EA: Dungeon Keeper Failed by "Innovating Too Much"

[Jodell88]

"Dungeon Keeper suffered from a few things," Gibeau told Games Industry. "I think we might have innovated too much or tried some different things that people just weren't ready for... I don't think we did a particularly good job marketing it or talking to fans about their expectations for what Dungeon Keeper was going to be or ultimately should be."

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/136011-EA-Dungeon-Keeper-Failed-by-Innovating-Too-Much
The people at EA are delusional.

 

[shortylickens]

two games, both of them awesome, EA bought the franchise, killed it, now blames the talent.


Dear god I think I may have to kill someone.

 

[Craig234]

It looks like the issue can be better summarized as 'EA is much too aggressive in making the mobile Dungeon Keeper a cash grab, executive spins that as 'too much innovation''.

The article mentions that the president of EA said something different and apologized for how the game was done.

 

[master_shake_]

this could have been an issue...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GpdoBwezFVA&feature=kp

caution swearing.

 

[Fardringle]

The problem is that the folks at EA don't realize that the "Midas Touch" they possess is not the original version. The original Midas Touch allowed Midas to touch garbage and magically turn it into gold. The version that resides at EA is the ANTI-Midas Touch, which allows them to touch gold and magically turn it into garbage.

 

[pontifex]

Microtransactions in the mobile games just kills them all for me. Its ridiculous because you have to pay money just to do simple little things.

 

[Anteaus]

The only thing they tried to innovate was the cash grab model and picked the wrong type of game to do it with. You can't pick what was already a slow paced game and then slow it further purely as an cash extortion method. That's like offering a chess game that forces the player to way 2 hours between turns unless they pay up. It could take weeks to play a game at that rate. Paying up only speeds up the game and adds nothing of substance.

The only way a free-to-play game model works is if paying up involves some sort of immediate, tangible gratification. Even then, I think the F2P game model is fallacy. The games aren't truly free, even if they ultimately allow all content to be viewed with enough time. It's like when time share organizations offer free tickets to some show or theme park, but only if you spend 8 hours riding around looking at properties. It's BS and false advertising. What if a free viewing of the latest Transformers movie was offered, but you could only watch one minute of it per hour? Such crap.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Oh look, another "I hate EA" thread.

This was a mobile game that tried to push in app purchases beyond the norm even for mobile games. That's the reason it failed. EA knows, they aren't idiots. They just won't admit that was the reason.

 

[Fardringle]

EA has produced some nice games. The problem is that most of the franchises they purchase from other developers just get ruined, and that makes a lot of loyal fans upset.

 

[maniacalpha1-1]

EA has produced some nice games and origin isnt bad. Dragon Age 2, Battlefield post BC2 are two big strikes for me, and I'm sure others have their own strikes, like SimCity. For myself I have managed not to buy BF4. Maybe when it's $10.

Redemption can come with Dragon Age 3, let's cross our fingers.

 

[Anteaus]

This thread is more about hating the F2P model that EA uses and not about EA in general. Plenty of other developers employ these dirty tactics.

 

[Craig234]

The thing with 'mobile games' is it seems to have developed a pricing culture of very low prices - 99 cents, $1.99 - and that leaves a lot of pressure for in-game purchases.

PC games aren't immune - the norm for MMO's now is 'free to pay' as I call it. But it's hard to see microtransactions not being common without higher game prices.

 

[master_shake_]

The thing with 'mobile games' is it seems to have developed a pricing culture of very low prices - 99 cents, $1.99 - and that leaves a lot of pressure for in-game purchases.

PC games aren't immune - the norm for MMO's now is 'pay to win' as I call it. But it's hard to see microtransactions not being common without higher game prices.

fixed that...

thats complete crap at the end though...

games are 60 dollars. rockstar sold a billion dollars worth of game when they released a COMPLETED PRODUCT THAT WAS A QUALITY PRODUCT.

some publishers care about what customers think of them some just think of us as glorified atm's with eyes... or pinatas full of cash that they can beat repeatedly and get more money.

i think you can find where the f2p group fits.

 

[Maximilian]

this could have been an issue...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GpdoBwezFVA&feature=kp

caution swearing.

03:10

LMFAO!!!!! £1.50 to dig out once piece of land!

£70 to dig out 56 bits of land... fuck lol.

Thanks for the laugh EA

 

[cmdrdredd]

fixed that...

thats complete crap at the end though...

games are 60 dollars. rockstar sold a billion dollars worth of game when they released a COMPLETED PRODUCT THAT WAS A QUALITY PRODUCT.

some publishers care about what customers think of them some just think of us as glorified atm's with eyes... or pinatas full of cash that they can beat repeatedly and get more money.

i think you can find where the f2p group fits.

