The owner of a restaurant owns the kitchen too but you wouldn't say they were the chef.
The owners do typically buy the ingredients and have a huge say about what goes on the menu. If a popular restaurant caused you to get sick, are you likely to go there again? Does it matter if its the chef or the owner that made the food in that context? The mistrust toward EA is justified imo. Sure he might miss out on some cool games, but with the the number of other cool games out there, its hardly a loss imo.
Also, this whole number boasting is very embarrasing to watch. They offer something free and then brag about how many players signed up to try it. I get that its another marketing ploy, but it just looks terribly ignorant and self-serving which is a huge reason why many people hate EA in the first place, imo.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Don't forget AL is also canibalizing Overwatch players. Basically all big former OW streamers are streaming Apex now: Dakotas, TimTheTatman, Aimbotcalvin, Seagull, xQcOW and more.
Streamers will play whatever will make them the most money.
EA paid top streamers to play AL at launch. The masses enjoyed watching it so they kept playing as that's where the money is now.
It's not like top streamers play what they want - it's a job for them.
If Blizzard came in and dropped more cash their way, they would all be playing Overwatch
Paying streamers at launch doesn't make any game popular in the long term, Otherwise Lawbreakers would not have died and Quake Champions would not be almost dead right now. Both games had high profile paid streamers to give them visibility in their first days.
Don't forget AL is also canibalizing Overwatch players. Basically all big former OW streamers are streaming Apex now: Dakotas, TimTheTatman, Aimbotcalvin, Seagull, xQcOW and more.
But why? It's a totally different experience. I know AL is doing the whole Hero Shooter thing.. but there's a big difference between a fragger and battle royale. I can't stand BR but I could play a fragger all day.
As seagull said before, they are losing faith in blizzard when it comes to hero balancing.
The long term success - or failure - of a game comes down to whether its a "good" game. Good being subjective.
If people don't know about a game though then it has zero chance of being successful. You can have the best game in the world but if only you and your pet goat know about it so what.
Enter marketing.
EA's strategy for Apex was to pay streamers. To generate initial exposure after which - they hoped - word of mouth and continued streaming would kick in.
And the strategy has worked. The rest is down to whether its a good game.
That....isn't how it works. Never mind on funding, looked into it, EA did fund the game. It still doesn't mean they made it though. That would be like saying an art piece was made by the art dealer because the art dealer got paid for helping sell the artist's art.
Exam question. Is Anthem a Bioware game or an EA game? The answer: Bioware if its a good game, EA if its a bad game is not allowed btw!
The owner of a restaurant owns the kitchen too but you wouldn't say they were the chef.
The owners do typically buy the ingredients and have a huge say about what goes on the menu. If a popular restaurant caused you to get sick, are you likely to go there again? Does it matter if its the chef or the owner that made the food in that context? The mistrust toward EA is justified imo. Sure he might miss out on some cool games, but with the the number of other cool games out there, its hardly a loss imo.
Also, this whole number boasting is very embarrasing to watch. They offer something free and then brag about how many players signed up to try it. I get that its another marketing ploy, but it just looks terribly ignorant and self-serving which is a huge reason why many people hate EA in the first place, imo.
Most game publishers and development studios publish numbers after launch, it is not exclusive to EA at all. You must be embarrassed a lot.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
The downside? Will further encourage many other large developers to produce more new games of similar designs, while reducing funding for other genres.
There may never be another AAA MMORPG produced ever again, they just can't draw in numbers anything like this in this day and age.
Like what happened with Survival games, shooters etc. The industry will keep chasing the flavor of the month not really doing anything new until some relatively unknown studio (or person ahem) drops something that catches a significant portion of the market, then the focus will switch to making whatever that is.
This industry isn't about diversification of ingenuity, its about chasing the leader and crapping out clones in hopes of grabbing a couple bucks. You pointed it out later in this thread the lure of easy money and several others have pointed out; Polished. It released in a finished very playable state. If nothing else lets hope other game studios take THAT hint and stop releasing works in progress
Here's hoping the Honeymoon ends soon, and people go back to playing other stuff. Tired of seeing 2/3 of my followed list playing it because "It's the shiny new thing!"
LOL good luck!
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
The owner of a restaurant owns the kitchen too but you wouldn't say they were the chef.
