Games with isometric graphics—a slightly rotated view with a top-down perspective—were a big deal several years ago. Static, isometric maps, mostly used in strategy and role-playing games, allowed the developers to create spectacular, detailed visuals, and most of them have aged really well.
With Kickstarter-funded games like Shadowrun Returns or Project Eternity using the same sort of approach, it looks like isometric games are set to make a triumphant return. We've selected some of the most beautiful games featuring the isometric perspective for today's Show Us gallery.
Desperados: Wanted Dead Or Alive
Arcanum: Of Steamworks and Magick Obscura
Commandos: Behind Enemy Lines
Commandos 2: Men of Courage
Icewind Dale
Anno 1602
Robin Hood: The Legend of Sherwood
Baldur's Gate II: Shadows of Amn
Age of Empires II HD
Shadowrun Returns (Concept Art)
What are your picks for the best looking games with isometric graphics? Make sure to post them below with visuals.
When it comes to the increasing scapegoating that says video games cause mass shootings, game-makers haven't had a whole lot to say in their chosen medium. Most video game companies and their representatives seem to be choosing to stay away from a debate in the court of public opinion, operating maybe on the principle that they may get outmaneuvered in the land of soundbites and pop punditry.
But Molleindustria isn't most game companies. And the man behind the indie agit-prop dev studio may have outmaneuvered the NRA and the gun lobby's political allies with a bite-sized game that shows how more guns don't necessarily make anyone safer.
The Best Amendment is a satirical game about how guns make you the good guy. It's also a game about how guns make the same you a bad guy, too. Simple controls—WASD to move and mouse-clicks to shoot—let you pursue the game's only goal, which is to collect stars. Things get tricky when you start having to dodge the bullets of other gun-toting characters, who are actually your ghosts tracing the paths you previously made.
Sure, you get bigger better weapons as you go but they're no match for the sheer number of past selves you'll face up against. As you play Best Amendment and inevitably die, the words of NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre flash onscreen. "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun." But that assertion doesn't hold up in a game filled with guns.
The implicit argument embedded in the game is that the only way to stop gun violence is to not pick up a gun at all and/or to stop access to guns. Now, Paolo Pedercini—the man behind Molleindustria—leans way to the left in terms of his personal and professional politics. He's made games about the futility of trying to control information in the era of Wikileaks, the soul-crushing nature of working for big corporations and the messy business of being a unmanned drone pilot. Any accusatory claim of bias on his part would likely be answered with "guilty as charged." All Molleindustria games try to force players to re-think what they take for granted about the politics that circumscribe their lives.
Still, the most important thing about Best Amendment is that it's a video game that rebuts some of the harshest criticisms being thrown at the medium right now. It's a playable put-down of the people who would shift blame for tragedies like the Newtown massacre onto entertainment companies and not weapons manufacturers. Whether you agree with the game's stance or not, it's still a damn good thing that it—as a piece art that doesn't shy away from political realities—exists at all.
If you've been playing big-budget action video games over the last couple of years, you've probably noticed a few trends. The graphics have gotten better. The animations have become more lifelike. The explosions have gotten more explosive.
And more recently, amid all those improvements, has come a trend that's even more earth-shattering and important: Video games have discovered the bow and arrow.
Call it the "bowification" of video games. Far Cry 3. Crysis 3. Assassin's Creed III. Tomb Raider. In just the past six months, we've had four high profile games include a bow and arrow as a primary weapon. In an impressive bit of reverse evolution, it seems video games have finally discovered the bow and arrow, decades after they discovered the assault rifle.
All this goes along with pop culture's more general bow-obsession, with Katniss Everdeen using her archery chops to survive The Hunger Games and Brave's Merida besting each of her suitors in an archery contest, Robin Hood-style. Way to be current, video games!
A few notes: First of all, cossbows don't count. Sorry, Dishonored! I'm going to focus on four games that are pretty recent, as they represent the current height of video game bow-and-arrow design. So, I've left off games like Turok, Wii Sports Resort, and any of the Zelda games. I've also left off a few games where the bows don't really have a mechanical component to them—my bow and arrow in Guild Wars 2 operates pretty much like a gun; same thing with Diablo III or Torchlight II. I am including Skyrim, because that game is interesting and its iteration on the Elder Scrolls' bow and arrow design is cool. If there are other video game bows you think are worthy of recognition, I hope you'll mention them in the comments.
