EA and the Worst Company in America poll

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Ma55ter_fett**

They are not the worst company in America.

They didn't feth up the gulf with oil.

They didn't screw over my parents on their mortgage.

They didn't inflate and then pop the housing bubble causing thousands to lose their homes.

They didn't crash the economy which caused me to get laid off.

They haven’t flown in private jets to Washington to ask the American people to bail them out of their own bad decisions and business practices.

They haven't screwed over any collage graduates by charging them an arm and a leg for a useless degree.

They didn't refuse to cover my medical expenses because it was a preexisting condition/wasn't preapproved.

They didn't lay off my neighbor and everyone at the factory where he worked and move production to Taiwan.

They don't cut the tops off mountains and feth up the groundwater.

They have published (not personally developed so you can't really blame them for ME3's ending that honor goes to the overhyped bioware as does dragon age 2 and swtor) some less than stellar videogames and may have insisted that simcity have an always online requirement. They have also milked their properties for all the money they possibly can and been a little condescending to customers some of whom filed a class action lawsuit because they didn't like the end of a videogame.

Nothing they have done as a major videogame publisher is any worse than that which is done by any other major videogame publisher imo.

**Melissia**

Dunno, I still hold them higher htan I do Blizzard. At least they release actual games instead of re-releasing the same game several times, like Lucas Films does with its star wars re-releases.

**Lynata**

SilverMK2 wrote:So saying "45m people have an Origin account" when it is a requirement to play certain EA games and equating that to "45m people clearly love Origin" is like saying "everyone who drives a car pays road tax, therefore everyone driving a car must love paying road tax".

Where did you read this, though? The letter says "Origin is a valid competitor to Steam, look at our numbers". Which is hard to dispute.

SilverMK2 wrote:The first couple of games I got which required origin I got without realising that Origin was required (back in the days when it was first being launched).

This admittedly sucks. But that's not really something you can fault EA for. I'm pretty sure it was mentioned in the game's description, and the previews/reviews. At least I remember it was for ME3, as it was a huge topic back then.

The one thing (apart from my belief that all major publishers are a negative influence on the gaming market) I think EA can be blamed for is for such blatant lies as Sim City's online requirement having anything to do with "server-side calculations" and stuff. I'm not sure if whoever said that just didn't understand what the actual programmers told them, but this is arguably a huge blunder.
Maybe I'm just not as "emotionally invested" regarding those things that seem to bother a lot of people, even where they originate from a studio rather than the publisher - For example, I liked the ME3 ending and had far more of a problem with ME2 and ME3 not allowing me to crouch manually anymore or dumbing down equipment customisation. I also still like TOR, even though I continue to take issues with certain visual design decisions. I'm certainly not a fan and will continue to bitch about the things I wish would be different, but my dislike for EA seems to be far below the level of the vocal majority.

**Melissia**

Not that I agree entirely with the EA-bashing,buuuut...

But that's not really something you can fault EA for

Yes it is. Forcing people to use Origin to play their games is EXACTLY something you can blame EA for. Hell people whine enough any time a game comes out on Steam, you'd think you'd at least let them be consistent in their whining.

**Macok**

Lynata wrote:
SilverMK2 wrote:So saying "45m people have an Origin account" when it is a requirement to play certain EA games and equating that to "45m people clearly love Origin" is like saying "everyone who drives a car pays road tax, therefore everyone driving a car must love paying road tax".
Where did you read this, though? The letter says "Origin is a valid competitor to Steam, look at our numbers". Which is hard to dispute.

Exactly but that is dodging the issue. Because people are not disliking EA because "Origin is a valid competitor to Steam" but somehow they put it in response to this.
They did state some true fact but they did not not addressing why people "hate" them. All this coupled with the 'The tallest trees catch the most wind' probably won't make people like them more.

**Lynata**

Melissia wrote:Yes it is. Forcing people to use Origin to play their games is EXACTLY something you can blame EA for.

This has nothing to do with buying a game and then realising what it says on the package.
That is about as much EA's fault as it would be for anyone to buy WoW and then go like "gak, I need internet to play this?"

Macok wrote:They did state some true fact but they did not not addressing why people "hate" them.

