In the 8-bit days, EA was all about the games. It wasn't until the arrival of the Amiga and DPaint that they started selling tools. And the internal vision of their toolbuilders didn't match what they were selling to the end users, IMHO. I had more than a few EA c64/Amiga games, and some of their Amiga creative apps. Nobody I knew who was serious about music used DMusic, DVideo was an awkward attempt at solving a problem that the hardware didn't have anywhere near enough oomph to really nail, I can't even remember what the other Deluxe Tools were. But DPaint... DPaint was the king.
As a teenager with a c64, the EA brand meant "really interesting games that were worth buying for, which was good because their copy protection was really tough". And reading the album-styled packages with their moody photographs of game devs trying to look like rockstars along with the vision statement ads about how Games Are Art, and Game-Makers Are Artists? Hell, whether or not Games Are Art is argument still being had today.
Actually this article inspired me to look for some of the old packages on ebay, which actually are a little pricey.
Electronic Arts in their early years really inspired a vision of computers taking creative endeavors to a whole new level. Even their early ads in the computer magazines still give me goosebumps.
They were not a huge company and they had a full on "Creativity" group. Deluxe Paint, Deluxe Music, Deluxe Animation, Deluxe Video, Studio/8 and Studio/32 for Mac...
It wasn't until Sega Genesis that they went whole-hog on games. And even then they were distracted by edutainment software and other stuff.
I agree with what you're saying however I am pointing out that the core premise of the article ('Trip was all about games, he birthed a Game Company') is a little false. Trip was all over the map. For proof of this I typed in their official corporate charter above, as published in 1987. It does not contain the word "game."
EA began in 1982, not 1987. If I google 'c64 electronic arts', the entire first page of results is about games. Same with 'atari 800 electronic arts'; 'apple ii electronic arts' brings up mention of a few of their various 'something construction kit' titles, about half of which were really just games with level editors.
From the wikipedia page on DPaint:
DPaint began as an in-house art development tool called Prism. As author Dan Silva added features to Prism, it was developed as a showcase product to coincide with the Amiga's debut in 1985. [...] Deluxe Paint was first in a series of products from the Electronic Arts Tools group, which included such Amiga programs as Deluxe Music, Deluxe Video, and the Studio series of paint programs for the Macintosh.
I was there. EA optioned one of my games in 1989. Even the Wiki article gets it right: "In the late 1980s, the company began developing games in-house and supported consoles by the early 1990s."
They were a publisher and sort of a crappy one. And the reason EA exists today is because the tools/creativity group helped it weather the wacky games market.
The retro movement largely ignores all the amazing apps that were made back then. Old games are fun to play. Old apps? Not so much. Though you kids should. Now get off my lawn.
As a teenager with a c64, the EA brand meant "really interesting games that were worth buying for, which was good because their copy protection was really tough". And reading the album-styled packages with their moody photographs of game devs trying to look like rockstars along with the vision statement ads about how Games Are Art, and Game-Makers Are Artists? Hell, whether or not Games Are Art is argument still being had today.