While the sales figures will tell the tale, Madden NFL 21‘s initial reception suggests that it is a tremendous disappointment. Some fans are already calling it the worst Madden ever.

While I respect that enthusiasm, “Worst Madden Ever” is saying a lot. While the majority of Madden games have at least been playable, the worst Madden games ever truly stand out as stunning disasters.

We can’t promise that you’ll enjoy Madden NFL 21, but take comfort in the fact that you’re not playing one of these Madden games.

5. Madden Football 64

Tired of Madden games that feel too similar? Meet the Madden game that may have objectively been too ambitious.

Basically, EA decided that they wanted to use the power of the N64 to created the first truly 3D Madden game. The problem with that noble effort to advance the franchise was that Acclaim owned the exclusive rights to produce N64 NFL games for the 1997 season. In what would later be seen as a delicious bit of irony, EA was muscled out of the NFL license and was forced to make an unlicensed football game.

While it’s easy (and fun) to mock Madden Football 64‘s attempts to get as close to making an NFL game as legally possible, the real problem here is that the time just wasn’t right for a fully 3D football game. This title’s embarrassingly bad animations and nearly non-existent frame rate made electric football games a more accurate representation of the NFL, license or no license.

4. Madden NFL 25

The oddly named Madden NFL 25 is, according to the series standard naming conventions, Madden NFL 14. The name is meant to celebrate the 25-year history of the Madden franchise.

Instead of honoring the innovative nature of its predecessors, though, Madden NFL 25 helped cement the series soon to be infamous legacy of complacency.

Despite being the first Madden available for the next-gen PS4 and Xbox One, Madden NFL 25 featured few notable innovations that would suggest it was the harbinger of the medium’s future. Actually, most of its best features were just minor concepts that had strangely been removed from previous Madden games and resurrected in this one with little fanfare.

Maybe it is appropriate that Madden NFL 25 is named as such. After all, it’s the game that subtly informed us that future Madden games would rely heavily on our memories of what was.

3. Madden NFL 19

While it sometimes feels like most fairly recent Madden games have received the same general criticisms (bugs, lack of new features, etc), a notable amount of scorn is typically reserved for Madden NFL 19.

Why? Well, it starts with the animations. EA (quite hilariously) stated that this game would feature “real player motions,” which actually resulted in some of the clunkiest and most awkward animations in franchise history. More than a problem of visual vanity, Madden NFL 19’s awful animations would often result in players not behaving as they should. This was especially frustrating in online games which were too often determined by whose players accurately executed requested actions.

Interestingly, many feel that offenses (and the best offensive players in Madden NFL 19) felt somehow “nerfed.” It’s not clear whether this was intentional, but this was the Madden in which it was totally possible for a relatively slow defender to chase down some of the league’s fastest players.

We could go on, but the basic idea is that this was the year in which all of Madden‘s problems caught up with it and a few more problems were tossed in just for flavor.

2. Madden 13

Do you ever wonder if the Madden franchise was always like this and it’s your fond memories of the series which are misguided? We suppose that’s always possible, but honestly, we feel like you should be saving a little blame for the “innovations” of Madden 13.

Madden 13 is the game that removed Franchise mode, Superstar mode, Create-a-Team, and a host of stats and various other previously available features. In their place, we got a poor first attempt at a Connected Franchise mode and the Madden Ultimate Team concept which led us into the era of aggressive microtransactions that didn’t require the support of significant gameplay additions to incentivize purchases.

This is the game that stripped so much of the fun and little touches from Madden in order to help create an easily replicable formula that could slowly be built upon typically by gradually re-introducing features that used to be in the series in the first place. It was a nightmare that’s still being felt today by legions of disappointed fans.

1. Madden NFL 06 (Xbox 360)

Madden 13 may have done the most damage to the Madden franchise in the long-run, but if we’re talking about the absolute bottom of the barrel, then we’ve got to talk about Madden NFL 06 for the Xbox 360.

Now, you might think it’s strange that we’re specifying “for the Xbox 360.” After all, haven’t current and next-gen ports of Madden titles been largely similar over the years?

