What if KSP was sold to EA?

[StainX]

If EA would buy up Squad it would end like Bullfrog, Westwood, BioWare, Maxis and so on....

[Bob's Guardian Angel]

Ahem.

/thread

[Custard Donut (In Space)]

I almost forgot Will Wright's Spore, i have no idea what happened there either but the final product did not bear much resemblance to what Will was talking about and had envisioned in the early days of it's development, he didn't just move on to another company, he left the industry altogether after Spore. Now that's what i call disillusionment.

Maybe next year EA can go for their third consecutive golden poo award, make the hat-trick.

[Levelord]

I will ignore the fact that most of your post is made up considering Blizzard no longer has any original WoW developers. I work in the game industry, you don't know what your talking about in this area. Most companies replace staff, and many staff go onto other companies to work on new things. It's stupid to think a company keeps its staff totally intact. It's no different then any other company in existence.

"Let's entertain your claim that EA does make a good game once in a blue moon." Really, if that was true, then why are they still around and why is their company so large? If they where that bad at making games, customers would probably stop buying them. This whole EA hate thing only started up in recent years or at least to the proportion it is at now. Which has little to do with bad games, and more to do with their decisions.

I know that the WoW team isn't there anymore, but I'm saying that Blizzard kept their team together as long as possible until they decided to pursue other careers individually, which is in contrast to EA forcibly transferring and disbanding teams, and mass layoffs. That was the difference. As to the question of why EA is so large, it's because of how they rode the success of the games that they did not produce themselves before the takeovers. Then after that, used other techniques to derive money from DLC cut from original game content and using intrusive microtransactions for the games. But after looking at other sources it's suggesting that EA was actually getting smaller.

*As of Nov 6, 2008 it was confirmed that Electronic Arts is closing their Casual Label & merging it with their Hasbro partnership with The Sims Label. - http://kotaku.com/5078340/electronic-arts-ditches-casual-label-merges-it-with-the-sims

*Due to the 2008 Economic Crisis, Electronic Arts had a poorer than expected 2008 holiday season, moving it in February 2009 to cut approximately 1100 jobs, which it said represented about 11% of its workforce. In the quarter ending December 31, 2008, the company lost US$641 million. - http://www.contracostatimes.com/technology/ci_11618727

*On November 9, 2009, EA announced its acquisition of social casual games developer Playfish for US$275 million. On the same day, the company announced layoffs of 1500 employees, representing 17% of its workforce. - http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704402404574525473636440080.html

*In April 2013, EA announced a reorganization which was to include dismissal of 10% of their workforce - http://techcrunch.com/2013/04/25/ea-memo-layoffs/

If you asked me why EA is still around, I'll tell you I don't know and it's probably with the same magic that gives command pods their torque. But this doesn't look like a company that is doing well based on the quality or financial success of their games. Also, which part of the games industry do you work in, out of curiosity?

"EA is a publisher known to take shortcuts, overcharge their consumers, poorly pay their employees and issue impossible deadlines for game releases." Proof?

Here's one from 2012 for being voted 'worst company in America':

"According to many current and former EA employees, expectations for time spent at work constantly increased, even when projects were on schedule and no notable increase in productivity resulted from the excessive working hours. Twelve hour days and seven day workweeks were eventually considered normal; not surprisingly, increased employee illness and injury ensued. These harmful job-related health effects continue to be ignored by the corporate machine in favor of increasing revenue. This high human cost has not gone completely unacknowledged, however. Class action lawsuits have been filed against EA regarding improper classification of employees as exempt in order to skirt overtime regulations, and EA eventually reached several multi-million dollar settlements with the plaintiffs involved." - http://www.lebpc.com/New-Jersey-Law-Blog/2012/April/Electronic-Arts-Voted-the-Worst-Company-in-Ameri.aspx

Here's a slightly older one:

"As much as I don't like what's been said about our company and our industry, I recognize that at the heart of the matter is a core truth: The work is getting harder, the tasks are more complex, and the hours needed to accomplish them have become a burden," Rusty Rueff, the company's executive vice president of human resources, told employees in a memo Tuesday. "We haven't yet cracked the code on how to fully minimize the crunches in the development and production process. Net, there are things we just need to fix."

