CVG:GM Matt Bilbey on technology, authenticity and working with Sky
GamesIndustry - "Behind the big blockbusters, EA is offering very friendly deals for indie developers -- EVP Matt Bilbey tells us why."
The the small employees aren’t the bad guys, But you’re working for a company that has time and time again made several greedy moves That the vast majority don’t like
The head honchos dictate things. They set the tone but you guys follow it still and I don’t blame you because it can be tough to find a job in the game industry.
I’m sure there’s internal conflicts happening all the time there but at the end of the day it’s the final decisions that lead the company Identity
That is a perfectly sound argument. The senior management are the ones making the decisions, the smaller employees know exactly why the company gets so much hate from the gaming community, they are not the stupid ones.
EA is feeling what I have been preaching for years. Eventually they will have the Circuit city effect where there is a tipping point of bad will towards them from consumers.
It's Not the senior management making decisions but the Investor's telling them what to do
Trickle down to ghost games.
EA actually is really good with their indie publications. I've worked with them, and found then to be knowledgable and really capable, and they dont "intefere", although they often have really good ideas on how to make games better...which doesn't mean add MT.
Most of the hate for EA is centered around their big games, because obviously that is what most people care about.
But, the trickle down effect means it's all one corporation. Not much can be done about it unless you can get the execs.to stop doing things that people dont like.
@rainslacker The plan for Games as a service and the amount of Microtransactions in nearly all lineup of their games if pretty bad. EA was successful in a big way even before all that nonsense and I used to not actually mind buying a game under them. Now I won't touch them or anything that has their name on it with a 10 foot ethernet cord.
The problem is primary stakeholders and top-shelf management IMO. Management is trying to too off their fiscal turnover come a new year.
This basically led to all the dumbass decisions we've seen for the last 3-4 years especially.
The regular employee just follows directions, but the top is the one giving the direct orders to "innovate" the monetization scene and push it in there, harder and harder.
I do think it's a pity though, since I expect the top management isn't looking at ethnographic consumer behavior, only the raw numbers from their analysis.
"The head honchos dictate things. They set the tone but you guys follow it still and I don’t blame you because it can be tough to find a job in the game industry."
Keep in mind that EA is massive, especially in this industry. It goes without saying that the executives are the ones at the reins, but I think you may be underestimating how much control they have. Specifically, you seem to be understanding, but also kind of judgmental by saying "The the small employees aren’t the bad guys, But you’re working for a company that has time and time again made several greedy moves That the vast majority don’t like".
I don't work in this industry, but if you've spent your entire career as a game developer at EA with no other experience, it's rock- meet- hard place. If I'm being candid, an employee doing anything to piss off EA could very well be a career death knell. They're programmers, sure, but at the end of the day, they're still in the entertainment industry, and that's pretty tough to recover in when you've aggrieved the powerful.
How free market is suppose to work is that gamers vote with their wallets. Unfortunately for many of us many more still buy EA games.
EA need to get their profits up yoy for their shareholders and for their top fat cats to get their million dollar bonus
The money has to come from somewhere so thats us while they try to spend the least they need to. I mean look at Anthem for example.
It is what it is.
The majoraty of people love EA, if they don't, then how do their games sell so freaking much.
I wouldn't go that far.
I think most people are kind of "hardwired" to buy the annual sports franchises and recognize EA as "that logo that comes up every time I play my sports games"; I don't think it's love, so much as it is tradition. Like, I think if there's a string of truly abysmal sports titles year after year, people will stop buying them without really blaming or confiding in EA. If you can believe it, I know people who have had to Google "who makes Metal Gear Solid"- this conversation came up about a month ago, actually. And companies know this, which is why they often advertise new projects in terms of games instead of companies (e.g., "From the creators of [insert franchise with a positive reputation]"]Even if another company picked up the Madden license, if a high tier studio like, say, Naughty Dog made a Madden game, those same people who moved away from the series would probably not come back without some kind of assurance that a quality studio is handling it. I don't think the average person attributes much to EA nearly as much as the game itself, which actually protects existing franchises with a good reputation.
The people on this site are actually more informed than the general population who kinda just see a trailer for a game and get hyped.
