With their infinite money, they buy up countless developers and franchises, and tend to turn them into crap, and rehash them to hell.

Within their different teams and 2nd parties, they can definitely make some great originals, Maxis is still under them and working hard on Spore...though one problem with EA is that Spore probably would have stayed on PC. Because EA likes to spread their joy to as many platforms as possible...ports are made, and more often than not, they suck ass. (See...any port)

I personally don't hate EA, and I think they fill an important segment within the industry ...

Overall, I am disapointed with them because (outside of their sports games) there really is no need for them to release a version of every game they make which (often) sacrifices the quality and originality of their games.

Crappy PC support. None of their pc games that I own (BF2, BFME I&II, SC4, etc.) support widescreen displays larger than 1280x768, and all of them have been buggy as hell since I got Vista. I've tried all sorts of workarounds, but their tech support is so crappy that I keep running into a wall.

Their console games are just as bad but in different ways. They're all buggy rehashes of the same old crap.

I'm not trying to say that EA is perfect. They're far from perfect. I'm also not trying to say that they develop the best games on earth. They don't. In fact, most of the points brought up are very valid. Everyone seems to misunderstand why I brought this up. I'm asking "WHY EA?".

Why not Ubisoft? For every AAA title they create for the 360 and PS3, they add another 2 horribly put together games for the Wii. Also remember that Ubisoft makes the Petz series. Ouch!

Why not Sega? The best thing they have going for it at the moment is the Condemned and Virtua Fighter series. Now tell me the Virtua Fighter series is something more than a roster update. How many times have they whored out Sonic to substandard teams?

Why not THQ? Smackdown vs. RAW is a yearly roster update. If you own a PS3 and wanted the new Frontline FPS, too bad, it's cancelled. Saints Row, as good as it was, is a GTA clone, pure and simple. Where does THQ make it's money from? Oh right, Nickelodeon games and Pixar tie-ins, which come right on time with the movies release and are of subpar quality, just like EA. MX vs. ATV, Conan, and Stuntman all underperformed critically. 

Why not Konami? Where has Dance Dance Revolution really gone in the last 1,000 installments? Why not heavily criticize them for making a yearly roster update for Pro Evolution Soccer, and then STILL have it come out full of some of the worst bugs seen on a console game in a while?

Why not Activision? How many Guitar Heroes have popped up with nothing more than a few song updates and some new modes? Why make more games? Why not just patch GHIII and offer downloadable content? How about Tony Hawk? There's a dead series that is made for the money. How about Call of Duty being delivered every other year to Treyarch? Soldier of Fortune: Payback won most yearly "Worst Game of the Year" award. Marvel Ultimate Alliance is X-Men Legends with a paint-job and roster update, no?

The question is why EA? Why don't you guys hate all the big dogs with the corporate bottom-line decision making? At least EA had done a quality job with it's franchises and their yearly updates, they're movie tie-ins are some of the best, and the new IPs look killer.  

The argument that EA is somehow less crappy because other developers have made crappy games as well is as absurd as it sounds.

There's crap in almost every developer's history.

I'm pretty sure EA takes the cake, though.

EA has probably pissed off more fans of franchises after absorbing them (something most developers don't do to the extent that EA does), so that explains plenty of angry fans. You can like a game, but rest assured, you'll see that game rehashed for years until you want to puke...I've never seen a developer do it as much as EA, there's your answer.

whats wrong with releasing a madden game every year. Isn't that really what all the football fans like me want. they might make smalll innovations but compare madden 03 to madden 08 over time they have become better games.

And while many devs like to make games and chose that career i doubt many of them would be in the business if there was little money and it was hard to make a living. You do realize its a business there all in it to make profit. its just nice that what they do pleases many people

I don't think I can convince you that EA is crap...but you can enjoy Madden and other EA games and still dislike the company and its practices.

I loved SSX Blur, I play various Command and Conquer games...I enjoy plenty of EA games. That doesn't mean I can't criticize them buying out developers and ultimately wasting their talents.

You start with a good game made by talented developers. EA takes notice, buys them, and makes a sequel, which isn't as good, rinse and repeat.

If I sound bitter, it's because I am...EA has been doing this for countless years, there is indeed a reason why people hate EA. I'm not forcing my opinion onto you, you're free to like their games, but understand why people hate the company itself.

The point of this IS to understand why people hate them. If I understood, I wouldn't have asked.

On another point, it's not absurd to ask "Why not THQ", or "Why not Sega". The point I was trying to make is why single out EA if so many publishers have the same practices.

I'm understanding the points of buying out smaller developers and spewing out sub standard sequels. Fine. But what about the lazy rehashes argument?

If EA rehashes 40 games and the next guy rahashes only 20, does it really make the other guy much better? Sports games are by nature meant to be rehashed yearly. It's been the practice for many years. 2K Sports does it. Konami does it. THQ does it. It's common practice. Those people that play sports games usually accept the fact that if they don't take the few updates that can be created in twelve months on a sports game, they won't recieve the much needed roste update. For anyone that plays these games, it's the most important part.

As far as other games, Def Jam was a great fighting series and EA was smart enough to hand the reins over to AKI, whom are geniuses. Dead Space is shaping up to be awesome. Skate completely blew away Tony Hawk on it's first try. Facebreaker looks to be the best arcade boxer since Punch Out, and Fight Night was the best boxing series in a long time. The Orange Box was on the short list for game of the year, and was a gift to gamers with so much material within. EA showed the Wii a lot of early love when other companies turned their backs (Madden 07, Godfather and Medal of Honor Heroes 2). Maybe Pandemic moving to EA will finally allow them to finish Mercenaries 2, which is way delayed right now. Burnout is the best racing game on earth by many, including myself.

The point isn't that EA is great, because they're not. They're shady, imperfect and make horrible decisions. My point is, so does everybody else. Why pick on EA's practices when so many are doing the same thing. Because they've done it more times, or more often? Why does that matter? Once you do bad business, you're guilty.

I never really understood the problem people have with EA myself, some of my favorite games are EA games, but then again I don't really pay attention to who makes the game, just how good it is/how much it interests me.