True. But EA Sports never has catered to the hardcore console sports gamer. Ever. It's not a niche company, and hardcore sports console gamers like us are a niche group.
EA is going to do what's best for its bottom line and for general sports console gamers who put graphics and "extras" on the same level of importance as gameplay, not the rabid like us for whom gameplay stands tall above all. That's not a criticism or compliment, just an observation.
Take care,
PK
"You know why I love boxers? I love them because they face fear. And they face it alone." - Nick Charles
"First on the throttle, last on the brakes." - @MotoGP Twitter signature
- Keep the same team colors, like Silver and Black for the Oakland franchise, Blue and Gold for the Rams, etc.
- Put in fake team names like Oakland Maruders or St. Louis Bucks. But make those names easily user-editable. Just click on them and rename.
- Put in user-friendly editing tools, with keyboard support, so that you can scan in faces, type in names, edit attributes (maybe even a PC utility where you enter the numbers).
- Put in file sharing tools in the game so that you can connect and shared saved custom rosters. Just a simple email client or some way to upload and download custom roster files to and from some web site, WITHOUT having to use Action Replay or XPort or anything like that.
In other words, make it easy for the community to just ignore the licensing agreements.
Only problem is it would not be good for Xbox gamers since MS will probably veto any user-created files being exchanged on XBL, especially those which the NFL will no doubt complain about infringing on their license.
Oh and it might not hurt to underprice their games, since they won't have to pay the NFL and NFLPA licenses.
BTW, how likely is it that the NFL would grant an exclusive licenses to all platforms for a 4-year window when there are new platforms coming? I would think they would grant licenses explicity for each and every platform where the games will ship.
Well Madden and NCAA may not be some people's idea of the hardcore sim but for a lot of people, not everyone who buy these games but for a lot, they are sims with features and gameplay which appeal to the hardcore.
It's not just NFL players who play these games. It's high school and college players too and probably Pop Warner players. In other words, anyone with more than just a casual interest in the sport and gaming.
ESPN captures a lot of nuances that Madden doesn't and vice versa. I've no doubt that the development team and producers for both games are avid football fans and interested in producing sims. But they also yield to market realities by putting in things like Madden Cards and the Crib.
wco81 wrote:If this went down, here's what Sega should do:
- Keep the same team colors, like Silver and Black for the Oakland franchise, Blue and Gold for the Rams, etc.
- Put in fake team names like Oakland Maruders or St. Louis Bucks. But make those names easily user-editable. Just click on them and rename.
- Put in user-friendly editing tools, with keyboard support, so that you can scan in faces, type in names, edit attributes (maybe even a PC utility where you enter the numbers).
- Put in file sharing tools in the game so that you can connect and shared saved custom rosters. Just a simple email client or some way to upload and download custom roster files to and from some web site, WITHOUT having to use Action Replay or XPort or anything like that.
In other words, make it easy for the community to just ignore the licensing agreements.
Only problem is it would not be good for Xbox gamers since MS will probably veto any user-created files being exchanged on XBL, especially those which the NFL will no doubt complain about infringing on their license.
Oh and it might not hurt to underprice their games, since they won't have to pay the NFL and NFLPA licenses.
BTW, how likely is it that the NFL would grant an exclusive licenses to all platforms for a 4-year window when there are new platforms coming? I would think they would grant licenses explicity for each and every platform where the games will ship.
This deal does NOT include NFL team names, logos, uniforms, coaches, or the NFL name. Sega already has the NFL license. This is a deal with the NFLPA.
Or Sega should just put everything they have on the line to acquire the NFL license. This could do two things.
Get Sega and EA Sports in a bidding war. If Sega can drive up the price high enough to something astonomical, it could really put a damper on EA Sports. Possibly even cut into profits just to acquire the license.
Or Sega should just bid for the damn license. If Sega could acquire the license it could spell the end for Madden. Surely that would put Sega firmly in charge of the football game market. Like PK said, a lot of people would buy Madden because ESPN would have fake players. Will I'm sure a lot of Madden fans don't want to play Madden were you have player's name Falcon QB 7.
I still would be surprised if either the NFL or the NFLPA gave out an exclusive license. I think the N64 deal was a fluke and that one, the exclusivity was only on that platform.
So exclusivity for 4 years now is meaningless since there are new platforms coming out within that time period.
Still if the licenses are based on volume, that could be the pitfall of one game dominating the market share. NFL and NFLPA could determine that most of their licensing income is coming from EA so they could do without the others, if EA is willing to pay more.
However, Larry Probst was talking about how EA will not overpay for licensing rights. He gave the example of the LOTR series where he said other publishers offered higher bids but the producers of the movies went with EA because they had the production and marketing/distribution resources that other publishers didn't. So it would be out of character for EA to overbid.
