EA voted worst company in america

I cannot tell you how happy I am at this.

http://uk.ign.com/articles/2013/04/09/ea-named-worst-company-in-america-again?utm_campaign=ign+main+twitter&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social

It ma be covered by IGN, but oh god has this made my day, ripping people off year in year out for half assed games they deserve this kind of negative publicity

I don't get why Activision weren't on it.EA does it more widely but they are horrible too.And at least EA publish decent games.I read about this one some site called consumerist or something,they had companies like Bank of America,Comcast and Wallmart come close.

lol at the comments.


Didn't knew they were that bad. The Local News here went to visit EA at England when FIFA was released, and gave them a pretty good reputation for us. But still, they only talked how about their building is huge and showed little to no employees anyway

KrazykevS10 wrote:I don't get why Activision weren't on it.EA does it more widely but they are horrible too.And at least EA publish decent games.I read about this one some site called consumerist or something,they had companies like Bank of America,Comcast and Wallmart come close.

This is the poll from the site youre talking about.

I know,I'm just saying I haven't looked at the link except to read the comments.One person brought up and excellent point.Why is EA voted the worst when there are cigarette companies and the like running amok? A computer game publisher is hardly getting people killed.

This is old news. Their CEO recently got the boot for running the company into the ground. Their rep is in shambles.

Their reputation has always been in shambles.People tend not to like bad servers and having to pay for every item in the game.Mind you,Ubisoft servers are worse.

Longshot wrote:This is old news. Their CEO recently got the boot for running the company into the ground. Their rep is in shambles.

How can this be old news when it's dated yesterday?

Serious_Much wrote:

Longshot wrote:This is old news. Their CEO recently got the boot for running the company into the ground. Their rep is in shambles.

How can this be old news when it's dated yesterday?

Technically it's old AND new news. This is the second year in a row that EA has earned the Golden Poo.

I really hate that EA got voted worse company, it makes gamers look completely retarded when companies that employ child labor, or have had serious *** ups that have cost lives or caused damage to the environment end up lower on the list because we whined about video games.

God I hate society sometimes.

Wow... that's pretty bad...

Tolvo wrote:I really hate that EA got voted worse company, it makes gamers look completely retarded when companies that employ child labor, or have had serious *** ups that have cost lives or caused damage to the environment end up lower on the list because we whined about video games.

God I hate society sometimes.

We all know Nike is the best company ever.

I would have thought Fred's Puppy Murdering factory out of Portland would have gotten the nod.

Nike - The Benevolent Behemoth

Tolvo wrote:I really hate that EA got voted worse company, it makes gamers look completely retarded when companies that employ child labor, or have had serious *** ups that have cost lives or caused damage to the environment end up lower on the list because we whined about video games.

God I hate society sometimes.

On the flipside of this, EA is the only one of these companies that would actually care about this "award" anyway? Think Bank of America cares about being called the worst? Nope, not a chance. Neither do any of the others.

When the large majority of EA's audience is active on the internet and they get voted the worst? That sends a message.

They actually responded by saying this showed them that their fan base is full of idiots if they would vote EA over the banks and other companies.

If they have been voted worst in the entertainment industry or gaming industry, that's one thing.

This however just makes the gaming industry look like it's full of idiot consumers, more so than other industries.

I agree,it wouldn't have impacted a cigarette company nearly as badly.Most smokers can barely figure out how to use a lighter,let alone a computer.

Tolvo wrote:They actually responded by saying this showed them that their fan base is full of idiots if they would vote EA over the banks and other companies.

If they have been voted worst in the entertainment industry or gaming industry, that's one thing.

This however just makes the gaming industry look like it's full of idiot consumers, more so than other industries.

The idiocy between the consumers and most publishers/developers is mutual.

