EA's Online Pass

[The Coop]

They do when they own the developer.

I believe Bleck is asking for games from EA proper, not a company that EA bought and who still puts their name on what they create (like Bioware does).

[Gollgagh]

kinda like you wouldn't say that microsoft made the halo games

[DarkSim]

Skate was awesome (EA Black Box developed it), although Skate 2 didn't have the same wow factor as the first (but was probably better, although I only played it for a few hours), and Skate 3's just come out but I haven't had a go. My guess is they'll probably milk the franchise dry until it becomes an almost embarrassing annual release (see: Need for Speed, Tony Hawk's).

[Vivi22]

I believe Bleck is asking for games from EA proper, not a company that EA bought and who still puts their name on what they create (like Bioware does).

What's it matter? It's good business for EA to keep the brand equity that exists in the Bioware name. They could just as easily have renamed the company if they chose. In fact, since buying they've expanded Bioware to include three other studios besides their original one in Edmonton. I understand why the name may give the impression that the companies games are only published by EA, but it's EA calling the shots. Just because they bought them and left the old names doesn't make them any less a part of EA than a studio that EA established themselves.

Using that argument, Dante's Inferno wasn't made by EA because their subsidiary Visceral Games (formerly EA Redwood Shores) made it. But that argument is inherently stupid because it would basically mean that EA doesn't make anything, they just publish games made by their subsidiaries.

kinda like you wouldn't say that microsoft made the halo games

They didn't make the first one, but a wholly owned subsidiary made the second and third. So technically, they were made by Microsoft under the Bungie brand name. Had they changed Bungie's name for some stupid reason when they bought them you would be saying Microsoft made them.

[Gollgagh]

But that argument is inherently stupid because it would basically mean that EA doesn't make anything, they just publish games made by their subsidiaries.

that is the argument, yes

and you're just calling the entire argument stupid and leaving at that

nice

[DarkSim]

Bungie is to Microsoft what Rare were to Nintendo (and now are to Microsoft). Is the term a 'second-party developer'? Independent, but exclusive to the publisher.

[Vivi22]

How is it not a stupid argument? And how did I leave it at calling it stupid?

I said a company owned by, and therefore a part of EA made the games. Just because the company has a name separate from the EA name doesn't make them any less a part of EA. In practice it's no different than developers/publishers having multiple development teams in house under one brand (such as what Square-Enix does). The only difference is that EA's development teams are set up as wholly owned corporations rather than internal teams.

So from a legal and financial standpoint there's a difference in how Bioware is set up with regard to EA when compared to how Square structures their development teams, but in practice there really isn't a difference. The parent company EA is still calling the shots, just as Square's executives are calling the shots with regard to their internal development teams.

Bungie is to Microsoft what Rare were to Nintendo (and now are to Microsoft). Is the term a 'second-party developer'? Independent, but exclusive to the publisher.

Except that so-called second party developers aren't really independent. Rare is a first party developer for Microsoft in actual fact. Same as Naughty Dog and Polyphony Digital are for Sony. And it wouldn't be improper to say Sony made Uncharted 2 since the company responsible for making it is a Sony company. They're separate from Sony in name only, not in actual fact.

[DarkSim]

Except that so-called second party developers aren't really independent. Rare is a first party developer for Microsoft in actual fact. Same as Naughty Dog and Polyphony Digital are for Sony. And it wouldn't be improper to say Sony made Uncharted 2 since the company responsible for making it is a Sony company. They're separate from Sony in name only, not in actual fact.

But Rare own the rights to their games - hence why Perfect Dark has been released on XBLA.

This has gone a bit off-topic but to try and bring it back, I'll say this: why don't more devs go with digital distribution like valve? Take EA out of the equation altogether.

[Necrotic]

But Rare own the rights to their games - hence why Perfect Dark has been released on XBLA.

This has gone a bit off-topic but to try and bring it back, I'll say this: why don't more devs go with digital distribution like valve? Take EA out of the equation altogether.

Because Valve's endeavours were funded by two very well-off individuals even when they were starting out.

Game budgets are ridiculous these days and the only way to make your title a possibility in a majority of cases is to get, essentially, loans from a publisher and give up your intellectual property rights as collateral in case the product fails (which is why most game developers don't have the right to sell their products through digital distribution without going through a publisher first. Which, in that case, once again the publisher wins.)

