EA claims we're british?

Seifer

Joystiq summary and the original article
Well fúck them tbh.

animaX

Luckily I gave up on Electronic Arse long ago

super_furry

animaX wrote: »

Luckily I gave up on Electronic Arse long ago

Why? Over the last two years they've published some of the best games on the market.

Anyway, that article is a load of crap, check out my BF1943 profile page here - http://www.battlefield1943.com/soldier/profile/169829571/360

Seifer

super_furry wrote: »

Why? Over the last two years they've published some of the best games on the market.

Anyway, that article is a load of crap, check out my BF1943 profile page here - http://www.battlefield1943.com/soldier/profile/169829571/360

Would you say the part about Northern Ireland is true? A lot less galling but something they could easily avoid if they wanted to.

anonymous_joe

Seems a bit silly really.

For minimal effort you could avoid something that offers a maximum in potential bad PR.

There really is such a thing as bad publicity, and this could be a shining example thereof.

Silverfish

From what I gather, it's only affecting NI players, ROI players can select the Irish flag, but NI players should be able to select either the British flag or the ROI flag, but can't.

Bit lousy of EA. If enough people complain they may fix it with one of their wonderful patches.

super_furry

Well I'd suggest it's either one of two things, the flag is chosen on the basis of your IP address or on what nationality you have your Xbox Live or PSN account set up. I don't remember ever been asked to pick a nationality in BF1943, so I reckon it's automated on that basis.

Cunny-Funt

I'm confused, is this about people in Ireland being labeled with
the British flag? If so, its ground to be pretty annoyed , just as bad as labelling France with the German flag etc etc.

However if its Northern Ireland then its understandable and not surprising at all

Silverfish

Cunny-Funt wrote: »

However if its Northern Ireland then its understandable and not surprising at all

Not reeeeaaaallly.... they should be allowed to choose which, not slapped with one.

dlofnep

Cunny-Funt wrote: »

However if its Northern Ireland then its understandable and not surprising at all

No, because the people in the North are afforded the right to be regarded as Irish or British through the GFA.

Cunny-Funt

Yeah but they've been gaming online for awhile surely they must be used to it. A lot of games show flags by IP address and thus people in NI will get a British flag which is not inaccurate.

Theres a huge difference there between that and people from IRELAND showing as being from the UK. If that was happening, I'd be very pissed off.

But people from NI been given the UK flag is seriously not surprising at all.

Stephen

According to the article a guy in Dublin is getting the British flag. Why won't they just let people pick their country when they sign up?

Seifer

Stephen wrote: »

According to the article a guy in Dublin is getting the British flag. Why won't they just let people pick their country when they sign up?

That seems to be largely untrue from the feedback here though. Maybe he is just a unique case for whatever reason.
Also according to the article, there is a thread on the EA BF1943 forums about it but I couldn't see it anywhere.

ScumLord

Seifer wrote: »

That seems to be largely untrue from the feedback here though. Maybe he is just a unique case for whatever reason.
Also according to the article, there is thread on the EA BF1943 forums about it but I couldn't see it anywhere.

I wonder was he using a proxy at any stage that could throw it off. The lads up North would surely have grounds to sue if it's their right under law to pick a side.

Mossy Monk

Irish flag for me too.

nix

super_furry wrote: »

Why? Over the last two years they've published some of the best games on the market.

Anyway, that article is a load of crap, check out my BF1943 profile page here - http://www.battlefield1943.com/soldier/profile/169829571/360

What games would these be then? To my knowledge all EA is good for is releasing incomplete games and ripping off their customers.

Take battlefield for example, they even addmitted to ripping off their customers with this franchise. Its a piece of **** game and i hope its not on your list of best games of the last 2 years

CoD4 is also an overrated game, its for people who have no skill in other fps games and require artillery and a chopper they cant control to do all the work.

Fuck EA, Fuck them up their stupid asses.

noodler

nix wrote: »

What games would these be then? To my knowledge all EA is good for is releasing incomplete games and ripping off their customers.

Take battlefield for example, they even addmitted to ripping off their customers with this franchise. Its a piece of **** game and i hope its not on your list of best games of the last 2 years

CoD4 is also an overrated game, its for people who have no skill in other fps games and require artillery and a chopper they cant control to do all the work.

Fuck EA, Fuck them up their stupid asses.

Didn't even knpow EA published COD4....

