EA is mostly a producer. That means they fund developers and tell them what features are good for their games and what features aren't. (Very basically speaking.)
In LFS's case that'd mean Scavier had to send pre-release versions of the game to their producer, EA, for "quality assurance". EA would then most propably say "A lot too difficult for out target consumers" and make a list of things to change to adjust the game for EA's markting strategy. That list would read something like simplify setups, create cool backfire effects (even on non-turbo cars, as most target consumers don't know what backfire-systems actually do apart from looking cool), add a "trafic driving mode", create a credits system to buy additional tuning parts, create better driving assists like visible ideal line, etc. This would make LFS a lot more attractive to the broad mass of underage gamers which will help LFS to generate lots of money.
After this reviewing and adjustment process the devs would have to follow EA's demands or EA would just stop funding them.
The problem about EA is that it's very much focused on money. That's a good thing for people who hold EA stocks, but bad for all players who dislike typical console-gaming. EA wants to raise funds and thus produces (produce as in "Producer") games that are likely to generate a lot of money, like NFSU, NBA, etc. Quality games don't raise lots of money. Simple, quick, flashy and impressive games raise money, even if they have no replayability. EA's interest is about the funds you leave at the store, not about the fun you have while playing the game 8 months after the purchase.
Sure, as a company that's the right thing to do. It just doesn't gain any sympathy with those players who enjoy playing a game longer than two weeks.
Vain
well said
) - please take time and read this: