By Chris Morran April 4, 2012
Whether it's on a console, a PC, a smartphone or tablet, hundreds of millions of people play video games every day. Yet most mainstream media covers the industry the same way it treats adult dodge ball leagues and cat fashion shows (both noble ventures, but neither of them multi-billion dollar industries). And the only time you hear legislators discuss video games is when some politician decries them as the death knell for all things righteous in the world (hint: they're not). Now, after years of being ignored and relegated to steerage, game-players have voted to send a message to Electronic Arts and the gaming business as a whole: Stop treating your loyal customers like crap.
After more than 250,000 votes, Consumerist readers ultimately decided that the type of greed exhibited by EA, which is supposed to be making the world a more fun place, is worse than Bank of America's avarice, which some would argue is the entire point of operating a bank.
To those who might sneer at something as "non-essential" as a video game company winning the Worst Company In America vote: It's that exact kind of attitude that allows people to ignore the complaints as companies like EA to nickel and dime consumers to death.
For years, while movies and music became more affordable and publishers piled on bonus content -- or multiple modes of delivery -- as added value to entice customers to buy, video games have continued to be priced like premium goods.
There have even been numerous accusations that EA and its ilk deliberately hold back game content with the sole intent of charging a fee for it at a later date. It's one thing to support a game with new content that is worth the price. It's another to put out an inferior -- and occasionally broken -- product with the mindset of "ah, we'll fix it later and make some money for doing so."
New, independent game companies do pop up all the time, but the cost of entering the market has historically been too expensive, making these indie innovators prime targets for acquisition by mega-publishers like EA. Our hope is that the growth of app-based gaming and downloadable games will continue to make it easier for developers to get their products out without the backing of companies that don't care a lick about the people who fork over their cash.
Oh well, Worst Company In America 2012 is officially in the books. All that's left to do is send off the Golden Poo to EA.
Traditionally, the Poo has been delivered on its little red pillow. But this year, we'll give EA three different color options for its pillow, though in the end it's still the same old Poo.
Thanks again to everyone who voted. See you all again in about 49 weeks!
http://consumerist.com/2012/04/04/congratulations-ea-you-are-the-worst-c...
Liz Woolley
EA is the Worst Company in America, Now What?
Paul Tassi, Contributor
I write about video games, technology and the internet
Tech
4/04/2012 @ 12:02PM
The results of The Consumerist's "Worst Company in America" bracket are in, and as I predicted, Electronic Arts managed to beat out Bank of America for the title.
I won't spend any more time talking about whether that's a deserved result. I wrote yesterday that a company whose misdeeds resulted in home foreclosures and loss of income outweigh abusive DLC and DRM practices, but that's beside the point now.
EA's "win" here is a clear reflection of just how passionately gamers hate the brand. They flooded the Consumerists polls to ensure that they earned the top spot (over such other despised brands as Comcast, AT&T and Walmart), and you have to wonder what, if anything is going on at EA HQ today.
You might guess that they'd just shrug off the mantle. They're a huge company, and who cares what some website poll says? They've been reading hatred on forums for years now, what's different with this new round of scorn?
The truth is, hate for EA is approaching a critical mass. I've often talked about how far gamers can be pushed when it comes to the medium they love. I speculated that companies like EA are pushing the buttons of gamers on purpose, to see what they will and won't tolerate. And by tolerate, of course, I don't mean rant about on forums. I mean what they will pay for.
The most recent example would be the Day One DLC pack for Mass Effect 3. The description implied to players it was "essential content," and as such, raised the price of the game from $60 to $70 for fans. It was a test, and for how much the pack sold, it was a success.
Then there's the Mass Effect 3 ending, which I personally believe was meant to be yet another test. It was left cryptic and unclear, and as such, ripe for a DLC expansion. Now, with how angry players have gotten over the ending, they might have to scrap what they were planning. To release a paid DLC pack to "fix" the lackluster ending would turn fan anger into downright fury. But again, it would probably sell. EA continues to push the bounds of what's acceptable to gamers, and their winning this poll is an indicator they've gone too far. But the next marker must be a decrease in sales, or else all the rage is for nothing.
