seanmac31 wrote:And just when I'd come back to 2K5 and decided it was actually the better of the two games...
Like everyone else, I'm hoping VC will respond to this by releasing a college game next season. I could care less about college football, but I would absolutely shun NCAA 2006 for a chance to play the 2K engine. For that matter, I'd probably go ahead and pay $20 a year for roster updates and continued online access to 2K5 (is there anything to stop Sega from doing something like that?).
This is an awful day for football gamers, there's no getting around it.
Unfortauntely I don't see that happening. Look at the sales of NCAA 2005 which barely hits over 1,000,000 sales across all the platforms and this is it's best year. There just is no room right now for another college football game. I would love to see it but not holding my breath.
Kazuya wrote: Only people's anti-EA feelings make this even an issue. .
I think people have anti EA feelings because of issues like these.
I'm mad too, but I feel stupid "blaming" a company for trying to be profitable. Sega or anyone else would have tried this deal in a heartbeat if they could. The bottom line is that EA couldn't wake up in the morning and do away with the competition without the NFL's help. The NFL however, could wake up in the morning and do away with the competition, whether EA existed or not.
XXXIV wrote:Anytime competition is removed from the market...the consumer suffers...has nothing to do with EA love or hate.
Before today, EA was trying to kill off the competition in every way possible. But I seriously doubt anyone hated them for it. If they could have done it, they would have killed them off at NFL 2K. They don't have that kind of power.
XXXIV wrote:I took a shot at the NFL much earlier in this thread.
I cant stand this deal or the deal they made with Direct TV....both are huge kicks to my NFL nuts.
Yeah, I saw that. At least a few people are willing to put some blame on the NFL for what happens to their products (imagine that).
"Whatever, I don't know why you even play yourself to that degree,
you laugh at me?" - Del
1) This gives EA even greater hammer power over MS and Sony -- and to a lesser extent, Nintendo -- in the upcoming Next Gen console wars. Think back: good as NFL2k was, the Dreamcast was DOA without Madden. That's how much impact the franchise has in the North American market. Outside of GTA, Halo and Mario, it's the primary reason many people purchase a new console.
So now Madden is the ONLY NFL game in town. Which means any console with Madden exclusivity will crush the one without it, particularly in the early years of the console cycle. Imagine EA telling MS or Sony, 'hey, give us $250 million and we'll give you an exclusive next gen Madden for five years." What's to stop them? They could make back a big chunk of what they paid to the NFL and the NFLPA. And don't think Sony or MS wouldn't consider it.
Even if EA decides to develop for all consoles, they could still extract concessions from the hardware makers, just by the threat alone. Without NFL competition, they have hand, big time. A brilliant strategic move, I think. Whatever EA paid for this, it will be worth it and then some.
2) Say goodbye to the rest of the Sega Sports lineup. NFL football is by far the big seller, and probably funds/allows the other games' development. Bill Abner has already hinted as much, and he has inside perspective. Sega could make a college game, sure, but they'd be back to square one, with no market penetration and no brand equity. And even NCAA 2005 doesn't sell that well, not by Madden standards. EA could concievably buy up the rights to the NBA and NHL, but why bother? They've likely dealt a death blow to Sega Sports. The best we can hope for is that VC's talented people get jobs with EA and can make the games better from within.
3) I would really, really love to see Sega work with Take Two to use the NFL 2k engine to develop some sort of crazy, over the top, "Playmakers" meets "Any Given Sunday" fictional pro football game. I mean, the GTA of football games, the first football game with an "M" rating. No pro liscence? Go nuts. Make a funny, darkly satirical game in the spirit of the GTA series. Imagine a franchise mode with players getting arrested, doing drugs, etc. ... and as an owner, you have to decide how and when to cover it up, with the ESPN college hoops story generator worked in. Imagine backstabbing free agent negotiations, trying to crush other owners and extort your municipality for a better stadium deal. Imagine having to deal with ESPN NBA Association-style player complaints, only the players are complaining about a teammate who is sleeping with their wife. Imagine getting an email from your college scouts: "We like this kid ... but he beat his college girlfriend, has anger management problems and is probably puffed up on steroids. Is he worth the risk?" Imagine the most brutally realistic football game ever, where during weekly prep you have to decide how much Vicodin to give your ailing star quarterback. Just the right amount, his attributes go up. Too much for too long? Now he's an addict, and his stats slowly deteriorate. But maybe you can hide it and trade him to another club. Of course, this game would feature ESPN's unsurpassed graphics, albeit in Next Gen form, and even better, more realistic on-field gameplay. That would come first, like in Konami's soccer series. But done right (and this is where GTA-style satire is key), maybe the Dark Side of the Game hook would give people a reason to buy a game that isn't liscened by the NFL. Stupidly "mature" games like BMXXX don't sell; games with mature themes that don't insult their audience do.
