Gamer Chronicles

When Gaming Companies Go Rogue: A Look at Scandals, Snafus, and WTF Moments

• Aden • Episode 4

Share episode

Welcome to Game of Chronicles, where Aden dives into the gaming industry's most jaw-dropping controversies. From Cyberpunk 2077's disastrous launch to No Man’s Sky’s redemptive rise, we’re unpacking some of the biggest screw-ups. We’ll explore Black Ops 6’s controversial “pay-for-sound” feature, Battlefront II’s pay-to-win loot boxes, and Microsoft’s infamous Xbox One always-online debacle.

This episode tackles how gaming giants have pushed boundaries, sometimes at the expense of player trust, and the impact of corporate strategies, like Embracer Group’s acquisition spree and EA’s track record of studio closures. We also discuss Nintendo’s relentless IP enforcement, how Unity’s model change alienated indie devs, and the unforgettable “Red Ring of Death” hardware fail. Each story reveals how gamers pushed back, influencing the industry’s future with a mix of humor and insight.

Join us as we call out the BS, cheer for the wins, and explore the wild west of corporate gaming decisions—highlighting what these controversies mean for players and developers alike.

Drop us a Message

Make sure to subscribe, leave a review, and follow us on

Apple Podcasts
Spotify
X (Formally Twitter)
BlueSky
Discord

------- Intro ------  0:00


Welcome to Game of Chronicles, the podcast where pixels tell stories and gamers become legends. I'm your host, Aden. And today I'll be guiding you through some of the most controversial things that have happened in the gaming industry. 


 ------ Call of Duty Black Ops ------  0:40


So we all remember the horse armor Bethesda introduced in Skyrim, basically took the corporate greed of videogame companies to a whole new level. And you would think people would have learned. But Black Ops six released on Friday and it's actually not a bad call of duty game. I've been playing it and it's pretty good considering how much I paid for it because I didn't pay anything. Technically, I didn't pay anything because it's on Game Pass, so you can play it too, practically for free if you're already paying for a game pass subscription. I do know people say that you're paying for something, but you're paid for the game pass subscription for different games and this one just happens to be included. So if you want to play Call of Duty Black Ops, six for Free Game Pass, just do it. Play it. It's actually a pretty good game considering you don't pay the £80 or whatever silly money it is these days. So what is Black Ops six? Or should I say Activision done this time? That makes them more greedy than usual because they are extremely greedy bastards. As we know, Activision is one of the worst. So here's what they've done. They have introduced a $20 audio feature developed with Embody, which has sparked a notable pay to win controversy. The feature, known as the Enhanced Phone mode, uses head related transfer function technology to improve spatial audio by adjusting sound based on each user's unique ear shape. This personalization claims to enhance the directional accuracy of in-game sounds, giving players an auditory edge while the basic spatial audio feature is free for all players. The personalized profile option Tailored to individual physiology requires a paid subscription. responses on this have been mixed. While some argue that the feature provides an unfair advantage, as sound cues are critical in online play for first person shooters where accurate audio can significantly influence gameplay. Others, however, view it compared to premium audio upgrades and other games like Dolby Atmos, which are generally accepted without similar controversy. The concern is that by putting enhanced audio behind a paywall, Activision may have introduce a feature that subtly shifts gameplay balance in favor of those who can pay for it. This controversy highlights broader questions about monetizing competitive advantages in games. For many players, cosmetic only microtransactions are more acceptable, while paid competitive boosts risk harming the game's integrity. The backlash against Black Ops six audio feature reflects this concern as players worry about setting a precedent for future's pay to win performance boosts in competitive titles. Because as you all know, in games, it's all about the footsteps. So you can hear what direction they're coming from. A to be fair, while I do get that people have different ear shapes, I would find it quite bizarre if all they did was say, This is your ear shape, so this sound is a bit better. It's more probably. Let's just give them an advantage, but not tell them so that everyone who has better sound might have that advantage. 