EA's problems extend far beyond DLC packs however. They were Zynga before Zynga existed, buying up promising companies and gutting them so they were no longer competition, harvesting the best ideas for themselves. The complete list of EA's acquisitions over the years is massive, and they've killed many beloved brands in the process. Recently, Bioware seems to be their latest casualty, as the company now seems more dominated by EA's influence than ever.
Will EA change? No. Not if we don't force it to as consumers. The fact that they've been voted "Worst Company in America" indicates a clear PR problem, but PR problems only matter if they directly affect sales. In this case, so far, they have not. Gamers love titles like Battlefield and Mass Effect so much that they're willing to put up with changes they hate and give money to a company they despise in order to play the games.
Where the final line is drawn, I don't know. It seems with each new release comes another bold push from EA to pry more money out of gamers' pockets. But it doesn't work for consumers to yell "I hate you!" as they hand over their cash. The trade right now seems to be that gamers pay EA a tax in order to access titles they love. The rate keeps going up and up, but what choice do gamers have? Well, they could abandon these franchises and support companies that actually appreciate their players, rather than try to exploit them.
But that's not realistic in today's industry. Giant companies like EA and Activision control too much of the market for average gamers to boycott their titles. For every one proud activist who refuses to buy their games out of principle, there are a hundred more who simply don't care. They'll buy the titles, pick and choose what DLC they want, be annoyed with DRM and deal with a growing lack of creativity due to corporate interference. But in doing so, the industry gets a little worse with each new title.
I believe EA is a destructive force in the industry as their goal isn't to make gaming more accessible and respected as a medium. How can you argue that video games are art, when pieces of the story are cleaved out to be sold separately? This is why the titans of the gaming industry like EA are passionately hated, while movie studios and TV networks don't draw nearly as much ire. 3D price gouging seems downright generous when compared to the tricks companies like EA are using to wring more money out of consumers.
But the players are the only ones who can truly stop EA. If you think they're going to read The Consumerist today and have a sudden change of heart, you're kidding yourselves. The practices you hate will remain in place until it's proven they no longer work.
If you want to topple EA, don't vote in a poll. Vote with your wallet.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2012/04/04/ea-is-the-worst-company-in-america-now-what/2/
Liz Woolley
EA Shrugs Off Worst Company in America Title
Paul Tassi, Contributor
I write about video games, technology and the internet
Tech
4/05/2012 @ 9:24AM
We spent all day yesterday commenting about what it means for EA now that they've been crowned "The Worst Company in America" after a long slog through a bracket over at The Consumerist where they topped Bank of America in the finals.
Personally, I believed it wouldn't matter much to them at all, unless the bad PR corresponded with a drop in sales. Many readers asked me if anyone at EA even cared about "winning" this award, and if they'd respond to it. I said no, but it turns out I was wrong.
In a statement to Kotaku, an EA rep had this to say about the company's 1st place finish:
"We're sure that British Petroleum, AIG, Philip Morris, and Halliburton are all relieved they weren't nominated this year. We're going to continue making award-winning games and services played by more than 300 million people worldwide."
Arrogant, dismissive, and pretty much what fans expect from EA at this point. A far more appropriate statement might have been:
"We are sorry the readers of the Consumerist feel EA deserves this title. We will continue to make quality games and remember to treat our fans with respect in order to ensure this does not happen again."
Of course, that would be admitting fault, and why do that when you can just wave away millions of angry fans with a flick of your wrist?
Interestingly enough, The Consumerist points out that three of the four companies EA mentions HAVE won the "Worst Company" award in previous years. BP in 2010, AIG in 2009 and Haliburton in 2006. EA's defense of "at least we're not as bad as these other guys" seems to me like a bicycle thief pleading innocence because "well, at least it wasn't a Ferrari!"
