Nmenth

They haven't made multiple mistakes. They made one lengthy mistake of pandering to the wrong people, and some financially good decisions that are unpopular, but will benefit them in the long term.

Competent businessmen can still make mistakes. Your post hoc fallacy proves nothing. They made a calculated risk to pander to shareholders and game journalists at the expense of their fans. It backfired because they didn't expect their fans to have a powerful voice to rally them together. Now they know who else they need to start throwing bones to. By this time again next year, I fully expect EA will be doing just fine and everyone will still hate them.

That is exactly what I am seeing right now from a bunch of people whose total understanding of business could fit up a dung beetle's exhaust pipe. You don't have to like it. I don't like it. I hate EA, Rivals, and the whole gaming industry's tactics, but it is the truth. EA will most likely pull out of this current slump, will make boatloads of money, and treat all of their customers like landfill rats.

They are as far as EA is concerned. And eventually, the numbers will win, the numbers always win. A few road bumps are not relevant in the grand scheme. As I said, it will take time to refine the process. The "entire community" only moves in one direction when a minority of people can command the crowd as their leaders, these are the influencers. The governments only cared because of the publicity, which again, was due to the influencers raising a stink over it. The influencers are the cogs in the machine and if when EA can learn how turn the cogs to their tune, the "entire community" will dance to that tune. That is the equivalent of saying the PC gaming market or console market is oversaturated. While it is theoretically possible to have too many games for sale at one time on one platform, it is not a serious concern to any company. No, it is more reassuring to the shareholders to blame others. Some of the shareholders might even know EA is feeding them lines, but the last thing they want to hear from EA is, "Yeah, we screwed up big time. Mistakes were made left and right, but we have a vague plan or two that we hope will pan out in the short term, and in the long term, none of this really matters anyway."

Battle Royale is a genre that is being oversaturated. Mobile is a platform that is on the rise and has no signs of slowing. The comparison is not valid.

Mobile games currently account for a larger percent of the gaming market than either console or PC games and are expected to reach 50% of gaming revenue by 2020. EA is doubling down because betting on mobile is the smart financial move right now. EA has been floating in a reputation cess pit for a while and have taken several hard hits of more bad publicity over the past year. Their coffers are starting to feel the strain of it all and they are obligated to take it seriously at this time, but they aren't about to blame themselves for it in front of their shareholders who couldn't tell the difference between Pong and C&C: Rivals if their lives depended on it. I am certain the C&C remaster wouldn't have even be considered at this time last year. The remaster was an ideal move at the moment they took it on, it will cost much less to make than a new title, will reduce C&C fans sabotaging their more profitable mobile release, and will grant them a cheap reputation boost if it succeeds and not really hurt too badly if it flops. Every decision they make and everything they say to their shareholders makes complete sense from a business point of view. EA has been snubbing their customers in the past because they know most customers are ignorant and easily manipulated. Previously, it was game journalists and news sites that told customers what to think, but companies figured out how to control them and they are no longer a serious threat as long as the companies give them what they want. But a new monkey wrench was unexpectedly thrown into the gears in the form of influencers on social media, who also have the power to persuade EA's customers. The few squeaky wheels who got offended by the way big publishers were treating the fans didn't use to matter, the majority would keep buying product. But once those squeaky wheels found places like YouTube, where they could complain to audiences of millions, suddenly the minority's voice held sway. They still don't need to play nice with their customers, now they just need to suppress the influencers by giving them what they want too (oh look, a shiny C&C remaster). It may take them some time to refine their tactics to achieve this and have to be careful to avoid transforming the influencers into untrustworthy voices (i.e. shills). Eventually, they will figure out a technique, and their current need to be concerned with their bad reputation will no longer matter once again. People say "vote with your wallet," but unless, by some miracle, even a tiny portion of people actually do so, and by their own conscience rather than being told to do so by someone else, EA does not need to move one toe closer toward what fans want them to be. Since that will never happen, EA wins, and the squeaky minority can suck it.

It is the first Monday of February, so it is time for another Nmenth's Research Lab, this month we will look at special infantry in Command & Conquer, covering Mutants, Cyborgs, and Clones and see how these compare with reality. New technologies will be explored on the first Monday of every month, so return next month on the 4th for more from Nmenth's Research Lab.

In other news, getting shot in the foot isn't that bad. While you're still in shock, you may not even notice the pain. Shock wears off eventually, and it will start hurting then, but there are always painkillers for that. If the bullet misses your bones, it isn't even that major of a wound. You probably don't need to walk much anyway, and you can win all sorts of sympathy points during recovery. You might even get a wheelchair if you're lucky, and those can be pretty fun to scoot around in. There are problems with having a bullet hole in your foot obviously, but the body heals naturally and a splint can help prevent accidentally reopening the wound. But getting shot in the foot is definitely better than getting shot in the eye.

It is the first Monday of January, so to start off the second year of Nmenth's Research Lab, this month we will examine some of the unusual aircraft in Command & Conquer, including the Kirov, Siege Chopper, and S.H.R.I.N.K. Beam and see how these compare with reality. New technologies will be explored on the first Monday of every month, so return next month on the 4th for more from Nmenth's Research Lab.

Ah... I thought I could help you, but as I started writing a response, I discovered that I haven't modded AI in so long, I completely forgot what I was doing.

Did you make the map with FinalAlert2?

Well, real Miniguns are a specific type of Gatling gun, which is already on the list. Weapons held by "Minigunners" in TD and ZH were about the most inconsistent things in the entire series.

Future Nmenth's Research Lab articles will contain multiple technologies to basically "wrap up" whatever I haven't covered yet until I run out of ideas. The following is a list of all the article ideas I have remaining. Some of these I am certain I will be covering eventually, others may be rejected even on the second pass. Kirovs Bio Reactor Cloning Combat animals (dolphin, dog, bear, squid) Gatling guns Orbital weapons Siege Choppers Vacuum Imploder Stratospheric Transport SHRINK Beam Particle Cannon Cybernetics Stealth Genetic manipulation If there is any technology I have not yet covered, is not on the list, and you think should be covered, offer your suggestions. I will add them all to list unless there is a specific reason they can't be covered.

Luckily, that doesn't change anything. It is still a suicidal attack, just robot suicide instead of human.

To be honest, I'm not sure, which is why I didn't actually include them in the article. I think it might be possible, but as far as I know, no such device has ever been developed. And I suspect the reason for that is that it is unlikely such a weapon would be very efficient. It would probably require a lot of power to operate, have pretty bad range (since radiation is absorbed by the air, which is why the sun isn't currently killing us all right now and also why neutron bombs are so small - their blast area has to be smaller than the distance their radiation can reach), and probably would not be able to guarantee death as too many factors (such as exposure time, distance, and material between weapon and target) could interfere with it. "Living" through it would almost certainly be a horrible experience with possible later death due to radiation poisoning, or even later death due to cancer, which I'm sure would very quickly lead to it being banned as a war crime.