 ------ Watchdogs ------  3:55


next we go on to looking at some promises that weren't kept for a lot of games. Start with the watchdogs downgrade. I think Ubisoft appears quite a few times on this list. So does he. You know what? They're all fucking greedy. They all appear here because they only care about one thing. Ubisoft Watchdogs, which was first unveiled at E3 2012. So this was, you know, 12 years ago captivated audiences with high end graphics and smooth, futuristic gameplay. I do remember this trailer, and it looked incredible. I went out to buy a new GPU when I saw this because it's like we need to be able to play this game when it comes out because it might be as demanding as some of the Top End games now. 

the final game released in 2014 with noticeably downgraded visuals and gameplay fidelity, which left many fans disappointed. The core of the issues was that Watch Dogs was initially shown running on an exceptionally powerful PC, which Ubisoft later admitted wasn't representative of the actual consoles that would support the game, especially the new PS4 and Xbox One platforms that were still in development at the time. This resulted in a game that was visually and technically different from the ones fans were led to expect. The backlash from Watch Dogs taught Ubisoft valuable lessons about transparency in games marketing. CEO Yavuz Guillemot stated that following this experience, Ubisoft shifted its marketing approach to ensure that trailers better reflected the capabilities of target platforms, minimizing the risks of disappointing fans due to unmet expectations. Additional examples of similar marketing to release mismatches include Anthem and Aliens. For those of you who don't remember as well, Killzone two and as well as aliens, Colonial Marines. all these games had trailers, showcasting impressive visuals and innovative mechanics that were not fully realized in the final product, leading to similar criticisms of misleading marketing. These cases emphasize the importance of managing players expectations and reflect how trailers and disclaimers can set realistic expectations and help build trust with the gaming community. It's something that Ubisoft has definitely not done, is being able to build trust with the gaming community. 


 ------ No Man's Sky ------  6:25


Another one that decided to break everyone's trust was No Man's Sky. And one of the most challenging launches, probably if not in recent, but in all gaming history. It was originally released in 2016 and the game had missed many of its advertised features, like multiplayer and diverse ecosystems. You know what? We could have lived without the multiplayer, but the rest of it was unforgivable. This led to intense backlash with fans feeling misled due to marketing that promised a highly interactive, exploration driven universe. Some of the fans responses turned hostile, including harassment and even death threats directed at Halo Games Despite all of this, the studio committed to rebuilding its reputation by releasing significant updates to eventually turn No Mans's Sky into a game closer to what was initially promised. starting with the Foundation update In 2016, Halo games consistently expanded the game's features, introducing multiplayer, improved base building and new gameplay mechanics. Major updates like Next, Beyond and Origins transformed the game from its bare bones launch state into an expansive universe with richer environments and new player interactions.As  of 2024, the game includes around 30 major updates, making no man's sky nearly unrecognizable compared to its initial release and earning its praise as one of gaming's best redemption stories. This is one of the few cases where the journey of post-launch improvement highlights how critical community support and sustained developer dedication are for a Games revival. Because few games managed to recover like No Man's Sky did and Hello games have to take my hat off to them. Their commitment to its player base redefined the title and attracted a thriving community and set a standard for post-launch recovery in the gaming industry. The issue with this is that obviously these examples illustrate while ambition and marketing can generate initial excitement, you need to balance it with an achievable promise because it's vital to maintaining long term player trust and support. But games like No Man's Sky do demonstrate that genuine continued effort can rebuild reputations even after a rocky start. 


 ------ Cyberpunk 2077 ------  8:53


and this perfectly goes into the next segment, Which is a gaming company that actually released pretty much a broken game, shockingly broken. So the launch of Cyberpunk 2077, we all remember It was the most hyped game of 2020 released in December of that year, and it became probably the most infamous in gaming just after significant bugs and performance issues, especially on last gen consoles such as the PlayStation four and Xbox One. Despite generating excitement as one of the most anticipated RPGs probably for the decade, I would say after the Witcher three, the game's unstable state with crashes, visual glitches and gameplay affecting bugs led to a major backlash. And I remember I had this game on PC and it was okay When I say okay, It was like mediocre at best. Friends of mine who had it on their PlayStations and Xboxes were not happy because it ran absolutely terrible. And because of this, the issues were severe enough that Sony actually removed Cyberpunk 2077 from the PlayStation store and CD Projekt Red offered refunds to unhappy customers, ultimately costing the studio over $50 million in returns and lost sales. So CD Projekt red response included several hot fixes and patches over the following months to stabilize the game, which kind of helped their reputation. There was also an apology issued by the CEO at the time. many players felt the initial disappointment had already impacted the game's legacy. And by mid 2021, the major updates had made the game more playable. And the introduction of Phantom Liberty as well as the cyberpunk series on Netflix really helped this then take off the ground again. And I'm glad it did because CD Projekt Red, despite making this huge fuck up, is a company that makes good games. I won't say that they're the best company towards their employees or any of that that unfortunately that is just one of these things that is happening in the gaming industry, which is not okay. But they have made some good games and I hope they continue to do that and also treat their employees how they should be treated. 


