EA and other gaming firms must thrive in order to provide us with improved and fresh content.
EA and other gaming firms must thrive in order to provide us with improved and fresh content.
As much as I appreciate seeing EA adapted with less successful outcomes, it’s concerning that this trend continues. It leads them to release more uncertain projects and invest in new assets, which they can’t afford to absorb. Take Anthem as an example—I really liked it and plan to move on to the next phase, focusing on improving what comes next (I’ll set aside the debates about the game since I believe it won’t have a major impact long-term). The reason I downplay the controversies is that they mainly affect a small group of fans who criticize the company, but it could still lead to significant changes or even the end of Bioware.
Moreover, if you notice more media focused on gaming, the coverage around X or Y game will likely just be a marketing push to boost views and clicks—just a journalistic perspective for now.
A positive aspect here is that Apex could free up multiple projects within EA, allowing them to take risks again. Shareholders, of course, play a key role by pushing for recovery through higher share prices and dividends, which would benefit investors and provide financial stability. If they remain troubled, they might resort to controversial practices like loot boxes, ensuring continued revenue despite the risks.
Now, regarding activation—the only game they seem to be producing lately is COD, which is clearly not up to expectations. Yet it appears to generate substantial income each year, enabling them to invest in more games of similar types. When was the last time Activation introduced a completely new IP that truly changed the industry? Admittedly, for companies like them, innovation is tough because they mainly cater to mainstream audiences. Now, targeting indie players could be a fresh approach, especially since Blackout has proven successful in this regard.
For someone like me who struggles with innovation, it’s hard to see how they can create something groundbreaking when they mostly stick to what works. Still, I hope Battle Royale fades soon—though I enjoy it, it’s getting repetitive with so many similar titles.
In conclusion, most people will quickly move on to the core issue. Major publishers like EA and Activation Blizzard need to generate profits so they can drive meaningful changes. Otherwise, the industry’s dilution might reduce quality, as seen with Anthem. If DICE were truly independent, would they produce better projects? Or would they fall into a cycle of frequent, hit-or-miss releases?
I want to see if large publishers succeed because they, despite not always being perfect, play a crucial role in shaping the industry. If Anthem were fully indie, it would be seen as a positive step, giving them the space to grow. There’s no excuse for releasing incomplete games, but I believe lessons are being learned. Recent battlefield titles like R6 have taken time to improve, showing that patience pays off.
Attitudes are shifting, and games are now valued more as long-term projects. The rise of games-as-a-service models, such as WOW, is a great example. We, as a critical audience, should balance criticism with constructive feedback, supporting development rather than dismissing it outright. Try new games, give them time, and adjust your views instead of immediately labeling them bad.
Hopefully, with a better approach, we’ll get the quality we want and enjoy games that meet our expectations. Both sides can then find satisfaction.
Though there will always be critics.
(I wrote this late at night and am exhausted—please ignore any spelling errors or poor English. I look forward to your response or maybe not at all.)
Yes, I am British. The greatest nation ever. No argument.
The current major players must maintain their status because the video game industry will continue regardless of who owns the IPs. Even if those properties become outdated, I’m fine with that as long as publishers don’t force me to pay excessive fees for every small purchase.
True, especially for companies like EA, indie games don't meet their requirements. It could add variety to their collection, but it won't generate enough revenue to reach mainstream success where their large audiences exist. Among the indie titles you liked, how many were originally designed for consoles?
I wasn't proposing that EA adopt indie titles. My point is you don't require a big budget to create excellent games.
if you haven’t invested in loot boxes, you’re missing out on any fun opportunities. big names don’t need to stay in big games; for the audience, they won’t because it doesn’t add value. if someone consistently buys cod and fifa annually, they’re more likely (just a general thought) to remain loyal to those franchises for financial reasons. they’ll avoid the indie scene.