Here we go, ranked from last to first:
#5: Assassin's Creed III
How it works: Aim and fire with the Y/Triangle button.
How you cancel a shot: Press B/O.
How you aim: You select a target using the aiming feature, then Connor does the rest for you.
One hit? One kill with most humans, but not with animals.
Better than a gun? No, not in this case. The Assassin's Creed III bow is silent, which is good for taking out guards quietly, but in general it's inferior to the game's pistols, particularly the moment you've been spotted. Aiming and firing simply takes too long to be effective.
Upgrades: None to speak of.
Fakest thing you can do: The more I think about it, the more I think that Assassin's Creed III's bow might be the most realistic of all the video game bows on this list. Which unfortunately seems to have contributed to it being in last place.
Greatest moment: There's something to be said for hunting from the treetops in Assassin's Creed III, and the bow always felt at home in the woods.
John Rambo says: "Your worst nightmare."
Overall Opinion: The bow in Assassin's Creed III just doesn't feel very good to fire. The auto-aiming is strange and doesn't allow you to track a moving target, and as I've noted before, pressing "Y" (or triangle) to aim a weapon feels a bit like standing on your tiptoes to reach something in a high cupboard. There's a lack of satisfying impact, as well.
#4: Crysis 3
How it works: Zoom with the left trigger, pull the string back with the right. Release to fire.
How you cancel a shot: Click the right thumbstick.
How you aim: You don't actually aim along the arrow, but rather using crosshairs on your HUD combined with a green line indicating the arrow's trajectory.
One hit? One kill, provided you've got your draw-strength up for the bigger baddies.
Better than a gun? Without question. It's so much better than a gun, in fact, that it makes the guns totally pointless and throws off the balance of the game.
Upgrades: Your bow comes outfitted with all manner of special arrows, so they don't really qualify as "upgrades." But Prophet's bow can fire regular arrows, explosive arrows, thermite-tipped arrows that explode on a delay, and arrows that deliver a deadly electric shock.
Greatest moment: The sound design on the Crysis 3 bow makes up for its odd feel—the tension of the arrow combined with the thunk of impact makes it clear that this thing is really a deadly future-weapon in the guise of a bow and arrow.
Fakest thing you can do: At first I was going to say that having your arrows designed so that they'd show up on your heads-up display for gathering was unrealistic, but actually, that's exactly the sort of thing that some military weapons-designer would probably do.
John Rambo Says: "I could have killed 'em all, I could've killed you. In town you're the law, out here it's me. "
Overall Opinion: Prophet's bow in Crysis 3 is sort of a "bow in name only." Sure, it looks like a tricked-out compound bow. Yes, it fires arrows. But it's so powerful and futuristic that it's almost entirely removed from the more primal appeal of the weapon itself. Furthermore, because the bow can be fired while cloaked, it throws off the precarious balance struck by the first two Crysis games and makes Prophet overpowered.
#3: Skyrim
How it works: Aim with the right trigger, release to fire. Hit the left trigger to toggle slow-mo, if you have the ability. As a demonstration, check out this TOTALLY SICK VIDEO I just shot today. I was going to grab a screenshot to show how the bow works, but I happened to fire this arrow and... yesssss.
My first thought was "I can't believe no one saw that." Then I checked the corner and saw that I'd accidentally hit the record button and captured the whole thing using Fraps. Victory! So, I thought I'd share it here. (And okay, maybe it's not actually that hard to do—it does kind of look like the bird relocated so that my arrow would hit it. But I felt pretty proud, so. Anyway.)
How you cancel a shot: Press X, a welcome addition to the Elder Scrolls series, as in the past you'd have to fire into the ground and then pick up your arrow.
How you aim: Right along the arrow, with a zoom-in if you've purchased the required perk.
One hit? Rarely one kill, unless you're up against a weak enemy or you're firing from stealth.
Better than a gun? There are no guns in Skyrim, though video game marketers seem fond of suggesting that there are several other games that satisfy that particular fan desire…
Upgrades: The most important upgrade is the ability to slow down time while aiming, which is a boon for those who play this game with a controller, in particular. However, thanks to the game's crafting system, you can upgrade your bow in all manner of other deadly ways. My Daedric bow shoots lightning arrows, for example.
