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.

**BlapBlapBlap**

Hey,

So EA was recently elected as a semifinalist in the Worst Company in America poll, similar to last year. Naturally, they responded on their blog, and of course, because it's the internet, the comments went to hell.

http://www.ea.com/news/we-can-do-better

What do you think about this? Did EA really deserve this? Are the complaints legitimate? Does EA unfairly use the LGBT community as a shield?

This definitely won't get locked.

**Kanluwen**

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".

**Sigvatr**

Ruined DA? Check. ME3 ending? Check. Ruined Dead Space? Check. Ruined C&C? Check. Ruined WH:O? Check. Origin? Check. Ruined Sim City? Cheeeeeeck.

EA is a huge bunghole of a publisher. Hope they win. Tee-hee.

**Sasori**

They may not be the best company, but they don't even skim the waters when it comes to the worst.

**LordofHats**

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.

So all that evidence that the Always-On function served no purpose in the game other than to be there was just the internet trolling you?

I love how he completely distracts from all the things people actually hate about EA (like Day 1 DLC, crappy online support, bad PC ports etc) by not mentioning any of them and then tries to shift blame on conservatives hating their LGBT policy (which I'm sure there are plenty of but come on). Good to see the standard tactic of "don't criticize me you're a bigot" is still strong and alive.

Honestly I'd have respected EA a lot more if their response was just this line:

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

**Lynata**

Sasori wrote:They may not be the best company, but they don't even skim the waters when it comes to the worst.

This. And even when we limit it to gaming, it's business practices in general that hamper creativity in games.
To me, it boils down to the same butthurt kneejerk reaction that caused a bunch of presumptuous spoiled gamers to sue them because they didn't like the ending of a game. First World Problems. From companies that discriminate against gender and races, that treat their employees like gak and replace local citizens with cheaper immigrant labour, that employ bribery to buy the support of corrupt politicians, that abuse the financial system to trigger a crisis by gambling with other people's money ... yet this is a popular choice? Worst of all, it's the gamers who, out of all consumer groups, probably make the best use of the media (internet) to garner support for this campaign, further diluting what the poll was originally supposed to express.

I've criticised EA a lot in the past for a few of their decisions myself, but ... man, worst company? Really? ... Puh-leease.

People's ignorance makes me mad. This is why we can't have nice things.

**Melissia**

Meh, they're better than Blizzard.

**Ratius**

Ruined DA?

Forgive me. By DA you mean Dragon Age? And by extension, yes the second was imho a train wreck but DAO was easily one of the best games of recent years.

BF3 whilst not perfect, was an unreal piece of PC gaming and exceptionally enjoyable imho - havent seen MP maps like it to date.

So worst company for what exactly? (leaving aside the engines/game builds)
Being dicks?

**Kanluwen**

LordofHats wrote:
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.

So all that evidence that the Always-On function served no purpose in the game other than to be there was just the internet trolling you?

I love how he completely distracts from all the things people actually hate about EA (like Day 1 DLC, crappy online support, bad PC ports etc) by not mentioning any of them and then tries to shift blame on conservatives hating their LGBT policy (which I'm sure there are plenty of but come on). Good to see the standard tactic of "don't criticize me you're a bigot" is still strong and alive.

To be fair, if you actually read where that bit is placed Peter Moore says this:

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.

Put into that context?

That's not really "shifting the blame".

**LordofHats**

I did read where it is placed. Where it is placed is exactly why I think they're trying to shift blame because they list it last, while listing SimCity first and a bunch of subtle BS in the middle that no one will remember. So yeah. The structure of that list serves the purpose of painting their detractors with brush and associating them with what must be one of the smallest minorities in gaming.

First off, EA has no LGBT character policy. If anything Bioware has an LGBT character policy (and they've had it for a lot longer than they've been with EA). Claiming that the big wigs at EA are behind that decision is dishonest and serves the purpose associating their detractors with being anti-LGBT. That's never been a very strong complaint amongst gamers (it's never been a very strong complaint period). It's one of the most well received aspects of Bioware's character development. But that doesn't stop EA from listing last, where it's going to end up being the most well remembered of their list.

Is it true that there are idiots who will down vote EA over that? Yeah. But lets not pretend EA is some champion of equality or that that's why they're being voted worst company eva by the angry mob of the interwebs. If they didn't think that they could use that to dishonestly direct a negative reaction to criticism of their decisions they wouldn't say it at all.

**Sigvatr**

Ratius wrote:
Ruined DA?

Forgive me. By DA you mean Dragon Age? And by extension, yes the second was imho a train wreck but DAO was easily one of the best games of recent years.

