EA, one of the biggest games publishers in the world, has just criticized movie-based games, and said that it's better for companies to make their own intellectual properties, than release titles based on other ones, like James Bond or Jason Bourne.
EA is definitely in a new position this time, as a few years ago, it held lots of interesting game rights to movie franchises, but got rid of them one by one.
According to the president of the EA Games label, Frank Gibeau, it's time to eliminate movie-based games and replace them with new and original intellectual properties.
"If you want to make a hit, you have to give a game time to get to quality," the executive revealed. "The days of licensed-based, 75-rated games copies are dead like the dinosaur."
The EA executive then talked about the James Bond license, which is now owned by Activision, who has just released two new games with it, Blood Stone 007
and GoldenEye 007.
"We dumped that license because we felt like we needed to own more intellectual property, and we don't like where James Bond is going with all the creative limitations on it.
"Considering the total amount of money we have to spend on those types of James Bond games, and the total amount of man-hours we had to put into them, we thought; hell, let's work on our own IP."
He added: "The guys who made James Bond games for us, well yeah, they went on and made Dead Space. And look where we are now; what would you rather publish, retail and play - the latest James Bond or Dead Space 2?"
Gibeau does make a point, as Visceral Games
, formerly known as EA Redwood Shores, released the critically acclaimed Dead Space after grinding its teeth on low-key titles based on movie franchises like James Bond or The Godfather.
What do you think? Is EA right in proclaiming the end of licensed games or should they keep on appearing, in an effort to please fans of the license.