But yeah, I don't think saying people love EA is quite right. Anthony Mackie made a point about movies that I think is also true in games where he said in the 80s, people went to see "the new Sylvester Stallone movie ", but now, it's about going to see "the new Captain America movie". It shows you that people attribute excitement for the product rather than who brings it to life; likewise, the average person cares about "the new Madden", not "the latest game by EA". So yeah, I think people will continue to buy EA: because the company practices aren't relevant to the average person. I think it's a shame because the "surprise mechanics" comment will go largely ignored, I'm sure.
EA keep making money ignore the haters. Those people complain to complain its what the USA does best now. Whine and complain about everything small and big. Looking forward to Madden in a few weeks. Than you can hear people whine and complain it has not changed enough or that you own console rights to football. Its always something these days with the whiners and complainers.
You have no idea what you're talking about. And, you're part of the problem of why they do the things they do.
Anyone familiar with EA and their practices over the years, the closing or shady management of good developers after buying them, the locking up of more than just the football license to kill competition, the money hungry schemes to please their investors, their tag along jumping in with Microsoft in 2013 of trying to kill used games and gamer ownership, the lazy yearly development using the same game engines they acquired after buying their competitors, their "SURPRISE MECHANICS"...
You may love them. I'll continue to boycott them. Any money given to them only leads them to use it to monopolize more licenses so that no one else can make a licensed game that could be better. Or make them step up to produce better products.
Thank you for your poor consumer spending and blind loyalty.
So xRacer just can't enjoy the games from EA without having to get into some sort of backroom politics about it?
Everything you described has happened with pretty much every huge developer and publisher in this industry, the fact that EA seems to get singled out for this is not only puzzling but hilarious. Money hungry schemes? Shady management? Pleasing investors? Are you just running the generic big business gamut of what you believe is happening, because that's exactly what it sounds like.
You may have a valid complaint about EA closing a lot of studios they bought but then again, who in this industry hasn't done this?
Maybe you're the problem, unable to put aside some bias or high horse attitude towards a company but then excuse other companies when they have been doing the same thing for a while now. This is evident when as per usual with you, you want to drag in MS with your agenda, but lets not even talk about Sony's own exploration or "tag along" into the so called "killing used games" space.
https://attackofthefanboy.c...
https://www.eurogamer.net/a...
https://www.geek.com/games/...
"...only leads them to use it to monopolize more licenses so that no one else can make a licensed game that could be better"
Who else is handing out their licenses for others to use? Seriously, this makes no sense at all. Isn't this why companies go after licenses, for them to be the only ones to use.
"Or make them step up to produce better products."
EA doesn't make quality products? EA games may not be for everyone but saying they're not stepping up with better produced products is definitely not true.
"..using the same game engines they acquired after buying their competitors,"
Yes, because no one else does this at all. Are they suppose to completely trash an engine after purchasing it? How much sense does that make?
"Thank you for your poor consumer spending and blind loyalty."
Says this guy who is just as blind from others devs/publishers doing the same thing in this industry.
Yes he can't @gangsta_red shill if he is on a forum running his mouth about it. If you don't want to be involved then STFU and stay home pretty simple.
EA has certainly engaged in behavior designed to get the most money out of people, but as far as closing developer studios, blame the studios for getting greedy themselves. They weren't forced to sell out to EA. They did it for money.
***the fact that EA seems to get singled out for this is not only puzzling but hilarious.***
Not really. They're the most notable and egregious of the offenders outside of mobile games and they make horrible comments to try and cover it up that can be easily ridiculed by the gaming community. Their SWBF2 response was seriously bad. Their recent comments about "surprise mechanics" and how lootboxes are "actually ethical" were even worse.
Sure, they're not the "only ones" but they are a major problem and have had clapback from Disney alone because of it, let alone the gaming community. Add in their handling of BFV controversy, Anthem being the game it was thought to be but wasn't, and the like, it only makes them a bigger target.
Im the problem. I support a company who releases games I enjoy. if you do not like them Do not buy their games. Easy as that.
"Add in their handling of BFV controversy, Anthem being the game it was thought to be but wasn't, and the like, it only makes them a bigger target."
Should we also not recognize some of the great games they also released or were involved with from the past or upcoming games, Apex Legends, Sea of Solitude, past Battlefields, BattleField Bad Company, A Way Out, etc.
