no, you got that covered... I'm paid to do my real job (in rea life). As for "just doing my job", that has more to do with countering other people's arguments, in cases where I disagree with them or see flaws in their argument structure, and in some cases revealing people's true colors.
Well, that's what I said - paid hater...
You're missing the point Gdemami, I'm giving you another chance to pick up where you left off so we can continue our discussion. Yet somehow you refuse to have a discussion and revert to insults and childish behavior.
Yet somehow you refuse to have a discussion and revert to insults and childish behavior.
Yeah, my bad I followed you on that path and should have stop feeding you long ago..
And you still keep going! (this time it took you longer). I've been trying to have a good discussion with you, even after you insulted me (more than once). It just amazes me how even when given the chance to continue with the discussion you refuse, presist with your insults, and then blame me for your behavior.
Regardless... I'm still open to the discussion if you're willing to put aside childish behavior and start acting like an adult.
I suppose there's no point in mentionnning that "Forbes" has nothing to do with this article? It's one of their contributors, and this is how you become a "Forbes contributor".
1- Have your own blog.
2- Submit your blog to Forbes for consideration; they examine your past articles.
3- If they like your blog, they add you to their list of approved bloggers.
4- You then continue to blog, and Forbes doesn't control your content.
You literally could write an article about the poor quality of corn flakes- seriously -and post it on your contributor's blog. That wouldn't mean "OMG Forbes says corn flakes suck!"
It means one guy who got his blog approved by Forbes in the past says corn flakes suck.
I know, I know...no one's going to care and I'm just a fanboy, right?
Figured as much.
What you mentionedi s how to get hired as a writer for any magazine.
As a journalist, magazines such as Forbes don't accept any yahoo's blog.
Also, most magazines have few actual writers and depend on vetted and heavily scrutinzed freelance writers.
Oh shut up you two. It's obvious neither of you wants to let the other one get the last word in... Leave that to me and go on about doing something fun. LOL.
Oh shut up you two. It's obvious niethe of you wants to let the other one get the last word in... Leave that to me and go on about doing something fun. LOL.
fair enough, Crazy_Stick, I give you the last word (oops! damnit, there I go again)
Originally posted by dontadow What you mentionedi s how to get hired as a writer for any magazine. As a journalist, magazines such as Forbes don't accept any yahoo's blog. Also, most magazines have few actual writers and depend on vetted and heavily scrutinzed freelance writers.
It does not matter where the article got published or how, it does not change the fact the article is pile of garbage not worth the read - just another armchair general gamer trapped in his gamer perception of the things.
There is one comment under the blog that sums it up precisely:
Steven Badley 1 day ago 1. The Old Republic is LIKELY a Bigger Disaster Than ANYONEs Saying.They really needed the monthly fee model to work, and the fact that IT HASNT makes the game A FAILURE, no matter how many players a free-to-play switch may bring back.He left out IMHO and is based on guesswork and water army perception parts. Forbes might consider reevaluating their freelance contributor screening process.
I like how the fanatics think there is a debate to be had on the issue. Everyone knows that SWTOR failed the only question is how big of a financial disaster was Tortanic as a whole. If a game has Forbes articles calling it a financial disaster and has the phrase negative hype created just for it, so when anyone sees the phrase negative hype they see a picture of SWTOR , there is a very good chance that your game is a disaster. People who write articles for Forbes probablly know more about the market than a fan who wears Jedi robes at sci fi conventions. They also basicaly confirm that the overall cost of the game is well over 400 million and maybe even 500, something long denied by SWTOR deniers.
The people who are still trying to say that SWTOR is a good game, are sort of like those people who see video evidence of war crimes but refuse to accept it.
This is what cracks me up. The game *IS* a failure by any definition of the word. It was a complete flop even if you believe the spun numbers that EA spits out. The stock prices are indicative of that as well.
It literally amazes me that anyone tries to defend this game or bioware/ea. Literally AMAZES me.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
At last! A real journalist in a real newspaper does some real journalism about EA and SWTOR. That company got by for too long with its shady figures and marketing double-speak. Now it's going to be punished where it counts: in its share price.
All the voice overs that have been put into the game has cost them an insane amount of money. You can bet that it took pretty much all of their budget, with not much left for the game itself.
Oh, really? The voice overs are costly?