I didn't think EA would care about this to any significant degree, and it would seem they don't. Again, only when fan anger and bad press results in an actual decrease in sales, will anything be done to try and walk back abusive policies in order to placate upset players. Until then, they could be declared the worst company across all of time and space, and it won't make a bit of difference.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2012/04/05/ea-shrugs-off-worst-company-in-america-title/
Liz Woolley
EA's Reponse To Being Named 'The Worst Company in America' By Andrew Bridgman / April 10, 2013
http://www.dorkly.com/article/51363/eas-reponse-to-being-named-the-worst-company-in-america
Liz Woolley
If that's actually EA's response, I like it and agree with them. Stop buying their products if you dislike them so much. Seems to me the only thing those votes for EA accomplished was to make a farce of the award.
Acceptance. When I am disturbed, it is because a person, place, thing, or situation is unacceptable to me. I find no serenity until I accept my life as being exactly the way it is meant to be. Nothing happens in God’s world by mistake. Acknowledge the problem, but live the solution!
I remember being in my game of choice, just after a huge expansion, realizing once again the expansion was nothing more than the same old same old with a different dress on it. I would "listen" to the complaints from others in the game, but none of us players stopped buying the product.
The grumbling got worse and worst toward the "end" of one expansion, and all excitedly anticipating the new expansion "hoping" that the company heard our voices and gave us something for our money.
Ha! another round of consumer complaints about the newest expansion , another year of same old same old, with the company laughing all the way to the bank.
Glad I'm out of the loop.
I posted this, because if a person is addicted, they can't just stop. That is why EA gets away with treating their customers so badly.
Liz Woolley
Yes, my thoughts were just in line with Liz's thoughts here. Whether EA makes good games and provindes good services or not is not relevant, but what it shows is that the customers are conscious on some level that the games of EA are bad for them, that EA has learned that they did not really need care about customer service beyond providing addictive products, and that customers are absolutely unable to get off the hook.
This reaction is really similar to a drug addicted complaining how mean and debasing his drug dealer is... while continuing to buy drugs !
Well, I guess my point didn't get expressed. I was giving an example of myself--addicted gamer at the time and other addicted gamers in my game of choice--getting crap for our money, but we were so addicted that we kept buying the games anyway. We knew we were getting screwed, but we had to buy it, because of the addiction.
(It's like the time I bought green beer when an alcoholic; drinking it but complaining about the crappy taste. I had to drink it because there was nothing else available. Long story.)
I am just glad I'm out of that loop of addiction, because my money now goes to helping me and isn't going to gaming company's bank account.
My uncle works in the same building that EA does (in a different business outfit) and told me that EA had massive layoffs last year and may lay off more people this year too. It is no secret that pretty much everyone has felt the hit from the most recent recession, especially entertainment businesses, but I think EA's response to this situation was poorly handled. From what I am told, EA has opted to continually deliver the same product in new packaging for years (among it's sports titles), changing little more then personal stats for teams and a few tweaks to the game engine. I remember being disgusted by this notion as far back as 2006, and before that I was simply tired of it. Madden games in particular go back as far as '94. I see your point Pat. I admit that I used to think lowly of the people who kept buying sports titles year after year, even though little changed. I used to wonder "Don't they realize this crap is the EXACT same thing, with different box art!? Don't they realize that they can edit their teams in the team editor of their older game to match stats in the new game!?". But the way you explained it, I think those people did know that they were buying essentially crap, yet felt compulsed to buy it anyway. I admit that sometimes I do it myself, buying Magic the Gathering Booster packs. Every year a few cards are reprinted from older sets, sometimes with new art, sometimes not. Essentially it is the same situation, re-releasing the same content in new packaging. It is kind of like cutting cocaine before it is sold, lessening the value to consumers even though full price is still charged.
A single step is all it takes to begin a long journey...
Your point has been taken, Patria. Isn't it nice to be using your money for things you can really use in your real life?
Liz Woolley
All publicity is good publicity I suppose.
I think the voting on their service shows on how hooked and obsessed their players are that they really care about them so much as to consider them the worst company.
It could also be the voters are all gamers somehow.
leveling in steps, serenity, sponcys, sponsors, exercise, and sleep, (sanity has been downsized) sober from all electronic games since 11/19/2010