While that’s traditionally been true, this is the glaring exception to that basic rule. Rushed through development by an inexperienced team trying to get something out the door in time for the launch of the Xbox 360, Madden NFL 06 removed many of the best mode, features, and little touches from the previous-gen versions in order to make room for admittedly improved visuals that weren’t nearly good enough to justify the gameplay losses. Madden NFL 06‘s only modes were “Play Now” and an online option that many people still couldn’t properly access. It didn’t even feature John Madden as an announcer!

What’s strange is that many people consider the PS2 version of Madden 06 to be one of the better Madden games ever. By comparison, EA has actually apologized for this game and has basically described it as the worst Madden ever. We’re inclined to agree.

EA revealed an action-packed cinematic trailer today for Star Wars: Squadrons. While it lacked any definitive information about the gameplay, it did show off some nice looking combat with fighters slicing through asteroids and high above planets. However, we can determine a little bit of gameplay information from the game’s website.

Star Wars: Squadrons will have a single-player campaign, but will also feature a 5v5 multiplayer component with cross-play between PS4 and PC. When I saw this, the first thing that came to mind is a setup reminiscent of CSGO. I imagined a scenario where each side would start a round loading out a ship, determining what objectives to take, and preparing their single-life run against the opposing force.  Players would have to rely on skill and good team play to survive and win each round in fragile, but capable fighters. 

The ever-growing popularity of CSGO and now its Riot-produced clone, Valorant, is certainly having an impact on the game development community. While it may not be at the battle royale “gold rush” level just yet, I’m sure the concept has intrigued many developers and publishers. The idea does seem like it would put a good spin on both the traditional Star Wars fighter experience and the “genre” as a whole.

The key, however, is making this skill-based enough that it will properly fit the biggest allure of CSGO-like games. If the combat were more akin to recent Battlefront games, it certainly wouldn’t have people dumping hundreds of hours and packing servers to the brim. Yet, if they manage to make a controller-based online dogfighting system have enough depth and tactical functionality, it could achieve a similar prominence.

With the game only being $40 and having a single-player campaign, it potentially detracts a bit from idea that the multiplayer would robust. The price point also leads me to believe that, in typical EA fashion, the game could also feature a secondary monetization scheme. I’m sure they’ll be steering clear of loot boxes, but if they aren’t clamoring to get you to slap paint and stickers on your X-Wing I’d be very surprised.

I’ve always wanted a new Star Wars space combat game where you put a little more effort into keeping yourself alive. While I haven’t been as ensnared by the Counter-Strike design since I was playing it as a Half-Life mod, it would bring some new life to a franchise that has often been a bit shallow in gameplay. It would also double down on the trend Jedi: Fallen Order adopted in adopting a popular genre into the familiar Star Wars universe. 

The good thing is, we don’t have to wait too long to find out what the gameplay will be. Later this week on Thursday, June 18th, EA Play will show us all of the action. Then we can see if October 2nd will be a date we impatiently wait for or just a day people head back into Cyberpunk 2077.

Do you think Star Wars: Squadrons will borrow concepts from games like CSGO?  If not, what sort of gameplay do you expect?  Let us know in the comments!

It’s not an exaggeration to say that EA has been a controversial gaming company for most of the last 20 years.

The early 2000s saw EA transform into a publisher that increasingly relied on the popularity of a few (generally licensed) properties. They created sports game monopolies and absorbed developers only to typically shutter them shortly thereafter once they’d had the souls squeezed out of them. On top of all that, allegations began to emerge regarding how EA treated their employees and their general workplace culture.

The 2010’s were even worse to EA. Along with the controversial practices they carried over from the previous decade, EA began to experiment more and more with microtransactions and predatory DLC practices. Not only did many of their games suffer from a quality standpoint because of this policy, but a relative decrease in the sales of individual titles and even the Madden franchise seemingly inspired EA to rely more on “games as a service” which typically stop shy of simply forcing people to continue to spend money on them.

Simply put, EA has become the face of nearly everything that people hate about the modern video game industry. They’re seen as franchise and studio killers who want to end single-player games and use the medium as an excuse to squeeze the lunch money out of a casual market.

All that being said, it’s kind of shocking that Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order may be the game that helps EA turn it all around.

Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order may be a licensed title, but nearly everything else about it defies modern EA conventions. It was made by a studio (Respawn Entertainment) that has managed to preserve its creative spirit and drive despite being absorbed. It’s a title that doesn’t beat you over the head with microtransactions. Most importantly, it’s a single-player, story-driven title that features gameplay that may not be overwhelmingly difficult but is noticeably more challenging than the typical modern EA title.

