@cboye18 They should learn from indie developers. You don't need expensive Hollywood actors and flashy special effects to be successful. For me, putting more effort on the mechanics, gameplay and plot is worth the money for purchase. This way, devs and publishers won't have to expect unrealistic sales figures just to cover production cost.
@LeonRedfield334 No its not but it could possibly destroy future games. If the microtransactions go unopposed with Halo 4, then they might start thinking on putting it on other games. Then again, as long as the game does not force users to buy it and so long as its cosmetics only, I would have no problems with the option being there. I still won't buy it though.
@prostar343 It's like you read my mind. Think of all the games that $500 could get, specially with the summer sale coming. You could also go for a PC upgrade.
I think subscription based marketing for video games is worst than microtransactions and dlc combined. Most people don't like their games being held hostage if you can't pay the monthly or yearly fee.
How about we put an Online Requirement on their d**** so that every time they take a piss it will ask to for internet. Lets see how they deal with that!
Why does EA keep using the phrase "xxx loving those games,". EA needs to understand that Players love the games and the franchise but not EA's business model or marketing strategy.
As for Origins, number of registered users does not reflect a genuine love for EA. Most of the users registered there will only have 1 to 2 games on their library which were forced on them. If EA truly wants to see how Origin is fairing against its competition, they should take a look on how many games are in the library and how active their digital market is.
aeterna789's comments