Of course, this will never, ever happen. Probably take far more resources and creativity than the average NFL game to make these ideas actually fun to play. But it would be pretty cool to see someone try.
First dibs on an online Miami Sharks.
You know after seeing Nintendo in development of Mario Baseball and the new smaller football market my money says we see a Mario Football announcement in the next month or so.
JRod wrote:
Kazuya,
You are right, big bad company for making money. Problem is that's the samething every business believes and turns them into a monopoly. They were just trying to make money. Problem is you should be able to make money by making a good product not just killing your competition. We just don't live in a country that cares that much however.
You're absolutely correct, but this isn't a monopoly. You might as well stop trying to get Burger King to have exclusive rights to Schrek. Sega is still free to make video games, even football games. And the NFL is well within their rights to decide who makes games featuring their property.
BTW, I liked your letter a lot. I would have cosigned it.
"Whatever, I don't know why you even play yourself to that degree,
you laugh at me?" - Del
Before today, EA was trying to kill off the competition in every way possible. But I seriously doubt anyone hated them for it. If they could have done it, they would have killed them off at NFL 2K. They don't have that kind of power.
You ever go to the big gaming sites like IGN or gaming-age and visit their boards? The haterd for EA, especially on the Gamecube boards is a daily way of life. Did you miss the Goldeneye flop? The game on the N64 still considered by many the best FPS ever. EA destroyed the game and has taken a ton of flack.
I can't count how many times I have seen it mentioned here about how people hate EA (The company).
P.S. They tried to kill NFL 2K by not supporting Sega and the Dreamcast.
Last edited by bdoughty on Mon Dec 13, 2004 11:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I'm wondering what the team & player editor for NFL 2k6 will be like. with the way the guys at OS edited the 100+ college basketball rosters and even the 100+ college football teams,32 NFL teams will not be a problem. I'm sure Sega will find a way to put in team logos and emblems. Even some of the top college teams in College Hoops have the likenesses of the players, so I don't see this being an issue the higher profile NFL. I have no problem picking up the Sega game, if it is the best game out. This is really a non issue for me.
EA doesn't have the power to snuff the competition. Only the NFL does.
As does FIFA, the PGA Tour, Nascar.... All companies that decided the bed EA was sleeping in looked pretty darn comfy. Do you see a trend here?
I see a trend of companies entering into agreements of their own free will, not by EA gunpoint. I see companies trying to make money, which many are begrudging EA trying to do. What do you see?
bdoughty wrote:You can rattle off 50,000,000 reasons why EA should not be blamed for this. Won't change the fact that we only get ONE football game to pick from. Two if you count NFL Street as a football game.
Compare that with a few years ago when you had
Fever
Gameday
ESPN
NFL Blitz
Backyard Football (what about the children?)
Even more reason to be pissed at the NFL for allowing this dark day to occur.
bdoughty wrote:I have no idea why I am replying, this is Kazuya at his finest.
And it's you at your worst, making very little sense. But I'm giving you a break, because as you said it's a tough day for all of us.
"Whatever, I don't know why you even play yourself to that degree,
you laugh at me?" - Del
TheGamer wrote:I'm wondering what the team & player editor for NFL 2k6 will be like. with the way the guys at OS edited the 100+ college basketball rosters and even the 100+ college football teams,32 NFL teams will not be a problem. I'm sure Sega will find a way to put in team logos and emblems. Even some of the top college teams in College Hoops have the likenesses of the players, so I don't see this being an issue the higher profile NFL. I have no problem picking up the Sega game, if it is the best game out. This is really a non issue for me.