I thought it was a mixture of both PR distraction and truth, actually. I've seen some anti-EA campaigns because of LGBT myself. It's certainly not the biggest issue on the list, but at the same time I also believe that the Origin hate is at least 50% hyperbole. Hell, I used to be the same when Steam first came out.

What's strange is that they did not mention the ME3 ending in that list, though. I think that's one of the easiest silly things they could have dismissed.

**Melissia**

Yes Lynata, I get that you like to ramble on tangents, but you're ignoring the point.

**Lynata**

The point that people are trying to make an issue out of something that EA did not even touch in that letter?

I'm sorry for pointing out that the letter does not say what some people claim it says.

**JWhex**

Claiming that a company that makes video games is the worst company in America says more about the ignorance of people voting in the poll than it does about the company.

They are worse than cigarette companies? makers of so called energy drinks? companies that repeatedly pollute the land, air and sea, manufacturers of cheap handguns, worse than Monsanto? worse than BAE systems, worse than a dozen dirty banking and financial companies, worse than payday loan shark companies?

Only a pathetic uniformed ultra-narcisist would vote for a game company.

**Melissia**

EA didn't touch it because they were specifically avoiding touching any legitimate complaints.

Defending them for being cowardly weasels is fine, I guess, but that doesn't lessen the fact that they were cowardly weasels. They used classic logical fallacies to distract from and ignore the real issues at hand.

**timetowaste85**

nomotog wrote:
The big difference between EA and most other evil business is that they are unrepentant. Or at least that is how it feels. I mean BP did say sorry for destroying the environment. Meanwhile EA still defends always online DRM and says people hate them because they are gay friendly. What is that? I think if they where less dismissive, then they wouldn't be so hated.

You're kidding, right? I mean, you pretty much have to be. Comparing people being upset over a feature in a video game to a huge oil spill crisis that caused massive amounts of death to sea life and destruction...You're trolling us, right? Be honest. Otherwise, you really need to go re-evaluate, well, everything.

**Grundz**

Ma55ter_fett wrote:
They are not the worst company in America.

They didn't feth up the gulf with oil.

They didn't screw over my parents on their mortgage.

They didn't inflate and then pop the housing bubble causing thousands to lose their homes.

They didn't crash the economy which caused me to get laid off.

They haven’t flown in private jets to Washington to ask the American people to bail them out of their own bad decisions and business practices.

They haven't screwed over any collage graduates by charging them an arm and a leg for a useless degree.

They didn't refuse to cover my medical expenses because it was a preexisting condition/wasn't preapproved.

They didn't lay off my neighbor and everyone at the factory where he worked and move production to Taiwan.

They don't cut the tops off mountains and feth up the groundwater.

are any of those things really bad though?

**Melissia**

No, what they did to ME3's ending is much worse than any of those.

[/trololololol]

But seriously, I don't even consider EA to be the worst company in the gaming industry . That is definitely Blizzard.

**LordofHats**

The claim that Origin is a valid competitor to Steam is invalid on its face because Origin plays with a stacked deck. if it really were a valid competitor to Steam they wouldn't need to monopolize their products onto their platform. The platform doesn't stand on its own, it stands on the exclusivity of its market. And frankly, no one complains about the basic idea of Origin. People have wondered why no one has tried to challenge Steam for a long time. Origin garnered hate when EA pulled their titles from Steam and because of their EULA, and being an overall worse service than their competitor. People can want to play a game, buy it, play it, and still hate EA for pulling the stunt to start with. EA meanwhile will pretend like people hate Origin simply for existing which I don't feel is true for most gamers.

**HiveFleetPlastic**

JWhex wrote:
Claiming that a company that makes video games is the worst company in America says more about the ignorance of people voting in the poll than it does about the company.

Alternatively, it could say something about how seriously people take that poll, or online polls in general. Or something about highly-motivated groups skewing the results of self-selecting polls.

**H.B.M.C.**

Generally speaking the EA guy is right. They're not the worst company in the world. They're not even close to being the worst company in the world. What saddens me is that they seem to miss the point, using this poll as an excuse to dismiss three valid criticisms and spin them into something they're not.

