EA working hard to relieve you of your hard earned monies

[Gord]

“I think the notion of a single-player experience has to go away so we can earn more money by making gamers our bitch. However, I’m not saying that there will be no single-player experiences, as gamers might be upset and stop buying our shit… It could be it’s called Connected Single-Player or Online Single-Player instead, so people get a warm, cozy feeling and we still get to fuck them over.”

Fixed. But Cervat Yerli is anyway full of shit. Not only do his games get worse with every iteration, the stuff he says does so as well.

 

[ohWOW]

And instead of getting hung, he gets payed for such bullshit.

For fuck's sake.

 

[DeepOcean]

Quake 3 arena launched: Suit idiots : "Dude, single-player games are dead, multiplayers is tha future"
Xbox and PS 3 released: Suit idiots : "Dude, PC gaming is dead, consoles are the future."
World of Warcraft released: Suit idiots: "Dude, all games are going to be MMORPG"
Wii released: Suit idiots: "Dude, the future is mobile and casual gaming"
F2P games released: Suit idiots: "Dude, all games are going to be F2P"

It is incredible that people is paying salaries to those idiots to say what is popular/obvious at the moment is going to be the future, you really need to be a geniiiiius to do that. Hey , I can do it too:

"EA is going to crash hard and take Crytek with them"

Where is my CEO job at the gaming industry?

 

[ohWOW]

You are not jewish.

 

[DalekFlay]

I know from trying to solo a couple MMOs and coop games that there is no fucking way I am playing online games designed for groups by myself. It's a fucking horrid experience. Also the online requirement turns art into temporary services.

God Yerli pisses me off so often.

 

[Tytus]

I know from trying to solo a couple MMOs and coop games that there is no fucking way I am playing online games designed for groups by myself. It's a fucking horrid experience. Also the online requirement turns art into temporary services.

God Yerli pisses me off so often.

I tried to Solo The Old Republic and while most of the game can be done Solo (but it's a real pain and requires a lot of grinding) there is no way you can finish all the cool plot quests alone (Especially Flashpoints). In the end I managed to reach 50 lvl on my Sith Wariior and go through all his story areas. But I wasn't able to find a group to go through 6 last flashpoints that end his story arc. In the end I gave up on the entire game. As much as I liked the writing, the gameplay was a horrible experiance.

 

[DalekFlay]

I tried to Solo The Old Republic and while most of the game can be done Solo (but it's a real pain and requires a lot of grinding) there is no way you can finish all the cool plot quests alone (Especially Flashpoints). In the end I managed to reach 50 lvl on my Sith Wariior and go through all his story areas. But I wasn't able to find a group to go through 6 last flashpoints that end his story arc. In the end I gave up on the entire game. As much as I liked the writing, the gameplay was a horrible experiance.

I played a Sith Assassin and finished the first main quest but stopped immediately after. Level 30 or so?

It was god damn tedious as hell and obviously designed for groups and to take a looooong time, rather than be fun.

 

[Tytus]

I tried to Solo The Old Republic and while most of the game can be done Solo (but it's a real pain and requires a lot of grinding) there is no way you can finish all the cool plot quests alone (Especially Flashpoints). In the end I managed to reach 50 lvl on my Sith Wariior and go through all his story areas. But I wasn't able to find a group to go through 6 last flashpoints that end his story arc. In the end I gave up on the entire game. As much as I liked the writing, the gameplay was a horrible experiance.

I played a Sith Assassin and finished the first main quest but stopped immediately after. Level 30 or so?

It was god damn tedious as hell and obviously designed for groups and to take a looooong time, rather than be fun.

It was even worse when you played with someone. Yeah you got to see their story areas, but when the player was taking a side quest from someone. You stood there like an asshole unable to see what is going on. And after that - the person you played with would have to explain to you what the quest is about. Horrible design.

 

[sea]

My rambling, long-winded response to this announcement:

