Analyst: Canceling Tiberium hurt EA's credibility

EA is all that is wonderful. EA is the light, the warmth, and the heart of this world. EA can do no wrong.

Shit happens. How many random people even knew about this title that weren't hovering over sites like this one? And even here, it was only mentioned a handful of times.

Any credibility issue this causes is probably just for people who can't stand EA to begin with and like piling stuff on.

Well at least there's one less game out there competing for my money. It's probably for the best, if it was going to be a good game it wouldn't have gotten canceled.

aw, there, there EA.

just buy Tecmo, Square-Enix and maybe half of SCEA then you'll feel a little better. :D

I guess the fewer crappy games, the more better games? I did not know much about Tiberium, and do not know if it was gonna be good, but canceling a good game would have been stupid, and canceling a bad game is not a bad idea. Cut your losses and move on, or go buy somebody.

Pachter actually knows the video games business, the other talking head doesn't. Pachter realizes that sometimes games need to be cancelled and that releasing a terrible game can do a lot more harm to credibility than cancelling one.

What's Tiberium?

A game that takes place in a time where there is a war for an alternative new fuel named "tiberium". Aliens or creatures of some sort are involved in the shenanigans.

My opinion of EA hasn't changed I do not dislike them but games that come out under their branch sometimes do disappoint me IE army of two I loved the game but it was simply to short.

I dunno, i was kinda looking for forward to this game. But if it was cancelled, it was probably for the better so i'll let it go. At least I can still look forward to Mirror's Edge from EA.

What? That's so backwards, if anything canceling this game lets me know as a gamer EA is willing to put the hatchet to shitty games and take the financial loss to better their image and even.. *gasp* satisfy gamers or for our benifit.

Well the most important thing is publishers should always aim for quality, as we all know the ones that don't, people do actually take note of. Example being Ubisoft and all their shovelware DS titles. Publishers that tend to get low review scores constantly... and so on.

Its really not to uncommon for games to be cancelled, the problem however lies when there are people actually looking forward to the game and the sudden disappointment that the game is no longer coming out. The fans feel let down and then theirs resentment. I'm not saying to many people were looking forward to Tiberium but i certainly remember forums complaining about Microsoft cancelling that Marvel online game or whatever it was. The fact was, the game wasn't working, so they cancelled it but the fans moaned regardless even if their was perfectly good reason for it being cancelled.

For EA, cancelling the game doesn't solve the problem. Clearly the game had poor management from the get go and instead of sorting the mess out, it was easier for them to "cut their loses". For us gamers, its not a big deal but thats money lost on their end due to wasted time developing a title that will see no return on.

So that in turn brings us back to the original question. Was it worth canning? I'd say yes. The C&C IP is very popular, with a fan following. Releasing anything that doesn't hit a certain bar of quality will probably hurt EA's reputation. They probably saved more money in the long run cancelling it than investing more money and development time in getting it in good shape. Who knows.

people people people the game looked pure shit :) so stop with all the EA bull CRAP!!......

Thing that worrys me is how long before EA make there own games SYSTEM :O would it kill the market...i think so