Talk:Electronic Arts

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Electronic Arts article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find video game sources: "Electronic Arts" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5: 6 months

Electronic Arts received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

This level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Video games Top‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Top

This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Emote (1 participant)
Stardew Valley Guidebook (2 participants)
Train simulator (disambiguation) (8 participants)
Preston Arsement (3 participants)
Jackpot World (3 participants; relisted)
Melee (game terminology) (5 participants; relisted)
Godzilla 2: War of the Monsters (5 participants; relisted)
Godzilla: Monster of Monsters (5 participants; relisted)
Crazy Bus (14 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Featured content candidates

Good article nominations

DYK nominations

Reviews and reassessments

Articles that need...

Companies High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

California: San Francisco Bay Area Mid‑importance

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	San Francisco Bay Area portal This article is supported by San Francisco Bay Area task force (assessed as High-importance).

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

"A Short History of Electronic Arts". Edge. Future plc. 24 August 2006. Archived from the original on April 3, 2013.
"How Electronic Arts stopped being the worst company in America". CNET. June 2, 2015.
"How Electronic Arts Lost Its Souls". Polygon. Retrieved October 15, 2015.
"Players First: The Two Year Trial By Fire To Humanize Electronic Arts". IGN. October 14, 2015. Retrieved October 15, 2015.

Archives

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5

This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

The Secret World F2P?

The article currently says:

Secondly, while The Secret World from Funcom launched as a paid-for game without subscriptions, Funcom had to switch their monetization model to free-to-play to improve their revenues, which further affected EA Partners.

I switch this to:

Secondly, while The Secret World from Funcom launched as a subscription game, Funcom had to switch their monetization model to free-to-play to improve their revenues, which further affected EA Partners.

to more closely match this source [1] relating to something that happened in 2013. The source this mention the free-to-play claim. However AFAICT from both our The Secret World articles and searches, it's simply incorrect. The Secret World did eventually sort of go free-to-play in 2017 when it was relaunched as Secret World Legends but clearly something that happened in 2017 wasn't why EA did something in 2013.

I think this Eurogamer is confusing F2P with B2P. From what I understand, The Secret World was originally using a classically MMO payment model where you had to both buy the game and pay for subscriptions to keep playing i.e. pay to play (not to be confused with pay to win which is a criticism of some F2P games). It abandoned this and went to a model where had to buy the game but subscriptions were optional i.e. buy to play. It was obviously free to play after buying the game but this isn't what free to play means. Even in 2013, while it's true it was something that had mostly impacted online only PC games along with the mobile market, I'm fairly sure it was well established that free to play meant you didn't have to buy the game. (And definitely in the MMO market which pioneered it.)

Unfortunately since it's an analysis of the failures of the EA Partners programme, it might not be so easy to find a simple drop in replacement. But I also wonder whether this means we shouldn't trust this particular Eurogamer article even if they are I assume normally an RS. Did they just use the wrong terminology, or was whoever wrote that genuinely confused about what happened with The Secret World? If it's the former, it's no problem. If it's the latter, this suggests that maybe their analysis for this particular issue might not be correct.

Nil Einne (talk) 13:13, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 7 March 2022

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

"It is the second-largest gaming company in the Americas and Europe by revenue and market capitalization after Activision Blizzard" - Shouldn't it be Microsoft ("It is the second-largest gaming company in the Americas and Europe by revenue and market capitalization after Microsoft") or are we talking about gaming only?

Btw I am aware the Microsoft-Activision Blizzard deal hasn't gone through yet so my confusion is different.

Also, sorry if this demand is not how it's done. I rarely leave feedback on wikipedia. 178.238.165.69 (talk) 17:29, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think it talks about companies whose primary business is video games, which would exclude Microsoft. However, the source used to verify this claim does not actually contain it; it merely compares financial reports of select public video game companies. I chose to remove the sentence instead. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 17:37, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 18 November 2022

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change "Maitland" to "Orlando" for EA Sport Tiburon as the physical location has recently changed. 97.100.162.61 (talk) 01:58, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. —Sirdog (talk) 04:08, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 4 March 2023

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Their company information should list they refuse to answer any complaint about their products and has no user support. They have a chat forum where they expect other users to answer questions and ban any post or user they find any displeasure with. 2601:548:8201:6F30:2250:67C4:8149:A866 (talk) 23:38, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. M.Bitton (talk) 23:45, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

EA's PC client has changed from Origin to the EA app

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The current phrasing in the second paragraph is "Their desktop titles appear on self-developed Origin, an online gaming digital distribution platform for PCs and a direct competitor to Valve's Steam and Epic Games' Store."

I'd suggest refining to: "EA's desktop PC titles appear on their self-developed EA app, an online digital distribution platform for Windows PCs." 24.130.109.30 (talk) 23:59, 27 November 2023 (UTC) Done Modified lead appropriately. --Masem (t) 02:12, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]