Ail said:
Avinash_Tyagi said:
Zucas said:
Avinash_Tyagi said:
^I see it as a great thing, a smaller EA means they are more susceptible to a big flop, maybe even bankruptcy |
But if EA goes out of business that's not good at all. I mean, I know people have a general dislike for bigger gaming developers, but they are held together by a string of very prominent developers including that of Bioware. I would be very sad if EA were to ever go bankrupt.
I've never quite understood gamers dislike of big game developers considering MS, Sony, and Nintendo would fall under that category. I mean they are going to work the same way as smaller developers as well. I actually think EA does a pretty good job funding the guys under them and keeping things fresh. Only thing I don't like about them is their constant millking of sports franchises without much changes to them. Of course with the licensing with all those sports, they couldn't get out of that if they wanted to haha.
|
EA dying would be a sign of the collapse of the games industry, which imo would be a very good thing.
The big developers are part of the problem, one need only look at the loads of shovelware and the horrible milking of stale franchises to see it
|
yeah because Nintendo hasn't been milking Mario, Pokemon and Zelda for the last 20 years......
|
Which is bad why. I don't understand why people have problems with companies milking franchises... especially when they do it well. It's only smart to continue a franchise that still has life in it. That's a null argument. Even further if the company, like EA and Nintendo both do, understand that the continual need for new properties is necessary then why should we get on them. "Milking" as it is put here is an overused term mostly negative without much thought put into it. People need to take into account a business perspective as well.
