By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
GhaudePhaede010 said:
No matter how much evidence comes up that EA may not have wanted this game to succeed, there will be conspiracy theorist that excuse EA's current efforts. There is nothing we can do but speculate. It is absolutely stupid that people can say one side is ridiculous while having just as flimsy evidence on the other side.

I see that the game sold better in Japan, without selling out, than it did in the UK where it did sell out. Are we honestly saying EA expected it to sell better in Japan than in the UK? I would assume people here will say yes because EA would never sabotage a game they may have never wanted to make but were contractually obligated to produce. No, of course not. The only logical explanation for their lack of advertising, under shipping to the game's strongest market, taking an excessively long time to restock the game, lying about missing features and lying about the reasons for the features that they did say were missing (frostbite related), is that they clearly wanted this game to be a massive success. It is clear when you look at the facts. EA is clearly giving this title everything they can to make it a success. What in the world are we thinking to even suggest EA could have done more, or better, or been more transparent, or made the game more available, or made it more available in a fashion that may suggest they care about the game's success? How dare us think all of those bad business practices may affect business or even seem to suggest self-sabotage! I mean, obviously, they are giving everything they have to ensuring this game is a massive success. And their decisions have been sound and intelligent along the way promoting great business and massive profit. Anyone that thinks otherwise or questions EA's business decisions is a conspiracy theorist or even a troll.

Did I do it right?

being able to do better =/= intentional self sabotage.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."