Hm... There is like 200.000 lines of recorded text used. 1000 actors. Lets say each session lasts 4 hours. That is 4000 hours of voice-overs.
Now, do all the figures include other languages? I don't know but make it 3 for each language.
How much for recording hour? Is 1000 USD/hour enough?
Well, that makes 12000 hours at 1000 USD rate, resulting in 12M USD.
If you consider minimum budget as 150M USD, it is exactly 8% of the budged spent on 3 languages voice-overs.
Hate is blinding much, isn't it?
LOL. You don't understand "Actors ' Commercial Rights", do you? Actors don't just get paid once - they get 'residuals'. That means they get a piece of the revenues of any piece of EA that uses their voice on an ongoing basis. All those actors in SWTOR - EA's going to have to keep paying them for as long as SWTOR is up and running.
And these "experts" are the same people that said Facebook stock would be over $50 a share in a few months after launching...we know how that turned out hehe.
Edit: I haven't seen so much spin since I was on the merry-go-round in school. He touts that BF3 was a failure of EA? Even after he states that BF3 is the best selling title of all time. Like it was some suprise that CoD sold more. If you want something more than hackers and over-zealous no-lifes to play against, go play BF3...it was real new fps game, not a rehash of the exact same game that was released months before lol. I have both, and I'm tired of the old FPS formula, so I spend more time on BF3 about 4 to 1. I'm only on CoD when my friends call me to come join them.
I guess you can't believe everything you read on the internets XD
Originally posted by noncley LOL. You don't understand "Actors ' Commercial Rights", do you? Actors don't just get paid once - they get 'residuals'. That means they get a piece of the revenues of any piece of EA that uses their voice on an ongoing basis. All those actors in SWTOR - EA's going to have to keep paying them for as long as SWTOR is up and running.
What you mentionedi s how to get hired as a writer for any magazine.
As a journalist, magazines such as Forbes don't accept any yahoo's blog.
Also, most magazines have few actual writers and depend on vetted and heavily scrutinzed freelance writers.
It does not matter where the article got published or how, it does not change the fact the article is pile of garbage not worth the read - just another armchair general gamer trapped in his gamer perception of the things.
There is one comment under the blog that sums it up precisely:
Steven Badley 1 day ago “1. The Old Republic is LIKELY a Bigger Disaster Than ANYONE’s Saying.”
“They really needed the monthly fee model to work, and the fact that IT HASN’T makes the game A FAILURE, no matter how many players a free-to-play switch may bring back.”
He left out “IMHO” and “is based on guesswork and water army perception” parts. Forbes might consider reevaluating their freelance contributor screening process.
Sure it does... if the NY Times wrote an article about a certain topic that a blogger wrote as well in his personal blog, who do you think is going to receive more credibility? Sure people will have different opinions as to the source of the article, but the fact remains that certain sources tend to be more reliable than others; where the article is published DOES matter. It of course does not automatically give credibilty to the source, but it does lend its weight, authority, respect and yes even credibility to the source. In the case of this article from Forbes, considering Forbe's track record, I think it's safe to assume that the writer is not some armchair general gamer trapped in his gamer perception of things... again with the insults!
In your post you left out (IMHO) in "the article is a pile of garbage and not wroth the read" (based on my guesswork and water army perception). Funny how a writer for Forbes is not worth reading yet you are.
When you run out of arguments to defend your position you revert back to insults and tearing people down... instead of just insulting the writer, why not find an article where he was proven wrong or an article where his credibility was seriously questioned by his peers or subject matter experts (you and I do not count as subject matter experts!).
And these "experts" are the same people that said Facebook stock would be over $50 a share in a few months after launching...we know how that turned out hehe.
Edit: I haven't seen so much spin since I was on the merry-go-round in school. He touts that BF3 was a failure of EA? Even after he states that BF3 is the best selling title of all time. Like it was some suprise that CoD sold more. If you want something more than hackers and over-zealous no-lifes to play against, go play BF3...it was real new fps game, not a rehash of the exact same game that was released months before lol. I have both, and I'm tired of the old FPS formula, so I spend more time on BF3 about 4 to 1. I'm only on CoD when my friends call me to come join them.
I guess you can't believe everything you read on the internets XD
Another one with insults...
Instead of insulting a writer for Forbes, just because you disagree with him and for some God forsaken reason you're still hooked on SWTOR, try finding an article where the writer's credibility is seriously questioned by either his peers or subject matter experts (btw, you and I do not count as subject matter experts).