My point

DAO was AWESOME, then EA realized you could milk the franchise and then revealed an abomination of a "game", the software equivalent to too much mexican food.

**Ouze**

I'm not fond of EA, but they don't deserve Worst Company in America. They never foreclosed on someone's house over falsified paperwork, they never colluded with the government to spy on millions of Americans, etc etc etc. They just screwed up some video games.

I kind of lost a lot of respect for Consumerist readers when they won.

**Lynata**

Sigvatr wrote:DAO was AWESOME, then EA realized you could milk the franchise and then revealed an abomination of a "game", the software equivalent to too much mexican food.

To be fair, though, DA2 was only terrible if you compare it to the original. By itself, it wasn't too bad, and certainly worth the 20 bucks I spent once the price went down.
It's a case of disappointed expectations more than anything else - similar to the ME3 ending.

Doesn't make me wish any less that DA3 will be closer to Origins again as far as production values, complexity and content are concerned, ofc. Just like with DA2, I'll wait for the first proper reviews and then decide how much it's worth to me. The setting still feels cool and unique (which is why I'll remain an ardent supporter of Green Ronin's licensed Dragon Age P&P too).

**LordofHats**

Ouze wrote:
I'm not fond of EA, but they don't deserve Worst Company in America. They never foreclosed on someone's house over falsified paperwork, they never colluded with the government to spy on millions of Americans, etc etc etc. They just screwed up some video games.

I kind of lost a lot of respect for Consumerist readers when they won.

Most importantly they don't shut off my cable during prime time hours. Cursed Comcast.

**nomotog**

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.

**Rotgut**

EA seems to be an absolute crap company, but no where near the worst. The only thing they really do that is bad to anyone is make sub par games.

Granted they do take amazing franchises and rip them apart and make them into really boring games thinking more people will play that way.

**Lynata**

Saying "sorry" after you were cought lying to Congress isn't really "being repentant". It's the minimum you'd expect from any company who has an image to protect.
Additionally, EA still has the option to advertise its DRM-accompanied features as ... well, features (however transparent the true reason may be). This is not really possible for BP, but that doesn't change that they tried hard enough to prevent the truth from getting out. This is how it works in business - you only say sorry when there's no other option left. See also: Tepco.

Also wow @ comparing DRM to irreparable damage to the environment and loss of human life. Whilst both are caused by the same factor (greed), I really don't think you can toss them into the same corner.
If BP were truly sorry, the 2010 oil spill would've never happened, because this is by far not the first major incident caused by this company's corporate practices.

**Compel**

I really don't have a problem with modern Origin. Truth be told, it messes less with my stuff than steam seems to want to do nowadays. "Oh, you want to use the internet, well frakk you, I've got a billionth update for Team Fortress 2 that I'm going to duplicate for every other source game first."

So, Dragon Age 2 was done on the cheap and rather pants. They've figured that out and honestly, do seem to be constantly apologising for it.

The ME3 ending... I just can't directly blame EA for it. It's biowares writers that did that, they wanted to tell the story that way and have it end that way. I disagree with them, but they're the writers. I mean, honestly, if EA had any real influence in the ending, it would have been something that allowed "continuing adventures of Commander Shepard" to get more cash with established characters. - Which frankly, is what I wanted anyway.

Sim City... I can't really mitigate this arse-up. - They certainly don't try to. However, I can imagine that the 'always online' thing for Sim City was *primarily* motivated by DRM. I can think in the "envision" phase of the game, people did say. "Lets make it fully online, and have people creating full countries worth of cities together! That'd be awesome." Then realism hi during the later phases, thinks got chopped and cut out and they ended up with the kinda damp squib the online part of the game is now. - From what I hear at least.

I can't say I've looked into the F2P Command and Conquer game. I'm not interested in it, its existence doesn't hurt me. It's not removing something I already have, so why complain about it.

Micro-transactions. This entirely depends on how they're implemented. Take Mass Effect 3's multiplayer. The only negative impact their existence has on me, is an extra dialogue box to tick, very occasionally. They exist, they don't harm me, I don't care.
If they're implemented *badly* and make something 'pay to win' - then yes, I'd hold the company to account for it. I've not noticed EA doing anything especially different about that compared to other companies.

**RatBot**

Jesus fething Christ, here we go again... I know they haven't won yet, but I can't bloody see how a company that makes buggy and/or gakky games is worse than companies that kill and/or steal and/or actually damage or destroy the lives and livelihoods of others.

EA, while not a good company, shouldn't even be in the running.

I personally don't mind EA (in fact, I like them more than Activision, who always seems to get a pass from everyone). They're definitely not good and I try not to buy games from them unless they're games I actually authentically believe are good, but the worst company in America? fething please.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

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.