A copy of the memo was seen by CNET News.com. EA did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

EA has been blasted in recent weeks by accusations that it subjects some of its workers to grueling hours--such as 80-hour weeks for months on end. Exhausting work demands are part of the game industry in general and have long been associated with software development overall. But in the wake of an anonymous Web log posting by an EA employee's fiancee, game developers have been speaking out, effectively saying companies are pushing workers too far.

In July, an EA employee filed a lawsuit claiming that the company improperly classified image production employees as exempt from California overtime laws. - http://news.cnet.com/Electronic-Arts-promises-workplace-change/2100-1022_3-5476714.html

I don't have the time to go hunting all over the internet for sources for all the articles on how bad it is to work there, but it's pretty straightforwards.

"If KSP was a financial failure" Sounds like you didn't read what I said, because I certainly did not say that.

Well I said KSP was doing well because it gave Harvester the independence to make the game without interference, then you asked me "I would like to see whre you get your proof on that. Show me that is actually the reason KSP is doing well.". Which is implying that KSP isn't doing well financially despite this, so I gave reasons why. KSP does well because there is little interference by Squad to heavily change the game into a monetization machine, which would make a few people hesitate buying a game given the current features it has. KSP in fact, gives a lot of things away for free in terms of it's updates and expansions, plus also giving the consumer a choice to have it linked up with Steam or to have it standalone. I should also add in that Squad also gave a demo, which is rarely done these days, which allows people to make informed choices on whether they should buy KSP. Which makes people less hesitant to buy a game in development if they liked what they saw in the demo.

Also DRM has little to do with a good game or not, or a companies financial stability. Again .. you are talking ... but you not only provide little proof to back your claims, but you clearly have no idea either. You also seem to put words in my mouth.

A lack of DRM has a lot to do with how it benefits the consumer, and you're right it has nothing to do with a company's financial stability, which is further reason why it shouldn't even exist. The games industry is simply having the same teething problems as the movie industry because of the shifting market towards digital goods and the inability to adapt to it. So they try things like PIPA, SOPA or DRMs to shift the burden to consumers instead of actually adapting to the new market.

I will link you to http://www.gamesindustry.biz as I did to someone else. Please do you research before you reply back.

I've actually read the article you linked earlier to another guy, but the articles themselves have a comment section, in particular: http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2013-07-19-gamestop-exploiting-developers-and-consumers-says-ready-at-dawn-boss

Which has various people from the industry also disagreeing to the logic of the written article. You really can't just disregard the comments just because they didn't have the opportunity to have their articles posted, I felt the comments helped put the articles in perspective. Because what you have here is an article saying one thing, and then a long comment section of his industry peers telling him that he's wrong.

Edited July 22, 2013 by Levelord

[kacperrutka26]

I don't understand what is wrong with EA... Honestly.

They make cool games like Fifa and other sport games.

[The Jedi Master]

Sue EA on Squads behalf. Failing that, never update again. If they force me to update, I would simply delete the game.

[Brabbit1987]

I know that the WoW team isn't there anymore, but I'm saying that Blizzard kept their team together as long as possible until they decided to pursue other careers individually, which is in contrast to EA forcibly transferring and disbanding teams, and mass layoffs. That was the difference. As to the question of why EA is so large, it's because of how they rode the success of the games that they did not produce themselves before the takeovers. Then after that, used other techniques to derive money from DLC cut from original game content and using intrusive microtransactions for the games. But after looking at other sources it's suggesting that EA was actually getting smaller.