Greatest moment: Picking off an entire roomful of bandits without alerting a single one. The "bang!" sound of a successful sneak attack is never less that satisfying, and it's only heightened by the goofy way the ragdoll physics can take over once they go flying. It's also fun to peg a dragon in midair with an arrow, partly because it's such a difficult trick to pull off. Unless you're me, as evidenced by that amazing video I've already talked about too much.
Fakest thing you can do: You can upgrade your bow so that it fires lightning and traps souls! God, how unrealistic.
John Rambo says: "It's in the blood! It's natural! Peace? That's an accident!"
Overall Opinion: While Skyrim's combat is generally not on par with the other games on this list, I actually like the bow and arrow a lot. It never quite has the stopping power I'd like it to when I've got a troll charging at me head-on, but when sneaking, there are few weapons in the Skyrim universe as deadly and satisfying.
#2: Far Cry 3
How it works: You aim with the left trigger and pull the string back with the right trigger.
How you cancel a shot: There isn't a consistent way, unfortunately. You can switch arrow-types if you've got an additional arrow assigned to the D-pad, but that's an unsteady workaround at best. I have memories of being able to inconsistently cancel pulled arrows, but haven't been able to recreate that in my game. If there's a way, I'm not sure what it is. Meaning that I wind up shooting my arrows into the ground and grabbing them. You got so much right, Far Cry 3!
Update: Since enough of you guys pointed out that in theory it's totally easy to cancel a shot, I thought I'd give it an even more thorough test. Looks like this issue is only on PC, or even just my PC, and it's inconsistent. I'm able to get "R" on the keyboard to cancel the shot every time, but "X" on the controller is inconsistent at best. Often it won't work at all. So, good on you for the most part, Far Cry 3—the issue isn't with your design but appears to be with your PC controller setup. Your bow is still pretty cool, though.
How you aim: You can get either a red-dot sight or a more advanced hunter's sight, which accounts for drop-off. I never quite mastered the way aiming works, but I did always use the hunter's sight, even though it was more difficult to see what was going on.
One hit? One kill.
Better than a gun? Not really. The bow is arguably better for silent takedowns, but it's hard to top a powerful silenced assault rifle or sniper rifle, particularly if you've unlocked the later weapons in the game. That said, it's certainly cooler than a gun, and holds its own.
Upgrades: You could eventually either make fire-arrows or explosive arrows. The explosive arrows were oddly underpowered, and often it took more than one to blow up a vehicle or kill a guy.
Greatest moment: Hunting actual animals, actually. Some of the most enjoyable side-missions in Far Cry 3 were the advanced bow hunts, where you'd be tasked with taking down a deadly jungle beast using only the bow and regular arrows. Usually it involved finding a good vantage point and hitting shots from far enough away that the tiger/leopard in question wouldn't be able to find you. But these sequences effectively captured the thrill of creeping through the underbrush, bow in hand.
Fakest thing you can do: Make an explosive-tipped arrow out of a hand grenade while under duress in the wild. Look, I get that Jason Brody has become something of a badass while on this adventure, but.
John Rambo says: "You know what you are... what you're made of. War is in your blood. Don't fight it. You didn't kill for your country. You killed for yourself."
Overall opinion: The bow in Far Cry 3 is a cool, empowering weapon, and easily the game's defining mode of dealing destruction. While silenced sniper rifles can generally get the same job done from a longer range, the bow itself was my weapon of choice for the majority of the game, particularly when hunting.
#1: Tomb Raider
How it works: Aim with the left trigger, pull back the string with the right trigger.
How you cancel a shot: Let go of the left trigger. Okay, hold on. This is the only game on this list to adopt this method of canceling a shot, and it deserves mention, because it's great. Initially, I was uncomfortable canceling shots this way, but only because it felt so unfamiliar. As it turns out, this is a very natural, subtly brilliant way of doing things. It's a much more accurate amalgamation of what you'd actually do if you decided you didn't want to shoot an arrow. You'd release the string.
How you aim: Down the arrow using a crosshair.
One hit? One kill, as long as you're sneaking or can score a headshot. In combat, it depends.
Better than a gun? Absolutely. The bow is a silent killer, has a ton of non-combat uses, and is wicked powerful and accurate over long distances.
Upgrades: By the end of Tomb Raider, Lara's bow has become something of a swiss army knife. It can fire regular, flaming, and explosive arrows, sure. It can also fire a rope that can manipulate objects in the environment and even attach to cliff-sides and set up ziplines. Coupled with her automated rope-retractor, she can demolish large chunks of wood and access new areas. She also uses her arrows as a makeshift melee weapon, and to skin animals after hunting. After a couple of days on the island, Lara's bow is no longer the sad little wooden thing she pulled off the corpse at the start; it's a wicked-looking high-tech compound bow with a counterweight and nasty arrows.