“Many continue to claim the Always-On function in SimCity is a DRM scheme. It’s not. People still want to argue about it. We can’t be any clearer – it’s not. Period.”

This is akin to saying “People keep saying they don’t like how pink our new range of cars are. Well they’re certainly not blue. Not blue at all. Period.” It really ignores the greater point. DRM or not people hate the always online aspect of the new Sim City. More people are annoyed that they have to connect, regardless of the reasons (and the reasons are pretty flimsy, as many have found out).

“Some claim there’s no room for Origin as a competitor to Steam. 45 million registered users are proving that wrong.”

Silver’s point on this couldn’t be any clearer. All EA games require Origin, even when bought on Steam (not that you can really buy EA games on Steam these days). This does not constitute a viable competitor. It just represents how many games you’ve sold independent of Origin.

“Some people think that free-to-play games and micro-transactions are a pox on gaming. Tens of millions more are playing and loving those games.”

This one is simply laughable as it’s probably the most spin-tastic dodge. People are annoyed at gak like Day-1 DLC, stuff that’s on the disc but is locked out until you pay more money, content cut from the original game and sold afterwards. These are the transactions people hate. Freemium and free-2-play and micro transactions and all that are fine as long as they are used correctly. Charging money to get cheat codes (as EA once did) is not a correct use.

People don’t mind paying for more content but the important word here is more content. Not content that was already there and removed to charge extra or to force an online pass (eg. Catwoman in Arkham City). Not content that’s right there on the disc for the world to see but is locked out (eg. Street Fighter x Tekken). People don’t want to be nickel and dimed, and this is something EA is particularly adept at.

They’re not the worst company in the world, but they get such a bad rap because of the three things above, three things they don’t need to do. Making money and being a successful company doesn’t require you to be an donkey-cave about it. Just as GW.

Lynata wrote:
Where did you read this, though? The letter says "Origin is a valid competitor to Steam, look at our numbers". Which is hard to dispute.

Not really. You need origin to play these games. There’s no choice in the matter. Origin isn’t a competitor of Steam because people choose to use Origin. People buy the game and then have to use Origin. They don’t join Origin and then buy the game.

Silver’s example about road tax couldn’t be more spot on if he tried.

**nomotog**

timetowaste85 wrote:
nomotog wrote:
The big difference between EA and most other evil business is that they are unrepentant. Or at least that is how it feels. I mean BP did say sorry for destroying the environment. Meanwhile EA still defends always online DRM and says people hate them because they are gay friendly. What is that? I think if they where less dismissive, then they wouldn't be so hated.

You're kidding, right? I mean, you pretty much have to be. Comparing people being upset over a feature in a video game to a huge oil spill crisis that caused massive amounts of death to sea life and destruction...You're trolling us, right? Be honest. Otherwise, you really need to go re-evaluate, well, everything.

Well that is what is being compared in this poll. It is crazy, but I didn't make the list. I didn't even vote. I do get it though. I understand why people hate EA more then they hate a company like BP.

**SneakyMek**

Well Ea isn't exactly the worst company around, i mean yeah sure they have done a few very bad games as of lately along with some other less bright ideas, but they also did a lot of good games back in the day.

As for Blizzard meh they are okay but to me they had their glory days with Diablo 2 and Warcraft 3, but now i'm not such a big fan of them anymore since Diablo 3 is horrible and SC2 is more like SC 1.5 than an actual game of it's own.

**Sir Pseudonymous**

SneakyMek wrote:
Well Ea isn't exactly the worst company around, i mean yeah sure they have done a few very bad games as of lately along with some other less bright ideas, but they also did a lot of good games back in the day.

As for Blizzard meh they are okay but to me they had their glory days with Diablo 2 and Warcraft 3, but now i'm not such a big fan of them anymore since Diablo 3 is horrible and SC2 is more like SC 1.5 than an actual game of it's own.

It's not about quality, it's about behavior and ideological impact. Both EA and Actiblizzard are obscenities who have done a great deal to poison and degrade the industry. Ubisoft gets an honorable mention for pioneering this always-on filth with whichever assassin's creed it was.