Despite being the antithesis of so many recent EA releases, Fallen Order has been a hit. Early projections suggest that it has (or soon will) hit the 8 million sales mark, which is a simply astonishing number. Granted, it’s a number that is almost certainly bolstered by the presence of the Star Wars license, but even that is somewhat remarkable given EA’s hesitation to actually make Star Wars games over the last few years.

What can EA learn from this game’s success? Well, the most obvious takeaway is that single-player games still matter. Yes, you may be able to make more money from multiplayer titles and microtransactions, but at a time when more and more major companies are buying into that philosophy, big-budget single-player games ironically become more valuable simply because they are much rarer. Besides, with Madden, FIFA, and other EA stalwarts slowly sliding down the decade sales charts (relatively speaking), EA may start greenlighting more single-player IPs simply because they need more franchises in their arsenal.

The bigger point here, though, is that Respawn has thus far managed to avoid the EA “curse” by making four games (Titanfall, Titanfall 2, Apex Legends, and Fallen Order) which are not only good but feel representative of the skills and voice of their creators. The graveyard of studios who were acquired and “killed” by EA is long and tragic, but it’s possible that Respawn’s (mostly very recent) success could be what convinces EA that they need to give developers the resources to be themselves on a larger scale.

Is that too much to hope? Maybe, but for a company that seems to live and die by what sales and revenue tell them, it’s possible that even EA will realize that by occasionally releasing well-made single-player titles that speak with the voice of their creators, they can still make a lot of money and deal with significantly fewer PR headaches.

Today EA finally confirmed its return to Steam by allowing preorders for Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order on the platform. EA was one of the first companies to move on from Steam to its proprietary platform, Origin, back in 2011. The controversial choice to remove Crysis 2 from Steam and release future EA titles on Origin lead to a somewhat muted backlash as the new platform presented an adequate resource for playing these games. Little did we know, this was only the first of many similar moves large publishers would undertake for the sake of profit.

The issue, as they saw it, was that Valve takes 30% of the sale for each game sold on the platform. By creating Origin, EA was able to take the full profit from the sale of their digital games. On paper, that seems to be an easy way to justify building and supporting the Origin client. For years now, we’ve seen PC versions of EA games exclusively on Origin while Steam continued to thrive with games from other publishers as well as indie titles.

Recently, Epic Games created the Epic Games Store and made an effort to put not only games they develop and publish but also other games on their platform exclusively. This exclusivity issue has caused quite the backlash and has put pressure on Valve. The question that some people have raised is whether this move with EA is Steam’s effort to get a taste of those exclusivity contracts. While it may not be possible for us to know to what extent this may be the case, I think there could be another reason for EA’s change of heart.

EA has had extremely limited success lately in releasing games like Anthem and Battlefield V. These games rely on the concept of “live services” to try to maintain a revenue stream that builds with time. Both games saw major drop-offs after launch and EA’s stock prices have remained stagnant since after taking a significant dive last year. Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order’s advertising has promoted having no microtransactions or post-launch DLC, which is the polar opposite of what those tent pole “live service” games attempted in the past. This means that the initial sales of the game are the primary way that EA is going to make money from the launch of the game.

The establishment of microtransactions in modern gaming is now the most popular way that publishers can turn games from just “profitable” into “cash cows.” It lets ongoing development fuel the sale of cosmetics and small pieces of content to players months or even years after a game has gone live. Its use in Fortnite is one of the primary reasons Epic has been able to leverage millions of dollars in exclusivity agreements. Without this, EA is going to have to make Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order one of the bestselling new games of the year to see similarly good profits. Perhaps with Steam on their side promoting to their millions of active users, they’ll be able to appeal to the numbers they need to make this happen. 

Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order is due to release this year. After being announced amidst quite a bit of speculation, the gameplay was recently revealed at E3 to somewhat mixed reactions. My issue was less with the gameplay of this new title and more with the idea of taking on the role of yet another Jedi in yet another game about Jedi in Star Wars. Why can’t we explore the rest of this vast lightsaber-free universe?