Like this; company that makes gak games is obviously just as bad as a company who's gross negligence fething killed people and destroyed lives. Aww, boohoo, the melon-fether was sorry. Well, the goddamed disaster shouldn't've even happened in the first place!

Jesus melon-fething Christ.

**nomotog**

Lynata wrote:
Saying "sorry" after you were cought lying to Congress isn't really "being repentant". It's the minimum you'd expect from any company who has an image to protect.
Additionally, EA still has the option to advertise its DRM-accompanied features as ... well, features (however transparent the true reason may be). This is not really possible for BP, but that doesn't change that they tried hard enough to prevent the truth from getting out. This is how it works in business - you only say sorry when there's no other option left. See also: Tepco.

Also wow @ comparing DRM to irreparable damage to the environment and loss of human life. Whilst both are caused by the same factor (greed), I really don't think you can toss them into the same corner.
If BP were truly sorry, the 2010 oil spill would've never happened, because this is by far not the first major incident caused by this company's corporate practices.

Saying sorry is the minimum expect and we don't get that from ea. Now comparing a oil spill to bad games is crazy, but the really crazy thing is the jury is already back on that subject. EA won last year beating out BP for worst. It's crazy yes, but I see why it happen.

**Grundz**

Ratius wrote:
Ruined DA?

Forgive me. By DA you mean Dragon Age? And by extension, yes the second was imho a train wreck but DAO was easily one of the best games of recent years.

the common forumla is to try and make the first game of a franchise really good, and then run it into the ground as cheaply as possible to make as much money as possible

**Xenii**

Peter Moore of EA wrote:

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

Ok, you have 45 million users because they like the games that are restricted to your platform. I am sure that if Mass Effect 3 or BF3 were hosted on steam, 11/10 people would play it on steam instead of your gakky Origin client.

Peter Moore of EA wrote:

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.

Again another example of this. The only reason tens of millions of people are playing those free to play and micro transaction games is because they enjoy them, it has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that they have micro-transactions in them. You are just skewing facts here.

Peter Moore of EA wrote:
Over the last three weeks, 900,000 SimCity players took us up on a free game offer for their troubles.

Yeah, and im sure that if you offered anyone a free game they would take it, what the feth does this prove about you being a good company. You HAD to give them this, if you didn't i'm sure you would be in a lot worse of a situation than you are now.

Overall, they aren't the worst company in a long shot, Monsanto, Bank of America, etc. Those are true to the roots EVIL companies. In terms of game and publishing and video games, they are about 1000x worse than the next worse company (maybe not that much but they are bad) the fact remains the same though, they need to stop being a game publisher. If they were to focus being an only game producing company, they would very quickly realize the piece of crap they are. The only reason they are still doing anything is because they are the publisher and get a safety blanket.

**Lynata**

Technically, he's saying that people who dislike Origin and Micro-Transactions that much could just stop using them. But they don't, so obviously it cannot be that bad.
Could it be better? I'd say so. But it really isn't as horrible as people make it out to be. And I have to agree with Compel that Origin doesn't act up as much as Steam does these days, at least in my personal experience from the last couple weeks.

And no, EA did not "have" to give people a free game. What situation do you imagine would they be in had they not done this? Apparently, people still keep bitching, so it did not serve to change public perception.

Personally, I'll just accept that success and size seems to corrupt corporations and turns them into bureaucratic monsters that sacrifice ideals on the altar of money, and I'm seeing EA on about the same level as Activision. I dislike that release pressure keeps interfering with game development, but that's about the same with any publisher. Rising prices don't concern me as much as I can simply wait until a new game drops in price. Games being dumbed down is compensated by indy studios and kickstarter projects. The only thing that really bothers me is how they run great franchises and their often rather cool settings into the ground, but again this is something that goes for just about any larger publisher, and EA is often mentioned in this connection only because they happend to be one of the big-shots who have acquired a lot of popular studios.

nomotog wrote:Saying sorry is the minimum expect and we don't get that from ea.

Sorry for .. what, exactly? If you're referring to the debacle that was the launch of Sim City and the unavailability of its servers, I'd agree. Yet they did say sorry and gave out a free game for that, so ...

nomotog wrote:EA won last year beating out BP for worst. It's crazy yes, but I see why it happen.

It's certainly not that I don't see the "why", I guess I'm just disappointed in humanity being that egocentric..

**SilverMK2**

Lynata wrote:
Technically, he's saying that people who dislike Origin and Micro-Transactions that much could just stop using them. But they don't, so obviously it cannot be that bad.

I have an origin account because i have to have one to play certain EA games, not because i like or otherwise use the software.