Being the supposed biggest target doesn't necessarily make them the right target to turn all this cynicism and hatred on. Especially when there's an admittance of every company doing the same thing as EA does.
They have had their share of problems like any other company who has been in this industry for this long. But a lot of these *issues* seem like they're being blown way out of proportion by folks on the internet that continuously have nothing good to say or hold extreme grudges against a company no matter what they do or how many quality games they still release to all systems.
Besides, ridiculing EA is one thing, adding a hefty amount of exaggeration (shady, money hungry, etc) makes it sound like EA is the Extensive Enterprises ran by Tomax and Xamot of the video game industry.
EA likes to try and defend itself against practices the consumer doesn't like. Other companies dont. That's why EA gets more attention. People complain about other companies, but those other companies dont keep poking the bear, hoping the bear will share their honey.
Basically, EA gives openings to be attacked, and historically, they say they'll change, do better, and start listening, only to do worse on their next attempt.
EA doesn't need to defend itself against haters, but if their practices are causing sales to not meet expectations, then they have to explain themselves to investors. That's what's been happening the past couple years with a couple games that came up short. Some of the openings they provide aren't because they want to discuss it, but out of necessity.
Other companies just dont have the same negative perception. Whether they deserve the same hate or not is irrelevant to how people view them, but in general, other publishers aren't quite as ecstatic to find ways to fleece the customer, and certainly they dont brag about how it's good or necessary.
EA sucks and most of their games suck. I'm a Battlefield addict and BFV is a shit show. Sparse content, the new updates have actually made the game run worse (constant frame drops, invisible enemies, missing animations), terrible stat tracking, lack of identity. And before you all point to DICE, EA gave them roughly 8 months to make this game. 8 fkn months...
I for one just hope that when my kids get a little older. That I don't have them come to me and ask me to get them something that can ONLY be gotten from a loot box. Then my options are A. Make the kid sad and try to explain to them why. Or B. Give in and be forced to literally gamble for the kids happiness.
On another note. Can you guys imagine if back in the day you had to pay the full price of a game for each world/level in mario games? lol
You...yes YOU are the reason the rest of us level headed people keep getting screwed over by EA
The type to lube themselves up before big Daddy EA has even parked his car on the drive way.
Eh. I wouldn't blame most gamers who are informed for the issues. It tends to go down to those who are less informed and play games because of streamers or the like. The goal to be better sooner than anyone else, not just because they like the game.
Yet, I find you the to be the issue. complaining about microtransactions you do not need to buy is just plain silly and a waste of your and my time.
xRacer74x - People BANG on about others buying MT's because it validates them and give EA the ammunition to sit in a court house in England and say things like - "People like surprise mechanics".
As is indefensible in this regard, but here we are people are defending them! It's bullshit and then EA have balls to cry foul - bunch of pricks.
I'm not screwed over by them because I dont buy many of their games. The ones I do buy tend not to have significant MT to get into the politics of it.
Its helped they've moved away from a lot of their SP offerings, because i dont have to worry about missing out on a good game which has bad practices attached to it.
@xracer
Sometimes their games are designed around MT, and it effects the main game. Others just find it distasteful to sell things the way they do...namely with loot boxes, because they feel its exploitative. Even if they aren't personally affected by them, it doesn't mean someone can't recognize what may be a bad practice.
More so...EA has a bad habit of only getting worse over time. It may be hard to comprehend what may be worse than loot boxes, but one thing that most can agree to, it's that EA is the one thinking of that right now. Probably watching the mobile market to rip it off from that market.
***Yet, I find you the to be the issue. complaining about microtransactions you do not need to buy is just plain silly and a waste of your and my time.***
I disagree with this. I don't disagree with being "too harsh" or "too whiny" in how we present it. But, complaining about things is important and playing it off as "if you don't need them then don't buy them" isn't the right thing to go with.
Why do I say this?
Gambling is regulated for a reason and has limitations for predatory actions to entice people to participate. And even with those regulations, it's easy to still sell it as something you can definitely win at.
Lootboxes/MTX are similar. There needs to be a boundary between what is acceptable and what isn't so that it doesn't become predatory.
