When does the Season 20 hype start?
We are 2 weeks out and there is literally nothing out there other than speculation about the new legend (Cave), the new map (codenamed 'District'), and some snippets about the Battlepass. Not that I...
Forum Discussion
@HappyHourSumwur I agree with you but we need to also see it from company perspective. Apex was not made by some garage community funded company. Whole idea of Apex is to generate money for EA. Only income they get from the game is the cosmetics sales. How would you feel if EA would be selling audio & matchmaking patches for 50 dollars? Competitive integrity and so on...
But dont get me wrong. I too feel that more money should be invested in the things you list below. But the issue is that EA is just too big stock company to do such things. Big execs & shareholders only see it as numbers game. And that numbers game is not the player numbers, its only the money numbers. Only thing that they care about is the profit. Should the devs / game directors try to make the game actually better (added cost + no direct income numbers like how much more sales we got from this audio patch) they risk losing their jobs. So in my opinion its not so much about their ability or interest to fix things but how the funding is allocated. Ive worked at higher level in big companies like EA (different industry) so I know the mindset.
For you its just a pastime where you get frustrated about the matchmaking. For devs its livelihood. What a life to be a dev. Get manured on and harassed by internet randos because of free to play game that your boss doesnt give you the funding or approval to do something about it.
@Airish85I understand the revenue model and would have no issue buying coins each season if the balance of the devs work was more on things that had value for me. It is more about the core experience for me than the window dressing of cosmetics. Their pricing is basic Economics 101 where they've priced me out of that market. I don't view them as luxury items where higher pricing would drive demand up. Many of them aren't really "micro transactions" anymore and thats an issue.
I look at live service games as entertainment investments. If I haven't seen an adequate return over time, I'm less likely to invest moving forward.
Of course EA wants to earn money. It should.
But the players' point of view/fear should not be forgotten: they don't want to invest money in a game in the hope that there will be enough money left over for the developers (to make long-awaited improvements), only to realize in the end that the "more" money disappears as profit into the pockets of the company bosses or shareholders (and nothing improves in the game).
Especially in the USA, they say "the market will sort it out". What if the market forces are out of action here? That only leaves the press, but I don't think EA cares about its image either.
If EA were demonstrably more concerned about the wishes of the players and could not make the improvements due to a lack of money, I would have a suggestion. But I don't want to say it, because an EA employee might read it and incorporate it into the game, and EA would rake in even more money without improving anything.
