What is EA thinking?????

[MayheM7]

If you don't have any good new ideas, then release some older NFS games instead. They were excellent. Remake them with better graphics if anything. No one want's this woke anime garbage. Not even the 'young people' you are pandering to. Absolute trash.

[Moist Cat]

Anime? Where?

[Zzz]

true

[The Mammalizer]

Considering your profile, i'm surprised you're not happy about the anime.

[Mno]

If you want to play the old games then just play the old games, you don't need a half-assed $70 remake to do that.

[The Mammalizer]

Originally posted by Only Idiots Preorder:

If you want to play the old games then just play the old games, you don't need a half-assed $70 remake to do that.

especially on pc
just download those overhaul mods

[MayheM7]

Originally posted by The Mammalizer:

Considering your profile, i'm surprised you're not happy about the anime.

Anime is fine in anime games, but it doesn't belong in NFS.. Just like Pacman wouldn't belong in Red Dead Redemption.

[MayheM7]

Originally posted by Only Idiots Preorder:

If you want to play the old games then just play the old games, you don't need a half-assed $70 remake to do that.

Not saying I need a remake. But if this out-of-touch garbage is all they can come up with for a new title, then they would be better off re-releasing or remaking. ..Given they could do it right of course.

[Mno]

Originally posted by MayheM7:

Not saying I need a remake. But if this out-of-touch garbage is all they can come up with for a new title, then they would be better off re-releasing or remaking. ..Given they could do it right of course.

You live in fantasy land. Why would anybody invest AAA money into remastering an old game in order to "do it right"? Anybody, not just EA. That's financial suicide.

Remasters/remakes are (by design) low risk investments, that's the only reason publishers bother in the first place. Why do you think EA choose to remaster Burnout Paradise and HP2010 out of all the racing games they published in the past? They were neither the best received nor the best selling. It's because they required the least investment, HP2010 doesn't have nearly as much licensed content as UG2 or MW, only a handful of cars, meanwhile Burnout Paradise has no licensed content besides the music and a few ads. And yet in both cases EA failed to license everything and had to remove cars and music from the remasters, now imagine remastering a game like UG2 or MW which features Toyota not to mention a crap ton of aftermarket brands, it'd probably cost more to license everything than it costs to make a new game.

[NitroDoorslammer]

Originally posted by Only Idiots Preorder:

If you want to play the old games then just play the old games, you don't need a half-assed $70 remake to do that.

Thanks for that comment 🙏🏻, I'm thinking the same.

[MayheM7]

Originally posted by Only Idiots Preorder:

Originally posted by MayheM7:

Not saying I need a remake. But if this out-of-touch garbage is all they can come up with for a new title, then they would be better off re-releasing or remaking. ..Given they could do it right of course.

You live in fantasy land. Why would anybody invest AAA money into remastering an old game in order to "do it right"? Anybody, not just EA. That's financial suicide.

Remasters/remakes are (by design) low risk investments, that's the only reason publishers bother in the first place. Why do you think EA choose to remaster Burnout Paradise and HP2010 out of all the racing games they published in the past? They were neither the best received nor the best selling. It's because they required the least investment, HP2010 doesn't have nearly as much licensed content as UG2 or MW, only a handful of cars, meanwhile Burnout Paradise has no licensed content besides the music and a few ads. And yet in both cases EA failed to license everything and had to remove cars and music from the remasters, now imagine remastering a game like UG2 or MW which features Toyota not to mention a crap ton of aftermarket brands, it'd probably cost more to license everything than it costs to make a new game.

So it's better to give long time fans of the franchise a middle finger, and releasing this garbage? Wasting AAA money on a generic out-of-touch attempt at pandering to new people?? The licensing prices are the same, regardless if you re-release of make a new product.
"Why would anybody invest AAA money into remastering an old game in order to "do it right"? Anybody, not just EA. That's financial suicide"
Just look at how much money, and excellent reviews, Square Enix and Capcom have gained from that exact strategy. If earning multi millions is financial suicide to you, then I don't know what reality you live in.
Releasing quality IS the better strategy, so if you don't have any good new ideas, which EA clearly doesn't, maybe better re-release something fans actually like.

[Mno]

Originally posted by MayheM7:

So it's better to give long time fans of the franchise a middle finger, and releasing this garbage?

As opposed to giving them the finger by releasing an incomplete, low effort remaster and charging the price of a new game for it? Yes, by a country mile.