Ubisoft used to be way more predatory. Then they backed that train up and started doing less predatory things and making it easier for people to obtain mostly cosmetic, non-gaming affecting stuff via normal gameplay (or weekly challenges).
EA was extremely predatory with SWBF2 release. Complaints didn't remove MTX/lootboxes, but it did force them to make them more reasonable and less taxing so that it would almost guarantee that if you wanted to get something you would need to spend money rather than wait for two months or so and hope it dropped for you.
There should be limitations on the predatory elements of these games and complaints about them help to announce when they are predatory and when they need to be fixed.
So has EA changed, because I've been seeing a lot of whining and complaining about them for a long time and yet EA is still doing what they're doing
That's because you are a vocal minority group unfortunately for you guys and it often does not end up working but, oof.
***So has EA changed, because I've been seeing a lot of whining and complaining about them for a long time and yet EA is still doing what they're doing***
Yeah, they have...
SWBF2 changed.
Apex Legends is more acceptable rather than heavy handed like other EA games.
They're actually making a Star Wars SP game after cancelling two others and citing that the profit margins for a SP game wasn't a good investment for them.
Now, FIFA... that's something that hasn't really changed. It's like a blind spot for EA and the community.
Didn't SWBF2 bring back the loot boxes in some other form even after the backlash? No clue actually, i thought i read that somehwere.
Besides loot boxes was a controversy that wasn't just specifically aimed at SWB2, but was the industry hot topic for a while with that game included.
Point is, whining and complaining never seems to get the change done more so than actually not playing or purchasing the game.
Best you really get from EA is some promise they'll do better. Then they usually end up being worse.
***Didn't SWBF2 bring back the loot boxes in some other form even after the backlash? No clue actually, i thought i read that somehwere. ***
The complaint: The implementation of lootboxes was extremely predatory.
The initial response: "provide players with a sense of pride and accomplishment for unlocking different heroes"
The response: Holy crap, you're not getting it. Let's downvote this Reddit response.
The follow-up response after being contacted by Disney as well: "Okay, we've drastically reduced how much time it would take to unlock the stuff you want."
The response: Okay, that's better. Let's not do that initial set up ever again, ok?
---
The feedback by actual players of the game wasn't to remove the lootboxes, but to reduce the predatory nature of them that created a sense of never being able to unlock the content within a reasonable amount of time. There are still people who are anti-lootbox, but the players of SWBF2 got what they wanted.
This is similar to NetherRealms and Injustice 2 issues. They reduced them drastically as well. And in MK11 they moved game affecting unlockables to accomplishments and had lootboxes as almost entirely cosmetic items.
So, the issue is that people think the complaint was about lootboxes existing, it wasn't, it was about how bad they were. People complained. They responded horribly. People complained to new levels. They made changes and those changes reflect what they've done in Apex Legends and will likely do going forward.
***Point is, whining and complaining never seems to get the change done more so than actually not playing or purchasing the game.***
You can't stop other people from buying games. You can get people who own the game to agree with a complaint, though.
So, I disagree with you there. Let alone the fact that if people don't buy the game they tend to blame the developers when it's a publisher issue applied to the game.
You know what gangsta, you may be right. I mean look at the colossal amount of disagrees you get and all the whining about your completely nonsensical opinions.... and you haven’t changed! You are the entertaining one on here, MS Butt buddy and now your in for EA too!? Holy hell I think you just like to go against public opinion😂 ah well keep doing what you do, it’s hilarious to read👍☺️
You have a point but I disagree with the "USA does best now". Why this whole notion that only people in the USA complain is hilarious especially when you have sites like this one filled with complainers from all over the world.
What's worse than whiners are people that bend over and take it, and worse than that are people who ask others to bend over and take it too. I think you're camp # 3.
People uninterested in EA games are good though. You guys know a thing or two about taking it since "As I said, we could never beat you."
it's not the problem that they make money but how they make it...
and yea i hate on them cause of that just like i hate on other practices i disagree with.
It's just common sense.
I mean you're also hating on people who are hating on EA, guess we're not so different after all ;)
It's not xRacer74x is a surprise EA shill!
