EA lost money!

Hero

Spaceman
Hey all, got some news which might explain EA's crasy moves: It appears that EA had a 54% decrease of profit in the first ouatrent of the year, compered to the ones of last year (10.8 milion compered to 23.6 milion).

(Sorry it looks bad, I had to translate it)


------------------
Evilution!
 
I'm not sure I follow you DH...
confused.gif
 
Last edited by a moderator:
EA probably releases several titles a month... Origin's latest game was Ultima Online: Renaissance, which was released a few weeks ago. Before that it was Ultima IX.

All in all, though, I wuppose last year wasn't erally a good game year for anyone... especially with EA, given C&C2 and such. Next year looks to be much more profitable.



------------------
Long live the Confederation,
Ben "Bandit" Lesnick
( loaf@wcnews.com - 302228)

The Wing Commander CIC

"You go, LOAF! Get some!" -JPG

Bombardez les Ptitard!
 
Actually, according to the article I've read (the one I translated part of), speciallist say that there's supposed to be another 10% drop in profits for PC games over the next year, mainly bcause of the interst in consle games such as the play-station 2 and the X-box.

[This message has been edited by Hero (edited May 05, 2000).]
 
The drop is more likely to be temporary. Once the consoles are out, they will die like the rest, and the PC will be back.
cool.gif


------------------
Robert "Meson" Stukowski

Wing Commander is more than just a game. It is a lifestyle.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
With the increase in the number of consoles being released thats unlikely, it seems a new one will be coming every year or so. I mean with wing commander dead (or atleast in a painful slumber) when the time comes in 12 months time when my PC is slow and I can upgrade everything for £400 or buy a dolphin for £100 with rare, nintendo etc I'll probably take the dolphin. That is ofcourse unless Wing Commander bursts back into life (please god please)
 
I`m sure you`re aware of the fact that WC games weren`t released only for PC.
would that still make you stick to the PC?
 
Pah! I hate consoles. They take away the customers that rightfully belong to the PC. Not to mention that they suck
smile.gif
.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
They have some very good points, standard control system Goldeneye played like a dream and would be a shadow of its former self on the PC, my advice become rich and get a good PC and the latest consoles. My personal opinion is PC for space combat and strategy, console for everything else, but thats just me, could be because I hate mouse and keyboard.
 
Fair enough. I actually can't stand consoles because I, on the other hand, hate their control pads. I much prefer keyboards, and PC mice. Generally don't tolerate other controls (except for joysticks, which sometimes are a necessity). Why, even the Mac's one-button mouse gives me the creeps.
 
Well I myself use the consoles only for fighting games (and maybe another type here and there). These are the only games I can't stand playing on PC: Small screen (compeared to the one of a TV), horrible control, MP is easier (for 2 people, and with all the new consoles comming with a modem, soon that could be a MP game all over the world).
 
Yes those stupid controlers suck. Playing a game with such a limited number of controls is incredibly annoying.

And Meson is right. Hardware will eventually become dirt cheap and then only a fool would buy something with the limited functionality of a console
smile.gif


And you can always hook up a TV to your comp.

And as for Goldeneye, any game ported over to PC would be a gazillion times better than the console counter part. They're not because those fools porting them over don't want to take the time to do the job properly. Take a look at FF7 on PC. First thing I thought was "that looks like shit and you need a 3D accelerator to run the damn thing?!?". I mean, seriously, the characters would walk through each other.

------------------
Mess with the best, die like the rest.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have a gamepad for my pc, but I never use the thing because it has limited uses. It's kind of akward to use too. I prefer the old keyboard. Even for flight, I rarely use the joystick, just something else in the way.
 
I have hooked my SNES and N64 into my computer. Computer screens have better resolutions than televisons. Even tv shows semm better when whated on pc.
cool.gif


------------------
Robert "Meson" Stukowski

Wing Commander is more than just a game. It is a lifestyle.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Buh gah?! Currently the games on the Dreamcast look better than on PC (just play RE: CODE Veronica and you'll see), you can't take the PSX as an example because it is donkeys years old and should have died. My favourite control system was the n64s because I instantly felt at home with it but obviously the console itself is out of date despite in the coming months getting Perfect Dark, Zelda 64 2, The World is Not Enough (GoldenEye style edition), some new RE style game etc etc. Oh and a UK TV goes upto 800*600 which looks better on a TV screen due to the line system (no more jagged edges yay)
 
Sure, Dreamcast might have some better looking games than PC for the MOMENT. But let's face it, it's only temporary. In another few months there's probably going to be another 3D card that'll kick the crap out of the Dreamcast and then some. Though I'll admit that one good thing about consoles is that they use RISC based cpus. Those things are cheaper and just as good as CISC.