And these "experts" are the same people that said Facebook stock would be over $50 a share in a few months after launching...we know how that turned out hehe.
Edit: I haven't seen so much spin since I was on the merry-go-round in school. He touts that BF3 was a failure of EA? Even after he states that BF3 is the best selling title of all time. Like it was some suprise that CoD sold more. If you want something more than hackers and over-zealous no-lifes to play against, go play BF3...it was real new fps game, not a rehash of the exact same game that was released months before lol. I have both, and I'm tired of the old FPS formula, so I spend more time on BF3 about 4 to 1. I'm only on CoD when my friends call me to come join them.
I guess you can't believe everything you read on the internets XD
Actually, he was saying that BF3 failed in regards to CoD in that it didn't come close to the success of MW3. Not that it wasn't still a success in general. Regardless, both of them are subpar shooters.
All the voice overs that have been put into the game has cost them an insane amount of money. You can bet that it took pretty much all of their budget, with not much left for the game itself.
Oh, really? The voice overs are costly?
Hm... There is like 200.000 lines of recorded text used. 1000 actors. Lets say each session lasts 4 hours. That is 4000 hours of voice-overs.
Now, do all the figures include other languages? I don't know but make it 3 for each language.
How much for recording hour? Is 1000 USD/hour enough?
Well, that makes 12000 hours at 1000 USD rate, resulting in 12M USD.
If you consider minimum budget as 150M USD, it is exactly 8% of the budged spent on 3 languages voice-overs.
Hate is blinding much, isn't it?
LOL. You don't understand "Actors ' Commercial Rights", do you? Actors don't just get paid once - they get 'residuals'. That means they get a piece of the revenues of any piece of EA that uses their voice on an ongoing basis. All those actors in SWTOR - EA's going to have to keep paying them for as long as SWTOR is up and running.
Has Bioware or one of the voice actors commented on pay? This could be true but it could also be false. It depends on what contracts were put in place. Even SAG actors don't always get residuals.
And these "experts" are the same people that said Facebook stock would be over $50 a share in a few months after launching...we know how that turned out hehe.
Edit: I haven't seen so much spin since I was on the merry-go-round in school. He touts that BF3 was a failure of EA? Even after he states that BF3 is the best selling title of all time. Like it was some suprise that CoD sold more. If you want something more than hackers and over-zealous no-lifes to play against, go play BF3...it was real new fps game, not a rehash of the exact same game that was released months before lol. I have both, and I'm tired of the old FPS formula, so I spend more time on BF3 about 4 to 1. I'm only on CoD when my friends call me to come join them.
I guess you can't believe everything you read on the internets XD
Actually, he was saying that BF3 failed in regards to CoD in that it didn't come close to the success of MW3. Not that it wasn't still a success in general. Regardless, both of them are subpar shooters.
As I was re-reading the article, I noticed the same thing... funny how Gravarg talks about spin when he's doing the same thing.
Originally posted by MaxJac Has Bioware or one of the voice actors commented on pay? This could be true but it could also be false. It depends on what contracts were put in place. Even SAG actors don't always get residuals.
There are no residual fees for voice-overs. The only thing that makes difference in pricing is whether the voice-over is used for broadcast or not, you always buy out the rights...
So in this thread we have a ot of people who rip on a blogger because he does not back his arguments up, they do this withyout backing their own arguments up and in turn get ripped by another group doing the exact same thing again.
Is EA doing less then stellar, absolutly they have spread their portfolio way to thin and have lost any kind of focus. That does not make them a bad company per se it is just a sign that the gold has goine out of the gaming market. As for SW:ToR and BioWare. I have seen worse first-timer MMO's and nobody can say that the BioWare part of the game is bad. Story is on level with the other BioWare games and characters are about as solid as one can expext in a non-SP game. The problem ofc in my mind is the MMO part and this is the part that went slightly wrong. Marketing and general player expectations set this game up for all the hatred it recives on this site. It simply could not live up to the hype. I will hold to that it still is not a bad game and for a MMO from a company that have never made MMO's (ok they got help from Mythic but THAT is not saying much)
This game will most likly not see the kind of revival that EvE had but i still think we might see new life brought in to the game it self. Most likley the game will have gone F2P by then as EA have had good sucsess with F2P titles before and i asume there is something in the contract with mythic that prevents them from doing so with WAR (or it is simply making to little money to worth converting.)