The other thing which would be bad if licenses were exclusive is that EA might raise prices. Direct TV is paying a fortune for the exclusive Sunday Ticket rights and they're passing on big increases to the subscribers, whereas if the rights weren't exclusive, then the subscription fees wouldn't be as high.
wco81 wrote:I still would be surprised if either the NFL or the NFLPA gave out an exclusive license. I think the N64 deal was a fluke and that one, the exclusivity was only on that platform.
So exclusivity for 4 years now is meaningless since there are new platforms coming out within that time period.
Still if the licenses are based on volume, that could be the pitfall of one game dominating the market share. NFL and NFLPA could determine that most of their licensing income is coming from EA so they could do without the others, if EA is willing to pay more.
However, Larry Probst was talking about how EA will not overpay for licensing rights. He gave the example of the LOTR series where he said other publishers offered higher bids but the producers of the movies went with EA because they had the production and marketing/distribution resources that other publishers didn't. So it would be out of character for EA to overbid.
The other thing which would be bad if licenses were exclusive is that EA might raise prices. Direct TV is paying a fortune for the exclusive Sunday Ticket rights and they're passing on big increases to the subscribers, whereas if the rights weren't exclusive, then the subscription fees wouldn't be as high.
Exactly. IMO, Congress through public pressure needs to put a lid on the NFL and this stupid exclusive contract with Directv and now perhaps with EA. It does not benefity the consumer in anyway. I have Directv and there is no way I can go without it thanks to Directv's monopoly on the NFL. I would love to switch to DISH or something else to get some lower prices, but they have the damned exclusive NFL contract and I can't watch my favorite team without it.
This is trust like business activity, by a league that is allowed certain exemptions from AntiTrust legislation. They need to be checked.
wco81 wrote:I still would be surprised if either the NFL or the NFLPA gave out an exclusive license. I think the N64 deal was a fluke and that one, the exclusivity was only on that platform.
Acclaim/NFL QB Club had exclusive rights to the NFL license that year. This resulted in higher sales for NFL QB Club over Madden64, which did not have NFL Teams/logos/uniforms. This was the last time a Madden game was outsold by the competition on the same platform.
>>>This deal does NOT include NFL team names, logos, uniforms, coaches, or the NFL name. Sega already has the NFL license. This is a deal with the NFLPA.<<<
No difference. You want to play an NFL game with real team names, real uniforms and coaches and fake player names?
I don't.
Authentic team names and uniforms only would make it a smidge easier to do Action Replay updates. Just a tiny smidge.
EA still has the football game market by the balls whether it locks up the rights to team names, logos and player names or just player names. The players make the game, not the teams.
Take care,
PK
"You know why I love boxers? I love them because they face fear. And they face it alone." - Nick Charles
"First on the throttle, last on the brakes." - @MotoGP Twitter signature
I know I am in the minority, but I could give a rats ass whether my digital QB is named after real players or not. But that is neither here nor there.
But I sure has hell would not go out and buy Madden if this were to happen. Basically, what EA is doing is what all big companies do: take a short term loss to completely own the market. Frito Lay did this in the snack food market by buying shelf space they did not need just to keep the competitors off the shelf. It effectively kept the competitors off the shelf and put a lot of them out of business. I remember how great Eagle Snacks chips and pretzels tasted. But they went belly up for the same reason Sega Sports will go belly up if this deal goes into effect.
Ultimately it has nothing to do with making a better product. Rather than put that money into making a better game, they use it to shut down the opposition. Something like this could just make me say the hell with it and quit gaming.
Ultimately it has nothing to do with making a better product. Rather than put that money into making a better game, they use it to shut down the opposition. Something like this could just make me say the hell with it and quit gaming.
Gaming is a business, as cutthroat as any other. Companies in the gaming business are all out to make money, not bring happieness and magic to the children and all kind-hearted souls.
And really, to say EA is choosing heavy-handed business tactics instead of investing in improving their product is somewhat unfair, no? As if they're not interested or haven't improved their products?
I know this is the wrong question to ask in a capitalist society, but when is enough really enough? EA is already making a ton of profits. They own the industry.
I am not a naive child. I understand the business tactics of EA and for that matter, Sega and Sonyand Microsoft and all the other players. But that doesn't mean that I have to like them. It might make them mega bucks but it doesn't do very much for the consumer.
And sure, Madden and other EA games have improved. But really, how much? Frankly, With their limitless resources, EA should be red faced over the fact that ESPN/Sega had better graphics last year. And for being the flagship of the EA sports franchise, Madden has the absolute worst audio of any game out there. Sure, they have to live with Madden's tired and inadequate voice-overs (just like we do on Monday nights) but couldn't they at least pump up the crowd? Madden may be the deepest sports video game in the world, but it has the personality of Microsoft Access. And for such a great game it has pathetically limited playbooks. And Madden really suffers by comparison to the real NFL. Special teams are such a big part of the NFL, yet we have none of the excitement or passion of the real game here in Madden.