 ------ Xbox One DRM ------  11:15


Right. Moving on to Microsoft, and they probably say, what did Microsoft do? What didn't they do? So if all of you remember the famous Xbox One always on DRM, they announced the Xbox One in 2013 and it came with strict DRM. For those of you don't know what DRM is. Digital rights management policies included requirement for a 24 hour online check in to verify game licenses. This meant that players who did not have consistent Internet access couldn't use the console and traditional practices like game borrowing or reselling were basically non-existent. The public reaction was so swift and overwhelmingly negative, with both players and the media criticizing Microsoft's perceived overreach on consumer rights. This was just a ploy for Microsoft, again, to try and get more money because they couldn't get enough money. They're not one of the top ten companies in the world who don't have enough money. They just need more of it, of course. But silver lining, the incident did mark a turning point for digital rights in gaming. Since then, c have been more mindful of maintaining offline functionality and respecting physical media, even as digital and cloud gaming become more prominent. Microsoft's initial vision of an always connected gaming ecosystem. While may be more acceptable today with cloud gaming innovations provided, it enhances the experience with clear benefits like faster load times and seamless multiplayer integration. The Xbox One controversy remains a strong example of how critical player feedback and clear messaging are when introducing major changes to gaming practices. Do not piss gamers is off. Okay, because we want to give our money for something that we will enjoy. But if you start to piss us off, we will not give you that money. I'll bet you a lot of people went from Xbox to PlayStation as soon as they just read that and have never looked back. 


 ------ Suicide Squad Kills the Justice League ------  13:20


Now, this next one rubs me the wrong way because I can't believe I bought this fucking game. Someone convinced me to buy this game because they were buying it so I could cross play with them. And it was. Suicide Squad kills the Justice League for Suicide Squad kills the Justice League. Rocksteady. decision to incorporate live service elements, including a battle pass, drew considerable backlash from fans. So for those of you who don't know, Rocksteady was known for its Batman Arkham series, Incredible series, apart from One fuck up, which I believe was the porting of Batman Arkham Knight onto the PC, which caused a huge backlash. But anyway, that's all part of this. I digress. from making the Arkham series, they then obviously did this live service which showcased gameplay that emphasized seasonal updates, had a cosmetic only battle pass, and required players to remain online even in single player mode. Again, with this online bullshit that nobody wants to do. Of course, many fans expressed frustration in this, and this response stemmed from concerns that these live service elements might compromise a narrative driven experience. Rockstea is celebrated for shifting focus towards monetization rather than story quality, and I can tell you it absolutely did because this game was utter shit. The Battle Pass and Suicide Squad allowed players to earn new cosmetic items through free and premium tiers with no impact on gameplay performance. So you pay this much money for a game that's trying to be like Fortnite, which is free as cosmetics if you want to buy it. this drives me insane when these companies do it. This is bullshit. However, the battle pass model paired with an always online requirement, had led fans to worry about the long term accessibility as similar to live service games such as Babylon's Fall, Marvel's Avengers and heaven forbid we shall not forget Concord on the PlayStation five, which appeared as quickly as it disappeared. And these were all shut down soon after release due to low engagement, obviously leaving fans concerned about suicide squad's future viability if it didn't perform well. And to be fair, they are releasing new content, but it's a dead game. Pretty much. They've lost money on it. So I don't think it's going to continue for long because what this controversy does is highlights a broader debate on the appropriateness of battle passes and live service mechanics in narrative driven games not like Fortnite or Warzone, where you drop down somewhere and attack a bunch of people. This is literally supposed to be a single player game or co-op game with a life service. It just doesn't work because people expect this kind of stuff in competitive multiplayer titles, not in single player or story focused games. Rocksteady, however, made the huge mistake of defending the model as necessary for maintaining cross-platform production and customization. If Rocksteady doesn't sort this shit out, they are absolutely going to be screwed because they were a great gaming company. hopefully this isn't their last game. Hopefully the games they release next are going to be good. Let's just hope for that. 