Originally posted by tawess So in this thread we have a ot of people who rip on a blogger because he does not back his arguments up, they do this withyout backing their own arguments up and in turn get ripped by another group doing the exact same thing again.
Like seriously..?
Let's skim through this stinking pile quickly...
0) "Investors just dont understand gaming?"
That is not what JR says, his point is clear:
"There is a perception among investors that the game industry is tough to invest in right now. They're looking for the winners and they're looking for the catalysts. I think those will take place over the next twelve months."
Tassi missed the point by a long shot or just manipulated JR words to look like something he never said...
1) "The game was meant to be the first serious threat to Activision/Blizzards World of Warcraft"
Oh, really? According to who? No back up, claim pulled right out of his nose...
His estimates of development costs and marketing are in the same category. 300M spent on marketing? Source...?
2) "Battlefield is Not Call of Duty"
Yeah, Battlefield is not reaching sales of Call of Duty and SWTOR is not reaching WoW numbers, therefore they are both FAILURES.
Honestly, this is too thick just say it loud, not to say to publish it on "credited" magazine...
3) "There was controversy from the start as the game was announced to have Day One DLC that fans deemed rather essential to gameplay. "
!!! OMG,OMG!they have DAY 1 DLC !!! ...well, where are the sale numbers? Again, no business being talked...just a spin for weak minded bashers.
And at this point I do not feel like going further because the article becomes plain stupid and unbearable...
"We've been testing the game aggressively for quite a long time... and the focus for us as we head towards launch is on security, stability, saleability and retention," he said.
Muzyka continued: "There are ten of millions, tens of tens of millions of potential consumers for this game because Star Wars is the biggest IP in the world and that's a factor that can't be underestimated."
"I have tremendous respect for the folks at Blizzard, but I think we're building a product that will more than compete."
If those words were not meant to be a serious threat, then what exactly would be?
Originally posted by BardusEA must of cost someone at Forbes to make a bad investment. Forbes isn't even waisting Vaseline on this one. "The Old Republic is Likely a Bigger Disaster Than Anyones Saying" Read the rest for yourself, I'm not your keeper.http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2012/07/19/five-reasons-ea-is-in-decline/
I suppose there's no point in mentionnning that "Forbes" has nothing to do with this article? It's one of their contributors, and this is how you become a "Forbes contributor".
1- Have your own blog.
2- Submit your blog to Forbes for consideration; they examine your past articles.
3- If they like your blog, they add you to their list of approved bloggers.
4- You then continue to blog, and Forbes doesn't control your content.
You literally could write an article about the poor quality of corn flakes- seriously -and post it on your contributor's blog. That wouldn't mean "OMG Forbes says corn flakes suck!"
It means one guy who got his blog approved by Forbes in the past says corn flakes suck.
I know, I know...no one's going to care and I'm just a fanboy, right?
Figured as much.
thats all well and good. But, I am not sure how ANY of what I read in that article was deemed incorrect, irrelevant or wrong because of what you just said. At the end of the day, it was spot on. He presented facts to back up his claims :sales figures, EA being named worst company, layoffs at SWTOR, as well as mentioning EA's stock price dropping -- all FACTS. In your desperate attempt to come across as clever and witty you fall flat on your face. bottom line is this, it was a well written, factually correct piece on EA.
Originally posted by Segun777 My how far journalism has fallen. No facts, merely rumor posited as truth. Lazy. This is Forbes?!
EA stock price dropping = FACT. LAYOFFS at SWTOR = fact. Unable to compete effectively with Activisions top brands = FACT. EA named worst company fact. Im not sure you can understand what you read, or at the very least you dont know the definition of a fact. either way, you need to stop spreading the BS around.
Comments
You're missing the point Gdemami, I'm giving you another chance to pick up where you left off so we can continue our discussion. Yet somehow you refuse to have a discussion and revert to insults and childish behavior.
Yeah, my bad I followed you on that path and should have stop feeding you long ago..
And you still keep going! (this time it took you longer). I've been trying to have a good discussion with you, even after you insulted me (more than once). It just amazes me how even when given the chance to continue with the discussion you refuse, presist with your insults, and then blame me for your behavior.
Regardless... I'm still open to the discussion if you're willing to put aside childish behavior and start acting like an adult.