------------------
Mess with the best, die like the rest.
 
Pedro said:
Buh gah?! Currently the games on the Dreamcast look better than on PC (just play RE: CODE Veronica and you'll see), you can't take the PSX as an example because it is donkeys years old and should have died. My favourite control system was the n64s because I instantly felt at home with it but obviously the console itself is out of date despite in the coming months getting Perfect Dark, Zelda 64 2, The World is Not Enough (GoldenEye style edition), some new RE style game etc etc. Oh and a UK TV goes upto 800*600 which looks better on a TV screen due to the line system (no more jagged edges yay)


Buh Gah yourself.
TV: 800x600 max resolution, my system 1600x1200 max resolution. Which do you think would look better?

Not to mention game console controllers recognize that computers are better; they come with keyboards and mice addons, internet, etc. PS2, last I heard, is suppose to be $400 - you can buy computers for that.
 
Okay, now lets look at this with fairly level heads...

Since when do graphics matter? I'd think that all the people here should know they don't. Hell, we all play the orignal Wing Commander games, the graphics suck, but the games rock, right?

A hint: GRAPHICS ARE AN ADD-ON. They make a good game better. They don't make a bad game good.

Next: The World is Not Enough is actually scheduled for a PC release, last I heard.

>>And as for Goldeneye, any game ported over to PC would be a gazillion times better than the console counter part. They're not because those fools porting them over don't want to take the time to do the job properly. Take a look at FF7 on PC. First thing I thought was "that looks like shit and you need a 3D accelerator to run the damn thing?!?". I mean, seriously, the characters would walk through each other.<<

Erm... no. Let's take a quick look at FF7. I don't know if you've played the PSX version, but the graphics didn't change, and the characters walked through each other anyway. So they ported the same damn thing over.

Now... for the simplistics...

On the PC I play- Flight sims, strategies (Not to many, i don't like em), Adventure games, Simulations, and a few First Person Shooters (Jedi Knight, Dark Forces, Rainbow Six and Rogue Spear).

The consoles I play- Action games (Metal Gear Solid), racing games, arcade-type games, and no fighters, can't stand em.

The point is, graphics should never become a serious point in this type of debate, really. I still play my Nintendo for crying out loud, because it doesn't matter. If graphics are a selling point, then you really shouldn't call yourself a gamer.

I remember this topic at the GameSages (www.gamesages.com) UBB, before it closed down. It got very heated, and a bunch of people got very angry...

No system is superior to the other. Someone made the point that PC games always need to have patches downloaded... while Console games never do. That's the most ridiculous argument I've ever heard. Console games have bugs too, but you can't download patches for them.

Let's hope no one decides to get that stupid..
smile.gif





------------------
"Your job is not to die for your country, your job is to make some poor dumb bastard die for his!"- Patton
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Man Tooner... I'm usually not blunt, but boy are you off.

If a non-WC flight sim was released today with the graphics of WC1, it wouldn't even make to the shelves. We play WC1 because it's WC. Heck... I play text-based role playing games. If I go to buy a game w/ graphics, they had better be good - and WC has always been an industry leader in graphics.

Next, by normal PC standards, FF7's graphics were extremely limited. FF8's were better but restricted to 640x480. For comparison, I play games at 1600x1200. I paid $250 for my video card and $500 for my monitor...by god I want to see some nice things on them.

And some consoles ARE superior to others. Would you say the PlayStation is equal to Sega Genesis? The PS's online abilities alone up it's stock a bit.

Patches are more often in demand, for PC games because they exist. A lot of companies will rush deployment of a product and say 'make a patch if there are problems.' - they can't do that with game consoles, yet anyway.

And I have a question...you think Pong's still in with the times? heh...

Think that's it for now...
 
Back
Top