, close studio, repeat." That ignores the fact that EA buying Maxis enabled Maxis to successfully finish and ship The Sims, which became the best selling PC game of all time. And that The Sims division was a major part of EA (one of three main studios), which made a huge amount of money over a long period of time. You're correct to say that Maxis and The Sims franchise enjoyed autonomy and protection thanks to Will Wright, while he was at the company. But after he left, he didn't have much to do with it, and it was on its own. Many of the people working The Sims and SimCity franchises were the original people from Maxis or the early days of The Sims at EA, and they did a wonderful job of carrying on without Will. The infamous problems of latest SimCity release were actually Origin's fault, which the Maxis people unsuccessfully fought against, and had to take the rap for. Lucy Bradshaw managed The Sims and SimCity since EA acquired Maxis, but EA threw her under the bus by insisting that she make public statements that simply and obviously weren't true, in an attempt to justify Origin's idiotic and non-negotiable mistakes that they pushed on Maxis. Ocean Quigley was the lead artist for SimCity and The Sims at Maxis since before EA acquired us. Ocean invented the beautiful yet practical hybrid z-buffered 2.5D / real time 3D "holodeck" technology that enabled The Sims 1 to run well on non-accelerated low-end PCs in 2000, which enabled it its widespread success and appeal to casual gamers and young kids (who inherit their older sibling's low end PCs). Ocean's technical and artistic contributions were as important as Will's game design contributions, and he stuck around for much longer. He led the ground-up redesign of SimCity (2013), which I think was both true to the original game, and took it into a totally new territory, away from the terrible tiles, and re-oriented around free-form roads. Ocean and other Maxis employees were rightfully frustrated by Origin's interference in SimCity (specifically their insistence on online play, and their initial public pretension that offline play was impossible). After the release, Ocean left to pursue his own projects. After working on Will's ideas for so many years, he has a lot of his own original ideas that he wanted to work on. He explained how it was time to step out of Will's shadow in this article [1], which I empathize with. [1] http://venturebeat.com/2013/07/19/ocean-quigley-steps-out-of-the-shadow-of-will-wright-interview/ http://venturebeat.com/2013/07/19/ocean-quigley-steps-out-of... Maxis hired me in January 1997 to work on The Sims (before it was given that name), then EA bought Maxis in July 1997, then we shipped The Sims 1 in February 2000, and I left soon after the release. Then I did some contracting for EA to develop user created content tools like The Sims Transmogrifier, and I worked for Will's own company, the Stupid Fun Club, while he was still working for EA on The Sims expansion packs and Spore. At the time, SFC was just Will's side project for, well, doing stupid fun stuff. We did things that were outside of EA's scope like robotics and reality TV shows, including Empathy [2] and Servitude [3] (which were never aired), and researched and developed some of his entertainment, toy and game ideas. [2] http://donhopkins.com/home/RobotMovies/Empathy.mpg http://donhopkins.com/home/RobotMovies/Empathy.mpg [3] http://donhopkins.com/home/RobotMovies/Servitude.mpg http://donhopkins.com/home/RobotMovies/Servitude.mpg After Will finished Spore, he left EA in 2009, and EA invested in SFC. Then I joined SFC full time, where we worked on various projects including producing a viewer-scripted TV show, Bar Karma, with Current TV. [4] [4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bar_Karma http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bar_Karma SFC was shut down after problems spinning off a company called HiveMind, that ended in lawsuits due to the melt-down and failure of a self-described "Serial Hackerpreneur" (cough, cough), who neglected to pay the rent, let alone secure the investments he was contractually obliged to, after which he baselessly accused Will of "atrocity" and "genocide", then failed to deliver on his blustering threat that he tweeted: "Looking for PR professionals to build awareness for "THE INCONVENIENT TRUTH ABOUT WILL", an exposé documentary, releasing on YouTube 6/2012." >HiveMind [5] [5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiveMind http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiveMind >It was announced in early June 2012 that the entire project was on hold due to ongoing legal disputes between company executives. Said Wright, "Hivemind is still a company. But it has no money. No nothing. It's just sitting there because of the litigation. It is frozen. It's so complex and there's quite a bit of disappointment... We have to find out where this is going in the near term." On October 26, Wright and HiveMind co-founder Jawad Ansari stated they had settled their disagreements regarding the company. Wright said, "We are pleased to have reached a friendly and respectful resolution. Jawad’s entrepreneurial energy, passion for the expansion of the online game industry and tenacious execution brought the necessary elements together to build Hive Mind to where the operating team can take the Company forward." >Game pioneer Will Wright’s personal gaming startup falls apart in litigation (exclusive) [6] [6] http://venturebeat.com/2012/06/03/game-pioneer-will-wrights-personal-gaming-startup-falls-apart-in-litigation-exclusive/ http://venturebeat.com/2012/06/03/game-pioneer-will-wrights-... >“It didn’t work out at all,” Wright said. “Hive Mind is still a company. But it has no money. No nothing. It’s just sitting there because of the litigation. It is frozen. It’s so complex and there’s quite a bit of disappointment.” >Ansari withdrew his lawsuit in Alameda, Calif., and in Delaware, the court appointed Wright, Randy Breen and Ansari as the board of Hive Mind. The litigation is still ongoing. >Will Wright's Social Game Is In Legal Limbo [7] [7] http://uproxx.com/gammasquad/2012/06/will-wrights-social-game-is-in-legal-limbo/ http://uproxx.com/gammasquad/2012/06/will-wrights-social-gam... >To give you an idea of just how ugly this is getting, the guy who started all this, Jawad Ansari, recently tweeted that he’s looking for PR professionals to help him plug a YouTube “documentary” called “The Inconvenient Truth about Will”. Yeah, Jawad, if you have to start with the smear tactics, we’re just going to go ahead and assume you don’t have much of a case and are a bit of an ass. >SimCity creator Will Wright settles lawsuit over Hive Mind studio control [8] [8] http://www.polygon.com/2012/11/2/3589520/simcity-creator-will-wright-settles-lawsuit-over-hive-mind-studio http://www.polygon.com/2012/11/2/3589520/simcity-creator-wil... >Ansari released his own statement, adding: "During my 18 years in the business I have never met anyone who has the creativity and vision of Will Wright. Over the period of several months working with Will Wright, Will's mentorship helped me develop a deep understanding of players' psychology and thus the ability to see the world in dimensions that I did not know even existed. For this I would always be thankful to Will!" Yeeeeeah, and he's sooooo sorry he took the money. [9] [9] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XA8PXbTb7OQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XA8PXbTb7OQ

