By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Notch: EA methodically destroying gaming

Wh1pL4shL1ve_007 said:
Ea is just a cash whore company in my eyes. Im sorry but thats how I see them.


That's basically how almost everyone sees them...



Around the Network

Just poor choice of words by EA, yet it's not like the bundle really hurts anyone. A company makes money (as it is suppose to), and the customers get a deal.



Mummelmann said:
Wh1pL4shL1ve_007 said:
Ea is just a cash whore company in my eyes. Im sorry but thats how I see them.


That's basically how almost everyone sees them...

 

Because every company is a cash whore company? Thats what they need to do

 

EA is one of the best rated publisher (critically) at the moment, so FU Notch, and you shitty ass excuse for games. Dont get me wrong there are some fine ideas behind the indie scene ( Dear Esther anyone?) but the only reason Im still gaming are new, massive IPs like Dead Space, Uncharted, Assassins Creed, and not for ho-hum games like Scrools



Vote the Mayor for Mayor!

zarx said:
adriane23 said:

So if a small company self funds themselves, they're indie. If Microsoft self funds themselves, it's not indie event though they did it independently, because Microsoft publishes other games?

So if I bought an acre of land with my own money and used it to grow corn to sell at a marketplace, am I an indie farmer? Is the only think differentiating me from a mega farm the fact that I put up my own money? Am I not still doing the same thing, but at a smaller scale. And if I'm successful enough to expand my land to the size of a mega farm, am I then not considered indie because I'm too big???

Conlusion: The term "indie" is pointless.


Is there such a thing as an indie farm? I don't think anyone is calling any farms "indie farms".

Anyway as the term indie by deffinition the term is a game not funded by a publisher, so no a publisher like MS or EA can't make an indie game, if they could every game would be indie. The who point of the label is to make the destinction, that the game is not funded by a publisher, I don't see why you can't grasp that other than to try and make a point. 

So using Mojang for example Minecraft was an indie game, Notch made it on his own time with his own money, meaning he made it "indipendently from a publisher. But Mojang doesn't make indie games anymore because they are now a publisher themselves since they decided to publish Cobolt.

The term indie is largely arbitary but only pointless if companies like EA can call their own games indie, which is just an oxymoron. 

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you just missed the point of my analogy. The distinction is pointless. They make games to sell for profit.



I am the Playstation Avenger.

   

Well he's right.



Around the Network

"Indies are saving gaming.."

 




adriane23 said:

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you just missed the point of my analogy. The distinction is pointless. They make games to sell for profit.


Think of it this way indie is the equivelent to "made in *your country here*" vs "made in china" yes both items are made in much the same way yes they are both made to be sold in your country etc. Is that distinction pointless?



@TheVoxelman on twitter

Check out my hype threads: Cyberpunk, and The Witcher 3!

Deoz said:

"Indies are saving gaming.."

One pretentious asshole at a time



indie devs need to stop making knockoffs of 8-bit and flash games before they assume the role of absolute moral authority of the videogame industry.



On 2/24/13, MB1025 said:
You know I was always wondering why no one ever used the dollar sign for $ony, but then I realized they have no money so it would be pointless.

When Notch makes something original, I'll listen to him.



Food for thought: Shove an apple in your brain