• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Gamefront Rumor: Moore to replace John Riccitiello as EA CEO [Up: EA's Board says no]

Currygan

at last, for christ's sake
let's hope Moore drinks his tea alone




Pachter might be right about something..

Holy shit.

The world is coming to an end after all

yeah, I wouldn't exactly call reporting a person's factually correct feelings about his fear of being fired a revelation though
 

excaliburps

Press - MP1st.com
How far back is this "rumor?"

In case anyone forgot, Moore isn't the boss of EA Sports anymore, he's now the COO or something to that effect...either the tipster got it wrong, or this is some high-level BS.

How can this "source" get that wrong? It's like saying Miyamoto is the CEO of Nintendo, or Eric Hirshberg is the CEO of Activision and not just publishing.

Not saying this doesn't make it fake, just that it seriously undermines its credibility.

However, if true, Moore might be one of the fastest videogame execs to transition from brand label boss (EA Sports) to CEO in quite some time...what does this make it? Less than two years or something?

That's quite a trajectory, no?
 

vireland

Member
fTcru.jpg

Okay, that's a hilarious reference - from the hospital commercial, right? Well played.
 
Rewatch the EA press conference from the past E3, and watch as John Riccitiello looks terrified. He's looking around as if there's an assassin among the audience.
 
I believe it after how badly The Old Republic flopped/is flopping. Pachter wasn't joking at all

But the troubles with EA began before TOR even came out, it's been on a downward slope since months before it's release, and it still was selling well and had big sub numbers while it was going down the toilet. BF3 has done 15mil and such, yet the company stock keeps plummeting. One game is not going to sink the company when it's still doing ok, so what is really bringing down EA?
 

Patryn

Member
Haven't I read analysis that says that TOR actually wasn't a massive flop, it was just a break-even project?

Basically, between pre-orders and subs for those first six months they earned just about $200 million to cover the costs?
 
Haven't I read analysis that says that TOR actually wasn't a massive flop, it was just a break-even project?

Basically, between pre-orders and subs for those first six months they earned just about $200 million to cover the costs?

No one is going to know for sure since no one knows how the money is divided out, especially with Lucasarts having to get it's cut as well. Also the whole 1mil target to make good profit from their financial stuff is supposed to be including the investment EA put into buying Bioware apparently, so it's just just purely about TOR.

From what we have seen so far from the financials, the game was doing fine so far and still above the profit zone, but the downward trend in the last financial report was not good for investors about the games future.

The issue though is what really are the problems with EA since it's stock has been in free fall since last fall before TOR even came out. Shareholder confidence in TOR and being voted worst company in an internet poll should not be the reasons for this alone, what has been causing this constant downtrend for EA's stock? BF3 was a big hit and ME3 did well.
 
This would be a fantastic idea.

Riccitiello came in with great ideas, and it looked like he was on his way when EA started belting out cool new IP.

But instead of sticking the plan, he let one down year and some shareholder whining convince him to totally switch strategies.

Instead of building up new IP that could be leveraged in the future and turning EA in a destination that talent WANTED to work at because they would have the freedom to explore new ideas, he turned EA into Activision lite.

We get our yearly FPS, our MMO, some licensed games, and - his own twist - a push into digital territory. You know, cause that's much smarter than just taking advantage of the established digital channels that the market already embraced while you were busy trying to be the new Activision.

The sooner this guy is ousted, the healthier EA will be.
 
I don't know why, but I read "Peter Moore" as Peter "Molyneux" and for a moment I thought that was a bit genius. Personally I don't have a problem with Ricitello.


Have they really? Other than Old Republic (which granted is a huge misstep), haven't their games been pretty profitable? I'm pretty sure even Dragon Age 2 was profitable. Or are you just heaping Mass Effect 3 ending hate on top of that despite the fact that they're probably making boat loads of money from that game.

Dragon Age 1 sold well. DA2 sales were heavily frontloaded before nosediving as I recall and didn't sell as well as DA1. Mass Effect 2 sold well enough, but I don't think it had crazy huge sales numbers and the price imploded to bomba levels later that year. Ironically, ME3 sold really well I believe.

The thing is that while they were all likely profitable, for the money EA spent to buy BioWare they likely wanted them to be much, much more profitable like six to ten million copies per title profitable.
 

Loxley

Member
At the very least it's not like half of EA's studios are making Battlefield 3 map packs :/ So they haven't stooped that low. Anyway, part of me hopes this is true, I like Moore.
 
Top Bottom