**LordofHats**

Always online was being pioneered long before AC2. AC2 just had a particularly horrible iteration.

**H.B.M.C.**

Always online is a bad idea and will always be a bad idea. Rumours point towards the next X-Box always requiring a constant Internet connection to even function, and if disconnected for 3+ minutes it will lock up until connectivity is restored. I lost connection 10 times today whilst connected to the PSN Store. Were it a 720 (or whatever they're calling it) I would be fethed.

**Lynata**

H.B.M.C. wrote:Not really. You need origin to play these games. There’s no choice in the matter. Origin isn’t a competitor of Steam because people choose to use Origin. People buy the game and then have to use Origin. They don’t join Origin and then buy the game.

I originally got Steam only so I could play Half-Life 2. What does that make Steam/Valve?

How quickly people forget.

And I don't think anyone - including EA - said that Origin is a competitor because people like the client. It's a competitor because it has a huge number of users and sales. That's really all there is to it.

**RatBot**

Melissia wrote:
Dunno, I still hold them higher htan I do Blizzard. At least they release actual games instead of re-releasing the same game several times, like Lucas Films does with its star wars re-releases.

This, too. Even if EA is milking a lot of their properties for all they're worth, I at least see some tiny sparks of innovation coming from EA-owned studios. I can't remember the last time Activision released a game that wasn't a rehashed sequel of a rehashed sequel or an expansion for an existing game.

I would also argue that if all these people hated Origin so much, they could send a clear message by not buying these Origin-locked games. Yes, that would mean that *GASP!* you'd have to go without whatever the hell game you were so, so looking forward to, but well, I guess Origin's not that bad if you're buying the games anyway. What incentive would EA have to do away with their Origin policy if you'll buy the damn game anyway? And this isn't aimed at anyone specifically.

I haven't bought an Activision released game in over three years, for the record, and I only buy EA games that I truly believe will be awesome. I have no opinion on Origin since I've never had to use it; the last two EA games I bought were The Old Republic and The Secret World.

**LordofHats**

Lynata wrote:
]I originally got Steam only so I could play Half-Life 2. What does that make Steam/Valve?

How quickly people forget.

EA releases more games in 3 months than Valve has released in 7 years. Most people aren't using Steam solely to play Valve games. Most people are using Origin only to play EA games. There's a slight difference. EDIT: And really this is still glossing over that Valve games require Steam much like EA games need Origin but lets not let EA spoil their fantasy reality where people hate Origin just for existing with actual reality where they have a point that could actually be made but didn't.

And I don't think anyone - including EA - said that Origin is a competitor because people like the client. It's a competitor because it has a huge number of users and sales. That's really all there is to it.

And everyone is saying EA missed the point of why people hate Origin. Origin's existence isn't it. EDIT: The irony is that a lot of hate comes from EULA which is a really stupid reason to hate EA cause they'd been using that EULA for years (at least since BFBC2) and EA passed up a good chance to point out their detractors as idiots and instead went with something that wasn't true.

What incentive would EA have to do away with their Origin policy if you'll buy the damn game anyway? And this isn't aimed at anyone specifically.

It's the nature of the market, especially the gaming market. Just like how people complain about GW prices and still buy GW products by the cake load. And it is precisely why EA does this stuff. They know that at the end of the day their bottom line is more important than their reputation. As long as the former is in tack I think they could care less about the later (of course, with the recent sales hit they might start shifting their attitude maybe). The last time I bought an EA game was ME3 (ME3 was after SWTOR right?), and I highly doubt they could ever get me to come back, at least on the PC. Consoles are still consoles and what not.

**RatBot**

LordofHats wrote:

What incentive would EA have to do away with their Origin policy if you'll buy the damn game anyway? And this isn't aimed at anyone specifically.

It's the nature of the market, especially the gaming market. Just like how people complain about GW prices and still buy GW products by the cake load. And it is precisely why EA does this stuff. They know that at the end of the day their bottom line is more important than their reputation. As long as the former is in tack I think they could care less about the later (of course, with the recent sales hit they might start shifting their attitude maybe). The last time I bought an EA game was ME3 (ME3 was after SWTOR right?), and I highly doubt they could ever get me to come back, at least on the PC. Consoles are still consoles and what not.