I genuinely don't get it, why are you so desperate to pay $70 for a game you probably already own or have owned in the past? I could understand it if you were a console gamer but if you're on PC you can literally get the original release for free and have it up and running on your device in a matter of minutes and the publisher couldn't care less, on account of that particular product being abandonware. This is literally the second best case scenario for us, only topped by a potential leak of the game's source code and/or someone reverse engineering it like they did with GTA3 and GTAVC, and yet you would rather pay $70 for the Defective Trilogy. Seriously?

Originally posted by MayheM7:

Wasting AAA money on a generic out-of-touch attempt at pandering to new people?? The licensing prices are the same, regardless if you re-release of make a new product.

This is false, none of Ghost's games have nearly as much licensed content as the Black Box games did, the sheer amount of aftermarket decals available in those games would probably cost more than Ghost's entire development budget today and you couldn't even get them all, since a lot of those companies have become defunct since then.

Publishers could afford to go nuts with the licensing deals back in those days because gaming was still an underdog in the entertainment industry, not all brands had seen the advertising potential yet so licensing stuff was a lot cheaper/easier than it is today. How do you think EA managed to con Porsche, one of the biggest luxury car manufacturers in the world, to sign an exclusivity deal with them before NFS had even hit the big leagues?

Originally posted by MayheM7:

Just look at how much money, and excellent reviews, Square Enix and Capcom have gained from that exact strategy. If earning multi millions is financial suicide to you, then I don't know what reality you live in.

Are you being daft on purpose? The games released by Square Enix and Capcom feature little to no licensed content, NFS games practically revolve around it. The only reason the franchise was even created in the first place is because EA wanted to promote the 3DO and Road & Track wanted to promote their magazine along with the cars featured in it.

They wouldn't even be able to release a complete remaster of the first NFS game which only had like 9 cars in total, simply because one of those cars is the Toyota Supra. Go ahead and try to release a complete remaster of something like Most Wanted which features 37 cars, including these:

- Toyota Supra
- Lexus IS300
- Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren
- Audi A4
- Audi A3
- Audi TT
- Pontiac GTO

That's practically a quarter of all the customizable cars in the game which they almost certainly wouldn't be able to bring back, including 3 Blacklist member's cars.

Originally posted by MayheM7:

Releasing quality IS the better strategy, so if you don't have any good new ideas, which EA clearly doesn't, maybe better re-release something fans actually like.

That's a really ♥♥♥♥ take, and this is coming from the CEO of hating EA so maybe listen to me and drop this nonsense.

[MayheM7]

Originally posted by Only Idiots Preorder:

Originally posted by MayheM7:

So it's better to give long time fans of the franchise a middle finger, and releasing this garbage?

As opposed to giving them the finger by releasing an incomplete, low effort remaster and charging the price of a new game for it? Yes, by a country mile.

I genuinely don't get it, why are you so desperate to pay $70 for a game you probably already own or have owned in the past? I could understand it if you were a console gamer but if you're on PC you can literally get the original release for free and have it up and running on your device in a matter of minutes and the publisher couldn't care less, on account of that particular product being abandonware. This is literally the second best case scenario for us, only topped by a potential leak of the game's source code and/or someone reverse engineering it like they did with GTA3 and GTAVC, and yet you would rather pay $70 for the Defective Trilogy. Seriously?

Originally posted by MayheM7:

Wasting AAA money on a generic out-of-touch attempt at pandering to new people?? The licensing prices are the same, regardless if you re-release of make a new product.

This is false, none of Ghost's games have nearly as much licensed content as the Black Box games did, the sheer amount of aftermarket decals available in those games would probably cost more than Ghost's entire development budget today and you couldn't even get them all, since a lot of those companies have become defunct since then.

Publishers could afford to go nuts with the licensing deals back in those days because gaming was still an underdog in the entertainment industry, not all brands had seen the advertising potential yet so licensing stuff was a lot cheaper/easier than it is today. How do you think EA managed to con Porsche, one of the biggest luxury car manufacturers in the world, to sign an exclusivity deal with them before NFS had even hit the big leagues?

Originally posted by MayheM7:

Just look at how much money, and excellent reviews, Square Enix and Capcom have gained from that exact strategy. If earning multi millions is financial suicide to you, then I don't know what reality you live in.