[DarkSim]

Game budgets are ridiculous these days and the only way to make your title a possibility in a majority of cases is to get, essentially, loans from a publisher and give up your intellectual property rights as collateral in case the product fails (which is why most game developers don't own their products.)

Such a sorry state of affairs though, isn't it? The rich publishers get richer whilst robbing the developers of profit that they earned with their talent. All the publishers did was have the fortune to be rich in the first place (or have built it up from screwing over some other people). Same with the music and film industries, which is why big publishers absorbing little ones in the gaming industry worries me as a gamer.

Soon enough EA and ActiBlizz will have bought out every developer and then they can basically do/charge what they like for their games, and no-one will be able to do anything about it.

[Necrotic]

Such a sorry state of affairs though, isn't it? The rich publishers get richer whilst robbing the developers of profit that they earned with their talent. All the publishers did was have the fortune to be rich in the first place (or have built it up from screwing over some other people). Same with the music and film industries, which is why big publishers absorbing little ones in the gaming industry worries me as a gamer.

Soon enough EA and ActiBlizz will have bought out every developer and then they can basically do/charge what they like for their games, and no-one will be able to do anything about it.

It's not even big publishers absorbing small publishers anymore, we're long past that. Now it's large publishers merging or absorbing eachother. Activision and Blizzard merging (the Vivendi merger was pretty huge too), and Square-Enix just took Eidos over.

I just took a look at my games collection and basically noticed that all of them in the last 2 or 3 years were basically published by 9 juggernauts not counting console manufacturers. That list is narrowing pretty fast.

Juggernauts

ActiBlizz (this would also include former publishing giants Sierra and Vivendi)

EA (I can't even begin to count the number of smaller publishing agencies these guys absorbed.)

Take-Two (has been in danger of aggressive takeovers recently by EA, and no doubt ActiBlizz is eying them as well.)

Square-Enix (just absorbed Eidos)

Ubisoft (has talked about the possibility of a merger with EA before)

Namco-Bandai (the Namco-Bandai merger is probably doing little to raise profits and I'm sure they're going to be the victim of another merger/takeover within a couple years)

Konami

Capcom

2K Games

Plus of course:

Microsoft

Sony

Nintendo

Not as relevant:

THQ

SEGA

Atari

Majesco (lawl I can't believe they still exist)

Midway (double lawl)

[The Damned]

Hey! Hey! Get back to deconstructing each others valid or invalid points. No more of this personal observations about game collections.

This popcorn isn't going to eat itself, you know.

[Necrotic]

Hey! Hey! Get back to deconstructing each others valid or invalid points. No more of this personal observations about game collections.

This popcorn isn't going to eat itself, you know.

I do wud I want!

D:<

[Kidd Cabbage]

Bungie is to Microsoft what Rare were to Nintendo (and now are to Microsoft). Is the term a 'second-party developer'? Independent, but exclusive to the publisher.

A second-party developer is like Retro Studios is to Nintendo. Nintendo owns it, but it's not an in-house development company.

[zircon]

This has gone a bit off-topic but to try and bring it back, I'll say this: why don't more devs go with digital distribution like valve? Take EA out of the equation altogether.

Most of you don't realize just how hard game development is. I started a game development studio with four others and we went to banks, venture capitalists, angels, the SBA and other organizations on a local, state and federal level to try to get funding. We couldn't get any. We have to pay for everything out of pocket and work strictly on a volunteer basis. Even with a very sharp business plan (we have one over 60 pages long, evaluated by UPenn's Wharton school of business) and good personnel, it is basically impossible to get money as a startup company, much less one that needs few fixed assets (lenders prefer to lend to companies who use the money to buy fixed assets that they can sell later in the case of a loan default.)

Publishers are what enable so many developers to actually realize their games. They take on the risk (and there is a LOT of risk, most games do NOT turn a profit) and the developers get to enjoy paychecks, as opposed to working day jobs and trying to develop a game in their spare time (next to impossible.) I really can't say this enough. It's INCREDIBLY hard to develop a game. Even one with basic graphics requires massive man-hours. And if you need contractors, for things like AI, netcode, modeling, rigging, texturing, scripting, etc.? It's incredibly expensive. Our estimates for a small-scale XBLA multiplayer RPG title called for over $100k in startup capital. To a publisher, this is nothing. To a group of five people trying to start a company, it's an impenetrable wall.