When you think about it, it's not a bad way to make a fortune. Build a game engine for the new console and over the lifespan of the console, gradually add new features while fixing the ones that don't work correctly.
EA does it. Sega does it. Pretty much standard practice.
To be fair to Madden and EA and the whole gaming industry, they are doing nothing that we don't see in the the entertainment industry as a whole. You don't see a lot of innovation or intelligence coming out of Hollywood either. And most of the songs we listen to and books we read are just more of the same thing - lacking in creativity, intelligence or personality.
And before anyone calls me a spoiled child who wants more cookies than are in the jar, keep in mind that I simply view the gaming industry the same way the industry views their profit margin. If EA can take the stance that winning isn't enough and crushing the opposition is the only way to go, then why the hell can't I take the position that the improvements in Madden aren't even close to being enough? If EA can afford to pay all that money for the rights to player names, then I don't want to hear a bunch of crap about the limitations of a 1 year cycle for sports game development. That may be true for the 3DO's of this world, but there is no reason that a company with the money and resources of EA can't put together a lot more improvements than we are seeing on a year-to-year basis.
Same old tired complaint. You can say the same of Sega or any of these companies.
Gaming is a business, as cutthroat as any other. Companies in the gaming business are all out to make money, not bring happieness and magic to the children and all kind-hearted souls.
This is a sad statement. Sadder still is that this is the motto companies (especially ones in the USA) live by. So now video games are somehow NOT about making people happy? Video games are entertainment. By definition it is supposed to entertain us. Making money is part of it, but when you start focusing solely on $$$ and forget what it is you are creating, then your cerations turn to garbage. Another sad note is that a good majority of sheep will still buy this garbage.
I am ashamed more every day of how our country works. I still can't get over those first few: "Gaming is a business...". Didn't the definition of the word game used to mean something that was fun, and brought joy to someone?
Everything else I wanted to say Kevin already said.
But you know by now that there are millions or billions involved now in this entertainment business. You only have to look at the GDC or the E3 to understand that.
There are no garage band startups, driven only by their imagination. There is cultivation of "franchises" which is why most games are sequels. You better believe they're more concerned with return on equity than innovative gameplay.
Besides which, I've always distrusted companies who talk about making the world better with their products, from their multibillion, multinational entity, as opposed to those more honest about what they're about.
EA products must entertain a lot of people, otherwise they wouldn't be purchased by the bushel basket. Marketing moves a lot of units, for sure, but people ultimately wouldn't return to buy the next year's version if they didn't like the game.
Again, we're the hardcore. We're a niche. Most of us aren't served well by EA's emphasis on gimmicks with minute gameplay improvements year to year.
But no company knows what the "average" masses of gamers want better than EA, and satisfying that huge group also delivers EA massive profits. Give credit where credit is due.
Take care,
PK
"You know why I love boxers? I love them because they face fear. And they face it alone." - Nick Charles
"First on the throttle, last on the brakes." - @MotoGP Twitter signature
EA products must entertain a lot of people, otherwise they wouldn't be purchased by the bushel basket. Marketing moves a lot of units, for sure, but people ultimately wouldn't return to buy the next year's version if they didn't like the game.
Again, we're the hardcore. We're a niche. Most of us aren't served well by EA's emphasis on gimmicks with minute gameplay improvements year to year.
But no company knows what the "average" masses of gamers want better than EA, and satisfying that huge group also delivers EA massive profits. Give credit where credit is due.
Take care,
PK
Well, I think you have Madden and NCAA, and then all the other EA games. I like Madden, and it was a close choice between that and ESPN for me last year. If ESPN hadn't been around, I would have been pretty happy with Madden. NCAA is also a nice surprise because, despite having no real competition, it's a high quality title and has been for several years.
I don't imagine EA could make a rights grab like this for any other sport, simply because other sports genres don't come close to Madden's sales.
Brando70 wrote:
Well, I think you have Madden and NCAA, and then all the other EA games.
At last count, EA had 23 titles sell 1 million units or more in 2003. And Madden is not their best selling franchise (re: Sims, et al...yuck IMHO). Even TW PS2 sold over a million copies, so they do know how to turn franchises into profits...consistently...
Brando70 wrote:
Well, I think you have Madden and NCAA, and then all the other EA games.
At last count, EA had 23 titles sell 1 million units or more in 2003. And Madden is not their best selling franchise (re: Sims, et al...yuck IMHO). Even TW PS2 sold over a million copies, so they do know how to turn franchises into profits...consistently...