Are you being daft on purpose? The games released by Square Enix and Capcom feature little to no licensed content, NFS games practically revolve around it. The only reason the franchise was even created in the first place is because EA wanted to promote the 3DO and Road & Track wanted to promote their magazine along with the cars featured in it.

They wouldn't even be able to release a complete remaster of the first NFS game which only had like 9 cars in total, simply because one of those cars is the Toyota Supra. Go ahead and try to release a complete remaster of something like Most Wanted which features 37 cars, including these:

- Toyota Supra
- Lexus IS300
- Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren
- Audi A4
- Audi A3
- Audi TT
- Pontiac GTO

That's practically a quarter of all the customizable cars in the game which they almost certainly wouldn't be able to bring back, including 3 Blacklist member's cars.

Originally posted by MayheM7:

Releasing quality IS the better strategy, so if you don't have any good new ideas, which EA clearly doesn't, maybe better re-release something fans actually like.

That's a really ♥♥♥♥ take, and this is coming from the CEO of hating EA so maybe listen to me and drop this nonsense.

"As opposed to giving them the finger by releasing an incomplete, low effort remaster and charging the price of a new game for it? Yes, by a country mile."
You argue like toddler. Where do I state that I want a low effort remaster? I CLEARLY stated that I rather wanted a remake of a good game that people like, given it was done right. So in your head, "done right" translates into "low effort"? Sure.. You are just purposely misrepresenting what I wrote so you can pretend to write a 'winning' argument.
Lame.
Remaking a good old game with better graphics and scaling for modern screen sizes is not a middle finger if the price is right. You are a moron if you think so.

"I genuinely don't get it, why are you so desperate to pay $70 for a game you probably already own or have owned in the past?"
WHERE do I state this??? Again, you are making up something I never stated, so your argument is invalid once again.
I stated that I rather EA remake a great game, given they do it right, instead of releasing woke garbage no one wants. Where in that sentence do you find that I am desperate to pay $70 for something i already own??? And where do you see I write anything about pricing?? ..Address what I'm actually writing instead of making things up. Pathetic.

"This is false, none of Ghost's games have nearly as much licensed content as the Black Box games did"
Probably.. I don't have the time or interest in verifying your claim, so I'll give you that one. That doesn't change that fact tho. I still think they would more money in the end by releasing a quality product instead of crap. If not, well, then better do something else entirely. But if it was profitable in the past, I'm pretty sure it will be as well today. The gaming industry has grown immensely the past 10 years.

"Are you being daft on purpose? The games released by Square Enix and Capcom feature little to no licensed content"
Do you have dementia? You wrote: "Why would anybody invest AAA money into remastering an old game in order to "do it right"? Anybody, not just EA. That's financial suicide."
...."Anybody, not just EA. That's financial suicide"....

"That's a really ♥♥♥♥ take, and this is coming from the CEO of hating EA so maybe listen to me and drop this nonsense."
So releasing quality is nonsense?
That's literally what you are arguing. ..Maybe not what you meant, but seriously dude.

If you think this new garbade is the sh!ts, go ahead and buy it. Reward AE for mediocracy and pandering, I couldn't care less. I think it's a trash and a disgrace to the franchise, so all I'm saying is, their efforts would have been batter spent making a quality product instead. Even a remake. Anything would be better han this.. And looking at other companies successful re-releasens, I highly doubt it's more of a "financial suicide" than releasing this trash.

[Swarmfly]

Originally posted by MayheM7:

Originally posted by Only Idiots Preorder:

As opposed to giving them the finger by releasing an incomplete, low effort remaster and charging the price of a new game for it? Yes, by a country mile.

I genuinely don't get it, why are you so desperate to pay $70 for a game you probably already own or have owned in the past? I could understand it if you were a console gamer but if you're on PC you can literally get the original release for free and have it up and running on your device in a matter of minutes and the publisher couldn't care less, on account of that particular product being abandonware. This is literally the second best case scenario for us, only topped by a potential leak of the game's source code and/or someone reverse engineering it like they did with GTA3 and GTAVC, and yet you would rather pay $70 for the Defective Trilogy. Seriously?



This is false, none of Ghost's games have nearly as much licensed content as the Black Box games did, the sheer amount of aftermarket decals available in those games would probably cost more than Ghost's entire development budget today and you couldn't even get them all, since a lot of those companies have become defunct since then.