BF1943 is excellent, Dead Space I think EA did too and also Mirror's edge. New Fifa was critically preferred to pes.

super_furry

Well in the last two years they've published among others; The Orange Box, Crysis, Burnout Paradise, Battlefield: Bad Company, FIFA 09, Dead Space, Mirrors Edge and both Skate games. All quality games.

Seifer

noodler wrote: »

Didn't even knpow EA published COD4....

They don't, Activision does.

super_furry wrote:

Well in the last two years they've published among others; The Orange Box

According to wiki they're distributors and not publishers and in reality EA have nothing at all to do with the magic that is the Orange Box.

Captain Chaos

There is a big difference between publishing and developing games. Dead Space was made by a division of EA like FIFA, while Mirrors Edge and the others list are not, EA just pay to publish the games.

It's usually EA's fault for rushing developers that results in poor unfinished games. Its down to pure greed and profits for the shareholders.

super_furry

They published both console versions and actually created the PS3 version.

super_furry

To be honest I think that's an outdated view of EA. The genuinely seem to have changed their corporate culture since the whole EA Spouse thing and are more willing to take risks on new and untested titles like Dead Space, Mirrors Edge and Brutal Legend.

Retr0gamer

All I have to add is this:



EA are forgiven a whole lot by me for publishing soukyugurentai.

Cuddlesworth

Retr0gamer wrote: »

All I have to add is this:



EA are forgiven a whole lot by me for publishing soukyugurentai.

Looks like a bad hentai to me....

gizmo

Captain Chaos wrote: »

There is a big difference between publishing and developing games. Dead Space was made by a division of EA like FIFA, while Mirrors Edge and the others list are not, EA just pay to publish the games.

It's usually EA's fault for rushing developers that results in poor unfinished games. Its down to pure greed and profits for the shareholders.

Incorrect, DICE, the developers of Battlefield are a wholly owned EA company, therefore there is technically no difference between them, Visceral Games (formerly EA Redwood Shores and the developers of Dead Space) and Criterion (developers of the Burnout franchise).

As for the company themselves, everyone knows Activision are the new EA. Their releases over the last while have seen the company embracing new IP and picking up titles which have been abandoned by other publishers, all a far cry from Bobby Kotick's $100m franchise bull****.

Retr0gamer

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

Looks like a bad hentai to me....

The box art is ****e but it's one of the best shoot'em ups ever made.

Fnz

It's a shame that now EA is losing out to Activision/Blizzard who seem to have adopted EA's old methods. Mirror's Edge and Dead Space under-performing iirc.

Hopefully the pressure from shareholders to regress to the, more successful, old formula isn't too great.

I wonder how Henry Hatsworth performed for them?

nix

Fnz wrote: »

It's a shame that now EA is losing out to Activision/Blizzard who seem to have adopted EA's old methods. Mirror's Edge and Dead Space under-performing iirc.

Hopefully the pressure from shareholders to regress to the, more successful, old formula isn't too great.

I wonder how Henry Hatsworth performed for them?

How have blizz adopted this? They spend more time on their games than any other company and always deliver a satisfactory and finished game. Look how long SC2 is taking to make, and it will blow us away

Bubs101

Silverfish wrote: »

Not reeeeaaaallly.... they should be allowed to choose which, not slapped with one.

Say what?? everybody is slapped with a nationality, nobody chooses. Why should they get a choice, the North is british and has been for 209 years.

Seifer

nix wrote: »

How have blizz adopted this? They spend more time on their games than any other company and always deliver a satisfactory and finished game. Look how long SC2 is taking to make, and it will blow us away

Once you buy all three parts.
None of which will have lan play.

And they're also being **** with CoD:MW2 by raising the price because they know people will pay it.

Fnz

nix wrote: »

How have blizz adopted this? They spend more time on their games than any other company and always deliver a satisfactory and finished game. Look how long SC2 is taking to make, and it will blow us away

Activision/Blizzard is a single company now, with Bobby Kotick as its CEO. The following is from totalvideogames.com, passing along Bobby's comments from a post earnings report conference call:

"With respect to the franchises that don't have the potential to be exploited every year across every platform, with clear sequel potential that can meet our objectives of over time becoming $100 million plus franchises: that's a strategy that has worked very well for us."

"I think generally our strategy has been to focus [on games] . . . that we know if we release today, we'll be working on ten years from now," Kotick continued before going on to explain how unreliable investments in new intellectual properties can be.

[Link]

Activision/Blizzard are adversed to the risks associated with innovation according to their CEO. The sad part is, this policy has been working out well for them so far.