Well if they are willing to spend a billion on the NFL I am sure they would have no problem spending a few bucks to buy out Action Replay and all the other people who make these devices. Sounds far fetched but I would not put it past them as they now have a LARGE investment to protect.
TheGamer wrote:I'm wondering what the team & player editor for NFL 2k6 will be like. with the way the guys at OS edited the 100+ college basketball rosters and even the 100+ college football teams,32 NFL teams will not be a problem. I'm sure Sega will find a way to put in team logos and emblems. Even some of the top college teams in College Hoops have the likenesses of the players, so I don't see this being an issue the higher profile NFL. I have no problem picking up the Sega game, if it is the best game out. This is really a non issue for me.
TheGamer wrote:I'm wondering what the team & player editor for NFL 2k6 will be like. with the way the guys at OS edited the 100+ college basketball rosters and even the 100+ college football teams,32 NFL teams will not be a problem. I'm sure Sega will find a way to put in team logos and emblems. Even some of the top college teams in College Hoops have the likenesses of the players, so I don't see this being an issue the higher profile NFL. I have no problem picking up the Sega game, if it is the best game out. This is really a non issue for me.
Their will be no ESPN NFL 2k6 because of this.
Well allow for a tiny shred of hope. I will be intrested to see what Visual Concpets (Greg Thomas) says about this and their plans.
Before today, EA was trying to kill off the competition in every way possible. But I seriously doubt anyone hated them for it. If they could have done it, they would have killed them off at NFL 2K. They don't have that kind of power.
You ever go to the big gaming sites like IGN or gaming-age and visit their boards? The haterd for EA, especially on the Gamecube boards is a daily way of life. Did you miss the Goldeneye flop? The game on the N64 still considered by many the best FPS ever. EA destroyed the game and has taken a ton of flack.
I can't count how many times I have seen it mentioned here about how people hate EA (The company).
P.S. They tried to kill NFL 2K by not supporting Sega and the Dreamcast.
Well, I didn't phrase that correctly but what I meant is that if it wasn't a valid reason before it shouldn't be one now. You're correct in that many, many people hate EA for a variety of reasons (most of the non-gameplay reasons have very little merit IMO). The point is that EA and to a lesser degree every company out there are trying to put the other guy out of business. I don't think Sega has some master plan where they end up dominating the market but intentionally leave a few scraps for EA out of the goodness of their heart. They want to be where EA is. If I don't hate a company from day one for these reasons, I don't think it's appropriate to hate them just because they actually succeed (with a whole lot of help).
"Whatever, I don't know why you even play yourself to that degree,
you laugh at me?" - Del
JRod wrote:
Kazuya,
You are right, big bad company for making money. Problem is that's the samething every business believes and turns them into a monopoly. They were just trying to make money. Problem is you should be able to make money by making a good product not just killing your competition. We just don't live in a country that cares that much however.
You're absolutely correct, but this isn't a monopoly. You might as well stop trying to get Burger King to have exclusive rights to Schrek. Sega is still free to make video games, even football games. And the NFL is well within their rights to decide who makes games featuring their property.
BTW, I liked your letter a lot. I would have cosigned it.
If its not a monopoly how is other companies supposed to compete by making a football game?
It is all about how they succeed for most. Lots of rich people out there who made their millions/billions in business by screwing people. They still are successful and have their millions/billions but you don't have to like them.
I would prefer to see EA win by beating it's competition by delivering a quality product, instead of buying them out. EA took the easy road and instead of fighting Sega in retail sales they . You say it is not like EA put a gun to their head (the NFL) to take the deal and with that I agree. I do put as much blame on the NFL as I do EA. We do not know how the deal went down or who contacted who, etc, etc yet my money is on the fact EA waved the cash and the NFL drooled like a puppy in pool of milkboanes. Just like they did with the others. So I still feel compelled to place most of the blame on EA. I think EA is slowly destroying sports gaming as we know it. If you feel comfortable living with what EA dishes out then more power to you. On that we will not agree.
JRod wrote:
Kazuya,
You are right, big bad company for making money. Problem is that's the samething every business believes and turns them into a monopoly. They were just trying to make money. Problem is you should be able to make money by making a good product not just killing your competition. We just don't live in a country that cares that much however.
You're absolutely correct, but this isn't a monopoly. You might as well stop trying to get Burger King to have exclusive rights to Schrek. Sega is still free to make video games, even football games. And the NFL is well within their rights to decide who makes games featuring their property.
