Viewing Thread:
"Does EA mean arcade?"

For many, many years, EA has been one of the most influential developers of sport games, and has always been around that area of the games industry. The company goes as for back as the Mega Drive and further. Everyone knows them for there Fifa series and other games such as NBA, NHL, F1 and more. They have also had a go at other genres but have really stuck to sport games. But are EA known for another reputation, creating arcade games?

Lots of developers now are turning to realism to sell there games, always trying to make them more real so they become more appealing, for example the new Top Gun, a new flight simulator, GT3, MGS 2, all these and more are created to act and play more realistic, not forgetting Pro Evo. But it seems that EA have settled on the idea that people will always like arcade games more, and they have stuck with this.

The most obvious example is the Fifa series, this, however much it hurts me to say, is the most popular football game there is. Itís the classic arcade game, easy to pick up and play, fun with your mates and plenty to offer when playing on your own. This game has always sold millions of copies, and it does so every time an update is released, no matter that often there is very little changed. This is an obvious indicator to EA that the public like arcade games and they are very willing to buy them, so they release a new one every year.

This idea though, that the public like arcade games has been taken off the pitch, and taken to many other genres. Every year EA releases many arcade games. Another genre that has taken this is the NHL series, this plays much like Fifa, very easy to play and pick up, even if at first it is hard to score, its also immensely fun. But again it relies upon arcade gaming to sell again, and that it does. But this arcade idea does not just stop there, all the NBA games are like this too, though I have not played many, or owned many these too have been fun. There are many examples on PS1, too many to name, but EA too have taken this to PS2.

In the first few games to be released on PS2, there was the usual Fifa 2001, containing the usual game play and very good graphics, also there was the magnificent SSX. This was finally one of those games from EA that I loved, the last being Fifa 96 on the Mega Drive. Every thing about it was excellent, top graphics that really showed what the PS2 was capable of, and game play to die for, and was predominately a arcade game. This game sold loads and was one of the first to hit the top of the charts. Previous snowboarding games had been poor, but EA got on the mark with this one, and will again with the coming sequel.

Another well know game is Rumble Racing. Strangely this game was based on SSX only with cars, it offered fast pace racing with huge powered cars that were capable of huge speeds, also these cars were able to perform stunts which added a whole new edge to the game. Again, this heavily relied upon and arcade style of play, and was excellent.

All EAís games seem to do well in the charts which show that they are doing something right, but what? With the majority of developers turning to realism, EA are sticking with arcade and this may be why they are doing well. Yes, lots of people are buying the new ìrealismî games, but they also want there dose of arcade gaming, and with few other companies offering this apart from Actvision, Acclaim and a few others, EA have little competition within the market so there games are bound to do well.

What do you, the public prefer though, Realism, or Arcade? And if the new gamers prefer realism, what are EA going to do?

Thanks, Pro Evo.

Of course it does but then you might as well do a post about arcade games and sims rather than concentrate on EA because only a couple of their games are really arcadey eg.fun to play but not deep enough for real players....

Triple_H wrote:
> But then you might as well say all ice hockey and basketball games are
> arcadey......There isnt too much difference between them...So you are
> contradicting yourself...

lol, how am i doing that? All i said was that it was arcady, and if the rest are, they are. That leaves the market open for a sim does it not?

But then you might as well say all ice hockey and basketball games are arcadey......There isnt too much difference between them...So you are contradicting yourself...

SSX is great, and its an arcade game. NHL,NBA ect too.

Im not saying these are bad, just that there arcade, and it might not last much longer.

I know it wasnt mate. But FIFA is the only true arcade game out of all of them. Cant really see Madden being a TRULY arcade game. Is Medal Of Honor arcadey?Is SSX?Well SSX is partly arcadey but its still brilliant.....

Hmm, but Fifa was not just the only example there.

No dame, I perfectly understood you. Its just that it seems to me that we wouldnt be having this talk if it wouldnt be for FIFA

You are too entitled to your opinion too, but i think you miss understand me. This post has nothing to do with ISS or Konami, i was just stating that a large amount of EA's games were based upon arcade.

Im not saying that this is bad, its good that EA make these, but some people wont want this in the not too distant future. Thats all.

Look, I am gonna end this once and for all. This is my honest opinion and I am never EVER going to start argung about this.

Pro Evo, I can see how biased you are towards ISS games because its obvious. Personally I think thats why you done this post. Fair enough, ISS games are really good to play, because the gameplay is fantastic, and it actually resembles a proper game of football. But FIFA was, is and will be the best-selling football game. If you dont believe me, we will have to wait and see.

FIFA games always brought fun to peoples homes because of the playability. Its simple to pick up and play and have a good kickabout. FIFA 99 was a great game and in my point of view it is as good as any footie game, not because of the gameplay but because of the satisfaction it gave me while playing it. I admit FIFA went a bit downhill in the next 3 years but now I hope they will be back in business.


But its not only about FIFA. NOONE CAN MAKE BETTER SPORTS GAMES THAN EA. Take NHL, NBA, NFL-they got it all. They are all fantastic games and please dont tell me Madden is not realistic.....

SSX has changed the way people think about snowboarding games and again nothing will be better than that game in the next few years(except for the sequels of course).

NBA Street is another great example of an innovative, playable game. Its not supposed to be realistic-its all about pretty dunks and cool moves.

And then take Medal Of Honor and its sequel....They are the best FPS on the PS-and I dont mean two-player wise...

My point is that noone can currently compete with EA in terms of the quality of games they are making. No game has come close to beating EA's presentation and they are just starting to explore the PS2 properly. Be honest here, how many of you would wouldnt go with Madden, NHL and NBA games???No other games on the marketcome even close....Its only Pro Evo soccer that is beating FIFA at the moment.

I like arcadey and realistic games and i WILL buy games like FIFA because they are fun and great to play.

Its a very good post Pro Evo and you are entitled to your own opinion just like all of us, but on this instance I disagree with you. Thats all

Thank you......

like spike i also didnt have any respect for EA because i bought Fifa 98 world to road cup for my ( deceased) N64 and then Fifa 99 for my PS1 and they were exactly the same so SSX has really changed it around even though i havent bought SSX i have played the Demo which is enough prove that they are really trying hard on the PS2 and i am now getting SSX Tricky