Greatest moment: There's a sequence near the middle of the game where Lara enters a large wooded area at night. It's full of guards. The first time I played this bit, I was able to creep through the woods, silently picking off guard after guard until none were left standing. It was probably my favorite sequence in the entire game—Lara Croft as deadly predator, dealing death with a bow and arrow.
Fakest thing you can do: While I value the utility, I'm not at all convinced that a bow could fire a rope-arrow into a cliff face firmly enough to let me peg that rope and climb across a chasm.
John Rambo says: "When you're pushed, killing's as easy as breathing."
Overall Opinion: Turns out there's a reason that Lara's bow has been featured so prominently in Tomb Raider's promotional materials—the weapon feels inextricably tied to Lara in the new game, and between the two of them, they can overcome almost any obstacle. The bow has a marvelous feeling of physicality to it, including how Lara can only pull the string back for so long before her aim starts to shake. The decision to give players the ability to hit "up" and flick Lara's lighter, igniting the arrow, was inspired. I found it telling that in the game, I used Lara's bow whenever possible, even when it wasn't the most powerful option, unless I was getting rushed by enemies on either side. Even then, whipping out a machine gun or shotgun just felt wrong somehow.
So, Tomb Raider wins it by a neck. Far Cry 3 put up a good fight, but while that game does have some very fun bow-hunting, the bow itself doesn't match Lara Croft's weapon in all its upgraded glory. My Skyrim bow is all well and good, but falls short in heated combat. Crysis 3's bow is barely a bow at all, really—more of an overpowered killing device—that may be to some players' taste, but it isn't to mine. And Assassin's Creed III's bow, like so many other things about that game, is better in concept than in execution.
Congrats, Lara. Take a bow. You are currently the video game archer to beat. At least until it turns out there's an awesome bow and arrow in BioShock Infinite or The Last of Us. Which, given the industry's current bow-happy state, wouldn't surprise me in the least.
It's that time of year again—the time of year when someone links me a Space Jam mash-up and I fall into a terrifying black hole of WELCOME TO THE JAM again. I'm dragging you down with me this time, dear reader. I'm so sorry (...wait, no I'm not). This had to happen.
Here's a collection of video game related Slams, which prove the eternal axiom: Quad City DJ's Space Jam goes with everything (as I'm sure some of you are already aware—this isn't a new meme!)
Persona? Yup.
Smash Bros.? Sure. Hell, there's a whole album dedicated to the franchise!Marvel vs Capcom 3? Uh huh. (Thanks, DMThigpen!)
Megaman? Well...
Tetris? Oh yeah.
Mario? Of course.
Rise of the Triad? Roger that.
Pokemon Uh, HELLO.
Sonic? Yes.
Zelda? Have at it.
Whatever...this is?
Guile's theme? !!??!
If you've heard a good Slam, make sure to share—I'm sure I've missed many!
Our sister site Gizmodo on TV? This seems like a great idea. Better than Deadspin: The Movie or a Kotaku opera, yes?
Gizmodo: The Gadget Testers is a real TV show. It's on BBC America tonight. Give it a look, will you? It's on after Top Gear tonight at 10:20 ET/PT, 9:20pm Central.
EA's CEO John Riccitiello has stepped down. And so of course, the fact that he's got a difficult-to-spell name, combined with the general level of dislike EA has earned in the wake of SimCity's disastrous launch, means that jokers the world over have been quick to hop on the joke train and joke it up with their jokes.
When I first saw There Came An Echo, the Wil Wheaton-supported Kickstarter project whose creators want $90,000 to make a voice-controlled real-time strategy game, I thought it was kind of absurd.
Voice commands? Who wants to use some sort of gimmick to play an RTS? What's wrong with a mouse and keyboard?
So while chatting with Jason Wishnov, the man behind There Came An Echo whose last game, Sequence, came out on Steam back in 2011, I asked why he thought people would care. And he gave me a pretty decent explanation:
There's a few reasons. Voice commands, not used in a dedicated fashion since 2008's EndWar, have progressed significantly in the past five years, primarily due to research and development spurred on by the smartphone industry and features like Siri. The recognition rates have drastically improved, and supplementary features...like Mass Effect 3's voice command system, or getting to yell "FUS RO DAH!" at Skyrim, have worked well, and gotten a good response from those who chose to use them.
