It is no secret that Electronic Arts (EA) is one of the world’s largest third party publishers, ranking 8th on the list of largest software companies in the world with a net annual revenue of US $4.02 billion in the fiscal year 2008. EA’s success can be attributed to its acquisition of several successful developers, acquiring sports licenses under its EA Sports label, games based on popular movie licenses, and games from long-running franchises like Road Rash, Need for Speed, Medal of Honor, The Sims, Command & Conquer, and Battlefield.

However it was not all success for EA Games, which had its fair share of failure both with its closing down of acquired developer studios and with the gaming community’s general loss of confidence in EA’s ability to develop quality games. A lot of people have expressed their frustration by branding the company as the “Evil Empire of the gaming industry,” whose sole purpose is to monopolize the industry by buying out small developing studios, only to shut them down and make a profit on their already existing games. A prime example is the 2003 closing down of Las Vegas developer Westwood Studios, which was acquired by EA in 1998. Fans complained that EA’s next C&C game, Command and Conquer: Generals, didn’t feel the same in its gameplay and were disappointed by the lack of support given to its multiplayer component.

In a surprising announcement on the final day of the DICE summit in early 2008, Electronic Arts CEO John Riccitiello admitted, to the disbelief of a lot of people, that he was very sorry about what happened to Bullfrog, Westwood and Origin Systems, three developers that were once acquired and later disbanded by EA:

“We at EA blew it, and to a degree I was involved in these things, so I blew it. When I talked to the creators that populated these companies at the time, they felt like they were buried and stifled. The command and conquer model doesn’t work. If you think you’re going to buy a developer and put your name on the label . . . you’re making a profound mistake.”


Riccitiello continued to explain, “Creative teams can be thought of as flowers in a hothouse—you move the temperature up or down a few degrees and the flowers will die.” Riccitiello blames EA’s choice to force its management structure on the acquired developer, which he says seriously hampered their creative freedom. But these days, even as EA and its competitors swallow up more and more developers in the race towards consolidation, he thinks things are working out right with companies like Bioware and Maxis, who have been allowed to keep their corporate culture.

The good news out of all this negativity is that EA promises to turn a new leaf. By promising that it won’t happen again and that they had learned from their mistakes, and especially by giving developers the ability to keep their corporate culture, it seems that they are on the right track.

Their promise for change has not gone unnoticed, with recent reports that Doug Lombardi, Marketing VP of independent developer Valve, the company that brought us "Half-Life” and “Counter-Strike,” has announced that, should the company be approached with a buyout offer, he would be “happy to have that conversation.” Lombardi further explained describing the relationship between EA and Valve as “really good.” Furthermore, Tom Frisina, Vice President and General Manager, EA Partners, commented on the future of Half-Life and Counter-Strike saying:

“At EA Partners, our mandate is to seek out the world’s top studios and game franchises, build partnerships, empower the development teams and help get these great games to more people in more countries than ever before. We consider Half-Life and Counter-Strike to be two of the best game franchises of all time [...] We could not be more excited to have the opportunity to help deliver these outstanding games to players around the globe.”


“EA is the worldwide leader in bringing best of breed games, for all platforms, to market,” said Gabe Newell, Valve’s founder and president. “Valve games have sold over 18 million units at retail since Half-Life shipped in November 1998. By combining EA’s unparalleled operation structure and distribution channel with Valve’s award-winning development teams and games community, we’ve established an awesome combination for delivering great products to console and PC gamers around the world.”

Reports of the possible buyout received a lot of mixed responses; some suggested that it will only lead to the further growth and development of Valve’s franchises, while others strongly believe, based on EA’s history, that if Valve goes through with it, it will sentence its franchises to its death and lead to the closure of Valve.

So is it all about the final number or has Electronic Arts made a change for the better? We want to know what you think, so join the discussion in our forums and share your opinion.