 ------ Diablo Immortal & Diablo 4 ------  16:45


So moving on again, it is Activision and but this time Activision Blizzard, which is the Diablo Immortal and Diablo four Season one. If all of you remember when Blizzard announced Diablo Immortal on stage, there was a huge backlash where people were bullying them on stage, which I thought was absolutely brilliant. And not only was that the backlash, it also centered on its heavy reliance on micro-transactions, because how else would they make money on a free game, especially around its legendary chests, which enabled players to unlock powerful items essential for high level gameplay. Many players criticized these as pay to win due to the low of obtaining top tier items without significant spending. Calculations by fans suggested it could cost thousands of dollars to max out a character turning progression into a financial burden rather than a reward for gameplay. This pay to win model led to Diablo Immortal being banned in Belgium and the Netherlands, which laws classify such mechanics as gambling Of course, Blizzard tried to defend these choices, arguing that paid items are optional, but fans felt these claims overlooked how chord progression could be strongly impacted by paid options. at least some countries have stance to ban this shit. While as in Diablo four's first season, which made me really mad because I enjoyed Diablo four when it came out. The season of the Malignant, they introduced a major patch that changed gameplay dynamics significantly. It was a good game. You released a good game. People enjoy the game and then you absolutely fucked it up. This is the opposite of what everyone else is doing. You actually released a decent game patch 1.1.0 included wide spread class nerfs, longer cooldown for popular abilities and adjustments that just increase the difficulty of in-game activities such as nightmare dungeons. Many fans found that these changes were frustrating and reduced the power of survivability of their built. So where I played as the rogue and I was enjoying the rogue, this absolutely fucked my class up. the response was so intense. Again, like I said, don't fuck with gamers, that Players began review bombing the game on Metacritic, where its score dropped drastically in response to this perceived fan dampening adjustment. development team did acknowledge the backlash and held a livestream to discuss players concerns. Associate game director Joe  Purpura and game director Joe Shelley explained that the intent was to prevent overpowered builds from dominating gameplay, But they admitted that reducing player power was ultimately detrimental to the player experience. To address these concerns, blizzard released hot fixes to retune certain aspects of the game, promising that future patches would avoid similar missteps. I don't understand why. Because if you've ever played Diablo, it isn't. You can go to a place where it's player versus player, but it's mostly player versus environment and you can play it single player. It's fine to play a single player if you want to. It is a good game that you can play single player or you can join someone. It doesn't matter. don't know if they've recovered yet, but I haven't played it since season two and a lot of people haven't picked it up that I know since then either. So I don't know if they've picked up again. I can't really comment from there. I played season one and two and then I was just like I gave up because it's just, you know, it's not as enjoyable as it was when it first came out. 


 ------ Skull & Bones ------  20:40


Of course, the next one is another Ubisoft controversy with its Skull and Bones. I've already mentioned this on another episode. Skull and Bones faced extensive delays and challenges, partly due to an agreement with the Singaporean Government. It was initially launched as a project by Ubisoft, Singapore after Assassin's Creed for Black Flag. Skull and Bones was intended to showcase the studio's naval combat expertise. However, this development shifted due to mismanagement, leadership changes and issues related to the studio's inexperience with complex projects. And to make things worse. Right. Which is why they had to absolutely make Skull and Bones. because Ubisoft signed a deal with the Singaporean government, which provided significant financial subsidies in exchange for Ubisoft producing and launching an original IP from Singapore. And this commitment meant that Ubisoft could not cancel Skull and Bones despite its troubled development. Many former developers claim that the game might have been cancelled at a different studio without such contractual obligation. So yeah, if you're going to commit to a project with a government sign up for something, you know what you're doing. And this was not that. And they really, really fucked it because the game is out now and it's mediocre at best and people are expecting a black flag kind of continuation with the same mechanics. And they did not do that. And they had many years to do that and they really didn't. And the situation has sparked debate over public financing and game development. On one hand, government support provides resources to ambitious projects, But it may also impose obligations that can stifle creative flexibility. This has led some to argue that regular progress reports and performance reviews should accompany public funding, especially for delayed projects to ensure transparency and accountability. In Ubisoft's case, the commitment has turned Skull and Bones into a must release title regardless of the development, difficulties and quality. 


