Global Conflict

*sigh* http://pixelenemy.com/report-ea-forced- ... e-shelves/

At least they really are working on things.

Except for Duke Nukem Forever every game is rushed to the market.

Hgx wrote:

AND THE WINNER!!!
FOR THIS YEAR'S WORST COMPANY GOES TOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

My favourite is still BP.

Jokerle wrote:Except for Duke Nukem Forever every game is rushed to the market.

Still waitin' for ma starcraft: Ghost

Evil_Jocey wrote:

Hgx wrote:

AND THE WINNER!!!
FOR THIS YEAR'S WORST COMPANY GOES TOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

My favourite is still BP.

BP is not a horrible company. Greedy, yes. Horrible, no. It's actually quite a good company and looks after most of it's employees very well.

The QA guy doesn't answer the question. Only looking for sympathy.
I dont care about the bugs they guy is asking about.
But are you really telling me they played this game for 3 hours and not the client nor the server crashed once and they said "good, its ready"?
No f*ing way.

Either this QA team sucked really bad, or nobody gave a F about them.
In both cases id be ashamed to be a part of it.

QA is to test bugs and report them, if they get fixed is up tot the developer. Ofcourse you can blame EA here but I think DICE bloody well knows they need to release a game 2 years after BF3 since they started right after BF3 launched. As someone on MHQ pointed out this is the problem:

the first thing is "the corporate culture is to keep adding things until the last minute"

That is the real problem, no matter when DICE releases, they'll add crap (or finish assets) until the last minute, making proper QA impossible, it's just how DICE rolls, making a bug free release or patch nearly impossible until they change their attitude.

A systemic problem penetrating the whole company, but especially the management responsible

_____
for BP:
I would say greedy is still horrible, just look how they made costcutting decisions for the oilplatforms in Mexico. I wouldnt say that was really safe for the workers.

If not for the attitude of DICE we would have a game that is much less Battlefield.
Less gadgets, less weapons, less maps, less everything. Not sure if I want that.

Sure, they can also do the Blizzard thing and delay the game multiple times, or say 'when its done'.
Which is an insane luxury, btw.

I dont really blame them for what they do.

Does BP actually "own" any platforms in GoM? I think they are all chartered, owned by other companies. BP is also a PITA about safety, I can't see BP dropping safety budgets to keep down costs, I'd like to see a source for that. Regarding greed, every company on that scale is greedy and wants more money, but I wouldn't go to the level of calling them evil. BP gets a lot of flak for the Deepwater Horizon incident, but that was barely their fault. They had ONE BP employee on that rig, that was NOT their fault.

If you want an "Evil" oil company, look at Halliburton.

Foxconn is my personal favourite.

No one is calling them evil? Of course companies want to make money
Source
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/01/ ... SX20110105
And yes BP is not the only one to blame but still the main responsible according to the reports and investigations.

That's a fair source, but I think a lot of blame is being thrown BPs way after the fact mainly because of the massive "It's British Petroleum's Fault" that was being thrown around by politicians, the media, and the other companies involved at the time. I've worked on BP projects in the past, and know of others who have done the same, and BP is quite often so "Safety concerned" it's ridiculous. In saying that, everything I've done has been in the UK/North Sea sector, where safety is a much bigger concern across the board. I'm surprised to see that their safety budget in particular was cut though. I'd have imagined it was more of a general budget cut that had a lower level manager going "we can save money by cutting safety". Or perhaps it was more of a "work smarter not harder" kind of deal. Stop with the useless crap that gets in the way and focus on the actual issues kind of deal, but again that could have been some lower level guy misinterpreting. Regardless, I don't see how a BP safety budget cut factored into a 3rd party facility with hardly any BP personnel on board. They should have had their own safety sorted out.

Considering Halliburtons crap work, and Transoceans "top-notch" team who should have stopped the job (they had that power), BP gets too much of the blame. Are they blameless? No. But they get waaaay to much flak (and frak anyone who ever called them "British Petroleum". They are BP.). I think the overall moral of the story though is that all large oil companies are assholes.

I think we can safely assume that all mentioned companies are still worse than EA when singled out.

Poisoning the environment to such a degree is still worse than being a game developer dick.