What you mentionedi s how to get hired as a writer for any magazine.
As a journalist, magazines such as Forbes don't accept any yahoo's blog.
Also, most magazines have few actual writers and depend on vetted and heavily scrutinzed freelance writers.
Oh shut up you two. It's obvious neither of you wants to let the other one get the last word in... Leave that to me and go on about doing something fun. LOL.
fair enough, Crazy_Stick, I give you the last word (oops! damnit, there I go again)
It does not matter where the article got published or how, it does not change the fact the article is pile of garbage not worth the read - just another armchair general gamer trapped in his gamer perception of the things.
There is one comment under the blog that sums it up precisely:
I like how the fanatics think there is a debate to be had on the issue. Everyone knows that SWTOR failed the only question is how big of a financial disaster was Tortanic as a whole. If a game has Forbes articles calling it a financial disaster and has the phrase negative hype created just for it, so when anyone sees the phrase negative hype they see a picture of SWTOR , there is a very good chance that your game is a disaster. People who write articles for Forbes probablly know more about the market than a fan who wears Jedi robes at sci fi conventions. They also basicaly confirm that the overall cost of the game is well over 400 million and maybe even 500, something long denied by SWTOR deniers.
The people who are still trying to say that SWTOR is a good game, are sort of like those people who see video evidence of war crimes but refuse to accept it.
This is what cracks me up. The game *IS* a failure by any definition of the word. It was a complete flop even if you believe the spun numbers that EA spits out. The stock prices are indicative of that as well.
It literally amazes me that anyone tries to defend this game or bioware/ea. Literally AMAZES me.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
At last! A real journalist in a real newspaper does some real journalism about EA and SWTOR. That company got by for too long with its shady figures and marketing double-speak. Now it's going to be punished where it counts: in its share price.
LOL. You don't understand "Actors ' Commercial Rights", do you? Actors don't just get paid once - they get 'residuals'. That means they get a piece of the revenues of any piece of EA that uses their voice on an ongoing basis. All those actors in SWTOR - EA's going to have to keep paying them for as long as SWTOR is up and running.
And these "experts" are the same people that said Facebook stock would be over $50 a share in a few months after launching...we know how that turned out hehe.
Edit: I haven't seen so much spin since I was on the merry-go-round in school. He touts that BF3 was a failure of EA? Even after he states that BF3 is the best selling title of all time. Like it was some suprise that CoD sold more. If you want something more than hackers and over-zealous no-lifes to play against, go play BF3...it was real new fps game, not a rehash of the exact same game that was released months before lol. I have both, and I'm tired of the old FPS formula, so I spend more time on BF3 about 4 to 1. I'm only on CoD when my friends call me to come join them.
I guess you can't believe everything you read on the internets XD
Erm, no....
Sure it does... if the NY Times wrote an article about a certain topic that a blogger wrote as well in his personal blog, who do you think is going to receive more credibility? Sure people will have different opinions as to the source of the article, but the fact remains that certain sources tend to be more reliable than others; where the article is published DOES matter. It of course does not automatically give credibilty to the source, but it does lend its weight, authority, respect and yes even credibility to the source. In the case of this article from Forbes, considering Forbe's track record, I think it's safe to assume that the writer is not some armchair general gamer trapped in his gamer perception of things... again with the insults!
In your post you left out (IMHO) in "the article is a pile of garbage and not wroth the read" (based on my guesswork and water army perception). Funny how a writer for Forbes is not worth reading yet you are.
When you run out of arguments to defend your position you revert back to insults and tearing people down... instead of just insulting the writer, why not find an article where he was proven wrong or an article where his credibility was seriously questioned by his peers or subject matter experts (you and I do not count as subject matter experts!).
Another one with insults...
Instead of insulting a writer for Forbes, just because you disagree with him and for some God forsaken reason you're still hooked on SWTOR, try finding an article where the writer's credibility is seriously questioned by either his peers or subject matter experts (btw, you and I do not count as subject matter experts).
Actually, he was saying that BF3 failed in regards to CoD in that it didn't come close to the success of MW3. Not that it wasn't still a success in general. Regardless, both of them are subpar shooters.
Has Bioware or one of the voice actors commented on pay? This could be true but it could also be false. It depends on what contracts were put in place. Even SAG actors don't always get residuals.
