Tuesday, July 10th 2007

EA Chief Says Games Boring People to Death

Electronic Arts new Chief Executive, John Riccitiello, who started in April, worries that his company as well as others in the video game industry lack innovation. He says they need to push more aggressively to attract the casual gamer and change the routine of selling $50 - $60 discs that take 40 hours to play that few ever finish. We're boring people to death and making games that are harder and harder to play," Mr. Riccitiello said in an interview. He adds that there are exceptions like "Guitar Hero" and "World of Warcraft" but for the most part the industry has been rinse and repeat. Mr. Riccitiello's comments come as the industry prepares for this year's E3 Conference.Source: Wall Street Journal
Add your own comment

73 Comments on EA Chief Says Games Boring People to Death

#1
Telexen
Mussels said:
I expect you to be playing at 640x480 with a two button mouse, no joystick, 2.0 speaker setup, all details at minimum and your framerate capped at 30FPS. Otherwise, you have an unfair advantage over players with a weaker system.
Don't forget he should be slowing his latency to match mine too :D

Calling using widescreen cheating is a little out of line. The game supports it for a reason. It exists for a reason. People use it for a reason. That reason is that it is a much more natural representation of an image. My eyes don't see in a near 4:3 ratio, it's much more spanned horizontally.
Posted on Reply
#2
Mussels
Moderprator
As a direct picture response, here is the two modes available to widescreen users in BF2.
First image is using the widescreen 'hack' - its more or less zoomed in, so that i get the normal 4:3 horizontal view, but vertically i am missing the top and bottom of the image.
Second image is running 1280x1024 on a monitor without scaling - stretched to fill the screen

I'm sorry, but these arent as good as 4:3 modes - please screwup 4:3 viewing for normal users, so that its fair for everyone.

Theres your logic thrown right back at you.
Posted on Reply
#3
Dippyskoodlez
Mussels said:

Its not like widescreen users can see through walls, and our crosshair is still in the center of the screen - we have to turn to shoot, and its nothing you cant see BY MOVING YOUR MOUSE AROUND. I can see a little more to the side? well damn, why cant you just look to the side - thats how i do it, if i want to see more.
If I'm focused and shooting at a guy on the balcony, you would be able to see the guy hiding in the bushes shoot at you.

I would not.

Is that fair? No.

The game at 640x480 gives the same view that 1600x1200 brings. All FPS's do this. The difference is level of detail, which will not hinder your viewable area. Sometimes high detail has drawbacks to the visability of characters, sometimes its a bonus.

This is just flat out screwing the non widescreen people over.

Telexen said:
Don't forget he should be slowing his latency to match mine too :D.
I suppose you've never heard of latency compensation? This would be why in many games it removes latency from the equation. Wolf ET's implementation of this is excellent.
Posted on Reply
#4
G0DZLR
compare say, a 20" LCD running 1600x1200 such as you have (and i do aswell), to a 22" widescreen running 1680x1050. the diference is 40 pixels each side...seriously, your argument is just petty. besides, they would loose pixels vertically, being only 1050 instead of 1200.

just get over it.
Posted on Reply
#5
Mussels
Moderprator
Dippyskoodlez said:
If I'm focused and shooting at a guy on the balcony, you would be able to see the guy hiding in the bushes shoot at you.

I would not.

Is that fair? No.

The game at 640x480 gives the same view that 1600x1200 brings. All FPS's do this. The difference is level of detail, which will not hinder your viewable area. Sometimes high detail has drawbacks to the visability of characters, sometimes its a bonus.

This is just flat out screwing the non widescreen people over.



I suppose you've never heard of latency compensation? This would be why in many games it removes latency from the equation. Wolf ET's implementation of this is excellent.
Ok, so two people are on-screen at once
#1 my eyes focus at one point at a time - i still have to look around my screen, or MOVE THE MOUSE to have my screen do the looking - my eyes cant look at both places at once. Even if i could, i can still only shoot one at a time.
#2 The guy on the balcony has an FX5200 and cant even see you as you're too far away.
#3 you havent commented on my sound or controls things yet. Having more mouse buttons (voice comms) is an advantage - so is having a joystick for flying, or a 5.1 speaker setup for identifying targets locations.

Stop repeating the same thing over and over, and reply to those above. Its no different, it gives you an advantage, one that i damned well paid for. If you want fair matches with everything identical, go buy an Xbox360. - Oh thats right, BF2 modern combat on Xbox360 does support widescreen. Funny how its only unfair on PC.
Posted on Reply
#6
Ketxxx
Heedless Psychic
Games need to be long and fun to play. STALKER is one example, a great game but can be completed far too quickly.
Posted on Reply
#7
Telexen
Ketxxx said:
Games need to be long and fun to play. STALKER is one example, a great game but can be completed far too quickly.
Long games have a tendency to be repetitive though. Doom 3 is about as bad as it gets -
1) walk into room
2) lights go out
3) imp shreeks
4) lights come in and imp is directly in front of you
Posted on Reply
#8
Mussels
Moderprator
Ketxxx said:
Games need to be long and fun to play. STALKER is one example, a great game but can be completed far too quickly.
Half life 2 and episode 1 are examples of this, where they break up monotonous gameplay segments with 'cinematic' sequences (where you lose control to watch something, or its a sequence with people talking where you cant shoot) the odd puzzle (physics ones in HL2) or even just throwing in a vehicle sequence to spice things up.

