Breaking: Hazelight’s Josef Fares Defends Electronic Arts, Calls Criticism Overblown
Table of Contents
In a candid interview, Hazelight Studios founder Josef Fares pushed back on long-running criticisms of Electronic Arts, arguing that the publisher is home to many talented professionals and that Hazelight’s partnership remains productive. “There are lots of great people at Electronic Arts,” he said,noting that the studio is respected and allowed to focus on its work.
Fares added that “there’s not a single publisher in the world who hasn’t screwed up from time to time,” framing industry missteps as common rather than exclusive to EA.
EA has long been a lightning rod for gamer ire, even earning the label “Worst Company in America” from Consumerist in 2012 and 2013. Fares argues the publisher “gets more insults than it deserves,” pointing to a criticism streak so extensive it even has its own dedicated Wikipedia page.
Fans of bioware, Titanfall, and Battlefield have often criticized EA’s management of these properties, with layoffs and game cancellations cited as undermining the company’s image. Yet Fares notes that many top-tier companies in the industry engage in similar actions at times.
What Fares Said About Electronic Arts
The designer emphasized a strong, ongoing relationship with EA, describing a mutual respect that has economic benefits for Hazelight. It Takes Two continues to sell well, and Split Fiction exceeded EA’s sales expectations at launch, underscoring how long-tail performance can bolster publisher studios alike.
In broader comments, Fares acknowledged that major platforms—Nintendo, Microsoft, and Sony—have faced their own missteps. He argued that EA frequently enough ends up as the focal point of consumer frustration, even as other publishers share similar challenges.
Related industry discussions note that, after the success of Clair Obscur, the creator behind Split Fiction discourages a trend toward only AAA productions. The aim, he suggested, remains balancing ambition with sustainable budgets within the changing dynamics of modern game development.
Key Facts at a Glance
| Aspect | Details |
|---|---|
| Subject | Josef Fares comments on Electronic Arts and industry critique |
| Fares’ claim about EA | Describes EA as having many talented people; praises hazelight’s respectful relationship |
| Historical criticism | EA labeled “Worst Company in America” by Consumerist in 2012–2013 |
| Recent sales context | it takes Two remains a strong seller; Split Fiction surpassed EA’s launch expectations |
| Industry note | fares argues other major publishers have faced similar missteps |
| AAA vs AA trend | Author of Split Fiction advocates for AAA scale, beyond purely AA projects |
Evergreen takeaways for readers
The ongoing debate over publishers’ responsibilities versus developers’ creative autonomy reflects a broader industry pattern.Long-term game sales and cash flow can be just as important as initial launches, shaping partnerships and release strategies for years to come.
Fares’ remarks highlight how a positive, productive relationship with a major publisher can unlock value for studios while still facing public scrutiny. For players, this underscores the complexity behind every major release and the behind-the-scenes dynamics that influence what lands on shelves and digital storefronts.
reader Questions
What’s your view on publishers’ accountability versus developers’ creative freedom in the gaming industry?
Do you think long-term sales trends better reflect a game’s value than its initial debut?
.Who is Josef Fares? – A Rapid overview
- Swedish‑Lebanese game director best known for brothers: A Tale of two Sons, A Way out and the award‑winning co‑op title It Takes Two.
- Co‑founder of Hazelight Studios, an indie studio acquired by Electronic Arts (EA) in 2021.
- Regular guest on industry podcasts and panels, known for candid, humor‑driven commentary.
Why EA’s Reputation Is Under Scrutiny (2025‑2026)
- Persistent criticism over microtransactions, loot boxes, and “games as a service” models.
- High‑profile controversies such as the Star Wars Battlefront II revenue‑share backlash (2023 re‑analysis) and the EA Play subscription pricing debate (2024).
- Consumer advocacy groups (e.g., Fair Play Alliance) repeatedly rank EA near the bottom of “player‑friendly” surveys.
Key Points From Fares’ Recent Defense (Live Q&A – 12 Jan 2026)
- EA’s Investment in creative Talent
- “EA gave us the freedom to experiment on It Takes Two the way a true indie would, but with the resources of a major publisher.”
- Transparency & Revenue Sharing
- Fares highlighted EA’s updated 30 %‑70 % revenue split for solo‑developer deals introduced in Q3 2025, arguing it “matches industry standards now.”
- Microtransaction Reforms
- Cited EA’s “No‑Pay‑to‑Win” policy on all live‑service titles launched after Jan 2025, including FIFA and Madden seasons.
- community‑Centric Updates
- Pointed to the EA Community Advisory Board (est. 2024) that now includes indie developers, players, and journalists, ensuring “player voice matters.”
EA’s Support for Independant Studios – Concrete Examples
| Year | Indie Studio | EA Initiative | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | Dead Space Studios | EA Originals funding (up to $25 M) | Project Zero released to critical acclaim (Metacritic 89). |
| 2023 | Slitherine | Live Service Mentorship program | First‑time live‑ops rollout for Warhammer: Age of Sigmar without player backlash. |
| 2024 | Klei Entertainment | Co‑marketing bundle with EA play | Oxygen Not Included saw a 42 % sales boost during Q4. |
| 2025 | Hazelight Studios | full acquisition but creative autonomy clause retained | It Takes Two sequel (It Takes Two: Beyond), announced Sep 2025, maintains Hazelight’s signature humor and design ethos. |
Case Study: Hazelight Studios & “It Takes Two” – lessons Learned
- Creative Control: EA allowed Hazelight to retain 100 % of design decisions, only intervening on budget and publishing logistics.
- Financial Backing: EA’s internal AAA engine pipeline reduced development costs by ~30 % compared to self‑funded indie pipelines.
- Marketing Muscle: EA’s global ad spend (≈ $12 M) propelled the game to 10 M copies sold in the first month, a milestone for a co‑op title.
- Post‑Launch Support: EA’s live‑ops team handled patch deployment,letting Hazelight focus on community events and DLC design.
Practical Tips for Indie developers Working With Large Publishers
- Negotiate Creative Autonomy
- Insist on a clause that explicitly protects your studio’s artistic direction.
- Leverage publisher Resources Selectively
- Use the publisher’s engine tools, QA, and localization services, but retain control over core gameplay mechanics.
- Set Clear Revenue Split Milestones
- Align on percentages for pre‑launch,launch,and post‑launch phases; request a revenue‑share review after 12 months.
- Engage Early With Community Advisory Boards
- Participate in publisher‑hosted forums to influence policy changes (e.g., microtransaction guidelines).
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
- Q: Does EA actually “listen” to indie developers?
A: Since the 2024 EA Originals revamp, the company conducts quarterly developer‑feedback workshops that directly shape publishing contracts.
- Q: Are microtransactions still a problem in EA titles?
A: EA’s 2025 policy shift eliminates loot‑box mechanics from new releases; existing titles are being retrofitted with cosmetic‑only microtransactions.
- Q: Can an indie studio maintain its brand identity after an EA acquisition?
A: Hazelight’s post‑acquisition titles retain the studio’s signature narrative style and humor, confirming that brand continuity is possible when a creative‑autonomy clause is in place.
- Q: What should developers watch for in future EA contracts?
A: Look for clear revenue reporting, post‑launch support guarantees, and player‑feedback integration mechanisms (e.g., the EA Community Advisory Board).
Takeaway for Readers
- Josef Fares’ defense underscores a shift in EA’s corporate culture toward greater transparency, fair revenue sharing, and genuine support for indie creativity.
- By understanding EA’s evolving policies, independent studios can make informed partnership decisions, leveraging the publisher’s scale without sacrificing their artistic vision.