*As of Nov 6, 2008 it was confirmed that Electronic Arts is closing their Casual Label & merging it with their Hasbro partnership with The Sims Label. - http://kotaku.com/5078340/electronic-arts-ditches-casual-label-merges-it-with-the-sims

*Due to the 2008 Economic Crisis, Electronic Arts had a poorer than expected 2008 holiday season, moving it in February 2009 to cut approximately 1100 jobs, which it said represented about 11% of its workforce. In the quarter ending December 31, 2008, the company lost US$641 million. - http://www.contracostatimes.com/technology/ci_11618727

*On November 9, 2009, EA announced its acquisition of social casual games developer Playfish for US$275 million. On the same day, the company announced layoffs of 1500 employees, representing 17% of its workforce. - http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704402404574525473636440080.html

*In April 2013, EA announced a reorganization which was to include dismissal of 10% of their workforce - http://techcrunch.com/2013/04/25/ea-memo-layoffs/

If you asked me why EA is still around, I'll tell you I don't know and it's probably with the same magic that gives command pods their torque. But this doesn't look like a company that is doing well based on the quality or financial success of their games. Also, which part of the games industry do you work in, out of curiosity?

Here's one from 2012 for being voted 'worst company in America':

"According to many current and former EA employees, expectations for time spent at work constantly increased, even when projects were on schedule and no notable increase in productivity resulted from the excessive working hours. Twelve hour days and seven day workweeks were eventually considered normal; not surprisingly, increased employee illness and injury ensued. These harmful job-related health effects continue to be ignored by the corporate machine in favor of increasing revenue. This high human cost has not gone completely unacknowledged, however. Class action lawsuits have been filed against EA regarding improper classification of employees as exempt in order to skirt overtime regulations, and EA eventually reached several multi-million dollar settlements with the plaintiffs involved." - http://www.lebpc.com/New-Jersey-Law-Blog/2012/April/Electronic-Arts-Voted-the-Worst-Company-in-Ameri.aspx

Here's a slightly older one:

"As much as I don't like what's been said about our company and our industry, I recognize that at the heart of the matter is a core truth: The work is getting harder, the tasks are more complex, and the hours needed to accomplish them have become a burden," Rusty Rueff, the company's executive vice president of human resources, told employees in a memo Tuesday. "We haven't yet cracked the code on how to fully minimize the crunches in the development and production process. Net, there are things we just need to fix."

A copy of the memo was seen by CNET News.com. EA did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

EA has been blasted in recent weeks by accusations that it subjects some of its workers to grueling hours--such as 80-hour weeks for months on end. Exhausting work demands are part of the game industry in general and have long been associated with software development overall. But in the wake of an anonymous Web log posting by an EA employee's fiancee, game developers have been speaking out, effectively saying companies are pushing workers too far.

In July, an EA employee filed a lawsuit claiming that the company improperly classified image production employees as exempt from California overtime laws. - http://news.cnet.com/Electronic-Arts-promises-workplace-change/2100-1022_3-5476714.html

I don't have the time to go hunting all over the internet for sources for all the articles on how bad it is to work there, but it's pretty straightforwards.

Well I said KSP was doing well because it gave Harvester the independence to make the game without interference, then you asked me "I would like to see whre you get your proof on that. Show me that is actually the reason KSP is doing well.". Which is implying that KSP isn't doing well financially despite this, so I gave reasons why. KSP does well because there is little interference by Squad to heavily change the game into a monetization machine, which would make a few people hesitate buying a game given the current features it has. KSP in fact, gives a lot of things away for free in terms of it's updates and expansions, plus also giving the consumer a choice to have it linked up with Steam or to have it standalone. I should also add in that Squad also gave a demo, which is rarely done these days, which allows people to make informed choices on whether they should buy KSP. Which makes people less hesitant to buy a game in development if they liked what they saw in the demo.

A lack of DRM has a lot to do with how it benefits the consumer, and you're right it has nothing to do with a company's financial stability, which is further reason why it shouldn't even exist. The games industry is simply having the same teething problems as the movie industry because of the shifting market towards digital goods and the inability to adapt to it. So they try things like PIPA, SOPA or DRMs to shift the burden to consumers instead of actually adapting to the new market.