Pretty much, gotta pick and choose your purchases is all.

 

[xantub]

I remember reading some news about how EA tried to game the review system. Basically they added a 'low score trap' in their in-game rating button. Instead of directly sending you to Android review screen to enter your score, it pops a nice window that says "Are you going to score this …" two buttons: "1-4" and "5". If you click "1-4" it opens a window where you put a score and it's sent as an email to EA (but no score is recorded), while only '5' opens the real review screen, so if you want to score it 2, you have to click on '5' and then when the real review screen comes, score it 2. That says it all about EA right there.

 

[JamesV]

The problem with EA, is that they believe there is some kind of formula to games. They view games as a product, and gamers as children waiting to get the next spoonful of whatever they want to feed them. Their management is not chock full of gamers, but of business grads, thinking they can use the precedents of other industries, while disregarding the art aspect of it all.

Just like any other business, games need a strong leader. You can't simply get the cheapest animators and modelers and throw something together under a licensed big name; games need vision brought about by a leader. EA has no vision other than a sugarplum ideal of 'if we will make it, they will buy'.

If they stopped throwing away millions on so-called experts, and had a baseball-like scout system to find and hire brilliant new designers, they might be a force to be reckoned with. But, they are content to just churn out things that non-gamer marketing and business types tell them will make money.

I'm betting Vivendi will own EA within the next decade.

 

[escrow4]

Come now, they are still not as trash as Ubisoft. Yet.

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

03:10

LMFAO!!!!! £1.50 to dig out once piece of land!

£70 to dig out 56 bits of land... fuck lol.

Thanks for the laugh EA

Just imagine playing the original campaign at those rates. You could build a small nation IRL with the profits.

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

Come now, they are still not as trash as Ubisoft. Yet.

They've been the worst company in the US for a long time now let alone the gaming industry.

 

[Moe Zart]

Evil EA is evil.

 

[BSim500]

It looks like the issue can be better summarized as 'EA is much too aggressive in making the mobile Dungeon Keeper a cash grab, executive spins that as 'too much innovation''.

Nailed it in one. From article:-

"It should be noted that EA can no longer legally market the game as free in Europe, due to its crazy amount of in-app purchases"

"But, but, but... It's because gamers weren't ready for it". LOL. They never learn.

"I remember reading some news about how EA tried to game the review system. Basically they added a 'low score trap' in their in-game rating button. Instead of directly sending you to Android review screen to enter your score, it pops a nice window that says "Are you going to score this …" two buttons: "1-4" and "5". If you click "1-4" it opens a window where you put a score and it's sent as an email to EA (but no score is recorded), while only '5' opens the real review screen"

I remember reading the same. To those who say "the problem isn't with EA in particular, it's just F2P" - actually yes - the problem genuinely *is* with EA's endless narcissism & 'attitude'...

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

I remember reading some news about how EA tried to game the review system. Basically they added a 'low score trap' in their in-game rating button. Instead of directly sending you to Android review screen to enter your score, it pops a nice window that says "Are you going to score this …" two buttons: "1-4" and "5". If you click "1-4" it opens a window where you put a score and it's sent as an email to EA (but no score is recorded), while only '5' opens the real review screen, so if you want to score it 2, you have to click on '5' and then when the real review screen comes, score it 2. That says it all about EA right there.

Funny since the only reviews I tend to pay attention to with online reviews are generally 2-4s especially if the spectrum appears oddly one sided.

 

[Anteaus]

I remember reading the same. To those who say "the problem isn't with EA in particular, it's just F2P" - actually yes - the problem genuinely *is* with EA's endless narcissism & 'attitude'...

It's about bait and switch. If EA had just said up front that only a portion of the game was readily accessible and that payment would be required to see all content within a reasonable time span, it would be a non-story. Instead, they call it free to play and act like payment is completely optional. Technically that's correct, but not the whole story. This is about false advertising. Otherwise, it would just be about EA making a bad game, which is the other half of the equation. When you take a bad game and then burden it with additional entry fees, you end up with what we have now.

People anthropomorphize too much. I doubt the CEO of EA sits around saying "f*ck those people." Obviously, someone made the pitch and this strategy looked good on paper but ultimately failed to properly read public interest. Bad staff work.

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

People anthropomorphize too much. I doubt the CEO of EA sits around saying "f*ck those people." Obviously, someone made the pitch and this strategy looked good on paper but ultimately failed to properly read public interest. Bad staff work.

It's activision but whatever: http://penny-arcade.com/comic/2007/12/05