EA mans up on its share of what it calls "Creative Downfall"

[downphoenix]

IGN: DICE 2008: Gaming's 'Disturbing' Future

"At EA we've had our share of failures with the acquisitions of developers. Westwood, Bullfrog, Origin Systems -- these places no longer exist today and are no longer creative forces in the industry," he said. "There was a fundamental belief that we could be one happy family. We had a top-down approach to development. We at EA blew it. I would say I blew it."

EA CEO John Riccitiello said this.

Discuss

[PirateThom]

Saying this and changing this are two different things.

EA is about the money and I still say BioWare are at serious risk.

[Spindel]

Originally Posted by John Riccitiello

The days of small developers creating blockbuster games are largely at an end, Riccitiello said. Games that once took 25-person teams to develop now need 200 to come to fruition, and 700 MB disks have given way to 25 GB Blu-Ray disks.

I call this BS, it's true if you only continue to focus on graphics but having a well written and catching story and good game play don't need extra people in a dev team.

But then again most gamers are about as smart as birds and only get attracted to shiny objects

[Juno]

Originally Posted by Spindel

I call this BS, it's true if you only continue to focus on graphics but having a well written and catching story and good game play don't need extra people in a dev team.

Ok, you try making a million seller game on the 360 with N64 graphics. Not only that but gamers are a lot more demanding. OOT, while being the highest rate game ever, is pretty average by todays standards.

EA is about the money and I still say BioWare are at serious risk.

Maybe it's a honeymoon period but since this new CEO took over EA has been completely different. The newest FIFA is better than PES, they've had several good games out recently and there's some promising ones still coming.

[Neohamster]

Ok, 'fess up. Who's been equipping pigs with wings?

Those fuckers belong the the ground.

[Darth Alec]

Originally Posted by Juno

Ok, you try making a million seller game on the 360 with N64 graphics. Not only that but gamers are a lot more demanding.

Well, that's not what anyone said. Not every game has to look like Gears to sell, it's just a matter of knowing your skills and adapting. It's perfectly acceptable to not look as good as CoD4.

OOT, while being the highest rate game ever, is pretty average by todays standards.

It's ten years old. What doesn't get worse in comparison over time.

[Gnu]

Originally Posted by Spindel

But then again most gamers are about as smart as birds and only get attracted to shiny objects

Nah, Birds are smarter.

[Juno]

Originally Posted by Darth Alec

Well, that's not what anyone said. Not every game has to look like Gears to sell, it's just a matter of knowing your skills and adapting. It's perfectly acceptable to not look as good as CoD4.

The skill or time it takes to make a good look as good as COD4 or not so good anymore like Oblivion probably isn't very different. It's just a matter of what you are aiming for.

It's ten years old. What doesn't get worse in comparison over time.

Well, it didn't have to get worse in comparison over time it's just that gaming moved on and now games require more in them to get better scores. Hence why more people are needed as to keep development cycles the same.

[Fyrus]

good? I guess?

What say you rounds?

[PirateThom]

Originally Posted by Darth Alec

It's ten years old. What doesn't get worse in comparison over time.

Lots of things, movies, music, books, Super Mario World.