Meet EA's board of directors - not a single one of them has a gaming background

[Noodlesocks]

But that's completely contradictory to reality, which is that ever-crappier iterations of command and conquer resulted in ever-decreasing sales. Hence, the state we're in right now.

Meanwhile Blizzard produces SC2, which opinions about its play style aside, is 293874239472398472389742398742937842379 times higher quality than anything EA has ever produced. Ever. Thus, Blizzard isn't the one scrambling to "reinvent" the genre or the franchise, and EA is.

Why? Because nobody at the very top understands what constitutes a quality game, or even what their target market perceives as a quality game. It doesn't take a business degree to understand that quality sells. What it does take, is someone who understands what constitutes a quality product.

Quality may sell but if they can get away with making more money for less effort (therefore poorer quality), that's what they are going to do.

Their only interest is in the maximisation or profit margins.

[Commander_McNash]

-DF-Fenrir- yes, the video has good points.

There's also a huge difference between being accountable and actually being hands on....

I think he refers to the fact every company has chains of command, that's something no one will denny, now, what are the most efficient and dedicated armies? Well, those where generals take care for their men and listen to them to know what's going on, I am sure the israeli generals have a complete network of intel and inner communication which allow them to know what's going on, also, they care of keeping you and the other lads alive and well, have industrial and technological capabilities and have a prosperous and dedicated population to protect, I mean, that's one of the main differences between your army and the groups you fight, which dont seem to care about anything than get their objectives done and crush their own people in the name of the cause (ok, we know we are on murky waters now so back on-topic).

Novakiller, about the case of Jose Mourinho, I am not fan of football but I guess you are right on the sense he knows what to do, however, I am sure mr. Mourinho at least was a football fan, he watched games and was "all in", that's the main difference with EA executive staff and shareholders, for all we know they do not play videogames, they dont even read the media and comments we read or they just think it's peasant talk, citing an article on EA CEO mr. Riccitiello:

Riccitiello said he didn't want to be seen as designing the game in front of Kotaku — he's not a game designer he acknowledged — but he did offer some hints, saying. "I'm a believer that the RTS sector is more open to fundamental innovation at a metagame level than almost any genre."
Time for something different. Something, he admitted, build on a path blazed by massively-multiplayer online games, connecting more players and doing it outside a fantasy universe.
Sounds like Command & Conquer has its marching orders.

http://kotaku.com/5418926/ea-command...ooler-graphics

EA were planning on this from long ago (the article was published in 2009), what is worst, we can conclude mr. Riccitiello himself isn't really sure in terms of design what they are doing, which only comes to bring more insecurity and lack of trust from us the customers, I really believe it's time they listen a bit more to us instead of trusting in what seems to be "the new tendency".

Quality may sell but if they can get away with making more money for less effort (therefore poorer quality), that's what they are going to do.

Their only interest is in the maximisation or profit margins.

The problem with that focus is that eventually you will lose customers bcs they are noticing you are selling them bad products, when it's about videogames, which is not even essential to stay alive, the process is even faster, again, I am not telling them they are going to lose our love and dedication to the brand, for all we know they hardly care for that, I am telling them they are going to lose money, I think and hope they can understand that.

[Zocom7]

I already knew about EA's handling of business several years ago. EA cares more on sales than quality. Activision, same thing. However, Blizzard cares more on quality than quantity.

[Commander_McNash]

I already knew about EA's handling of business several years ago. EA cares more on sales than quality. Activision, same thing. However, Blizzard cares more on quality than quantity.

However, Activision understands something EA dont, the concept of "classic", why do you think people keep buying CoD even when it's the same? Well, the answer is there, they sell the same stuff, they have a winning formula, like Coca-Cola, Snickers, KFC and Ciaphas Cain's novels, they only add some new stuff for a bit of variety and develop the story to justify the added content, the gameplay remains the same, and people knows and love that, while they praise the added content every new release brings, they know they are going to enjoy yet another iteration of a classic, it's the same reason why people keep buying Coca-Cola, they love it and they are happy with the flavour, even while it has been the same for more than a century.

[=LEVIATHEN=]

I'd say the best course of action is to either be your own publisher and developer or be a publisher and do what the developers tell you to do. That doesn't seem to be how EA works, however.

Random opinion is random. That is all.