The owners do typically buy the ingredients and have a huge say about what goes on the menu. If a popular restaurant caused you to get sick, are you likely to go there again? Does it matter if its the chef or the owner that made the food in that context? The mistrust toward EA is justified imo. Sure he might miss out on some cool games, but with the the number of other cool games out there, its hardly a loss imo.
Also, this whole number boasting is very embarrasing to watch. They offer something free and then brag about how many players signed up to try it. I get that its another marketing ploy, but it just looks terribly ignorant and self-serving which is a huge reason why many people hate EA in the first place, imo.
Most game publishers and development studios publish numbers after launch, it is not exclusive to EA at all. You must be embarrassed a lot.
If you cant tell the difference then I am embarrassed for you.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
The owner of a restaurant owns the kitchen too but you wouldn't say they were the chef.
The owners do typically buy the ingredients and have a huge say about what goes on the menu. If a popular restaurant caused you to get sick, are you likely to go there again? Does it matter if its the chef or the owner that made the food in that context? The mistrust toward EA is justified imo. Sure he might miss out on some cool games, but with the the number of other cool games out there, its hardly a loss imo.
Also, this whole number boasting is very embarrasing to watch. They offer something free and then brag about how many players signed up to try it. I get that its another marketing ploy, but it just looks terribly ignorant and self-serving which is a huge reason why many people hate EA in the first place, imo.
Most game publishers and development studios publish numbers after launch, it is not exclusive to EA at all. You must be embarrassed a lot.
If you cant tell the difference then I am embarrassed for you.
OK, what is the difference? Because I see it all the time. The ONLY difference here is you have some reason to dislike EA (in my opinion a complete bullshit reason but not the point) so you jump on the bandwagon. Most, if not all game studios publish numbers after launch. It is a fact. Some do it in flashy ways, others just publish numbers.
So please, illuminate the difference for me.
Also, here ya go champ, Wiki is a weak reference, I admit, but those numbers came from somewhere.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
.. this whole number boasting is very embarrasing to watch. They offer something free and then brag about how many players signed up to try it. I get that its another marketing ploy, but it just looks terribly ignorant and self-serving which is a huge reason why many people hate EA in the first place, imo.
Most game publishers and development studios publish numbers after launch, it is not exclusive to EA at all. You must be embarrassed a lot.
If you cant tell the difference then I am embarrassed for you.
OK, what is the difference? Because I see it all the time. The ONLY difference here is you have some reason to dislike EA (in my opinion a complete bullshit reason but not the point) so you jump on the bandwagon. Most, if not all game studios publish numbers after launch. It is a fact. Some do it in flashy ways, others just publish numbers.
So please, illuminate the difference for me.
Also, here ya go champ, Wiki is a weak reference, I admit, but those numbers came from somewhere.
Fine. I usually don’t do this for free, but:
The difference is those other companies are not (usually) giving away a product for free and then immediately bragging about how popular it is. If they are, then they are ignorant and self-serving too. Most of the numbers come after the product has been out longer and the user has already made an actual investment in trying the game. I think U2 once tried this by giving their album away for free. They might have bragged about how popular that made it, which would be embarrassing, imo.
EA is one of my least favorite game publishers, but I still tried the game. I have no big vendetta against them other than their obvious greed and laziness. But, as you said, some companies do try to pull over on customers. That doesnt make it ok or any less embarrasing. I know it seems like I might just be bashing EA, but I would feel similar about any product by any publisher who did the same thing. There have been several in the past, im certain.
I hope the game does well (population and longevity-wise),tbh. EA has a way to go to earn many peoples’ trust back, and this game could be a huge step in that direction. I dont think they need the extra marketing fluff, as it makes them look bad again despite any possible actual success of the game, imo.
Post edited by Palebane on
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
That....isn't how it works. Never mind on funding, looked into it, EA did fund the game. It still doesn't mean they made it though. That would be like saying an art piece was made by the art dealer because the art dealer got paid for helping sell the artist's art.
Exam question. Is Anthem a Bioware game or an EA game? The answer: Bioware if its a good game, EA if its a bad game is not allowed btw!
Erm, the answer is Bioware in both cases ;P Just like everything from Mass Effect 2 to Andromeda is a Bioware game...