 ------ Xbox 360 RROD ------  22:50


not always just about the software and the games. It's about the gaming consoles themselves. Very famously, the Xbox three sixties read Ring of Death code named RROD. This was marked by three red lights on the consoles power ring and became one of the biggest hardware failures in gaming history. Reports of the red ring of death began surfacing soon after the console's 2005 release, with many users experience frequent overheating that led to complete system failure. At its peak, up to 

54% of early Xbox 360 consoles were estimated to be affected. In this case, Microsoft did the right thing and they responded by allocating a staggering $1.15 billion to cover an extended three year warranty, which included free repairs and even console replacements. The company also absorbed the cost of shipping and repair logistics, making it clear that they were committed to addressing the problem in scale. So this was good because even former executive at Xbox, Peter Moore, said that the decision to address this was crucial to maintaining customer trust and potentially saving the Xbox brand itself. And at this time, it showed Microsoft's strong commitment to consumer satisfaction. And you could argue that it actually played a role in helping Xbox retain a loyal user base despite the issue. Because, you know, if your console bricked, you could send it to Microsoft and they'd just send you a new one or repair it. And I did know a few people who went through this. It did take a long time. That was the only problem. But they did get a new console. and this is why it's important treat your consumers right, because it shows that there was a there was trust here and people who possibly didn't care about that Xbox One DRM problem stayed with Xbox because of this. What this event did show was that the risk associated with rushing hardware releases for profit could have been mitigated if additional testing had been done for companies in the highly competitive console market. It emphasizes the importance of rigorous quality control to prevent costly repairs and its reputation from being damaged in the long term. 


 ------ Playstation 5 Thermocreep ------  25:10


And speaking of consoles going up Shits Creek. Some of you might not have heard of this. Some of you might have suffered. It is the PlayStation five thermal paste creep. So the PlayStation five uses liquid metal for CPU cooling as a high performance alternative to thermal paste. It has raised durability concerns due to a phenomenon known as thermal paste creep. this issue can occur if the liquid metal leaks or shifts over time and is especially prevalent in consoles that are placed vertically. Some repair technicians have noticed that this shift could increase the risk of overheating or motherboard damage in affected consoles. one of the reasons I don't use metal thermal paste is because I'll be honest, I'm just too scared to use it. It is probably the best solution to dissipating heat. But if something goes wrong and it leaks into one of the wrong places, it's going to short circuit my motherboard and then everything is fucked. I'd rather just use normal thermal paste and just clean it off every year or something and re-seat the cooling unit. this problem is not too widespread though, and the potential solution is just to your PlayStation in a horizontal position. Easier said than done because the PlayStation is unbelievably big, is huge, is monstrous. It is just the new consoles. Both the Xbox and the PlayStation are just huge. They'r the size of PCs. So to keep it horizontal, you have to have a lot of space. 