Yeah, that's pretty much exactly the case. My question was rhetorical, really. I know people will complain and rant and rave and rage.... and then buy things anyway. I think people, in general, really need to realize that if they want gak to change, they'll have to change, and maybe pass up on the things they want to have. I can commiserate, too. Every once in a while I hear the siren song of the Dark Eldar, but have to remind myself that I do not want to contribute to a company I believe is doing wrong by their customers. (Not to turn this into a GW-bash thread, but it's pretty much the single best personal example I have of a company I don't want to support but makes things I really, really want.) At the end of the day, whether right or wrong, all any company that even approaches being large cares about is money. To slightly alter an old saying: "Let them hate me so long as they pay me."

**Lynata**

LordofHats wrote:EA releases more games in 3 months than Valve has released in 7 years. Most people aren't using Steam solely to play Valve games. Most people are using Origin only to play EA games. There's a slight difference. EDIT: And really this is still glossing over that Valve games require Steam much like EA games need Origin but lets not let EA spoil their fantasy reality where people hate Origin just for existing with actual reality where they have a point that could actually be made but didn't.

Yeah, but all of this has to do solely with EA's size versus Valve, and that Steam is also open to outside companies instead of just selling Valve's stuff.

Here's an interesting question: Would people suddenly like Origin more if you could also buy non-EA games there? Because that's pretty much the only real difference between the two clients I see at this point.

LordofHats wrote:And everyone is saying EA missed the point of why people hate Origin.

No argument there. I'm fairly sure they know the real reason, too. But statements like these are made for two groups: the ignorant masses who don't really read much about games (including parents buying stuff for their kids), and the investors who pay market analysts to stay somewhat on top of ongoing issues. They had to say something, but like every major company have to balance truth and PR with detracting drivel.
My comment on the subject was born solely out of the pragmatic conviction that there's no reason to blow up the whole thing even further by claiming the statement says something that it really doesn't only to further fan the flames of rage. I'm actually glad to see that unlike that poll, this thread at least is dominated by fairly moderate opinions rather than uncompromising apologists or hate-driven zealots.

**LordofHats**

Lynata wrote:
Yeah, but all of this has to do solely with EA's size versus Valve, and that Steam is also open to outside companies instead of just selling Valve's stuff.

Here's an interesting question: Would people suddenly like Origin more if you could also buy non-EA games there? Because that's pretty much the only real difference between the two clients I see at this point.

Honestly, I suspect people would like Origin more if it had been first. But it was second XD And Origin is a terrible client. Horribly glitchy, their cloud loves to be wonky, and their customer support is atrocious (and I should know, I've been trying to fix ME3 for over a year but they're no help at all). And frankly people hated EA long before Origin came along so when EA came out and said "We're gonna do this cause we think it'll be good for everyone" everyone heard "We're EA and we want more of your money so we're going to force you to download this thing we're making."

Part of the fear I think though is that people are at least capable of seeing the writing on the wall. The mentality is: With Origin its only a matter of time till Activision, Ubisoft, Square, etc follow suit. They'll all pull their games from Steam and each other's services and to play any games we'll have to download a half dozen crappy clients that all want to run at the same time and that all want our money. Whether or not that will actually happen is speculative but I think people at large are somewhat conscious of it. No one wants the market to go in the direction. They'd much rather have a selection of third party retailers (of which Steam is currently the closest too) than a horde of first party retailers.

**Lynata**

Weird, I've had little issues with Origin - but experiences with such things frequently vary on the personal level. Sorry to hear you had problems there.

Regarding the possibility of other publishers launching their own version of Steam/Origin/Battle.net etc, that is a valid concern and something I am dreading and half-expecting myself, although I regard this as a process which has begun long before Origin. Steam was the "socialist" experiment, where everyone could host their games on a single platform for all. Yet still the number of games which required a dedicated account was on a steady rise, even producing such strange effects as games where you'd first log in to Steam and THEN log in to something else just so you could play. I suppose it was a lack of trust in Steam, both as a handler of their games as well as its role in the future, that led these companies to keep developing their own DRM accounts.