Publishers could afford to go nuts with the licensing deals back in those days because gaming was still an underdog in the entertainment industry, not all brands had seen the advertising potential yet so licensing stuff was a lot cheaper/easier than it is today. How do you think EA managed to con Porsche, one of the biggest luxury car manufacturers in the world, to sign an exclusivity deal with them before NFS had even hit the big leagues?



Are you being daft on purpose? The games released by Square Enix and Capcom feature little to no licensed content, NFS games practically revolve around it. The only reason the franchise was even created in the first place is because EA wanted to promote the 3DO and Road & Track wanted to promote their magazine along with the cars featured in it.

They wouldn't even be able to release a complete remaster of the first NFS game which only had like 9 cars in total, simply because one of those cars is the Toyota Supra. Go ahead and try to release a complete remaster of something like Most Wanted which features 37 cars, including these:

- Toyota Supra
- Lexus IS300
- Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren
- Audi A4
- Audi A3
- Audi TT
- Pontiac GTO

That's practically a quarter of all the customizable cars in the game which they almost certainly wouldn't be able to bring back, including 3 Blacklist member's cars.



That's a really ♥♥♥♥ take, and this is coming from the CEO of hating EA so maybe listen to me and drop this nonsense.

"As opposed to giving them the finger by releasing an incomplete, low effort remaster and charging the price of a new game for it? Yes, by a country mile."
You argue like toddler. Where do I state that I want a low effort remaster? I CLEARLY stated that I rather wanted a remake of a good game that people like, given it was done right. So in your head, "done right" translates into "low effort"? Sure.. You are just purposely misrepresenting what I wrote so you can pretend to write a 'winning' argument.
Lame.
Remaking a good old game with better graphics and scaling for modern screen sizes is not a middle finger if the price is right. You are a moron if you think so.

"I genuinely don't get it, why are you so desperate to pay $70 for a game you probably already own or have owned in the past?"
WHERE do I state this??? Again, you are making up something I never stated, so your argument is invalid once again.
I stated that I rather EA remake a great game, given they do it right, instead of releasing woke garbage no one wants. Where in that sentence do you find that I am desperate to pay $70 for something i already own??? And where do you see I write anything about pricing?? ..Address what I'm actually writing instead of making things up. Pathetic.

"This is false, none of Ghost's games have nearly as much licensed content as the Black Box games did"
Probably.. I don't have the time or interest in verifying your claim, so I'll give you that one. That doesn't change that fact tho. I still think they would more money in the end by releasing a quality product instead of crap. If not, well, then better do something else entirely. But if it was profitable in the past, I'm pretty sure it will be as well today. The gaming industry has grown immensely the past 10 years.

"Are you being daft on purpose? The games released by Square Enix and Capcom feature little to no licensed content"
Do you have dementia? You wrote: "Why would anybody invest AAA money into remastering an old game in order to "do it right"? Anybody, not just EA. That's financial suicide."
...."Anybody, not just EA. That's financial suicide"....

"That's a really ♥♥♥♥ take, and this is coming from the CEO of hating EA so maybe listen to me and drop this nonsense."
So releasing quality is nonsense?
That's literally what you are arguing. ..Maybe not what you meant, but seriously dude.

If you think this new garbade is the sh!ts, go ahead and buy it. Reward AE for mediocracy and pandering, I couldn't care less. I think it's a trash and a disgrace to the franchise, so all I'm saying is, their efforts would have been batter spent making a quality product instead. Even a remake. Anything would be better han this.. And looking at other companies successful re-releasens, I highly doubt it's more of a "financial suicide" than releasing this trash.

Holy mother of embedded posts! Where do I begin to unearth this literary juggernaut unlike anything seen before?!

[Mno]

Originally posted by MayheM7:

You argue like toddler. Where do I state that I want a low effort remaster? I CLEARLY stated that I rather wanted a remake of a good game that people like, given it was done right.

I know, and I CLEARLY explained (in several ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ paragraphs) why such a thing is impossible. Do you have a learning disability or something?

Originally posted by MayheM7:

So in your head, "done right" translates into "low effort"? Sure.. You are just purposely misrepresenting what I wrote so you can pretend to write a 'winning' argument.
Lame.

No that's what you're doing. Literally that's what you're doing, you just did it right now, after I wasted several minutes of my life trying to educate your ignorant ass.

Well, I'm not making that same mistake twice. Not reading the rest of that, ♥♥♥♥ off.

[IGNITRO]

They cant release older nfs games because of licensing costs.