15 Reasons why EA is Pure Evil

From Destructoid. This was too precious not to post. Here's the first 5:

1: EA was founded by the descendants of Elizabeth Bathory and Genghis Kahn, whose previously unrecorded (and unbelievable, but just go with it) tryst ended with the spawning of a race of nocturnal bat-like creatures with hairy scales and leathery eyes. They now live underground where their legs have atrophied into useless stubs and they now use mechanical shells to move around. A bit like Daleks, but they're not Daleks.

2: Electronic Arts was originally believed to be founded by Trip Hawkins, but this is a lie. Hawkins' real identity is used car salesman Manny Maplins, who was kidnapped by the true creators of EA, who had his brain removed and replaced with a sparrow which flies around inside his skull, directing his actions. This explains why Hawkins now makes mobile phone games.

3: Contrary to popular belief, it was not Judas that betrayed Jesus to the Romans for thirty pieces of silver. It was actually EA that betrayed him for the NFL license.

4: To inspire developer Criterion's Burnout series of games, EA hired forty five cars and filled them with live ducks. There were so many ducks inside that you could not see anything but feathers and beaks in the windows. EA executives then put bricks on the accelerators and made Criterion watch as the cars smashed into each other and there was nothing but twisted steel, bloody feathers and squawking giblets. Despite what you may think, this wasn't to inspire the crashes in Burnout -- the devs were just told that they'd be next if the games sold poorly.

5: You know when you've just finished using the toilet and you're sat on the bowl and you reach for toilet paper only to realize, all too late, that only a bare cardboard tube is left? EA is responsible for that, somehow.

Pure Destructoid gold.

Parallax Abstraction wrote:
Pure Destructoid gold.

More like purely pointless.

dhelor wrote:
Parallax Abstraction wrote:
Pure Destructoid gold.

More like purely pointless.

Aren't they one and the same?

Doesn't it feel a few years too late to be bashing EA?

And considering how well they managed the Fox News/Mass Effect insanity, even more poorly timed.

Kurrelgyre wrote:
And considering how well they managed the Fox News/Mass Effect insanity, even more poorly timed.

I was going to point that out earlier. I really have nothing against EA and the way the handled the Fox situation was very appropriate.

kuddles wrote:
Aren't they one and the same?

Precisely.

13: EA has kidnapped John Madden's wife and children in order to force him to keep promoting the company's football games. Every Thursday, Electronic Arts emails Madden a photo of his family, who are currently made to do motion capture work for the next ten thousand Boogie sequels. He is allowed one phone call a month to what he believes is his wife, but is actually Tiger Woods putting on a high voice.

Quick! Someone form a search party! If we hurry, we could rescue them before the Madden '09 release and destroy the franchise forever!

Danjo Olivaw wrote:
Doesn't it feel a few years too late to be bashing EA?

I didn't get that vibe from the article at all - if anything, it was a parody of those who have knee-jerk EA bashing reactions.

Dysplastic wrote:
I didn't get that vibe from the article at all - if anything, it was a parody of those who have knee-jerk EA bashing reactions.

Exactly. If anything, it's pointing out how silly it is to call EA evil.

After buying more creative developers, defending them in public in an industry where most publishers cower in a corner when the mass media misrepresents them, apparently being the most reasonable publisher for the enthusiast press to deal with, and hiring Peter Moore to clean up the image of their Sports department, I'm not exactly in love with them but they don't represent the evil monolithic soul-sucking game publisher right now.

Ubisoft is the new EA for me. Blacklisting publications that don't kiss their ass, generic regurgitations of previously original franchises, cheap Wii-cash-in's, horribly optimized, buggy console-to-PC ports, and hyping up a slightly-better-than-average game with a ridiculous amount of hype that didn't really provide info on the actual game at all.

Very funny. Good find soul.

Quintin_Stone wrote:
Dysplastic wrote:
I didn't get that vibe from the article at all - if anything, it was a parody of those who have knee-jerk EA bashing reactions.

Exactly. If anything, it's pointing out how silly it is to call EA evil.

Which would have been funnier a few years ago when people actually were calling them evil.