I don't understand. The gunplay is fun, but it's just another subpar battle royal game. Worse, no titans or pilots you play as simple soldiers. So I don't get how it became so popular but I do hope this means titanfall 3.
What exactly makes it subpar? I mean, 25 million accounts with 2 million concurrent players isn't exactly a recipe for fail. I don't understand how it's sub par with such a strong start.
Well, technically speaking, being F2P means it could be a fail with 25 million concurrent players- because players playing doesn't necessarily mean EA or Respawn have received a dime in revenue.
However, realistically speaking, the more folks playing, the higher the potential for mtx revenue.
Matter of fact I told you specifically. The game was going to be a smash hit, and that there is plenty of room in the genre these days.
I don't understand. The gunplay is fun, but it's just another subpar battle royal game. Worse, no titans or pilots you play as simple soldiers. So I don't get how it became so popular but I do hope this means titanfall 3.
What exactly makes it subpar? I mean, 25 million accounts with 2 million concurrent players isn't exactly a recipe for fail. I don't understand how it's sub par with such a strong start.
Well, technically speaking, being F2P means it could be a fail with 25 million concurrent players- because players playing doesn't necessarily mean EA or Respawn have received a dime in revenue.
However, realistically speaking, the more folks playing, the higher the potential for mtx revenue.
Matter of fact I told you specifically. The game was going to be a smash hit, and that there is plenty of room in the genre these days.
didnt I?
I think Apex's popularity surprised a lot of people, with Overwatch losing its esports thing, and PUBG just being 'old' and still having a few optimisation issues, for a game to come out as good as Apex that runs well too, its no wonder that players are leaving Overwatch, PUBG, Fortnite etc. to play Apex instead, its not that there is plenty of room in that particular genre, its just that games are easily replaced in favour of something new and possibly better, which Apex is likely both of those things, it will be interesting to see in perhaps as little as 3 months time, just how much games like Fortnite have lost player numbers, Overwatch too given all those layoffs at ActiBlizz, players aren't going to hang around to watch a sinking ship when they can go play something fun instead. But heres the thing, how long before another game releases like Apex, a B.R game that works well and is fun to play, its not an 'if' so much as a 'when', not only that but Epic are going to want to try and get their players back, so what are they going to do in Fortnite to try and entice them back, so expect more free stuff, maybe PUBG will get desperate enough to lower their prices, the battle of the B.R games is going to be fun to watch even if your not a fan of B.R
I don't understand. The gunplay is fun, but it's just another subpar battle royal game. Worse, no titans or pilots you play as simple soldiers. So I don't get how it became so popular but I do hope this means titanfall 3.
What exactly makes it subpar? I mean, 25 million accounts with 2 million concurrent players isn't exactly a recipe for fail. I don't understand how it's sub par with such a strong start.
Well, technically speaking, being F2P means it could be a fail with 25 million concurrent players- because players playing doesn't necessarily mean EA or Respawn have received a dime in revenue.
However, realistically speaking, the more folks playing, the higher the potential for mtx revenue.
Matter of fact I told you specifically. The game was going to be a smash hit, and that there is plenty of room in the genre these days.
didnt I?
I think Apex's popularity surprised a lot of people, with Overwatch losing its esports thing, and PUBG just being 'old' and still having a few optimisation issues, for a game to come out as good as Apex that runs well too, its no wonder that players are leaving Overwatch, PUBG, Fortnite etc. to play Apex instead, its not that there is plenty of room in that particular genre, its just that games are easily replaced in favour of something new and possibly better, which Apex is likely both of those things, it will be interesting to see in perhaps as little as 3 months time, just how much games like Fortnite have lost player numbers, Overwatch too given all those layoffs at ActiBlizz, players aren't going to hang around to watch a sinking ship when they can go play something fun instead. But heres the thing, how long before another game releases like Apex, a B.R game that works well and is fun to play, its not an 'if' so much as a 'when', not only that but Epic are going to want to try and get their players back, so what are they going to do in Fortnite to try and entice them back, so expect more free stuff, maybe PUBG will get desperate enough to lower their prices, the battle of the B.R games is going to be fun to watch even if your not a fan of B.R
Long gone are the days of 15-20 mill players across all major mmorpgs, struggling with internet and computer issues.
There are100s of millions of gamers with greatequipment and huge bandwiith.
“We have less horse and bayonets too” get with the times bruh.