Don’t get me wrong, I know the core premise of the entire franchise of movies and games is hyper-focused on these quasi-religious purveyors of the Force, but some of Star Wars’ greatest games left them out as much as possible. The original Star Wars: Battlefront had you taking control of one of a wide variety of nameless and faceless soldiers blasting away in different roles to try and win a battle. Jedi and other significant characters were only a small part of the game and it was wonderful. Even modern Battlefront games have them in limited numbers. However, other games in the franchise left these central characters out entirely.

Star Wars: Republic Commando had you take over a Clone commando squad using tactics and raw blaster power to help the Republic win the war against a host of different enemies. This lets us see firsthand the experiences of characters that were relatively insignificant in an already less significant part of the series. Republic Commando managed to be one of the more notable titles in the history of Star Wars games and stands on its own as an enjoyable first-person shooter even for those not a fan of the movies.

Before that, Star Wars Racer let us say to ourselves “Now this is podracing!”. Ripping through desert canyons in a modern interpretation of ancient chariot racing at ridiculous speeds gave us both a wildly fun and exceptionally challenging experience in the Star Wars universe. Again, without any Force powers or mind tricks. Just good old fashioned floating vehicle racing evocative of classics like Wipeout and F-Zero.

Even earlier was another FPS by the name of Star Wars: Dark Forces. While the main character, without really any foreshadowing whatsoever, becomes a Jedi in the sequel it’s safe to say the first game is free of Jedi involvement. It’s independently designed 3D engine may look like Doom or Duke Nukem 3D, but in my opinion, it is actually more visually appealing and gets to draw on the excellent architecture and design of the Star Wars universe.

That is only a taste of games of the many Star Wars games without Jedi running around. There are more still that featured flying the many ships of the franchise like X-Wing and Rogue Squadron as well as some real-time strategies. These are just some I’ve played and enjoyed. Currently, Star Wars games are becoming much rarer. If you ignore the Lego games and The Old Republic’s continued existence, this entire decade has seen only a small number of dedicated Star Wars games at all. I think a lot of blame can be on the heads of EA and, of course, Disney for letting EA do things as poorly as they have, but when you consider the continued growth of the franchise it makes it all the more confusing as to why they aren’t developing more.

It’s hard to talk about Jedi-free games without mentioning the now canceled Star Wars 1313. From the trailer and the bits of information released about it, it was set to put the player in a much more gritty role set in the depths of Coruscant. The many gadgets and blaster weapons synonymous with the franchise would play a heavy role in this cover based action shooter game. It was going to be a game that didn’t just step away from the Force but took a step into the darker side of the entire Star Wars universe.

That’s really the whole point, though. The Star Wars universe is so vast and is filled with stories of people trying to survive and thrive on worlds that can be as harsh as they are unique. It feels like a waste to focus on a handful of characters that are all part of the same narrative thread. Sure, it’s cool to make use of unstoppable laser swords and superhuman powers, but even in the films, it’s only a part of the overall story. I think it’s even worth noting that climbing back in the pilot’s seat and blasting away at TIE fighters would fit perfectly in this era of space sim resurgence. There are so many ways to succeed in building a Star Wars game, I simply can’t understand why Disney hasn’t sought to explore them and finally satisfy their starving gaming fanbase.

The obvious reason, and the one the proprietors of these services will gladly divulge, is that they actually drive people to buy the games they try. Some players use it as a cheaper “test drive” option so they can see if a game is worth the full price. Spending $5 or $15 to try a few games and determine if they’re worth the standard $60 price tag is a respectable way to go about being a consumer. Another reason for their growing popularity is that they allow multiplayer games to build and maintain a higher population. If a game is added to the service or available from launch, many more people are going to check it out. This is one of the reasons Sea of Thieves was able to stay relevant as improvements were made to its limited gameplay. Both of these are valid and certainly justify the existence of the programs to a degree, but I think there’s another goal in mind – and one which will ensure this isn’t the last game subscription service we see.

Anthem is a game as a service. The Division 2 and Sea of Thieves are as well. This means, briefly, that they are games players usually purchase in whole, but are rendered as a service to them. You can’t play them without EA or Microsoft’s servers, and there’s no way to run the servers yourself. These games strongly lean toward the idea of playing with other people online, but all of them feature gameplay that should be (and is) accessible by the solo player. However, without an internet connection, you can’t play at all. While the legality of this has come into question in many countries around the world, these publishers have a stake in building more of games of this type.