Lots of games tend to be a bit more boring as its the same thing over and over with no variety. Example, CnC3 - it might be a good RTS, but in the end it all boils down to knowing the units. Company of heroes 'randomness' fixes that beatifully (as in, a jeep can drive past 5 tanks and the tanks will miss, rather than each being a perfect shot doing X damage each time) - randomly, tactics that SHOULD fail, dont (such as running infantry up to throw sticky bombs at the tanks - if the tanks miss, you could pull off an 'impossible' achievement and cripple the tanks - therefore delaying the tanks next attack.

(Thanks ket, for getting this back on topic)
Posted on Reply
#9
gromet
[quote="Easy Rhino, post: 387640"]you would think with comments like he made that EA is planning on putting out some pretty sweet games in the future. QUOTE]

I have high hopes for WAR! Though its mainly a mythic design, DAOC was and still is one of the better PVP games imo. I played that game on and off for about 4 years....the PVP (or RVR depending on which server) is just hard to beat in any other game. WOW doesnt even come close, and imo stands for Waiting on Warhammer.
Posted on Reply
#10
Zero Cool
Telexen said:
Long games have a tendency to be repetitive though. Doom 3 is about as bad as it gets -
1) walk into room
2) lights go out
3) imp shreeks
4) lights come in and imp is directly in front of you
amen lol
Posted on Reply
#11
Benpi
Dippyskoodlez said:
Normal:




Wide.


See images above before insulting me.
I didn't insult you. I just pointed out the fact that your argument is completely flawed. I didn't call you a cheapskate technophobe grandma did I?

Also, you're using a less than 4:3 full screen image to support your theory, and your using a wider widescreen than 16:10 - even wider than 16:9 to support your theory.

It's cute how you try to lie just to get people on the internet to believe you. Nice try tho.
Here's ACTUAL fullscreen 4:3

Here's ACTUAL widescreen 16:10

It isn't that big of a difference.

-We should limit all 5.1 speaker setups to 2 channels because Dippyskoodles thinks it's unfair for the people who only have 2 speakers.
-we should limit all 3Mb/S ++ internet connections to 1.5mb/s or dialup speeds because Dippyskoodles thinks it's unfair to cheap dialup users, or cheap dsl users.
-we should limit all RAM in all PCs to 1gb and all CPU/GPUs to the same as Dippyskoodles so we can all have the exact same framerate so, Dippyskoodles, doesn't claim he lost due to an unfair advantage.

Dippy, the world doesn't revolve around YOU. If YOU are unsatisfied with the way PCs are so easily upgradable, play Multiplayer Console games Offline only please. Or just buy a mac and don't play games at all.
Posted on Reply
#12
Dippyskoodlez
Benpi said:
I didn't insult you. I just pointed out the fact that your argument is completely flawed. I didn't call you a cheapskate technophobe grandma did I?

Dippy, the world doesn't revolve around YOU. If YOU are unsatisfied with the way PCs are so easily upgradable, play Multiplayer Console games Offline only please. Or just buy a mac and don't play games at all.
You called me "mr know it all" last i checked thats an insult.

And please, learn to spell my name right if you're going to bold it repeatedly.

Its not very hard. Its even right beside my post.

and STFU about me owning a mac thats has nothing to do with this. If you payed any attention, you would realize that all macs are wide screen already.

And lay off the double post, geez. Double posted then added a bunch of information. Its also nice when you don't double post, quoting images.

But this is getting way off topic and turning into one of its own.
Posted on Reply
#13
zekrahminator
McLovin
I am in NO MOOD to deal with either of you today, so both of you back off, and we'll forget this ever happened, mmkay?

If you ignore me, I'm going to ensure that you will be banned for a week. If you want to fight, go take it somewhere else.
Posted on Reply
#14
Mussels
Moderprator
Although i'm part of the opposing party to dippy in this thread, i do find it hilarious he was told to go buy a mac, when he has one - and its quite capable of running BF2. lol.
Posted on Reply
#15
Zero Cool
Mussels said:
Although i'm part of the opposing party to dippy in this thread, i do find it hilarious he was told to go buy a mac, when he has one - and its quite capable of running BF2. lol.
this thread is a joke :shadedshu:
Posted on Reply
#16
russianboy
zekrahminator said:
I am in NO MOOD to deal with either of you today, so both of you back off, and we'll forget this ever happened, mmkay?

If you ignore me, I'm going to ensure that you will be banned for a week. If you want to fight, go take it somewhere else.
:laugh:

zek your funny!
Posted on Reply
#18
Casheti
zekrahminator said:
I am in NO MOOD to deal with either of you today, so both of you back off, and we'll forget this ever happened, mmkay?

If you ignore me, I'm going to ensure that you will be banned for a week. If you want to fight, go take it somewhere else.
Somebody got rejected by a girl :p
Posted on Reply
#19
Nemesis881
zekrahminator said:
Back on topic plz.
EA games are boring people?? NO WAY!!! :rolleyes:
Posted on Reply
#20
zekrahminator
McLovin
Casheti said:
Somebody got rejected by a girl :p
You're a freaking psychic :laugh:.

Back off topic. Just no fights plz.
Posted on Reply
#21
russianboy
Casheti said:
Somebody got rejected by a girl :p
yeah I could use some comforting.
Posted on Reply
#22
Zero Cool
Casheti said:
Somebody got rejected by a girl :p
you cant talk! :roll:
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment