Well, the person in my example has a phD. Anyhow, the truth is he didn't get "lost" because they layed him off - he's working in a smaller independent lab now that gets contracted (i.e. : not in a corporation or even what might be called a "big company").
The whole reason that it has come to a point that you have to let off 1000 people to "save" the jobs of 5000 is simply because corporations have been left to become way too big. Ofcourse a corporation will employ all the means to survive. And yes we all understand "demand and supply" and the whole free market mumbo jumbo of modern day capitalism. And it's not always a bankruptcy avoiding manoeuvre - it's a tactic employed for lesser reasons.
Let me put it this way. If a company gets into financial trouble they will start laying people off because if they wait too long the company will end up going down the drain. Basically, companies do not hire a bunch of people with the intention of firing them. It's always somebody's screwup, or market conditions changed, or the new drug failed FDA regulations, etc, etc.
The place where I work at right now all of the temporary workers got laid off two months ago. They told me that I have a month to work. Eventually they kept all of the engineers once they figured out that they need engineers to run the place. However, I understand that I might have my job today, and not have it tomorrow. I'm always on my toes, always on the lookout. That's capitalism, it's the nature of the beast. It may not be a perfect system, but it is IMHO the best system.
And you see, xaotik, that guy with a PhD didn't end up on the street with a cup asking for change. He went out and got another job. I mean it was absolutely a huge inconvenience for him, but that's free market for you.
For the EA bashing, at this moment there are two boxes on my computer that have their logo on it, and somewhere else there is a bunch of more boxes with the same logo. I started to disrespect EA some while now, but I have to admit, from a purely amusing point of view, they have great and fun games, I don't think many people can actually deny that. So what is the problem? There are far worse games, but they don't get the attention because they're made by a small firm that nobody really knows or even cares about. EA is just starting to be a victim of their own success. If EA would put the money they put into NFS, into a simulation like LFS, I think they would make some serious losses, simply because people don't want sims, they want pure entertainment right from the box, no learning curve, just hit the throttle and win.
And just for the record of EA only wanting to make money... What is a company? It's an industry, focusing on selling goods, and to make as much as possible of a profit out of doing that. So EA is actually doing VERY good in what it should do.
EA don't put decent music in it, they put (c)rap in all the (with 1 exception) shite that they emit. NFS soundtracks have shite rap*, with always 3 tolerable songs. Oddly always Asian Dub Foundation illepall . Madden NFL 2007 has some OK music, but it has some rap, but I turned all the crap off lol (Damone, Wolfmother, etc. etc. FTW)
The only EA things I would get within a mile of are their NFL titles. I admit that they rarely change, I bought 07 because the last one I got was ESPN NFL 2K5 about a year ago.
* I plead guilty to buying a copy of NFSU1 for a youth club for young people on the autistic spectrum which I help at, and testing it. As a means of apology to the civilised world, Live For Speed will be installed on the computers when a computer room is installed. My defence is that it was abolutely ****ing cheap.
ya.. well, NFS Carbon has 1 good rap song that i've heard lol but the rest are HORRIBLE!
i listen to rap every now and then, and i know whats good and bad... but NFSU2 and afterwards.. haven't had many good rap songs; maybe 1 in either game, but the rest are just plain bad; but the other songs are usually really good i think, hell right now i have a need for speed cd from NFS high stakes to NFS Carbon soundtracks, and a CD with Burnout takedown and Burnout revenge (which.. is way better lol) but now that i have an itrip to play with i have plenty of music to go about listening to
but the rock and dance music in EA's games are usually good (every now and then i come across a bad one, but its only a few)
its just.. the rap, i have the feeling that there aren't any black people behind the scenes picking each games' rap
Well silver, that's nice - all the best in it. Somehow it sounds like you're fresh out of college and still a little wet behind the ears.
As for capitalism, it's a system that works well for certain countries of the western world and is the system that most closely conforms to the average human's nature. However, a trully free market is as much a utopia as a true communist state (something that has never existed and never will because) exactly because of human nature.
All the main ideas and theories you've illustrated (what makes a company healthy, education is the only way, be competitive, etc) are great in theory and in a sort of idealized abstract "capitalist's dream" world, however the factors are just too many to simplify it like that - it doesn't actually work as such. It might work in a world ran and populated by robots.
I never said he was doomed - you need a really bad break or severe lack of smarts to manage that - the example was posted in the context of the "contracted work for a corporation" vs. "working as an employee for a corporation" after you mentioned that you worked similarly and then stated that it isn't bad to work for a corporation. He only had to relocate together with his family, seek new employment, readjust to a new environment, etc. Which is by far better than what really run-down people have to put up with.
To get back on the EA subject:
The problem with companies like EA is not that they make money nor that they have crappy support policies. The main problem is what they take away from the game developer/creator scene the one thing that should be No1 - creativity and development.
Let's take this buy-out for example. One of the reasons it happened is that DICE was pushed to a point where further development of titles that followed todays trends (as promoted by the massive marketing departments of companies like EA) would cost far more than their budget could support. (see: Moore's Wall - which is Moore's Law as applied to gaming)
There is no telling what their contract with EA had in store for them if they failed to meet certain requirements - sort of like an Aikido move, use your opponents momentum to bring him to a situation where he has to yield. Although this sounds dramatic, they played with "the beast" and unavoidably they got swallowed whole.
Games. There is an art in making a good game. Look at LFS - it's running DX8 (which by today's standard is "omg so old!!") and it still looks great and is trully stimulating to play. Could a three-man outfit like Scavier (which the game's engine programming is done by one man) follow every single technological development and continue to provide adequate game quality? No way. Would a large company fund such a project that maintained this development model that from result we see is of exemplary quality? Nope. The same thing would happen today with games which are now considered as true hallmarks in gaming.
Almost all new games you see coming out of large companies have the same trend: nothing actually new, nothing actually creative. It's just the "what sells today" trend using "today's technology." Which in all shouldn't be bad, right? It follows the times. Wrong. What sells today is still what sold yesterday because new ideas don't get funded - old sales-proven ideas are funded.
From Wikipedia about "Games":
"Games generally involve mental or physical stimulation, and sometimes both. Many games help develop practical skills, serve as a form of exercise, or otherwise perform an educational, simulational or psychological role."
That's what society has always used games for. That is the value of gaming - either it was kids playing games in the street or solitary games. In the meantime it relaxes us and we enjoy it.
Now think about this: is that the aim of the games you see produced by large companies?
Using LFS as a parallel example - if Scavier just did this for your money and money only do you think LFS would be as it is today or have such a strong fanbase?
EDIT:
Want to see true diversity and creativity in games? Go check out entries in the Independent Games Festival as a start.
When seeking your new source of computerized entertainment, instead of following the ads and promotional campaigns - take a stroll around the independent developer gaming scene - you'll be amazed - LFS is part of this too, no?
EDIT #2:
For a list of past similar acts of EA's read here.
All the people that likes EA games will like it.
Well EA it's not killing people to publish their games, they just make crappy games to answer to the market demand. Wich means cromed wheels, neons and NOS.
Do the sim games world be affected by this? Maybe, but that is what the majority of people wants.
How to not make this happen? Buy S2. Or GPL, or Rfactor or whatever hardcore sim you like.
Personally i dont like when "the-underdogs" and other abandonware sites, cant post 10 years old games (or even get shut down) because they have still copyright on it, but it's easy to blame EA and then blame people because they used your skin (maybe made with copyrighted decals) or crack LFS.
Sorry for my bad english!
Is it what people want?
Or is it that people have no choice to play what they want?
My biggest fear is that EA will at some point dictate what you will play on your PC, and then dump PC gaming alltogether and move towards console... They've been doing it for several years with the EA Sports section, removing the cool features from the PC games, to attract more people to the consoles.
Luckily at the moment we still have some simulators that do a good job of simulating racing which are not controlled by power-hungry corporations, but how long will that last?
Let me set one thing straight at first. Nobody shut down Dice. Dice was no longer competitive, and EA was KIND ENOUGH to buy them out. Now let me elaborate....