Games as a service allow companies to create games that entice you to keep playing over time. They regularly try to get you interacting with other players and spending as much time as possible in the game working toward long-term goals. Games as a service want you to build a connection so that, as new content is released for the service, you’re going to be more willing to spend money to access it faster, play it the way you want, or just look better doing it. It allows publishers to continue monetizing content with much smaller development teams and thus make them more profit. When the profit margin is too slim, they can shut down the game, move the developers on, and find a more profitable game to render as a service.

That’s where subscription services come in. When a game as a service is available in a subscription model, people will be more likely to try it – bolstering its online presence and allowing players to make more of a connection with the game and other players. Subscribers are also more likely to come back in and try new content giving the game more opportunities for a resurgence. It’s also easier to justify spending money on microtransactions when your price of admission is much lower than outright purchasing the game. Then, if a game does not “meet expectations” and is shut down, never to be played again, fewer people will be upset as they never purchased the game outright, but still had access to all of the features.

Don’t be surprised if, in the coming years, Microsoft and EA are joined by other major publishers and companies in subscription services. Google is expected to have a subscription service that goes along with their Stadia launch. These are going to be the routes through which games as a service are delivered – and they will be delivered. All the while, the least popular of these titles will get flushed down the drain with minimal protest from the public, lost forever because they couldn’t meet profit demands.

But why is there still so much hate? And why is Battlefront II in the process of dying a slow death?

The Slow Fall Of Battlefront II

Initially, there were bugs upon launch. There always is. But for some reason, EA took forever to patch up their mistakes, creating a very negative vibe in the Star Wars Battlefront II community.

The bugs were minor things like Star Cards not working and a sound glitch which forced the player to restart the game in order to get the sound back. Simple, yet extremely frustrating when ignored.

There’s also the issue of multiplayer modes which require a minimum number of players. Normally if a game is healthy, there are always players to be found. But this hasn’t been the case with Battlefront II. Take Ewok Hunt for example. It’s a fun and brilliantly designed mini-game which never has enough players for gameplay. Log in and a player is likely to see “waiting on X number of players” for 15-30 minutes (if not longer).

5 Super Easy Tips For Sucess In MTG Arena

Lastly, new players joining the game late quickly realized how outmatched they were in multiplayer modes, also creating a negative environment. The grind towards leveling up is brutal, especially when a player’s characters are too weak to earn battle points.

Battlefront II is full of positive things like the beautifully created large-scale maps with an intense attention to detail in modes like Starfighter Assault (taking multiplayer spaceship battles to a whole new level). Recently, General Grievous and Obi-Wan Kenobi became two available heroes and according to EA’s rollout plan for Battlefront II, there’s more on the way — including a bunch of Clone Wars content to coincide with the return of Star Wars: The Clone Wars on Disney+ in 2019.

Sadly, however, these positive notes often get drowned out in the negativity surrounding Battlefront II.

Between the Star Wars boycotter groups on social media and gamers who refused to wait for EA to get their “bleep” together, the pool of worldwide players has become drastically small.

Can Battlefront II Be Saved?

Anything is possible, but considering EA’s standard approach to resolving issues is to ignore gamers and do as they please, the likely answer is no. And yet, there are a few of us left who are holding on to an unseen last hope — those of us who enjoy playing modes other than Galactic Assault.

The patches and upgrades EA’s applying to Battlefront II are nice (skins and new heroes), but they aren’t necessarily what the game needs. Maybe if EA adjusted the player count for the smaller modes and figured out a way to reduce camping in Starfighter Assault, gamers might return. An adjustment of the Star Cards would be nice too, giving new players a decent chance of being able to compete, instead of always being taken out with one-shot while delivering 10-headshots (only slightly exaggerated) to take out their opponent.

If EA was serious about saving Star Wars Battlefront II, the rollout plan would have the real issues singled out, along with promises of satisfactory resolution. Instead, there’s just lots of talk about skins, new characters, and a Geonosis map.

Smh — and EA wonders why other studios are surpassing them in sales and content.

EA has released a trailer for Fuse in Single Player mode. The 2-minute trailer suggests pre-ordering the game for  PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 to get exclusive team extras. Bonus exclusives include uniform upgrades, customizing weapons and increased damage. Fuse is slated to release in Mar. 2013, playable in single, cooperative, multiplayer modes. Trailer by Machinima.