Frankly, that is why record labels are a very, very good thing as well. I understand some major labels have made some terrible decisions in the past, but while home recording is nice and all, how many indie artists do you know of with enough money to afford world-class engineers, session players and recording spaces? You might say "well you don't need that" but the fact of the matter is, if you want to make the best music, you need the best tools and the best people. Good luck funding any of that as an indie artist without a label. Labels are awesome because again, they take risk away from the artist and let them realize their music to its fullest potential, AND get paid (via advances) in the process so they can spend all of their time on music.

This is all to say nothing of the other, non-monetary benefits that a publisher/label can bring: promotion, distribution, brand name (and brand trust), a legal and accounting staff, headhunting/recruiting, and so on.

It's really easy to be on the outside and say "oh publishers/record labels are so bad" but until you've really been through the game development (or album development) process, you really don't know what it's like.

[DarkSim]

OK so I just wikipedia'd it (solid source) and there's no such thing as a second-party developer. Only first or third. Actually thinking back to my Rare example, wasn't there an issue over licensing that led them to cancel the release of Goldeneye over XBLA despite the game being ready for release? If that doesn't hurt the gamers then I don't know what does.

[DarkSim]

Useful insight there zircon - it's interesting to hear you tried! Shame it didn't work out, but that's kinda the point I want to make. Smaller groups of talented people simply can't get a look-in because the industry moves so fast and by the time the hours have been invested your product looks crap compared to the new standard. Duke Nukem Forever anyone? Also Haze looked so dated when it came out, and now Free Radical are bust so no more Timesplitters.

Whether these games would have been good or not we'll never know - and that's the tragedy - artists can lose out because it's the money that matters, not their skill.

[Coyote-Trickster]

We can't forget that the economy hasn't faired that well lately and most companies have gone into panic mode to try to make sure they don't crash and burn. So if you can save and/or earn an extra buck, sometimes that can make all the difference.

Obviously someone at EA though that this code deal was a good way to earn extra income at low cost.

[The Coop]

OK so I just wikipedia'd it (solid source) and there's no such thing as a second-party developer. Only first or third. Actually thinking back to my Rare example, wasn't there an issue over licensing that led them to cancel the release of Goldeneye over XBLA despite the game being ready for release? If that doesn't hurt the gamers then I don't know what does.

Don't go solely by what Wikipedia has the say. The term "Second Party Developer" has been around for a good while. It's not a recent invention.

http://www.search.com/reference/Second-party_developer

It may not be "official," but it does exist.

[zircon]

Useful insight there zircon - it's interesting to hear you tried! Shame it didn't work out, but that's kinda the point I want to make. Smaller groups of talented people simply can't get a look-in because the industry moves so fast and by the time the hours have been invested your product looks crap compared to the new standard. Duke Nukem Forever anyone? Also Haze looked so dated when it came out, and now Free Radical are bust so no more Timesplitters.

Whether these games would have been good or not we'll never know - and that's the tragedy - artists can lose out because it's the money that matters, not their skill.

Hey, only getting funding from a bank didn't work out. Our first game is actually nearing completion. Like I said, we just had to bootstrap it

www.spacewhalestudios.com - check it out!

[Hum4n After All]

http://www.gofanboy.com/go-fanboy-news/2804-gaming-media-should-stand-up-to-eas-online-pass-for-consumers/

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/100797-THQ-Joins-the-Used-Game-Fight

[Toadofsky]

Hey, only getting funding from a bank didn't work out. Our first game is actually nearing completion. Like I said, we just had to bootstrap it

www.spacewhalestudios.com - check it out!

At least you seem to have a good head on shoulders Zircon. I don't think many game makers even like getting into the business aspect of making games, which is probably their biggest problem, Wrst and Zampella anyone? (of course there could be more to that situation than we all know of)

[Coyote-Trickster]

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/100797-THQ-Joins-the-Used-Game-Fight

and it begins

[Kanthos]

I got to read the proposal they were sending around for Space Whale Tactics, and it was *very* well thought out. I just didn't know that they'd gone anywhere as a company, and I'm glad to hear that they have.

[Hyperion5182]

and it begins

I was hoping this wouldn't happen...but yeah we're going to see more of this. I hate this, big time. UFC 2010. Given how outspoken Dana White was with the competetor's project and the fact that any UFC star on said product would be dropped from the UFC i now gotta wonder if he might not speak out about this.

Regardless EA+THQ two groups of games i wont be touching for a while. This is a bad idea and not the way to combat used game sales.