Moreover, though, I simply think they haven't been used correctly yet. 2004's Lifeline is a perfect example of this. Voice commands should *never* be designed to replace the press of the button...they'll never be perfectly accurate, and they're much slower. Having to tell a character to fire their gun, reload, get out of the line of fire...this would be utterly frustrating. Instead, the player should be using voice *in a manner that reflects an actual usage of voice*...in this particular case, directing a small squad of units. It's how it would actually be done. The minutia, the small stuff, is handled intelligently by the AI. And the speech isn't just one-way: the characters ask you questions, they talk back, it becomes a dialogue. It's a very immersive experience, and helps to tie the player emotionally to the characters. Using generic "army dudes" in a game like this is severely limiting its potential, which is why we've been sure to write a script that takes full advantage.
Could it work? Dunno. I'm still skeptical. But I really enjoyed Sequence—which is a fun, albeit grindy little rhythm-RPG—so maybe Wishnov can pull this thing off too.
Ars Technica reports that a vulnerability on Origin, the game platform by EA, has been found. It's an exploit that allows Origin to become an "attack platform" that can install malware on your computer.
Under normal circumstances, the Origin website creates links which allow it to uninstall or launch games, along with other similar tasks. If a user clicks on a special Origin link created by an attacker, Origin will execute code that might be dangerous for your computer. The links start as "origin://," so it goes without saying that you should be wary of clicking anything like that if it's not coming from Origin itself.
This exploit is similar to one found before on Steam—only those links start as "Steam://." It might be a good idea to set your browser such that it asks you before automatically opening either Origin or Steam links, just to be safe. Otherwise, it might open them automatically if you click on them—and it's possible that an attacker manages to trick you into doing so.
UPDATE: EA comments:
"Our team is constantly investigating hypotheticals like this one as we continually update our security infrastructure."
Breaking a habit is no easy thing—even when a game designer does their best to give players options.
Take Call of Duty: Black Ops II, for instance. Few things are as seductive to a CoD player as perfecting their kill/death ratio, and little about the game is designed from the ground up to encourage anything other than lone-wolf, kill-focused play. Even if that wasn't true, could you blame the average player? For years, the franchise has primed them to play in a certain way.
Getting players to change the way they look at a game is a Herculean task. Treyarch made a noble attempt when they included "scorestreaks," which reward players for their overall score. That includes kills, captures, objectives, assists and so on. Conceptually, the hope is that players would have an incentive to focus on something other than kills. In my experience, that hasn't actually happened.
I can't help but muse on this now while playing Gears of War: Judgment online. If you've ever played a competitive Gears mode, you might have noticed that most players live and die by the Gnasher shotgun. Last time I checked, about 45% of all kills in quickmatch are via Gnasher—keep in mind that the game has like two dozen types of weapons! It doesn't matter. Some players are so blindly devoted to the Gnasher that they'll refuse to use anything else—even when, say, trying to kill someone at long-range.
Sometimes, if you use something other than a shotgun, players will get mad at you for it, if not try to downplay your prowess in trash talk. It's as if it's widely accepted that there is only one way to play Gears of War, and that's with your shotgun out. In a way, this habit makes sense—the shotgun is an excellent weapon, particularly if you're a fan of gibbing.
Gears of War has gone through great pains to try to alter the shotgun predilection. Assault rifles were modified so much so that one of them-the retro lancer-could effectively be used in close range in a one-on-one against a shotgun-wielding opponent. The lancer rifle was beefed up to seriously hurt at long range. On the opposite end, the shotgun's starting ammo was decreased. More fantastic power weapons were developed. A new type of shotgun introduced, too—the sawed off shotgun. (Solving a shotgun problem with a shotgun? Sort of—the gun is so powerful that players might stand back and shoot at long rage instead of trying to gib up close.)
Despite all of that, you would guess the majority of players still seemed to think the Gnasher was the only weapon available, in the same way that many people defaulted to Ken Masters when playing Street Fighter IV online. It seems like most communities develop something like this—a preferred mode of play that people follow closely. Almost too closely—you start to wonder if they know there are other ways of playing a game. The hardcore Smash Bros. community has that famous meme, for example: Fox only, no items, Final Destination. Here, too, it doesn't matter that there are literally hundreds of other ways of playing the game. Nope. Only one character and no items whatsoever, on a very specific stage!