It's kind of sad and something I detest as well. I'm just not sure what's worse - that this vision becomes true, or that EA and Activision will slowly gobble up everyone else .. at least then you'll only need their two clients.

**LordofHats**

Because its more funny than true, but really funny (at the end): Jimquisition

EDIT: And because I completely forgot why this thread came to mind when watching that video; All his stuff I don't agree with aside. At the end he hits the nail on the head. People have concerns about the industry and the things that companies like EA do, and rather than having their concerns acknowledged they feel like they are being ignored. That the industry has adopted a "Deal with it" attitude in its relations with its customers and the mega-publishers, EA, Acti-Blizz, and Ubisoft, epitomize this attitude.

**Squigsquasher**

Kanluwen wrote:
It would be helpful if you would actually post their reply, rather than simply posting a link.

Peter Moore of EA wrote:

The tallest trees catch the most wind.

That’s an expression I frequently use when asked to defend EA’s place in the gaming industry. And it comes to mind again this week as we get deeper into the brackets of an annual Web poll to name the “Worst Company in America.”

This is the same poll that last year judged us as worse than companies responsible for the biggest oil spill in history, the mortgage crisis, and bank bailouts that cost millions of taxpayer dollars. The complaints against us last year were our support of SOPA (not true), and that they didn’t like the ending to Mass Effect 3.

This year’s contest started in March with EA outpolling a company which organizers contend is conspiring to corner the world market on mid-priced beer, and (gulp) allegedly waters down its product. That debate takes place in bars – our audience lives on the Internet. So no surprise that we drew more votes there.

Let me cut to the chase: it appears EA is going to “win.” Like the Yankees, Lakers and Manchester United, EA is one of those organizations that is defined by both a legacy of success, and a legion of critics (especially me regarding all three of those teams).

Are we really the “Worst Company in America?” I’ll be the first to admit that we’ve made plenty of mistakes. These include server shut downs too early, games that didn’t meet expectations, missteps on new pricing models and most recently, severely fumbling the launch of SimCity. We owe gamers better performance than this.

Some of these complaints are 100 percent legitimate – like all large companies we are not perfect. But others just don’t hold water:

Many continue to claim the Always-On function in SimCity is a DRM scheme. It’s not. People still want to argue about it. We can’t be any clearer – it’s not. Period.
Some claim there’s no room for Origin as a competitor to Steam. 45 million registered users are proving that wrong.
Some people think that free-to-play games and micro-transactions are a pox on gaming. Tens of millions more are playing and loving those games.
We’ve seen mailing lists that direct people to vote for EA because they disagree with the choice of the cover athlete on Madden NFL. Yes, really…
In the past year, we have received thousands of emails and postcards protesting against EA for allowing players to create LGBT characters in our games. This week, we’re seeing posts on conservative web sites urging people to protest our LGBT policy by voting EA the Worst Company in America.

That last one is particularly telling. If that’s what makes us the worst company, bring it on. Because we're not caving on that.

We are committed to fixing our mistakes. Over the last three weeks, 900,000 SimCity players took us up on a free game offer for their troubles. We owed them that. We’re constantly listening to feedback from our players, through our Customer Experience group, Twitter, this blog, or other sites. The feedback is vital, and impacts the decisions we make.

I expect the debate will include a lot of comments under this post. But here’s the truth: each year EA interacts with more than 350 million gamers; Origin is breaking records for revenue and users; The Simpsons: Tapped Out and Real Racing 3 are at the top of the mobile charts; Battlefield 3 and FIFA are stunning achievements with tens of millions of players; and SimCity is being enjoyed by millions of passionate fans all over the world.

Every day, millions of people across globe play and love our games – literally, hundreds of millions more than will vote in this contest.

So here’s my response to this poll: We can do better. We will do better. But I am damn proud of this company, the people around the globe who work at EA, the games we create and the people that play them.

The tallest trees catch the most wind. At EA we remain proud and unbowed.

For my own opinion?
I think he's on the spot for most of it.

Of course there's complaints to be had about EA, but there are people who are voting against them for the reasons that he mentions as "not holding water".

EA just won my respect. Couldn't have put it better myself.