So for those of you who are in game development, you know, that unity was one of the best game engines you could use. And their price model was pretty good as well, until their controversial fee per install model was introduced in September 2023, which of course quickly faced backlash from developers due to concerns over financial viability and sustainability, especially for indie and free to play titles. The policy stipulated that developers would be charged a fee for each game install after certain revenue and install thresholds were met, which sparked worry, especially among indie studios, which feared that its costs could spiral if their games, especially those offered on subscription services or given away for free, reached high install numbers.many indie developers voiced that the model unfairly penalized successful games and risks creating unmanageable financial burdens if a game gained popularity unexpectedly. Some developers also expressed concerns about potential abuses, such as malicious, repeated installs, artificially inflating fees in response to the backlash. Unity clarified that charity bundles would be exempt from fees and that fraud detection practices would be employed to limit fee manipulation. although these assurances did little to calm developers. Of course they didn't, because I said this on the last one. You know, luckily there are a lot of other ones that people can use because I mentioned this in the news when Unity was trying to come back from this. They basically fucked off so many people that they're now crawling back on their hands and knees. and of course, this fallout saw several developers pledging to switch engines considering  alternatives like Unreal Engine, especially as epic Games offered grants and supports to ease transitions. One thing I have to say is Epic Games did quite a good job at looking after developers for some time. Don't know if they still do it, but for time when they were trying to beat steam, they actually did look after developers quite well. So hats off to them for that. 


 ------ Overwatch 2 Replaces Overwatch 1 ------  28:55


Of course, we can't keep Activision off the list. They're still on it. Where Overwatch replaces Overwatch. So this is another blizzard one. So when Blizzard launched Overwatch two in October of 2022, didn't overwatch one going. What it did instead was fully replaced the original one which upset fans who are attached to the first game's content and had invested in it as a paid product. Overwatch one and overwatch two were actually different enough from each other to be their own games. And they did this. Blizzard framed overwatch two as a replacement for the current low servers of the original, leaving players with no option to access any of the original overwatch gameplay. Fans criticized the move, arguing that it eroded trust. Yeah, because it's Blizzard Activision. They're fucking dicks. Especially as the new game introduced a free to play model. So they had paid for overwatch and literally got absolutely fucked because went free to play. And people who had paid for stuff basically were like, What's going on? Critics felt that Blizzard should have allowed both games to coexist, respecting players, investments and longstanding loyalty. And they should have both games would have been popular. It's so annoying. If you have loyal customers, they will keep coming back. They'll keep giving you money. But if you piss them off like this, one day they're just going to stop. And then your company goes downhill and you have to make even more layoffs, which is horrible for the people who are working on these projects. So Blizzard did, however, attempt to ease the transition by allowing players to carry over current season unopened loot boxes from overwatch one to overwatch two. So if you would just open some loot boxes before Overwatch two came out, you're shit out of luck and you lost your hard earned money that. 


 ------ Nintendo Sues Palworld ------  31:00


we don't talk about Nintendo very often, but here they are and they are suing. Pocket Pair Nintendo's recent lawsuit against the palworld developer pocket pair revolves around patent infringement. you'd think it would be for either the visual or character similarities. But it was filed in the Tokyo District Court, which specifically cites patents related to game mechanics rather than copyrights or trademarks. So while Nintendo and the Pokémon company have not fully disclosed the patents involved, experts believe the case centers around patented gameplay elements that allow characters to be caught or interacted with in an open world setting. So this patent was initially filed in Japan in December 2021, and similar patents in the US were filed in 2023. This legal move aligns with Nintendo's historic approach to IP enforcement, which is often seen as strict and unyielding. Analysts believe Nintendo may aim to set legal precedent to dissuade other developers from using similar mechanics. In response pocket, Perez voiced concerns that the lawsuit diverts critical resources from game development to legal defense, which can be challenging for a smaller studio. The issue is if Nintendo succeeds, the ruling could deter other developers from creating similar gameplay systems, raising concerns among indie developers about innovation limits in genres involving creature interactions and capture mechanics. This also brings about the patenting of the Nemesis system. Can't remember who patented that. company that made Shadow Mordor was at Warner Brothers games and they painted a system that no one else can use and they haven't released a game since 2017, so they're not even using it. And they painted it. Something that they're not even using. It is annoying. It's terrible that they are doing this because Pal World and Pokémon are different from each other. Yes, I know there are similarities there, but people who love Pokémon, love Pokémon, I love Pokémon and the like Pal world. Why can't both just coexist? I will still pay for the Pokémon games. It's not that you're not going to get my money or anyone else's, but again, this is just one of these things because they also patented the game mechanics in the new Zelda game that lets you build on the fly. It's quite clever, but to incorporate those mechanics in the game would be extremely expensive and nobody is going to do it While does one is as basic as this? People can start patented things that are really silly like this. 