frik 12y ago

The SimCity reboot and The Sims 4 were a bad joke. So it's not surprising. It was definitely EA's fault to guide SimCity and Sims 4 in the wrong direction. Less content, fake simulation, even more DLCs, always-on-DRM, smaller game worlds, more casual gameplay. EA was also named the worst company to work for in the U.S.

guncheck 12y ago
EA did a fairly poor job with SimCity, I agree. A very, very poor job. EA was named the worst company to work for in the US, but that was years and years ago. They've really done a better job at keeping their developers happy (I worked there two years ago as a dev). I mean sure, Alpha and Beta can still be brutal, but what game studio isn't like this? Overall, I enjoyed working at EA and would work there again if they didn't offer me such a shitty salary. A shitty, shitty salary. Pretty much the only thing I can complain about. Oh, and no free food.
- yoklov 12y ago
  Worse than average for the game industry? I'm making less than 60k over here :( (But honestly I'd rather do something I enjoy and make less than something I don't even if it pays more)
  - guncheck 12y ago
    yeah :( they offered me starting pay of 60k, which granted is not the worst. It's alot more than other jobs, but I just had a better offer somewhere else that I couldn't say no to (though not in games). I had other priorities that had to come first than my love for games :(
- frik 12y ago
  > EA was named the worst company to work for in the US, but that was years and years ago Apr 09, 2013: EA wins Consumerist's Worst Company in America poll for second year in a row http://www.polygon.com/2013/4/9/4205402/ea-wins-consumerists-worst-company-in-america-poll-again http://www.polygon.com/2013/4/9/4205402/ea-wins-consumerists...

Qwertious 12y ago

Some people think this is happening to Bioware, too. See: http://i.imgur.com/e8Wp0yZ.jpg http://i.imgur.com/e8Wp0yZ.jpg

anon4 12y ago
Bioware have successfully pivoted from rich story-driven RPG territory into modern military shooter (butwithlasers!) territory, which seems like it will be predictably profitable for at least another decade.

randomname2 12y ago

Interesting how no one has mentioned stock buybacks yet. These job cuts are a cost cutting exercise, giving the company more funds to buy back stock with, making the stock price go up, meaning the executives get heftier bonuses. The "fire people to buy back stock in order to make the stock price go up" strategy is extremely popular in this economic environment.

randomname2 12y ago
This story about their $750M stock buyback plan supports the assertion: http://www.streetinsider.com/Stock+Buybacks/Electronic+Arts,+Inc.+%28EA%29+Announces+$750M+Stock+Buyback+Plan/9451466.html http://www.streetinsider.com/Stock+Buybacks/Electronic+Arts,...

SixSigma 12y ago

Business says "we exist to make a profit". People don't tend to be profit maximisers in their actual work. I don't know many workers who think "which one of these choices is most profitable for the company"

blumkvist 12y ago
Is this a joke?
- SixSigma 12y ago
  No. It's one of the core beliefs of Behavioral Science
  - blumkvist 12y ago
    Sales, Marketing and Accounting departments are filled with people whose only job is to think how to make more money for the company. Is that covered in the core beliefs of Behavioral Science?
    - SixSigma 12y ago
      You're missing the point. They don't think about how to maximise profit. They think about how to hit their sales target, how to run successful marketing and how to perform their accounting function. Assuming they even do that. Their daily thoughts are more likely to be : How can I make sure my superiors notice I perform my role. How can I make sure I don't fuck this up. What do I need to do to get a promotion. I don't feel fulfilled, I think I'll go find a job elsewhere, I wonder where I should start looking. etc. etc. When you posted these comments were you thinking : how does posting on HN maximise my profit ?
      - blumkvist 12y ago
        The fastest way to show that you don't understand what you're talking about is through analogy. I'm paraphrasing heavily, not to hurt your feelings. Less voodoo science, more thinking.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

plikan13 12y ago

> is this really more profitable than actually making good games? I know I'm going to sound like a terrible elitist snob, but the target audience for today's mainstream video games are not exactly the top layer of humanity. It's pretty much a tale of milking the stupid, i'm afraid.

ricree 12y ago

Maxis had a nearly 18 year run after the EA purchase. A lot of independent studios die over that sort of timeframe. They released every entry in the fairly successful Sims series, as well as two well regarded entries for SimCity. It's been a while since they put out anything special, but overall the company seems to have done well by EA.

TheCondor 12y ago

Is it EA or just how game studios work? Historically, studios either put out zero games or one game. I think it's the fairly extreme outliers that do it over and over and most of them deal in sequels. If you look inside the game industry, I think I would be hard pressed to do a second game if I made games. It doesn't look like an easy feat to keep the team magic working. Likewise, there seems to be no shortage of up and comers that want to make a new game. The studio might not be as valuable as we want to think. Which would you bet more money on: Maxis coming up with a new hit game concept or the masses going ape over sim city 2015 on ps4? And by "ape" I mean willing to buy it for over $30. I have a hard time with both options, just like ea.