Interesting how they're the company that caused legislation by governments to be brought forward. It even got bipartisan support in the US and banned their mechanics in some EU nations. For whiners and complainers, we are enjoying seeing EA trying to lie to different governments by re-labelling their mechanics to keep screwing over gamers like you.
You sure do use complain and whine a lot for only 4 lines. Who's the whiner and complainers again?
@shikoku
Oh please go for in a fire
People love jumping on bandwagons and hating like sheep. Sure EA are underperforming but they are no greedier than any developer. It's just that their games of late are not as good as they used to be. That's down to the designers. Not executives. And people complaining about frostbite haven't a clue what they're talking about because they're not technical. A game engine is constantly being updated and evolved by the engine team like any piece of software and the reason for their games being below par has nothing to do with the engine. I'm a software engineer working in a games company btw...
Let them keep thinking this as we watch their slow destruction. We will never forget! Say its name..........anthem. that one game taught me so many lessons. Thank u EA.
*EA have made some of the most franchises ever and eventually ruined 90% of them.
Replies(10)
Correction: EA has bought companies who made some of the most brilliant franchises ever.
Then they shut them down.
EA way back in the day was an awesome publisher. Near the beginning of last gen is when they started becoming what they are now. Not everything they do is bad, but they certainly have some notable bad qualities.
EA have BOUGHT some of the most brilliant franchises ever. And EVERY SINGLE ONE is ruined.
To be fair, EA has done NOTHING. EA is a publisher, its game studios that do the work. All EA is there to do is distribute and market. The fact that they are able to push the game studios to implement their publisher schemes is sad, but the alternatives are for the studio to not have funding to make or complete a game.
Technically EA provides the money to the developers for them to be able to create, much like any self preserved developer. It's the same as any other game company regardless if they are the publisher or the developer. It's on EA however to manage those funds appropriately since they are the publisher and can pull rank creatively.
EA assigns revenue goals and the game studios have to find a way to reach those goals. Separate budgets are assigned to different departments like textures, models, sound, etc. They also do all of the marketing. So they do way more then you think. Game studios are also to blame in this regard since it's up to them how they get the revenue each quarter. Some studios will implement horrible predatory items like Treyarch did with Blops 4, others like Massive make more fair ones with Division 2. That's one of the reasons why Anthem is so bad economy wise is due to Bioware's half assed market where they just couldn't finalize on a price point for items and kept the grind slow and awful and kept making it worse. They realized not enough people were buying the game to warrant the predicted revenue target they were trying to hit, then instead of leaving it they just made it worse. Never increase the workload on players. Only so much time in the day.
Source: EA insider
No EA holds the rights to some of the best franchises ever.
The people and studios that made most of them are long gone thanks to EA.
EA executive Matt Bilbey predicts that consoles will be inside smart TVs in ten years. He also said Frostbite is being upgraded to support user-generated content in the future.
I cant see gaming going to the cloud, this is really just no reason for it. I can see them going 100% digital though.
People who don't believe that cloud compute is the future are going to be in for a big surprise!
Now we have both Ubi and EA, along with MS, who know how important the cloud is.
Smart TV's don't force you to pay for them. They're there as a shortcut so you don't have to buy/use a 3rd party hook up. Use YT, Netflix, ps vue, etc, straight from the TV rather than a game console or USB device.
Same. I still don’t own a smart tv. I’ve got no problem hooking something into it like a Blu-ray player or AppleTV.
I have a smart Sharp TV and the apps are just annoying. Everything is slow and when you accidentally touch one of the app buttons on the remote it can take minutes to get back to what you're doing. I exclusively use my PS4 and Fire Stick for TV so having these extra apps that aren't regularly updated, if at all, is pointless.
Just never connect it to your network. I bought a TCL tv for an amazing price but read it actually spies on everything you do including sending screenshots back to home for marketing. It even says so in the terms-of-service.
I like having say the youtube and netflix aps or miracast, but I don't use much else, it depends on the services said apps can offer.
"Smart TVs" seem like a bit of an outdated concept to me already. Integrated hardware stuff isn't really cool anymore. The real future is having your phone be able to do everything (connect to TV wirelessly and stream games)
....😑 Then you won't be able to you your phone for other things. That's just stupid. Htf is giving easier access and less hardware need outdated? That like saying car GPS is outdated cause I can just use my phone's gps 😌
They should do it something like the LaserActive from back in the day. Just an expansion port that can accept modules to play a particular system. The LaserActive could support the Genesis or Turbo-Grafx/TurboCD.