 ------ Large Companies Destroying Smaller Ones ------  33:35


And of course, we've got the act of buying companies and then destroying them. So some of you may not have heard of them. The Embracer groups. aggressive acquisition spree has placed it at the centre of debates around industry consolidation and its impact on creativity and competition. they bought major studios and IP such as Gearbox Crystal Dynamics, and they quickly tried to expand their portfolio across gaming And  this is so that they could get a 2 billion investment deal from, I think it was Saudi Arabia. And the deal collapsed, forcing embracer into a costly restructuring process, which included closing studios, selling assets and laying off thousands of employees. A, of course, they're not the only ones who do this. A very famous one, Electronic Arts, which has a reputation for acquiring and subsequently closing numerous studios dotted with Origin Systems known for the Ultima RPG Series, which was acquired in 1992 by EA and was dissolved in 2004 after poor reception of Ultima nine and EA's shifting priorities to online gaming this one still sore Westwood Studios, famed for its command and Conquer series Red Alert. One of the best war strategy games ever made and was acquired in 1998 and shut by 2003. And this was mainly due to EA pushing westwood to meet corporate expectations. Another one that is sore Bullfrog production, which made theme hospital and theme park World faced similar fate when EA absorbed the studio in 1995 and shut them down by 2001. Another one. Pandemic Studios celebrated for Star Wars Battlefront, which was acquired in 2007, again closed in 2009. EA's closure of visceral games in 2017, even though Dead Space was a success. EA had pushed for micro transactions really hard in Dead three, which led to critical decline. So basically EA just wanted more money. They weren't getting it, so they shut the company down. The only one. So far that I know is surviving with some trouble is BioWare. And this next game of Dragon Age, the Vale Guard has to do well because otherwise BioWare will be another one that is absolutely fucked. So I'm hoping comes out at the end of October. I love Dragon Age. Definitely going to get this game and I really hope it's good I hope BioWare do well in this because they've had too many fuck ups. Not to be shut by EA so it would be a disaster if BioWare gets shut down. 


 ------ EA Loot Boxes ------  36:30


And finally, the EA loot Box controversy, so their implementation of loot boxes in Star Wars Battlefront two became a turning point for in-game monetization as players criticized the system for resembling gambling. Loot boxes were tied to player's progression, leading many to feel that purchasing them provided a significant in-game advantage, which sparked outrage over its pay to win nature. Controversy pushed several governments, including those in Belgium and the Netherlands, to investigate loot boxes under gambling laws, prompting EA to eventually remove them from Battlefront two, and rework its monetization approach. This backlash fueled industry wide challenges and leading companies to adopt more transparent monetization methods, often focusing on cosmetic only purchases rather than game altering loot boxes. The incident highlighted the ethical questions surrounding loot boxes, particularly concerning younger players, and led to broader conversations about regulatory measures to protect consumers from potentially addictive spending mechanics. So luckily EA really fucked it with Battlefront two that they wanted people to pay to win, that governments got involved and called it gambling. in a way we're lucky because the years corporate greed led to this. So lucky from that perspective. But unfortunately loot boxes still do exist. And it's fine if they're cosmetic only it's fine. People can buy them to look cool and that's okay. 


 ------ Outro ------  38:10


So thanks for sticking around. As we dragged gaming giants through the mud from EA's Loot Box Genius in Battlefront two to the chaos of Cyberpunk 2077's epic flop and Nintendo's IP's Death Grip. We've seen every flavor of corporate insanity, but hey, game is Westworld. Da aren't going anywhere soon. As long as there are gamers with wallets and companies with big ideas we'll be here to call out the bullshit and cheer for the wins. As always, if you've enjoyed today's show and want to hear more about the weird, wonderful and downright strange games out there, make sure to subscribe or leave a review. And you know, please hit us up on social media. I've put links in the description below and subscribe on the podcast. We are on many platforms. I'd love to hear what games you're playing or avoiding these days, so I'll catch up in the next episode and see what fresh chaos awaits.