BTW, I liked your letter a lot. I would have cosigned it.
If its not a monopoly how is other companies supposed to compete by making a football game?
I dunno, they could make a college game, a high school game, a Pop Warner game... (Yes, I know this is not realistic). The bottom line is that football is still a generic sport... the NFL didn't create it. If it were some way possible for someone to step in and say that this couldn't go down, then I don't see how every licensing deal in existence wouldn't be affected.
"Whatever, I don't know why you even play yourself to that degree,
you laugh at me?" - Del
Man, I better bone up on playing Madden. I'm so out of touch with that franchise it's comical. Now for the $1 million question: Do I ditch ESPN NFL 2K5 so I can pick up a copy of Madden 2005 on the double-cheap, or do I get Madden 2005 at $30 and keep ESPN NFL 2K5 as a keepsake, the last legitimate NFL game Sega will ever make?
I swear people are on fire today with the humor - from the GAF
EA SIGNS AN ALL-NEW PARTNERSHIP WITH JESUS, GOD TO HOLD EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS TO HEAVEN
Mon Dec 13, 2004 07:36 PM ET
LOS ANGELES, Dec 13 (Reuters) - Just hours after signing a record setting deal with the NFL and Player's Inc., video game publisher Electronic Arts Inc. also announced that it had negotiated separate deals with Jesus and God for the sole rights to heaven. The five-year exclusivity deal with Jesus allows EA to maintain control of admittance into the pearly gates, while the ten-year contract with God gives EA majority shareholder status of heaven.
"We've faced a lot of heavy competition in the video game industry this year," said EA chief executive Larry Probst, "But this deal allows us to penetrate a market of billions of Christians, especially those in the 'Red States', and their faith-installed subscription base."
The licensing agreement is an exclusive for not only heaven, but most of space, which includes the highly lucrative Mars, and may be a potential goldmine for EA.
"If there is indeed life on Mars," said Probst, "We know they will want copies of Madden."
...
Last edited by bdoughty on Mon Dec 13, 2004 11:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
pk500 wrote:You're right, but there's absolutely no way in hell that the NFL initiated this deal. EA did.
Antd there's no way in hell that EA signed the deal, the NFL did.
pk500 wrote:Think about it: The NFL will earn a huge licensing fee, which is nice. But other than that, there's no motivation for them to grant exclusivity. If 20 million football games were sold this year, this deal won't cause 25 million football games to be sold next year, and the licensing fee isn't commission-based, I'm guessing. It's a flat fee, regardless of whether EA sells 20 million or 200 million copies of Madden per year.
There probably will be 20 million football games sold again next year, but all 20 million will have the EA label on it. So the incentive, both short- and long-term, is for EA to initiate this deal.
Who do those guys think they are, making smart business decisions? Bad EA! Stop trying to make money!
pk500 wrote:But yes, the NFL has to approve the deal. No sh*t. But this also is a no-lose, no-risk proposition for the NFL. It's not like the NFL is shafting its customers who are gamers by granting this license to an upstart with a lot of cash and no track record of producing games.
If they aren't shafting their customers then why are we having this disucussion? They very much are shafting their customers, and they did it of their own free will, no matter how much you try to exonerate them.
It's also a no-lose, no-risk proposition for EA, but they don't get that consideration. Yet you give the NFL a free pass because it's no risk. Hey as long as it makes sense to you.
pk500 wrote:EA does and has produced damn good pro football games that are the market leaders in sales and are played by way more NFL players than any other title.
So it was a no-brainer decision for the NFL. It's not responsible for ensuring a quality videogame created through competition in the marketplace. It's responsible for administering a professional football league and earning lots of money.
EA is not responsible for ensuring competition in the marketplace. They are responsible for making video games and earning lots of money. Why anyone would think otherwise is baffling.
pk500 wrote:Now, EA also is responsible for earning lots of money. But it also is responsible for continuing to innovate and create quality products that sell like hell. Everyone knows the best way to create quality products is through competition.
According to who exactly? You're going to write a letter to a billion dollar company telling them to stop stepping on the little guy? To tell them how to make money? I think they're doing fine without your help.
pk500 wrote:EA just snuffed its competition, so you bet your ass I consider them more culpable than the NFL when it comes to treatment of videogamers.