Actually, BB, I was thinking in terms of sim quality, not profit. They have franchises down to a science, it's just that the sports ones tend to not be as realistic as hardcore sports gamers would like. Although I forgot TW 2004 for the PC, which was so realistic that my cyber golf game was as bad as my real life one
One thing that I believe will help will be XBL play. I find EA games tend to be disappointing as one player sports games because their AI is not as sharp as other games (Madden being an exception). However, head-to-head tends to fix a lot of those problems.
Brando70 wrote:Actually, BB, I was thinking in terms of sim quality, not profit. They have franchises down to a science, it's just that the sports ones tend to not be as realistic as hardcore sports gamers would like. Although I forgot TW 2004 for the PC, which was so realistic that my cyber golf game was as bad as my real life one
One thing that I believe will help will be XBL play. I find EA games tend to be disappointing as one player sports games because their AI is not as sharp as other games (Madden being an exception). However, head-to-head tends to fix a lot of those problems.
EA Sports is the most visible brand, which a lot of people associate with sports video games. I think if EA Sports games fail to be realistic in various aspects, a lot of people assume that video games in general could only go so far in realism. The truth is, there will always be limits in how far games could simulate sports.
Now a lot of people prefer Sega for being more realistic and they often chide EA games for not being as realistic as Sega games. Yet, these same Sega advocates will overlook glaring statistical anomalies or tolerate them. The truth is, EA and Sega both face limitations and competing goals. Often, adding new features or moving to a new platform breaks old code which may have yielded more "realistic" gameplay or stats. That in general is the nature of software.
As for XBL, it's interesting how much media coverage this is getting. For all the millions of games sold, only a few thousand gamers go online with any regularity. EA exclusivity on PS2 online wasn't responsible for Sony's market share lead nor will EA on XBL change the volumes shipped appreciably. A lot of hardcore guys may switch but they're not big enough to materially change the respective market shares.
And pretty much all sports games have poor or uninteresting singleplayer AI. I think people play singleplayer for the team management aspects as much as anything else.
>>>I think people play singleplayer for the team management aspects as much as anything else.<<<
No way. You think the casual gamer, which comprises much of the market, is hardcore enough to put franchises and seasons on the same level as pick-up-and-play gaming?
I don't.
If anything, I see EA's deep franchise as a nod toward the hardcore gamer, not the general gaming public.
Take care,
PK
"You know why I love boxers? I love them because they face fear. And they face it alone." - Nick Charles
"First on the throttle, last on the brakes." - @MotoGP Twitter signature
I'm going to be really interested to see how EA does on XBL this year. Everyone just sort of assumes that it will be pretty seamless. Who knows, maybe it will be.
But then again, it's still the same company that shipped its flagship title last year for the XBox, without a MAJOR component of the game working (i.e., importing NCAA rosters.) Last time I checked, EA still hadn't figured out how to solve Mario Running and/or the 30 yard drop-back QB problems either. I just hope to God that EA doesn't really buy up the NFLPA license. It's bad enough that Directtv was able to get away with it. If EA takes away our choice by choking the competition, simply because it couldn't make a better game, then I might just give up the hobby for good.
Which would be a shame... I can remember my parents telling me when I was a kid playing Odyssey 2 and Intellivision football that I would grow out of that "stage" some day. Now I'm a 33 year old professional and I love it even more than I ever did. But I'd give it up in a minute if Madden's my only choice. Not that Madden's a bad game, but I've lived through the days when EA didn't have any competition, and basically put out roster updates each year. We might still have Mario Running and sprite-based (rather than polygon) players and no online if there were no Sega game (remember, EA said online couldn't be done back back when VC was making it happen on the DC). I ain't going back to those days again.
Man, I can't believe I'm reading that people are considering quitting video games just because EA might buy the NFLPA license. I assume we're all hardcore gamers, so that surprises me.
Do football games mean that much to you? There's no other genre or genres that bring you any pleasure? What about EA's NCAA Football, which receives more universal acclaim than any football franchise?
Take care,
PK
"You know why I love boxers? I love them because they face fear. And they face it alone." - Nick Charles
"First on the throttle, last on the brakes." - @MotoGP Twitter signature
Schmev wrote: I would love to switch to DISH or something else to get some lower prices, but they have the damned exclusive NFL contract and I can't watch my favorite team without it.
Dude, I had DISH for two years, it sucks. Customer service sucks, everything about it sucks. I switched to DirecTV 3 years ago and never looked back. At the time I switched DISH told me they were in the process of buying DirectTV and that it would be pointless for me to switch because I would then have to BUY all their equipment again...still waiting on that one to happen.