It is a good thing because a company that could not survive in the market (Dice) was bought out by a company that could survive (EA). If EA had not bought the company, Dice would go down the drain and all of the employees would be out on the street.
It is very easy for Dice to blame EA and say "They bought us out, we had such a good thing going, and now we're no longer independant". The truth is that in 90% of the cases the smaller companies that get bought out are not profitable anymore.
Example. When Google was just starting out they had countless offers from bigger companies to buy their search engine, but they never sold it. Why? Because Google was making money. Dice obviously was not competitive anymore, they did not sell games, and they were going out of business. EA stepped in and bought them out, and probably saved people jobs.
The reason why Dice wnt under because they were not making any money from their games, not because EA is evil. If Dice was making great games that were SELLING GREAT, like hell they would sell their business to EA. However, they could not sell their product, and they went under. End of story.
EA make games that sell. Whatever they want to do with their games, they can do it. Don't buy their games if you don't like them. Fact is that there are millions of people who love EA games, and there are thousands of stuck-up elitists like you and me that don't like them. (unfortunately) The world does not revolve around us.
You know, you're absolutely right - on paper that is. Are you really entry level in your line a work? Meaning fresh outta college and into the workforce?
If so, Then this is how all that you said REALLY plays out (call me clueless and naive.... :really
They bought the owners out, not the employees....They already have plenty of employees and these existing employees "won't mind" working a few extra hours of overtime (especially since they are either salary or contracted) on a couple of extra titles...
Do you see where I'm going with this dude?
In the High tech field, alot of the smaller companies are more employee oriented and that's pretty much the way it is for most any successful small business. I don't know who the heck "dice" is or was, but if they had people on a payroll, then chances were that these employees were used to working a certain way... a way that clashes with EA's way of "meeting efficiency levels and production goals" What do you think is going to happen?
You almost got this part right though.. well sorta.
more like:
It is a good thing because a company that could not survive in the market (Dice) was bought out by a company that could survive (EA). because with the extra profit they make pushing the additional titles, they can afford to
spend more money on outsourcing and add to the X-mas bonus for all the execs!
No, I'm sorry. That's not right either...
It's It is a good thing because a company that could not survive in the market (Dice) was bought out by a company that could survive (EA). because with the extra profit they make pushing the additional titles, they can afford to
spend more money on outsourcing and offer sub standard health benefits
as a way of enticing potential employees.
Dice was VERY competitive... There is only one reason why EA would buy a company out... Rights to titles. As is the case here, EA wants to milk the Battlefield franchise as much as possible... Something that Dice could not (or did not want to) do. What will happen (keep an eye on this) is that there will be about 6 or 7 Battlefield spinoffs, within 2 years. And each will be the same thing with different textures. As little development as possible.
Maybe... But this was a hostile takeover... Not a regular buyout.
Hostile in the sense that the buyout was arranged under false pretense...
Here's a quote from EA when they finalized the transactions for the takeover.
5 days later, they close it down...
Something stinks.
Do you even know what Dice is, or what they created?
They made Battlefield, Midtown Madness 3, Rallisport Challenge, Pinball Fantasies (and other pinball games in the old DOS era), STCC and many more titles...
They had no problem selling games, especially since they sold their games to EA and Microsoft.
EA doesn't make games... They used to make games back in the 80s (EA Golf), but they haven't made a game in ages... All they do is buy companies that made games they distributed. EA is a distributor, not a developer studio. It's kind of like EMI selling Madonna CDs... EMI doesn't make music, they just sell it, and make money off of it. Or 20th Century Fox distributing a movie which a studio made.
Yeah, millions of people buy EA games... And I would too if there was a really good one I'd want (in fact, I've tried a NASCAR Heat... It suxx0r'd)... That doesn't make their current strategy or their M.O. either good for the economy or a preferable over other strategies.
illepall . Madden NFL 2007 has some OK music, but it has some rap, but I turned all the crap off lol (Damone, Wolfmother, etc. etc. FTW)