I don't understand. The gunplay is fun, but it's just another subpar battle royal game. Worse, no titans or pilots you play as simple soldiers. So I don't get how it became so popular but I do hope this means titanfall 3.
What exactly makes it subpar? I mean, 25 million accounts with 2 million concurrent players isn't exactly a recipe for fail. I don't understand how it's sub par with such a strong start.
Well, technically speaking, being F2P means it could be a fail with 25 million concurrent players- because players playing doesn't necessarily mean EA or Respawn have received a dime in revenue.
However, realistically speaking, the more folks playing, the higher the potential for mtx revenue.
Matter of fact I told you specifically. The game was going to be a smash hit, and that there is plenty of room in the genre these days.
didnt I?
I think Apex's popularity surprised a lot of people, with Overwatch losing its esports thing, and PUBG just being 'old' and still having a few optimisation issues, for a game to come out as good as Apex that runs well too, its no wonder that players are leaving Overwatch, PUBG, Fortnite etc. to play Apex instead, its not that there is plenty of room in that particular genre, its just that games are easily replaced in favour of something new and possibly better, which Apex is likely both of those things, it will be interesting to see in perhaps as little as 3 months time, just how much games like Fortnite have lost player numbers, Overwatch too given all those layoffs at ActiBlizz, players aren't going to hang around to watch a sinking ship when they can go play something fun instead. But heres the thing, how long before another game releases like Apex, a B.R game that works well and is fun to play, its not an 'if' so much as a 'when', not only that but Epic are going to want to try and get their players back, so what are they going to do in Fortnite to try and entice them back, so expect more free stuff, maybe PUBG will get desperate enough to lower their prices, the battle of the B.R games is going to be fun to watch even if your not a fan of B.R
Long gone are the days of 15-20 mill players across all major mmorpgs, struggling with internet and computer issues.
There are100s of millions of gamers with greatequipment and huge bandwiith.
“We have less horse and bayonets too” get with the times bruh.
Is that an argument? you make it sound like those millions of players who are playing Apex were just sitting on their hands waiting for the game and doing nothing, of course they came from somewhere, kind of silly to think they didn't. It will be interesting to see how Epic reacts to the loss of Fortnite players, same with PUBG etc. honestly if you think Apex's playerbase just appeared from nowhere, then i really don't know what to say to you.
Is this game still published by EA? If so, I won't ever touch it. Don't care if it's free or if every last person on earth is playing it.
It's called cutting off your nose to spite your face. How does the name of the publisher make a difference to your gaming experience? Life's too short to bear grudges.
I don't understand. The gunplay is fun, but it's just another subpar battle royal game. Worse, no titans or pilots you play as simple soldiers. So I don't get how it became so popular but I do hope this means titanfall 3.
What exactly makes it subpar? I mean, 25 million accounts with 2 million concurrent players isn't exactly a recipe for fail. I don't understand how it's sub par with such a strong start.
Well, technically speaking, being F2P means it could be a fail with 25 million concurrent players- because players playing doesn't necessarily mean EA or Respawn have received a dime in revenue.
However, realistically speaking, the more folks playing, the higher the potential for mtx revenue.
Matter of fact I told you specifically. The game was going to be a smash hit, and that there is plenty of room in the genre these days.
didnt I?
Lol, it's a week old.
I, and many others, have already said the same things: check back with us once the shiny wears off.
@Nyctelios oh believe me, I'm not saying it's chances are slim because I disbelieve the quality, only because it's going up against a verified lightning-in-a-bottle phenomenon in Fortnite.
After watching the rise of a genre via WoW, a title that put a relatively new genre on the map and enjoyed pop culture references and mainstream entertainment industry crossover (exactly like Fortnite has been enjoying), I just don't think it's a good idea to count the long-term success chickens until they actually hatch.
Is this game still published by EA? If so, I won't ever touch it. Don't care if it's free or if every last person on earth is playing it.
Sounds like a dumbass move to me but oook
Well, I hope you and all the people here playing this game aren't people who bash on or hate on EA.....Because I feel like there are a lot of hypocrites out there with this sort of stuff....
There are a lot of positive comments around forums and social media about the shooting and gun play. That's a real strength in my opinion. Fortnight is shackled to a building gimmick which could end up being its Achilles heel. It can distract from the shooting experience and once people get tired of building the interest could plummet as quickly as it rose.