DO YOU KNOW HOW EXPENSIVE IT IS TO MAKE GAMES? I find EA to be a good company they make quality games and if you hate them because of Micro Transactions then your an idiot game developers spend years making their games not to mention the massive amount of money to make the game in the last few years the cost of creating a game have increased dramatically a recent example is that Bioshock Infinite cost 200 million to produce so dont hate a game company for having day one DLC unless you wouldn't mind not getting paid for you job

I think whoever said it before hit the nail on the head.

This competition is about giving a wake up call to companies who are embarrassing to the industry. But would you really wanna waste votes on companies that won't and can't change like cigarette companies and banks? Sure they're worse than EA, but EA have more choice of direction to go in. Banks will always be using investment to gamble for more money, cigarettes companies lied for years about what their products do and will always make the same death sticks (really smoking should be banned but not gonna happen unfortunately)

Also, EA are a popularly known business on the Internet as they have high exposure from those who use the Internet most, so they're always gonna be susceptible to stuff like this

nsane32 wrote:DO YOU KNOW HOW EXPENSIVE IT IS TO MAKE GAMES? I find EA to be a good company they make quality games and if you hate them because of Micro Transactions then your an idiot game developers spend years making their games not to mention the massive amount of money to make the game in the last few years the cost of creating a game have increased dramatically a recent example is that Bioshock Infinite cost 200 million to produce so dont hate a game company for having day one DLC unless you wouldn't mind not getting paid for you job

I think you're confusing devs and publishers.

nsane32 wrote:I find EA to be a good company they make quality games

Such as?

Also, increased development costs are no one's fault but their own. They want to push graphical limits with lots of effects and shiny new lighting systems? They're gonna have to pay for it.

The only company I've ever been inspired to contact directly in order to tell them what criminals they are, and let them know I would never buy another game from them.

I purchased a game from them, a game that was essentially designed to be played online, with hardly any incentive to play solo, only to find that the servers had been shut down only a year after release. I will never give EA my money again.

nsane32 wrote:DO YOU KNOW HOW EXPENSIVE IT IS TO MAKE GAMES? I find
EA to be a good company they make quality games and if you hate them
because of Micro Transactions then your an idiot game developers spend
years making their games not to mention the massive amount of money to
make the game in the last few years the cost of creating a game have
increased dramatically a recent example is that Bioshock Infinite cost
200 million to produce so dont hate a game company for having day one
DLC unless you wouldn't mind not getting paid for you job

It's not just that dude, it's a lot of other things. Despite the majority of their games having day 1 paid DLC, and DLC following that does things that the game should have done already, for example Dragon Age: Origins, a game which I happen to love, having a DLC release that encompassed the only way in the entire game to store and save your items and equipment. That's complete BS. An RPG game where you have to buy an extra DLC to store your items. That's like Dark Souls being released and then From putting out a DLC where you have to buy the bottomless box separately. On top of that there's the release of online games with servers that only last a few months, which prompts me to ask what the point of the games are at all, like Lord of the Rings Conquest, which I happened to buy a year after release only to find the servers were shutdown, and the only option I had for play was playing one player excursions into multiplayer maps against mindless computer controlled enemies. Then, what's most important in my eyes, is the purchase and bastardization and destruction of wonderful series of games. I'd cite the Command & Conquer series. Really great series, ground breaking in the RTS genre, with almost every installment containing some aspect that made the game stand out in the genre and the series. Then EA comes along, buys out the franchise, and now we have Red Alert 3. Here's my review of it:

They should be separating these companies by type. That aside, this is a stupid poll anyways. Just a mindless distraction.

A company exist to make profits, EA makes a boat load of profits, so they are doing well. If you hate EA, don't give them your money. They do not exist to serve you, you do not exist to consume their product.

A lot of companies out there, while existing to make money, also make customer satisfaction a priority. It's a difference between companies with business models centered around creating repeat customers through manufacturing quality goods, and companies who implement models centered around producing as many products as possible, repeat customers be damned. It's quality vs quantity. Guess which one I think EA is.

Outside of that, I agree, the best thing to do is not give them your money. That's my solution.