I've actually read the article you linked earlier to another guy, but the articles themselves have a comment section, in particular: http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2013-07-19-gamestop-exploiting-developers-and-consumers-says-ready-at-dawn-boss

Which has various people from the industry also disagreeing to the logic of the written article. You really can't just disregard the comments just because they didn't have the opportunity to have their articles posted, I felt the comments helped put the articles in perspective. Because what you have here is an article saying one thing, and then a long comment section of his industry peers telling him that he's wrong.

Actually, most comments do not out right disagree with that article so no idea what you are talking about. Think you should reread. They may disagree with solutions and such, but that isn't disagreeing with the fact that their is a problem.

As for the rest of your post, I already gave up. You can think what you want to think about EA because honestly, it's one of those arguments that will not go anywhere because you are biased. An example, what can I say that would make you change your mind? The answer would be nothing, because you simply will not change your mind no matter what.

[Brabbit1987]

I don't understand what is wrong with EA... Honestly.

They make cool games like Fifa and other sport games.

lol really it's just most people who don't really know what is going on. They only think they do and they preach about it because they know better then everyone else. It happens in todays society a lot. It's the popular thing to do to hate on EA and every little thing they do.

[The Jedi Master]

Also, this is a likelier scenario than you might think. Imagine, if EA decides to buy KSP in order to cash in on it's popularity, they will use EVERY LAST DIRTY TRICK IN THE BOOK to FORCE Squad to sell it to them. No matter what we did, EA would get it's hands on it if they wanted to. All protest would be useless. WE CANNOT ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN. WE MUST DRIVE EA OUT OF BUSINESS.

[Brabbit1987]

http://ca.ign.com/articles/2012/06/14/why-do-people-hate-ea

A very sound argument and now go to the bottom of the page and ohhh look. Again lets hate EA. XD

lol no one can stick up for EA, because if they do .. they become the bad person.

[hellion13]

as much as i want this game to stay indie, its going to get too big to manage at some point even though it IS kind of a niche game.

i know there is still a lot left to get done for this game, from all the press from outside of the community it was supposed to be some sort of minecraft esque game, although i think we have gone WAY passed that by now, but with career mode and resources still on the board i have to ask when do we consider the game "done"? Whats next, or does Squad ride off into the sunset after having made one of the greatest games i have ever played? who controls KSP after the fact? or is it one of those games that stays perpetually in alpha stage and is just continually updated until we all die of rocket fuel poisoning!?

i cant see EA getting this game, if anything it should be Valve, but then instead of saying stupid crap like 12341416t+49234-12312317659=3 HL3 confirmed it would shift over to KSPs next update LOL

Edited July 22, 2013 by hellion13
really bad typo

[The Jedi Master]

At Brabbit, since I can't quote him/her directly because the forum is slow: I don't think you are a bad person simply because I disagree with you. In fact, I think you are a very good person.

[Sapphire]

I won't lie, I don't know much about gaming. Other than Pokemon, I only got into gaming like 2 years ago. My resume consists of playing Halo with my boyfriend and his friends, scattered bits of the Mass Effect series, Kerbal Space Program (obviously), Skyrim, and Firefall (sort of), so I won't claim to be an expert on this. I have what little I know from the Mass Effect series, articles I've read, and what I hear from other people. So I can say a few things.

Mass Effect 3 was a disaster. No, I'm not talking about the ending, I never even got to the ending. I gave it back before I finished it. I played Mass Effect 1 all the way though, and it was a beauty. And say what you want about the Mako sections, but at least it made the galaxy feel big. Mass Effect on the whole had poor gameplay (in my opinion) but a great story (and pretty awesome music and quirky elevator rides). And I played Mass Effect 3, and I could tell it was rushed. First you had the release date pushed back. Then it was the buggiest Mass Effect title; I've never run into a single bug in the first two, and I ran into about 5 in Mass Effect 3. It was shorter than the previous two games. Then you had all the lies Bioware fed to everyone before release. Things like multiplayer wasn't needed to get the best ending (it was needed, until the Extended Cut patch), and that the endings wouldn't be A,B, and C (it was exactly that), and most disappointing of all, exploration was completely cut. Gone. Not even scanning planets, which did stink, but at least there was something there.