This was good timing by EA and Respawn. The game offers tactics, but focuses on shooting. It's a way out of the building ladders loop but still offers AAA polish something PUBG and a slew of mediocre clones don't have.
Outside of the game quality, I'm rooting for this to succeed because I think it's in our [gamers, players, content creators, media outlets, and such] best interest overall to have our market force spread out a little. Even if Fortnite numbers get cut in half Epic will still be a powerhouse, but not singularly so which is where they're heading now.
I think it's the building that made Fortnite. It adds a unique layer of complexity to the battles that really has no comparison. I'd never found a normal FPS battle that interesting to watch, but how fast these guys can counter, counter-counter, and modify their own structures is impressive. I think any real competitor for Fortnite will have to have something on a similar level to really compete.
Battle Royal as a type of game though really shouldn't have one obvious King. It's too damn simple. Almost any game could have it as a mode. Once we are there it won't be which battle royal is the best, but which game has the best BR mode. I might actually like Fortnite if they had left it more tied to the PvE game, and let you keep your characters and weapon skins.
Comments
Also, this whole number boasting is very embarrasing to watch. They offer something free and then brag about how many players signed up to try it. I get that its another marketing ploy, but it just looks terribly ignorant and self-serving which is a huge reason why many people hate EA in the first place, imo.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
If people don't know about a game though then it has zero chance of being successful. You can have the best game in the world but if only you and your pet goat know about it so what.
Enter marketing.
EA's strategy for Apex was to pay streamers. To generate initial exposure after which - they hoped - word of mouth and continued streaming would kick in.
And the strategy has worked. The rest is down to whether its a good game.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
This industry isn't about diversification of ingenuity, its about chasing the leader and crapping out clones in hopes of grabbing a couple bucks. You pointed it out later in this thread the lure of easy money and several others have pointed out; Polished. It released in a finished very playable state. If nothing else lets hope other game studios take THAT hint and stop releasing works in progress
LOL good luck!
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
So please, illuminate the difference for me.
Also, here ya go champ, Wiki is a weak reference, I admit, but those numbers came from somewhere.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
The difference is those other companies are not (usually) giving away a product for free and then immediately bragging about how popular it is. If they are, then they are ignorant and self-serving too. Most of the numbers come after the product has been out longer and the user has already made an actual investment in trying the game. I think U2 once tried this by giving their album away for free. They might have bragged about how popular that made it, which would be embarrassing, imo.
EA is one of my least favorite game publishers, but I still tried the game. I have no big vendetta against them other than their obvious greed and laziness. But, as you said, some companies do try to pull over on customers. That doesnt make it ok or any less embarrasing. I know it seems like I might just be bashing EA, but I would feel similar about any product by any publisher who did the same thing. There have been several in the past, im certain.
I hope the game does well (population and longevity-wise),tbh. EA has a way to go to earn many peoples’ trust back, and this game could be a huge step in that direction. I dont think they need the extra marketing fluff, as it makes them look bad again despite any possible actual success of the game, imo.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Matter of fact I told you specifically. The game was going to be a smash hit, and that there is plenty of room in the genre these days.
didnt I?
But heres the thing, how long before another game releases like Apex, a B.R game that works well and is fun to play, its not an 'if' so much as a 'when', not only that but Epic are going to want to try and get their players back, so what are they going to do in Fortnite to try and entice them back, so expect more free stuff, maybe PUBG will get desperate enough to lower their prices, the battle of the B.R games is going to be fun to watch even if your not a fan of B.R
There are100s of millions of gamers with greatequipment and huge bandwiith.
“We have less horse and bayonets too” get with the times bruh.
I, and many others, have already said the same things: check back with us once the shiny wears off.
After watching the rise of a genre via WoW, a title that put a relatively new genre on the map and enjoyed pop culture references and mainstream entertainment industry crossover (exactly like Fortnite has been enjoying), I just don't think it's a good idea to count the long-term success chickens until they actually hatch.
Battle Royal as a type of game though really shouldn't have one obvious King. It's too damn simple. Almost any game could have it as a mode. Once we are there it won't be which battle royal is the best, but which game has the best BR mode. I might actually like Fortnite if they had left it more tied to the PvE game, and let you keep your characters and weapon skins.