That way every TV is compatible, and people can move at their own pace, and the console part of the hardware wouldn't become obsolete before the TV does.
Not really mobile GPU s are basically an Xbox 360 now. In 10years they could be PS4 pros or close to it.
Knowing EA it will stop your movie 10 minutes before it ends and ask for a micro-transaction payment to see the ending.
So when the next generation of Playstations or Xbox comes out, I have to replace the whole 4K HDR TV.... no, I think I'm with how things are.
Don't they already have access to things like Sony's Playstation Live?
Then you have to deal with which TV company has which licenses to have the app on your TV.
This “EA Exec” doesn’t know anything about gaming. All he cares about is profit. These are the same guys that force micro transactions and loot boxes into games.
Isn't it scary though? These execs are some of the people with the most control over the entire industry. When you have companies like EA, Ubi, Microsoft all talk about the future of gaming business, it's because many of these companies have decided already that's there they want it to go.
What EA is saying is that games won't be loaded localy, but in the clouds, very similar with Microsoft is saying.
Those games will be built to run on Azzure, for instance, and your TV is just the application laucher, like Netflix.
This approach solve a lot of problems for publishers, like piracy, used market and emulation once final user doesn't have access to the game code.
Not happening in ten years.
The tech will not be commercial vs the internet providers and their war on charging for data.
Sure, someone will try it... but the games will be laughed at once real world consumers start playing and dealing with all the latency and image crawling.
When 4k movies actually start streaming in 4k up to 60fps.. then I’ll believe it’s on its way.. until then, nope. And the fact that you have to pay the premium price to experience 4k television/streaming... no way.
EA is probably saying it because Microsoft paid them too, this is the kind of tactic Microsoft uses.
@kevnb I don't think so... Seems more like they share the same business model. Both companies are north american, open capital, profit before quality, etc.
If I own something I made why do I have to give it to you so you can own it.
@343 So we can play it when we want. Buying games isn't the same as going to the theater to watch a movie. We want to own the product the way we own the paintings on our walls or the furniture in our homes. If I want to own the game I'm willing to pay for it. If I want to rent im willing to pay far less. If publishers don't want customers owning their games, customers will go to other publishers. MS learned this lesson, or should have, when they announced the original Xbox One and watched they're gleeming utopian future burn to ashes.
Doesn't solve the problem that last time a company tried to force that, the gaming community pushed back.
To date, the console makers, and publishers seem to have a different idea on how to deliver their content, versus how consumers at large wish to consume it.
@kevnb
No, EA has been promoting this idea since last gen. In fact, I bet if we look back 8-10 years, we'll see them making a similar claim about digital being the main way consumers buy games on consoles.
We don't even have the internet infrastructure for this, it's even worse depending on the country you live in. We're going to need at least a decade for someone to build the telecom infrastructure as well as someone willing to front the money (I think it should be tax funded and government owned).
"That still means we, the consumers, lose our right to own the product."
Yes. Technically we don't 'own' the games already, because they sell us the licence rights to use. But, in pratice, at least in phisycal copies, we own the game. But some companies are already trying to change this, with Activision demanding download two of three games in Spyro Trilogy.
This is the way Publishers want, not it's the best for consumers.
@Rude-ro it's called 5G.
Now you can receive severe brain cancer while streaming the latest E.A. games!
What if the games were somehow a part of some sort of blockchain ledger? That would allow you to actually own your digital products.
It's an idea, but I'm not sure how close he is to the truth. I think the console is here to stay, at least for another 20 or so years, if only as a result of the net infrastructure around the world. Once that has developed to a great point and everybody has easy, superfast connections, maybe everything will be streamed and digital.
Replies(2)After this generation its clear that console manufacturers were too greedy and sold gamers a souped up tablet in the form of a console. That was as powerful as a 2010-2012 High end PC. To the point that console manufacturers were forced to re-release their consoles at launch prices due to its outdated technology. Its clear that the current console business model doesn't work. Besides both PSN and Xbox live are ready to turn into tv apps. It doesn't have to be cloud based but able to download say games and stored them onto external hard drives or usb flash drives. Both of those devices can already be hooked up to smart tvs. So, five years from now or 10 no more than that we will see PSN/Xbox live tv apps 😎. The end of console hardware is near.