Then there was SimCity. I never got into The Sims, but it looked like something I would've liked. But it had the same kind of lying that Bioware had. The worst was that they said that it would have taken significant engineering to make it singleplayer, then a single modder cut out one line and had it working fine! That sure looked embarrassing on Maxis. They clearly didn't learn from every other forced online game, which without exception had a horrible launch every time. Do you know what the implications of that are? EA and Maxis knew that there might be a problem at launch. They took a calculated risk, and it was the consumer's enjoyment on the line, and they failed. That's pretty arrogant.

What else can I say? Forced multiplayer, DRM like online passes and such. Guess what? You don't get to make your consumers jump through hoops to use your product, because they'll just go elsewhere. One of my favorite articles says "The solution to piracy isn't to violently **** everybody at the door, just in case they might be a pirate; it's to make the door look enticing enough and open it wide enough that all the non-pirates will flock inside." If you try and make consumers jump through hoops to buy your used games, then they simply won't buy your used games period.

Also I could be wrong because I've never played an EA Sports game, but it looks like the same game every year, just with different teams and better graphics.

[Brabbit1987]

At Brabbit, since I can't quote him/her directly because the forum is slow: I don't think you are a bad person simply because I disagree with you. In fact, I think you are a very good person.

Aww =^.^= ... thank you .. oh btw ... her* :3

I won't lie, I don't know much about gaming. Other than Pokemon, I only got into gaming like 2 years ago. My resume consists of playing Halo with my boyfriend and his friends, scattered bits of the Mass Effect series, Kerbal Space Program (obviously), Skyrim, and Firefall (sort of), so I won't claim to be an expert on this. I have what little I know from the Mass Effect series, articles I've read, and what I hear from other people. So I can say a few things.

Mass Effect 3 was a disaster. No, I'm not talking about the ending, I never even got to the ending. I gave it back before I finished it. I played Mass Effect 1 all the way though, and it was a beauty. And say what you want about the Mako sections, but at least it made the galaxy feel big. Mass Effect on the whole had poor gameplay (in my opinion) but a great story (and pretty awesome music and quirky elevator rides). And I played Mass Effect 3, and I could tell it was rushed. First you had the release date pushed back. Then it was the buggiest Mass Effect title; I've never run into a single bug in the first two, and I ran into about 5 in Mass Effect 3. It was shorter than the previous two games. Then you had all the lies Bioware fed to everyone before release. Things like multiplayer wasn't needed to get the best ending (it was needed, until the Extended Cut patch), and that the endings wouldn't be A,B, and C (it was exactly that), and most disappointing of all, exploration was completely cut. Gone. Not even scanning planets, which did stink, but at least there was something there.

Then there was SimCity. I never got into The Sims, but it looked like something I would've liked. But it had the same kind of lying that Bioware had. The worst was that they said that it would have taken significant engineering to make it singleplayer, then a single modder cut out one line and had it working fine! That sure looked embarrassing on Maxis. They clearly didn't learn from every other forced online game, which without exception had a horrible launch every time. Do you know what the implications of that are? EA and Maxis knew that there might be a problem at launch. They took a calculated risk, and it was the consumer's enjoyment on the line, and they failed. That's pretty arrogant.

What else can I say? Forced multiplayer, DRM like online passes and such. Guess what? You don't get to make your consumers jump through hoops to use your product, because they'll just go elsewhere. One of my favorite articles says "The solution to piracy isn't to violently **** everybody at the door, just in case they might be a pirate; it's to make the door look enticing enough and open it wide enough that all the non-pirates will flock inside." If you try and make consumers jump through hoops to buy your used games, then they simply won't buy your used games period.

Also I could be wrong because I've never played an EA Sports game, but it looks like the same game every year, just with different teams and better graphics.