Not everyone follows trends like that of course—in Gears of War's case, some of us took great joy in lancering other people down: it can be more effective at killing people than the shotgun is, under the right circumstances. Plus, it is particularly delicious to see the utter confusion some people had when they saw that their holy shotgun wasn't pulling miracles anymore.
You start to wonder if they know there are other ways of playing a game.
It still took a long time for me to stop automatically switching to a shotgun at the start of the match, though. Once I did, I was happy to find that a fantastic game only became better when you diversified what guns you used. I can't help but wonder how many games we play like this—where we assume one method of play or one specific trend is the only valuable or fun option. What if it's not?
Things are different in Gears of War: Judgment, though. You have to choose between either your assault rifle and a shotgun, coupled with a secondary pistol, instead of starting matches with both as in the older Gears games. So far, in the limited community I've encountered pre-release, almost everyone rolls with a shotgun. That includes me, though it feels like agony to have to choose in the first place. I wish I didn't have to choose—I wish I could use the appropriate tool for the job. Now it's like I've fallen back on a bad habit.
I'm afraid that this design choice will cement Gears as a shotgun-only game, even if players can pick up other weapons. Hell, I'm afraid that for most players, it won't even seem like a choice. But then again, looking at how difficult it is to get players to stop doing what they want to—well, maybe what choices People Can Fly offer us don't matter. The Multiplayer is a weekly column that looks at how people crash into each other while playing games. It runs every Monday at 6PM ET.
John Riccitiello, CEO of game publisher Electronic Arts, is stepping down from his position.
Former EA CEO and board chairman Larry Probst will take over while the board searches for a new replacement, EA said.
Riccitiello, who was first hired as CEO of the massive publisher in 2007, has faced criticism from investors and fans over the past few years as Electronic Arts has gone through all sorts of financial difficulties. In December, Riccitiello was listed as one of "eight CEOS to fire in 2013" by the blog 24/7 Wall Street.
Riccitiello always portrayed the image of an exec who actually plays games. The bosses at Activision or Microsoft wouldn't talk about the games they played. But Riccitiello would happily chat not just about his experiences with EA's own but about the competition's. And if you got him talking about, say, EA's Mirror's Edge, he'd express design ideas about how to make it better.
Here's what EA's stock has looked like since Riccitiello took over in April of 2007:
EA's financials took a dive during the recession in 2008 and have not come close to recovering since. The past six months have been particularly rocky for the publisher behind games like Battlefield and Madden.
In 2007, when Riccitiello first took over the company, he divided Electronic Arts into four labels: EA Games, EA Sports, EA Casual, and The Sims. Later that year, he oversaw one of EA's biggest acquisitions in the past decade, the purchase of VG Holding Corp, the company that then owned Pandemic Studios and BioWare, the well-respected developers behind role-playing games like Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic and Mass Effect.
In early 2008, news came out that EA had attempted to purchase Take-Two, the publisher behind Grand Theft Auto. Take-Two rejected EA's bid.
Although EA's sports label has found a great deal of success with the can't-fail Madden NFL series, the publisher has struggled to compete in the realm of basketball over the past few years, failing a few times to relaunch NBA Live, which has not been published since 2009.
Over the course of Riccitiello's tenure, EA took a number of risks on creative games that went outside the company's comfort zone, including Mirror's Edge, Brutal Legend, and Spore. They succeeded with some projects—The Simpsons: Tapped Out has been one of the most popular games on iOS—and struggled with others, like Star Wars: The Old Republic, which eventually had to go free-to-play after an unsuccessful launch in late 2011.
EA's most recent misstep was the SimCity debacle, which we've detailed here.
Here's the full press release announcing Riccitiello's departure, via EA:
REDWOOD CITY, Calif.—(BUSINESS WIRE)— Electronic Arts Inc. (NASDAQ: EA) today announced that John Riccitiello will step down as Chief Executive Officer and as a member of the Board of Directors, effective March 30. The Board has appointed Larry Probst as Executive Chairman to ensure a smooth transition and to lead EA's executive team while the Board conducts a search for a permanent CEO. The Board will consider internal and external candidates with the assistance of a leading executive search firm.
