Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Electronic Arts Leadership Are Out of Their Goddamned Minds

aftermath.site

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 62 posts

Re: Electronic Arts Leadership Are Out of Their Goddamned Minds

#21

Post by recursivecaveat »

rekenaut wrote: post #3

Is it feasible to get 100 million people to play this game even if it was free? I have to imagine that once you get to $400 million, every additional dollar has effectively no value add. When is it not better to just target a smaller user base and spend way less money? I’m unfamiliar with the ins an outs of this industry, so I am genuinely unsure.

Apparently Fortnite peaked at 110 million monthly players. So I think a Battlefield title reaching that level is simply unachievable. The series definitely has a considerably smaller potential audience, and I think its unlikely they'll be able to release on 3 consoles, pc, and mobile devices in their launch window to match the platform reach.

As you say, at some point you can't cram more $ into the product in a way that meaningfully affects the experience. Every area eventually experiences diminishing returns, especially within the framework of a realistic-ish multiplayer shooter. There is a kind of winner-takes-all effect to digital media, but this takes it too far.

It is kindof crazy how lethargic the big publishers are. For EA: 7 years after Hollow Knight to release a metroidvania, 9 years since Stardew Valley to release a new 'cozy' title, at this rate it will be 5 more years before we see their proximity chat game in response to Lethal Company. The trends are literally rendered passé by multiple waves of indie and A/AA games before they react. You'd think having a ton of money, and a giant pool of experienced developers, they could be fast-followers at least. Seems they are content to just push money into slow, giant 'summer blockbuster' type titles though.

Edit: Totally forgot, this is all about a battle-royale title, so assuming it releases next year: 9 years after Fortnite and 6 after the CoD equivalent.

Re: Electronic Arts Leadership Are Out of Their Goddamned Minds

#23

Post by turbofreak »

EA did recently release another corpus of C&C source code so I’m quite chuffed with their leadership in that regard. Now we just need BfME and E:BfD source code and maybe toss in NoX and a few other classics and we are cruising. But Renegade? Fuck. What a masterstroke. Whoever thought to release that is an absolute ledge.

Re: Electronic Arts Leadership Are Out of Their Goddamned Minds

#24

Post by cosmicgadget »

voidfunc wrote: post #2

Its EA... they're idiots. Too many MBAs thinking they can make the next multi-billion dollar moonshot game without thinking about what matters. Also they're addicted to subscription revenue models.

Well in this case they aren't trying a moonshot but instead milking a tired franchise.

Re: Electronic Arts Leadership Are Out of Their Goddamned Minds

#25

Post by cosmicgadget »

nophunphil wrote: post #6
Nathanba wrote: post #4

There is nothing wrong with setting high goals and trying to reach them. That they are failing is a different issue. This article is trying to farm outrage but there isn't any.

It’s important to set attainable goals. My guess is that this will put incredible, undue stress on the staff. Business idiots, as Ed Zitron would say.

The Ars writer said he spoke to a number of contributors to the game and it's a sweatshop. But hey, good on the MBAs not doing the development for setting ambitious goals!

Re: Electronic Arts Leadership Are Out of Their Goddamned Minds

#26

Post by delusional »

joegibbs wrote: post #20

I think the thing a lot of people don't realise when trying to make the next runaway hit game is that most of the games they're trying to emulate weren't produced with that intent, and didn't get their popularity with a running start as some massive AAA behemoth. Fortnite itself was originally a base-building PVE zombie game that Epic cranked out a battle royale mode for in a couple of months after seeing that PUBG (…

> I think the thing a lot of people don't realise when trying to make the next runaway hit game

Okay sure, let's say that. I don't think it's true. I think anyone who has ever made anything creative, which is most people, know that chasing success just make your creative work bad. That doesn't matter though.

Surely the executives at EA should know better. Like it's literally their job to know better. They head an entire organization dedicated to creative production. Surely the board would fire them if they don't know better right?

What is going on?

Re: Electronic Arts Leadership Are Out of Their Goddamned Minds

#27

Post by vivzkestrel »

not only EA but Ubisoft as well. Online only single player followed by a burning desire to convert everything into generic open world games followed by another strong burning desire to shutdown servers for everything without providing a LAN alternative or a way for people to play that game again with friends followed by another burning desire to add microtransactions into everything everywhere

Re: Electronic Arts Leadership Are Out of Their Goddamned Minds

#28

Post by Qahlel »

I've dedicated over 4,000 hours to the Battlefield series, with Battlefield 4 being my absolute favorite for its immersive, tactical gameplay and vibrant community. I eagerly played every title in the series until Battlefield 2042, which I found unplayable due to its departure from the core elements that made the franchise special. My frustration stems from a trend I see in companies like EA and even Samsung: chasing the "flavor of the year" instead of enhancing their unique strengths. If I wanted a Fortnite-style experience or an Apple-like ecosystem, I would have chosen those—I want Battlefield to be Battlefield.

One of my biggest issues with modern gaming, including Battlefield 2042, is the shift from community servers to matchmaking lobbies. I’ve never enjoyed lobbies, as they prioritize quick, transient matches over meaningful player interactions. Community servers allowed players to build relationships, strategize together, and create lasting memories, fostering a sense of camaraderie. Playing in lobbies feels like facing bots—there’s no human connection, and you’re unlikely to see those players again, making the experience feel empty and disconnected.

Gaming used to be my way of meeting like-minded people, and my Steam friends list is filled with players I met through Battlefield and other games. However, I haven’t added a new friend in years, as modern gaming’s focus on fast-paced, disposable matches makes it nearly impossible to form meaningful connections. I hope developers like EA return to the series’ roots, emphasizing tactical gameplay and community-driven servers to recapture the magic that made Battlefield a platform for both thrilling gameplay and lasting friendships.

Re: Electronic Arts Leadership Are Out of Their Goddamned Minds

#29

Post by dr_kiszonka »

nophunphil wrote: post #6
Nathanba wrote: post #4

There is nothing wrong with setting high goals and trying to reach them. That they are failing is a different issue. This article is trying to farm outrage but there isn't any.

It’s important to set attainable goals. My guess is that this will put incredible, undue stress on the staff. Business idiots, as Ed Zitron would say.

This is how I read it too. EA has a reputation for breaking good teams and studios. Although, they are not the only ones with an unhealthy crunch culture.

Re: Electronic Arts Leadership Are Out of Their Goddamned Minds

#30

Post by rincebrain »

Qahlel wrote: post #28

I've dedicated over 4,000 hours to the Battlefield series, with Battlefield 4 being my absolute favorite for its immersive, tactical gameplay and vibrant community. I eagerly played every title in the series until Battlefield 2042, which I found unplayable due to its departure from the core elements that made the franchise special. My frustration stems from a trend I see in companies like EA and even Samsung: chasing…

In some sense, that's working as intended for a lot of people, not just developers.

A lot of people who consume games don't want to foster lasting relationships, they want to tick the box saying "played game for X hours today" and move on.

I think that's pathological and, as you say, leads to lots of knock-on toxic effects in gameplay and community.

But it is the reality this is engineered for - a lot of people who play multiplayer games do not want to feel like they're doing something with other people when doing it, which is part of why you get lots of toxic interactions or entitled complaints about something which might be a good strategy but ruins the game experience for some of the people in the match.

Post reply on HN