If i could use the games without the account i would never have made one. If i could 'stop using it' and still be able to use all the features of a game i have paid for, i would.

**Lynata**

So? What I'm saying is that the requirement to use Origin did not prevent you from getting it, or paying for those games. Let's face it, you didn't buy the proverbial pig in a poke here, but knew perfectly well what you were getting into. Hence, your opinion on Origin is apparently not so low that it outweighs the enjoyment you get from its games.

For what it's worth, I had similar concerns about Steam, and so took my sweet time until I finally caved in. Now there really isn't any reason for why I shouldn't do the same for a similar service from another company, provided it is capable of delivering what I expect of it.

Yes, in an ideal world, we'd have a single service and a single account for all games in existance. Yet it just doesn't work that way. And tbh, Origin bothers me a lot less than certain Steam games' requirement to create stuff like a Microsoft LIVE accounts or a Kalypso Media account etc.

**Macok**

Lynata wrote:
So? What I'm saying is that the requirement to use Origin did not prevent you from getting it, or paying for those games. Let's face it, you didn't buy the proverbial pig in a poke here, but knew perfectly well what you were getting into. Hence, your opinion on Origin is apparently not so low that it outweighs the enjoyment you get from its games.

For what it's worth, I had similar concerns about Steam, and so took my sweet time until I finally caved in. Now there really isn't any reason for why I shouldn't do the same for a similar service from another company, provided it is capable of delivering what I expect of it.

Yes, in an ideal world, we'd have a single service and a single account for all games in existance. Yet it just doesn't work that way. And tbh, Origin bothers me a lot less than certain Steam games' requirement to create stuff like a Microsoft LIVE accounts or a Kalypso Media account etc.

I don't think the existence of Origin is what bothers the people. EA response makes it seem like nobody wants Origin to be. That is not the case. I want more competition because that kind of arms race is always good for the consumer (me).

People don't like that they do not have a choice where they can buy the game. I, for example, bought ME1 and ME2 on Steam. A year later they tell me I can't buy ME3 there and have everything in one place because of some stupid reasons. Of course none of those were: we want to promote our product.
And I do understand that if they want to put their thing through they have to make some of their games exclusive. I still don't like it. But they seem to ignore it and think I am happy and like Origin because I use it.

The whole response just seems that way. They think that people use their software / play their games because of those things. Quite often they do it in spite of them.

And no, I'm not saying that EA is even near the worst company. However, after buying ME3, I won't be buying anything else that is Origin exclusive. Had too many issues like connection problems, firewall problems and weird bugs. It was my first game bought there and I had no idea how this thing looked like. Maybe I was unlucky but fool me twice, shame on me.

I just won't be using it and that's it. No hard feelings. But they should not be surprised of all the gak that is flying their way if they use me, an unhappy customer, to show how happy their customers are because "45 million registered users".

**SilverMK2**

Lynata wrote:
So?

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".

What I'm saying is that the requirement to use Origin did not prevent you from getting it, or paying for those games. Let's face it, you didn't buy the proverbial pig in a poke here, but knew perfectly well what you were getting into. Hence, your opinion on Origin is apparently not so low that it outweighs the enjoyment you get from its games.

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). I've since been more careful about picking my games and now only buy EA games that my wife wants and boycott any other EA games even if I might otherwise want to play the game (on general principle rather than specifically because of Origin).

At least with Steam there are a range of companies working through the same program.

**Melissia**

Right, I'd gladly uninstall origin if I could still play ME3 without it. It's a buggy piece of gak.

At best, I tolerate origin. I don't really use it unless I absolutely have to.

**Absolutionis**

The site is "The Consumerist". Their focus is on individuals that buy products. They focus on consumers.

Companies such as Bank of America contributing to the financial meltdown aren't going to get heavy consideration because that isn't directly at the consumer level. Companies such as JPMorgan Chase illegally foreclosing on multiple homes won't gain traction because it's an internet poll and not everyone is directly affected by this.

Companies that are considered are ones that heavily and directly affect large amounts of consumers on the internet. Comcast and Time Warner Cable are on there because of their geographical monopoly and high prices; this affects consumers directly. EA is on there because tons of people on the internet are videogame-savvy and EA is ruining their fun. It makes sense.

Yes, the title is still called "Worst Company in America". Maybe it should have been called "Worst Company in America that Directly Affects Consumers that Frequent the Internet". Either way, can we please get over the title and stop trashing on a consumer-focused website for having a public poll on issues directly affecting consumers? Thank you for your time.

**Melissia**

I have no reason to "Get over" stupidity and stop calling people out for hteir stupid.

Don't get me wrong I understand the reason for the poll's results, but that doesn't make it less ignorant.