<eric> see
<eric> this is basically the MMOfication of gaming.
<eric> World of Warcraft was responsible for this.
<eric> to be honest.
<eric> World of Warcraft defined so many videogame standards.
<eric> central to that was the concept of grinding (not a new thing) in a persistent online game.
<eric> see, the MMO business model relies on frequent content updates.
<eric> but the massive size of your average MMO makes that impossible.
<eric> so, Blizzard had to take another approach whereby the game was primarily focused on a shallow, repetitive grind for levels that was over-extended beyond the point of being fun.
<eric> you may notice that a year or two after World of Warcraft came out, leveling systems started to make their way into almost every kind of game.
<eric> the reason for this was because designers and executives erroneously assumed that leveling systems were in themselves motivation enough to play a game.
<eric> truth be told, leveling systems are only one way of facilitating progression, but WoW's success made them the standard.
<eric> now what we are seeing is that developers and publishers are using the same MMO grind to milk more money out of games.
<eric> the idea being that if you make the grind long and painful enough, people will pay money to skip it.
<eric> they have already been conditioned to think of the grind as the "default" way games are to be played and indeed a fundamental component of modern videogames.
<eric> so they are now purposely using grinding to extend gameplay content beyond any "fun" value it may actually have and require/force you to keep doing it... except you can spend cash to get to the next "fun part" faster.
<eric> the thing is that this kind of bullshit basically would not exist if it was not for the prevalence of leveling.
<eric> from article:
<eric> "We are building into all of our games the ability to pay for things along the way; to get to a higher level," he explained.
<eric> I have seen this exact same mentality in businessmen involved in the videogame industry before; we have so many meanings of the word "level" with respect to gaming that they tend to conflate them all to the point where "level" is basically an end in and of itself in their eyes.
<eric> and not the actual experience of playing.
<eric> case in point, my boss at work. he is not really a gamer and he has that exact same confusion about what "level" even means. to him, videogames = leveling
<eric> and he thinks that leveling = fun on some fundamental level.
<eric> but what is lost in this entire though process/paradigm is that leveling is a way of presenting progression mechanics and a way of enabling steady distribution of content, not a thing that is enjoyable in and of itself.
<eric> this is the kind of distinction that can only be made when you are actually experienced with gaming, know games, play games, understand them and how they work, mechanically and systemically.
<eric> I would also wager this is where much of the "realism" trend in gaming stems from; this disconnected misunderstanding of what makes games fun also leads to the notion that graphics are an end in and of themselves (for competing in the marketplace), and not functional representations of mechanics.
<eric> on an even more basic level it highlights that difference in mindset between businessmen and consumers: that entertainment is compelling not for reasons of edification, but that there is some intrinsic value in "beating" the previous market leader.

I should probably focus those ideas into something more coherent.

 

[Renegen]

To add to this sea, I was shocked, just shocked when I discovered how much grind Minecraft had. Good guy Notch, he's just like us, doesn't do it for the money, loves babies, and then you realize he polluted his game with grind everywhere and I don't see why it's needed. The concept has just taken hold of everyone.

 

[tuluse]

The grind gives you a sense of accomplishment. You don't notice if time spent was doing something fun/trivial/challenging/banal, all you notice is that you spent 50 hours building that wooden house.

There has to be a term for this psychological effect.

 

[Gord]

I think that's part of it, yes.
In order to make your accomplishment valid, you must have earned it. Earning it means putting work into it. Work has to be something you don't really want to do but have to struggle for. Only through your struggle you prove worthy.

Protestant work ethics and all that.

Somehow I can't help but feel that this ideas are respsonsible for a lot of the shit that's going on in our world.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

Grinding in Minecraft, the game that consists of laying blocks to build whtever you feel like bulding? That's gotta be the loosest definition of grinding I've ever seen.

 

[Average Manatee]

Quake 3 arena launched: Suit idiots : "Dude, single-player games are dead, multiplayers is tha future"
Xbox and PS 3 released: Suit idiots : "Dude, PC gaming is dead, consoles are the future."
World of Warcraft released: Suit idiots: "Dude, all games are going to be MMORPG"
Wii released: Suit idiots: "Dude, the future is mobile and casual gaming"
F2P games released: Suit idiots: "Dude, all games are going to be F2P"

It is incredible that people is paying salaries to those idiots to say what is popular/obvious at the moment is going to be the future, you really need to be a geniiiiius to do that. Hey , I can do it too:

"EA is going to crash hard and take Crytek with them"

Where is my CEO job at the gaming industry?

They get paid because when you get someone worth lots of money predicting the future idiots start believing them and the future shifts to accommodate them.

 

[Cromwell]

The grind gives you a sense of accomplishment. You don't notice if time spent was doing something fun/trivial/challenging/banal, all you notice is that you spent 50 hours building that wooden house.

There has to be a term for this psychological effect.

I think, after all the grind, it didnt even matter what the player has accomplished actually, he feels accomplishment because the way to it was hard not the goal beeing worth it. it ust be worth it because you have worked your ass off for it.

whereass a better approach would be, if you want to make people spend time, make the goal worthwile enough to justify the work

i dont know if it fits but theres the sunk cost fallacy (i think thats hat its called) where you justify to spend more energy, mone whatever in some project because you want to justify for yourself the worth of whats already spend on it. Example:

you have this very expensivemuse say 200 bucks, but it only works (which you find out after you bought it) on one single system which costs again 2000. instead of cutting the loss of the 200 you buy the system because you already have the mouse. you grin more for shit because you grinded already for shit before you knew it was shit.

also, you put the illusion on yourself that the goal is worthwile because it has to be worthwile to justify the grind otherwise you would be an idiot, after you did that you dont notice what you actually do for it because you already live in the illusion its great and because its that great ou only have eyes for the goal not for the way towards it.