"It's clear that the current console business model doesn't work."
Uttered on the same day Sony announced its 500mil ps4 special edition console. When will you learn.
Then in 10 years the technology has to change because (input) lag is still a major problem in online gaming and TV/monitors. And there is also the problem of only digital which means no more selling games, and I don't think gamers are going to be happy about that
virtually all TVs now are smart TVs, especially the 4K ones, so there's no real way around that. plus, you're not forced to use any of those features if you aren't interested....
@ziggurcat
I know they all have them and it's a wasted expensive being forced on customers. Laggy interfaces and built in advertisements are trash, nothing but bad experiences on my end.
The "expense" of the smart features on a TV are about as expensive as installing Linux on a computer.
At this point, I don't think it does anything to add to the expense of the TV.
I agree that the OS is slow, clunky, etc... but that's mainly because it's Android, usually, and Android is kind of garbage.
They all use pretty much the same software within a single manufacturers line, many based off GoogleTV's OS so all the hardware makers really have to do is make their front end for the consumer. Since its developed for their smart TV's, and their non-smart TV's require pretty much the same hardware, there is no reason to not include them since even on a cheap TV, its a more desirable feature than not.
You are not paying anything more to have it. You'd just be paying the same to get less if you brought one without the smart features.
As far as the advertising, I suppose you are talking about the content purchasing option from Fandango or whatever service one TV uses. If you don't connect it to the internet, which you wouldn't have to if you don't use the smart features, then you'll never see them. On the LG, its an icon that doesn't take up any space unless you have the home menu open. Samsung is much the same, but with a cleaner interface.
Why, because it makes consoles irrelevant. Smart Tvs are the best invention for all your favorite multimedia apps are on there, plus they come with a built-in CPU, plus you can view your homemade multimedia via external hard drives or usb flash drives. Some of these tvs have voice command or able to surf the web. It sure makes consoles irrelevant except for those that play games but 5-10 years no more than that gamers will be able to play from PSN/Xbox Live and Nintendo tv apps 😀
Executive VP of strategic growth Matt Bilbey sees streaming-capable smart TVs eliminating traditional consoles in 10 years, discusses "EA moral compass" after Star Wars: Battlefront 2 loot box backlash.
When that time arrives, I will just play my old school systems and games.
So glad I never sold my stuff.
@annoyedgamer - "If everyone buys digital games it will."
even if everyone buys digital games, won't you still need a local hardware to play those digital games? O_o
@annoyedgamer
Everyone buys digital music but we have CD's, cassket tapes and records still. Lastly not everyone will buy digital so thats a nonstarter cause not everyone will do it some wont do it just cause most people are doing it.
There is nothing wrong with digital, its actually the same as physical except they don't let us transfer our license to use the product. I can see them attaching a license to physical media for consoles once enough people move to digital though, they can use piracy as an excuse just like they did on pc.
annoyedgamer, physical vs digital has EXACTLY ZERO to do with running a game locally vs streaming a movie of a remotely running game a short time after controller inputs get sent to it. I don't know where the misconception came from. We've had digital downloads for years, even on consoles, without streaming being in the picture at all. Streaming is an entirely different animal
Digital gaming has nothing to do with streaming, I don't get why there is a large group of people who actually think digital = streaming.
It's like saying "EA's demise will happen, just a matter of when"...
Somehow, I felt good writing that and I can't explain why :P
Sure they do it just points towards money all the time with no thought of anything else.
NOT streaming, nothing where if your Internet goes out for whatever reason you're just screwed. But installed digital games that are playable offline would be great
Single-player and local-coop console games very much are playable offline, whether they were downloaded or installed from discs. There are ways both on PS4 and XO to tell the OS to take the console offline. So it won't even try to log you on to your account online. Then all such games with local licenses will be playable if the internet connection dies.
I'd like crowds in my Fifa not squares.
I cannot wait!
day 1 on my PS4, FIFA!