Some of those were pretty hilarious.

0kelvin wrote:

Which would have been funnier a few years ago when people actually were calling them evil.

You live a sheltered life on these properly moderated forums. Trust me, people are still calling them evil, mostly for insane reasons.

kuddles wrote:
0kelvin wrote:

Which would have been funnier a few years ago when people actually were calling them evil.

You live a sheltered life on these properly moderated forums. Trust me, people are still calling them evil, mostly for insane reasons.

There are forums outside of GWJ!?

Nobody's commented on Elizabeth Bathory yet?

souldaddy wrote:
Nobody's commented on Elizabeth Bathory yet? :-P

I'd hit it?

Prederick wrote:
souldaddy wrote:
Nobody's commented on Elizabeth Bathory yet? :-P

I'd hit it?

That's dangerous territory, my friend.

Danjo Olivaw wrote:
Doesn't it feel a few years too late to be bashing EA?

Yeah. I hate EA for what they did to 2k football. I hate EA for how soulless much of what they create is. However, this is the company that has sold me 3 different copies of Burnout (Takedown, Revenge and Paradise). This is the company that published Rock Band, which gets played every other week by anyone who comes to our house. This is the company that published The Orange Box. And, yes, it's the company that is now defending Bioware and Mass Effect.

Vrikk wrote:
Prederick wrote:
souldaddy wrote:
Nobody's commented on Elizabeth Bathory yet? :-P

I'd hit it?

That's dangerous territory, my friend.

I think for this case, "I'd hit it" should be taken literally I mean she certainly isn't very "humanly" thus making her a "it" and I'd definite hit her upside the head! (with a bat )

kuddles wrote:
After buying more creative developers, defending them in public in an industry where most publishers cower in a corner when the mass media misrepresents them, apparently being the most reasonable publisher for the enthusiast press to deal with, and hiring Peter Moore to clean up the image of their Sports department, I'm not exactly in love with them but they don't represent the evil monolithic soul-sucking game publisher right now.

Ubisoft is the new EA for me. Blacklisting publications that don't kiss their ass, generic regurgitations of previously original franchises, cheap Wii-cash-in's, horribly optimized, buggy console-to-PC ports, and hyping up a slightly-better-than-average game with a ridiculous amount of hype that didn't really provide info on the actual game at all.

I'll second this.

kuddles wrote:
hyping up a slightly-better-than-average game with a ridiculous amount of hype that didn't really provide info on the actual game at all.

What game are you referring to?

Good find Soul!

LuminousViking wrote:
kuddles wrote:
hyping up a slightly-better-than-average game with a ridiculous amount of hype that didn't really provide info on the actual game at all.

What game are you referring to?

You honestly don't know? Many of us are still bitter about how hollow and pointless this game turned out.

DSGamer wrote:
LuminousViking wrote:
kuddles wrote:
hyping up a slightly-better-than-average game with a ridiculous amount of hype that didn't really provide info on the actual game at all.

What game are you referring to?

You honestly don't know? Many of us are still bitter about how hollow and pointless this game turned out.


Halo 3? Assassin's Creed? Wait, those aren't EA games. Oh well, the charges still stand.

Raven wrote:
Halo 3? Assassin's Creed? Wait, those aren't EA games. Oh well, the charges still stand.

Neither are Rock Band and Orange Box. EA put them on shelves, they had zero to do with the creative elements of those games. A lot of people give EA credit for those games being made when in fact they had nothing to do with it.

Raven wrote:
DSGamer wrote:
LuminousViking wrote:
kuddles wrote:
hyping up a slightly-better-than-average game with a ridiculous amount of hype that didn't really provide info on the actual game at all.

What game are you referring to?

You honestly don't know? Many of us are still bitter about how hollow and pointless this game turned out.


Halo 3? Assassin's Creed? Wait, those aren't EA games. Oh well, the charges still stand.

Wow. See, someone was bashing EA. Kuddles took Ubisoft to task and danced around the name of a overyped and slightly better than average game. Now this?

Come on. Seriously? The game is Assassin's Creed. Lots of Phail for not getting that.