Mr. Probst has played a leadership role at EA since 1991. In addition to serving as Chairman of the Board since 1994, he previously served as the Company's CEO from 1991 to 2007. As CEO, Probst successfully grew the Company's annual revenues from $175 million to approximately $3 billion, led EA into new platforms such as mobile, online and other emerging markets and expanded its international presence to more than 75 countries.
"We thank John for his contributions to EA since he was appointed CEO in 2007, especially the passion, dedication and energy he brought to the Company every single day," said Mr. Probst. "John has worked hard to lead the Company through challenging transitions in our industry, and was instrumental in driving our very significant growth in digital revenues. We appreciate John's leadership and the many important strategic initiatives he has driven for the Company. We have mutually agreed that this is the right time for a leadership transition."
On behalf of the Board, Lead Director Richard A. Simonson stated, "As we begin the CEO search, we are fortunate that Larry, who has a proven track record with our employees, partners and customers, has agreed to assume a day-to-day leadership role as Executive Chairman. He has 16 years of experience as CEO of EA and a deep understanding of the Company's strategy, management team, business potential and industry trends."
Mr. Riccitiello stated, "EA is an outstanding company with creative and talented employees, and it has been an honor to serve as the Company's CEO. I am proud of what we have accomplished together, and after six years I feel it is the right time for me pass the baton and let new leadership take the Company into its next phase of innovation and growth. I remain very optimistic about EA's future - there is a world class team driving the Company's transition to the next generation of game consoles."
And here's the letter John Riccitiello sent to EA:
To Everyone at EA –
I am writing with some tough news. I have resigned my position as EA's CEO. I will be around for a couple of weeks, and I hope to have the chance to say goodbye to many of you. Larry Probst will be stepping in as Executive Chairman to help smooth the transition. Larry first hired me at EA in 1997 and he was an incredible leader for the company during the 16 years he served as CEO. While he will continue to be the Chairman of the US Olympic Committee, he will also provide leadership for EA until a permanent CEO is appointed.
My decision to leave EA is really all about my accountability for the shortcomings in our financial results this year. It currently looks like we will come in at the low end of, or slightly below, the financial guidance we issued to the Street, and we have fallen short of the internal operating plan we set one year ago. And for that, I am 100 percent accountable.
Personally, I think we've never been in a better position as a company. You have made enormous progress in improving product quality. You are now generating more revenue on fewer titles by making EA's games better and bigger. You've navigated a rapidly transforming industry to create a digital business that is now approximately $1.5 billion and growing fast. The big investments you've made in creating EA's own platform are now showing solid returns. I believe EA is alone in mastering the challenges of building a platform for our games and services – a platform that will provide a more direct relationship with our consumers. You are number one in the fastest growing segment, mobile, with incredible games like The Simpsons: Tapped Out, Real Racing 3, Bejeweled, SCRABBLE and Plants v. Zombies. You have worked to put EA in a position to capture industry leadership on the next generation of consoles; and I believe two of our titles – Battlefield and FIFA – will be among the top few franchises in the entire industry. And the industry's most talented management team – Frank, Rajat, Peter, Gaby, Andrew, Patrick, Blake, Joel and Jeff — are certain to lead the company to a successful future.
I remain an incredible fan of EA and everyone who works in our world – from Stockholm to Seoul, Orlando to Edmonton, Guildford, Geneva, Cologne, Lyon, Bucharest, Montreal, Austin, Salt Lake, LA and, of course, EARS. My hope is that my travels and yours allow us the opportunity to talk more in the months and years to come.
In a few weeks, I will be leaving EA physically. But I will never leave emotionally. I am so incredibly proud of all the great things you have done, and it has been my honor to lead this team these past six years. After March, I will be cheering wildly for EA from the sidelines.
Games with isometric graphics—a slightly rotated view with a top-down perspective—were a big deal several years ago. Static, isometric maps, mostly used in strategy and role-playing games, allowed the developers to create spectacular, detailed visuals, and most of them have aged really well.
If you've been playing big-budget action video games over the last couple of years, you've probably noticed a few trends. The graphics have gotten better. The animations have become more lifelike. The explosions have gotten more explosive.
EA's CEO John Riccitiello has 
![Hackers Find Origin Exploit, Can Get At Your PC [UPDATE]](http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/18hwes2nn2yjmjpg/original.jpg "Hackers Find Origin Exploit, Can Get At Your PC [UPDATE]")
John Riccitiello, CEO of game publisher Electronic Arts, is stepping down from his position.