For the most part I agree with you. EA most certainly does some stupid crap. As for Mass Effect 3, I actually have not played it yet since it never was released on steam. I have heard mixed opinions on it though. Most will say how bad the ending was, and some will say they found nothing wrong with it. However, I have to say, just because Mass Effect 3 turned out bad, doesn't make EA a bad company. In other words you can't discount all their past game that where really good.

As for Simcity, no comment other than they really screwed that up. Again though, all companies make mistakes. EA just happens to be one of the big dogs in the industry, so you notice when they do things wrong more than others.

I still do not think EA deserves all the crap they get though. I am sorry, but I love a ton of their games, and while they do some stupid crap, I can say the same for many other companies out there as well. Actually in comparison EA isn't even that bad.

A good example though is a thread on here that stated what would you do if Squad stopped developing KSP here and right now. A lot of people where fine if that was the outcome, and most people said they where satisfied. Now what if, the game was bought out by EA, and EA did that instead. I bet they would get so much crap for it simply because they are EA.

That is why I feel like other opinions on EA are a bit out of line, because they are ok with one company doing something, but they foam up at the mouth when EA does it XD.

Edited July 22, 2013 by Brabbit1987

[Penguinhero]

if Ksp was sold to EA I would keep Squads last version of the game and build a rocket called "all future hopes of good Ksp development and why EA Sucks Soooooo badly" and crash it into the farthest planet in that version or maybe even out of the Kerbin system.

[Sof]

For all the bad press EA get, the do have some good games.

It also seems that they have realised some of the errors of their ways in recent weeks and hopefully start to become the publisher gamers need it to be.

If KSP was bought by EA, we'd see the final version of the game out by spring. Make of that as you will.

[DarthJazno]

Ack, is this thread still going? At least we don't have to worry about the game we all bought. It is being developed independently and we are all in on the final product. I'm still excited about that, not to mention watching the evolution too. No sense in worrying about what may or may not be.

[ComradeGoat]

I miss the old Electronic Arts, the one that produced the Deluxe Paint series.

The new Electronic Arts, the one that didn't update Boggle on the iPad for years, and when they did, they shoved it full of advertising, when I'd *paid* for it, them I really dislike.

[LegoDino77]

SPACEBAR DOES EVERYTHING... Oh wait!

[The Jedi Master]

Also, this is a likelier scenario than you might think. Imagine, if EA decides to buy KSP in order to cash in on it's popularity, they will use EVERY LAST DIRTY TRICK IN THE BOOK to FORCE Squad to sell it to them. No matter what we did, EA would get it's hands on it if they wanted to. All protest would be useless. WE CANNOT ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN. WE MUST DRIVE EA OUT OF BUSINESS.

I'm going to go straight out and say that I may have been a bit sensationalist in this comment. I apologize.

[Killerdude8]

If KSP was sold to EA?

Piratebay.

[Brabbit1987]

I'm going to go straight out and say that I may have been a bit sensationalist in this comment. I apologize.

lol it's ok. I don't think anyone took any offence or took it to serious, so no worries.

[Brabbit1987]

If KSP was sold to EA?

Piratebay.

This I do not agree with. No matter who the company is, never justifies stealing.

The only time I am ok with someone downloading a game is if they are planning on buying it anyway.

[Oxytropis]

If EA were to buy out Squad I would keep a copy of whatever the latest build was that Squad put out. Apologize to my friends for recommending the game to them. Then probably b**** and moan on the forums till I was banned.

Making great games is a labor of love. EA loves money.

I try and steer clear of EA games because of the DRM BS, and alleged worker rights violations. Also any other company that thinks always connected DRM is the answer(acti-blizz).

Edited July 23, 2013 by Oxytropis

[Killerdude8]

This I do not agree with. No matter who the company is, never justifies stealing.

The only time I am ok with someone downloading a game is if they are planning on buying it anyway.

Because the company who insists on selling me a menu screen for 60$ deserves my money.