 

[visions]

The grind gives you a sense of accomplishment. You don't notice if time spent was doing something fun/trivial/challenging/banal, all you notice is that you spent 50 hours building that wooden house.

There has to be a term for this psychological effect.

Idiocy?

 

[Horus]

I wonder just how bad EA's position is that they're trying shit like this now? I mean, their stock prices are in the shitter, they got delisted from the NASDAQ index, their $500 million MMO is a failure, they got voted worst company in America last year, at least two major titles flopped last year (Amalur and MoH Warfighter), they expect sales figures of $5 million for games like DS3 (which they missed) and they're laying off people left, right and centre.

It would be interesting to know just what EA's financial position is like at the moment, because I kinda get this feeling it's not too good and I'm willing to bet their investors aren't very happy.

As long as fifa is around they will make profit(ultimate team makes shitloads of money from kids)
But latest fifa's were shit and they might be caught by pes again(If the konami staff can get their head out of their asses of course).

 

[MetalCraze]

But Cervat Yerli is anyway full of shit. Not only do his games get worse with every iteration, the stuff he says does so as well.

Crytek makes games?

 

[Tytus]

My rambling, long-winded response to this announcement:

<eric> see
<eric> this is basically the MMOfication of gaming.
<eric> World of Warcraft was responsible for this.
<eric> to be honest.
<eric> World of Warcraft defined so many videogame standards.
<eric> central to that was the concept of grinding (not a new thing) in a persistent online game.
<eric> see, the MMO business model relies on frequent content updates.
<eric> but the massive size of your average MMO makes that impossible.
<eric> so, Blizzard had to take another approach whereby the game was primarily focused on a shallow, repetitive grind for levels that was over-extended beyond the point of being fun.
<eric> you may notice that a year or two after World of Warcraft came out, leveling systems started to make their way into almost every kind of game.
<eric> the reason for this was because designers and executives erroneously assumed that leveling systems were in themselves motivation enough to play a game.
<eric> truth be told, leveling systems are only one way of facilitating progression, but WoW's success made them the standard.
<eric> now what we are seeing is that developers and publishers are using the same MMO grind to milk more money out of games.
<eric> the idea being that if you make the grind long and painful enough, people will pay money to skip it.
<eric> they have already been conditioned to think of the grind as the "default" way games are to be played and indeed a fundamental component of modern videogames.
<eric> so they are now purposely using grinding to extend gameplay content beyond any "fun" value it may actually have and require/force you to keep doing it... except you can spend cash to get to the next "fun part" faster.
<eric> the thing is that this kind of bullshit basically would not exist if it was not for the prevalence of leveling.
<eric> from article:
<eric> "We are building into all of our games the ability to pay for things along the way; to get to a higher level," he explained.
<eric> I have seen this exact same mentality in businessmen involved in the videogame industry before; we have so many meanings of the word "level" with respect to gaming that they tend to conflate them all to the point where "level" is basically an end in and of itself in their eyes.
<eric> and not the actual experience of playing.
<eric> case in point, my boss at work. he is not really a gamer and he has that exact same confusion about what "level" even means. to him, videogames = leveling
<eric> and he thinks that leveling = fun on some fundamental level.
<eric> but what is lost in this entire though process/paradigm is that leveling is a way of presenting progression mechanics and a way of enabling steady distribution of content, not a thing that is enjoyable in and of itself.
<eric> this is the kind of distinction that can only be made when you are actually experienced with gaming, know games, play games, understand them and how they work, mechanically and systemically.
<eric> I would also wager this is where much of the "realism" trend in gaming stems from; this disconnected misunderstanding of what makes games fun also leads to the notion that graphics are an end in and of themselves (for competing in the marketplace), and not functional representations of mechanics.
<eric> on an even more basic level it highlights that difference in mindset between businessmen and consumers: that entertainment is compelling not for reasons of edification, but that there is some intrinsic value in "beating" the previous market leader.

I should probably focus those ideas into something more coherent.

So you copied your ramblings from some chat because you were to lazy to write a forum post? I hope you get hit by a truck.

 

[sea]

So you copied your ramblings from some chat because you were to lazy to write a forum post? I hope you get hit by a truck.

 

[Bulba]

just another reason to pirate = you get to play offline + you get all dlc and microtransaction staff. let the idiots pay real moneys

 

[Renegen]

Grinding in Minecraft, the game that consists of laying blocks to build whtever you feel like bulding? That's gotta be the loosest definition of grinding I've ever seen.

It's actually much worse than this, like all your items degrade, you need to rebuild them, there's randomness in what you find so you need to do very repetitive tasks hoping to get lucky etc

 

[Hellraiser]

A WILD KEBAB APPEARS: http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/03/01/yerli-single-player-games-must-be-online-single-player/

REMOVE KEBAB FROM CRYTEK PREMISES

 

[Blaine]

 

[Jaesun]