11 million sales of Skyrim? It's not collapsing.
PETA Says Virtual Whaling in Assassin’s Creed 4 is a Gateway Drug That Will Lead to Actual Whaling
PS4 Graphics Impressive to People Who Have Never Played Modern PC Games
Developers Are Running Out of Fake Excuses For Not Porting Games to the Wii U
Sony Partners with Mad Catz on PlayStation 4 Controller
SimCity 5 DLC Store to Include Nuke Neighbor, Remove In-Game Ad Paid Items
Gabe Newell’s Use of the Word Autistic Draws Ire of Gamers Who Use Faggot and Nigger on Daily Basis
Tomb Raider Devs: If You Can’t Handle Lara Being Impaled in the Head, Go Back to Nintendo Games
Sony Shows Off PS4′s Power by Announcing 45 Developers Have Already Gone Bankrupt Making Games For It
Pedophiles Prefer Nintendo Consoles over Sony and Microsoft
Beyond: Two Souls coming to PlayStation 3, Vita, and Theaters
Polygon Lowers Journalistic Standards to “Just Above Kotaku” After Releasing Yet Another Stupid Article
IGN Revises God Hand Score from 3/10 to 3.5/10
Just bookmarked it
TL;DR EA is retarded when it comes to business decisions. No fucking shit.Question: "Why does publisher X have such greedy business practices?"
Answer: "Companies exist to make money!"
I see this exchange a lot, and the sad thing is that both the question and the answer are misguided. Jim Sterling touched on this a few weeks ago, but I thought I'd dig a little deeper and talk about why the problem is cluelessness, not greed.
When people accuse a company of being "greedy", they make it sound like they think the company ought to make less money out of the kindness of their hearts. But this isn't really about money, or companies making too much. EA has been doing layoffs and struggling in various ways for years, and that doesn't make their behavior any less annoying to consumers. Apple and Starbucks are notorious for selling things with massive markups, yet both companies have rabid fans who can't wait to hand over their cash for the Next Delicious Thing. Meanwhile, people are becoming enraged at one-dollar items for sale in Dead Space 3. This isn't because people are mindless sheeple, or irrationally biased against EA, or because people are bad at math. It's because the most important aspect of these transactions isn't the price, but the consumer experience.
About twenty-five years ago, fast food places invented the idea of the value meal, combo meal, or whatever you call it when you order one item to get several. Before this, you had to order your burger, fries, and a drink individually. With a combo meal, you could just order a single item for a single price. Sure, maybe you used to get a small drink and now you get a medium and you didn't usually get fries and now you do, but by gathering up the items under a single price point the restaurant can make things more convenient, get you to buy more food, and leave you with the impression that you somehow saved money. This was smart. This was a system devised by people who understood what consumers wanted and how they behaved.
The stupid way around would be to make more money by charging people for small items. Charge for napkins. Charge for condiments. Charge for the cup, the ice, the tray, and the utensils. Charge people to enter the store, charge them to talk with other patrons, charge them for the bathroom, for window seats, for privacy, and for access to WiFi. This is how EA has been selling their games.
People will call the second idea "greedy", even if it makes less money than the combo meal idea. This isn't about greed, it's about customers feeling respected and not being unduly hassled over trivial things. Even more importantly, this is about convenience.
I'd bombard it, but São Paulo is far away.OH SHI- http://www.mobygames.com/company/electronic-arts-ltda
Note how it also publishes games from other hated publishers :EAlluminati:
I'd bombard it, but São Paulo is far away.OH SHI- http://www.mobygames.com/company/electronic-arts-ltda
Note how it also publishes games from other hated publishers :EAlluminati:
But I wonder what The Brazilian Slaughter thinks about this.
The freemium business model is "where things are going," according to Electronic Arts vice president of mobile and social studios Nick Earl. Speaking to GameSpot sister site CNET about the recent launch of Real Racing 3, the executive explained that the mobile game has been a big success, due in part to its business model.
"There's no question that going freemium was the right way to go," Earl said. "The vocal minority lashed out at freemium. We respect them and understand, but the market has spoken. That's just where things are going."
Earl revealed that first-week downloads of Real Racing 3 exceeded the total for the past two games combined. In addition, 350 million races have been completed since launch, with 25 million completed every day. On top of this, EA said gamers are spending an average of 25 minutes per day playing the title.
Earl declined to say how many copies of Real Racing 3 have been downloaded so far or how much revenue the game has brought in. However, he did note that he was "vindicated early" from a financial perspective.
This is not the first time an EA executive has sung the praises of microtransaction-supported games. EA chief financial officer Blake Jorgensen said last month that consumers are "enjoying and embracing microtransactions" and that this business model will be built into more and more of the company's games moving forward.
Before that, EA chief operating officer Peter Moore said he believes microtransactions will be in every game in the next five to ten years. He likened the business model to a clothing store like The Gap.
"It's free to me to walk into The Gap in my local shopping mall. They don't charge me to walk in there," he said at the time. "I can walk into The Gap, enjoy the music, look at the jeans and what have you, but if I want to buy something I have to pay for it."
The entertaining part of it is.Sim City ain't free.