As I was re-reading the article, I noticed the same thing... funny how Gravarg talks about spin when he's doing the same thing.
There are no residual fees for voice-overs. The only thing that makes difference in pricing is whether the voice-over is used for broadcast or not, you always buy out the rights...
So in this thread we have a ot of people who rip on a blogger because he does not back his arguments up, they do this withyout backing their own arguments up and in turn get ripped by another group doing the exact same thing again.
Is EA doing less then stellar, absolutly they have spread their portfolio way to thin and have lost any kind of focus. That does not make them a bad company per se it is just a sign that the gold has goine out of the gaming market. As for SW:ToR and BioWare. I have seen worse first-timer MMO's and nobody can say that the BioWare part of the game is bad. Story is on level with the other BioWare games and characters are about as solid as one can expext in a non-SP game. The problem ofc in my mind is the MMO part and this is the part that went slightly wrong. Marketing and general player expectations set this game up for all the hatred it recives on this site. It simply could not live up to the hype. I will hold to that it still is not a bad game and for a MMO from a company that have never made MMO's (ok they got help from Mythic but THAT is not saying much)
This game will most likly not see the kind of revival that EvE had but i still think we might see new life brought in to the game it self. Most likley the game will have gone F2P by then as EA have had good sucsess with F2P titles before and i asume there is something in the contract with mythic that prevents them from doing so with WAR (or it is simply making to little money to worth converting.)
This have been a good conversation
Like seriously..?
Let's skim through this stinking pile quickly...
0) "Investors just dont understand gaming?"
That is not what JR says, his point is clear:
"There is a perception among investors that the game industry is tough to invest in right now. They're looking for the winners and they're looking for the catalysts. I think those will take place over the next twelve months."
Tassi missed the point by a long shot or just manipulated JR words to look like something he never said...
1) "The game was meant to be the first serious threat to Activision/Blizzards World of Warcraft"
Oh, really? According to who? No back up, claim pulled right out of his nose...
His estimates of development costs and marketing are in the same category. 300M spent on marketing? Source...?
2) "Battlefield is Not Call of Duty"
Yeah, Battlefield is not reaching sales of Call of Duty and SWTOR is not reaching WoW numbers, therefore they are both FAILURES.
Honestly, this is too thick just say it loud, not to say to publish it on "credited" magazine...
3) "There was controversy from the start as the game was announced to have Day One DLC that fans deemed rather essential to gameplay. "
!!! OMG,OMG!they have DAY 1 DLC !!! ...well, where are the sale numbers? Again, no business being talked...just a spin for weak minded bashers.
And at this point I do not feel like going further because the article becomes plain stupid and unbearable...
According to BioWare cofounder Ray Muzyka, that's who .. derp.
ref:
E3 2011: BioWare: Old Republic 'will more than compete' with World of Warcraft
9th Jun 2011
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/306437/bioware-old-republic-will-more-than-compete-with-world-of-warcraft/
"We've been testing the game aggressively for quite a long time... and the focus for us as we head towards launch is on security, stability, saleability and retention," he said.
Muzyka continued: "There are ten of millions, tens of tens of millions of potential consumers for this game because Star Wars is the biggest IP in the world and that's a factor that can't be underestimated."
"I have tremendous respect for the folks at Blizzard, but I think we're building a product that will more than compete."
If those words were not meant to be a serious threat, then what exactly would be?
Want a nice understanding of life? Try Spirit Science: "The Human History"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8NNHmV3QPw&feature=plcp
Recognize the voice? Yep sounds like Penny Arcade's Extra Credits.
Pyshaw, who is this Forbes thing anyways to say such ridiculous things..... oh wait.
thats all well and good. But, I am not sure how ANY of what I read in that article was deemed incorrect, irrelevant or wrong because of what you just said. At the end of the day, it was spot on. He presented facts to back up his claims :sales figures, EA being named worst company, layoffs at SWTOR, as well as mentioning EA's stock price dropping -- all FACTS. In your desperate attempt to come across as clever and witty you fall flat on your face. bottom line is this, it was a well written, factually correct piece on EA.
EA stock price dropping = FACT. LAYOFFS at SWTOR = fact. Unable to compete effectively with Activisions top brands = FACT. EA named worst company fact. Im not sure you can understand what you read, or at the very least you dont know the definition of a fact. either way, you need to stop spreading the BS around.