EA doesn't have the power to snuff the competition. Only the NFL does.
pk500 wrote:The NFL is a football company; EA is a videogaming company. So who is more responsible for videogame customers?
Obviously the NFL. Can EA make an NFL video game without the NFL's say so? The NFL and the NFL alone is responsible for *NFL* video games because they are the ones who have the power.
pk500 wrote:Pretty easy choice, if you ask me, and it's why EA is more culpable for giving sports gamers the shaft here.
And it's why your Pepsi analogy is off. Jerry Jones is responsible for the welfare and happiness of his customers at Texas Stadium because he owns the team; Pepsi is not. EA is responsible for the quality and happiness of football videogaming customers because it's a videogaming company; the NFL is not.
No my analogy is correct. I challenge you to find one real life example where you would blame the person who offered the deal over the person who signed it. Only people's anti-EA feelings make this even an issue. Hell, the definition of a contract automatically at least implicatest the NFL for half of the responsibility, but for some reason all of the fanboys are mad at EA. I'm not thrilled with EA at the moment, but the NFL has the final say so on all of their products. The NFL decided that for the next five years, only EA will make their games. Therefore, my beef is with them.
Your simplistic view is quite charming, but if you honestly think the NFL cares and is culpable for the potential lack of innovation and quality that could be created by this deal, then you're nuts.
The NFL could care less. It does care about excessive violence depicted in its games, which is why it quietly ended its license with Midway for the Blitz franchise. But the NFL could care less if its game is a quality title -- otherwise, how the hell would have some Gameday and both NFL Fever titles hit the market?
EA should care about the atrophy that lack of competition that this deal could cause. But ultimately, and <i>correctly</i>, it puts money created by a monopoly ahead of quality, as any public company would and does.
But that doesn't mean that I can hold EA more culpable because it's a gaming company and is more beholden to its customers -- GAMERS -- than a football company is to its customers -- football fans.
Business is not an altruistic enterprise. I never indicated it was. But that doesn't mean that I can't be more pissed at EA because I'm mad at this as a GAMER, not a football fan. And EA is a GAMING company, while the NFL is a football company.
Capisce?
Take care,
PK
Last edited by pk500 on Tue Dec 14, 2004 12:12 am, edited 1 time in total.
"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
Anyone else find it interesting that we're using terms like "big bad monopoly", "buying out the competition", etc. and we're not even talking about Microsoft?
By the way, MS could have doubled the EA offer to the NFL if they were so inclined. They've got the cash.
Xbox Series: Murph1 Nintendo Switch 2: SW-8125-7768-9102
Kazuya wrote:I'm mad too, but I feel stupid "blaming" a company for trying to be profitable. Sega or anyone else would have tried this deal in a heartbeat if they could.
Exactly. People would be pissed at Sega if it did this deal, too. I don't doubt that for a second. But people are disturbed at the trend of EA gobbling up sports licenses instead of making better games to deal with competition. Sorry if you don't see that trend.
Kazuya wrote:Before today, EA was trying to kill off the competition in every way possible. But I seriously doubt anyone hated them for it. If they could have done it, they would have killed them off at NFL 2K. They don't have that kind of power.
Thanks for the news flash. The difference is that EA was trying to kill off the competition in more conventional ways, at least for the gaming industry. By creating better products, spitting out breathless press releases, etc. Now it has simply bought away its competition. Ruthlessly effective, yes, but that doesn't mean that gamers -- who are getting the shaft -- like it. Oh, and EA did try to kill the Dreamcast with its lack of support and apparently succeeded.
I'm glad you can remain so detached, as if EA isn't hurting sports gaming by all of its exclusive deals. It is. Sure, the NFL is an accomplice to this. But the NFL is a football company; EA is a gaming company.
Imagine if the NFL bought Major League Baseball, the NBA and the NHL and shut those leagues down, even if it let the owners of those franchises buy new NFL franchises and share in the wealth of the new sports monopoly, as the NFL would be the only major stick-and-ball sports league in America.
You'd be a bit pissed at the NFL even though the owners of the folded MLB, NHL and NBA franchises were accomplices to the deal, wouldn't you?
Take care,
PK
Last edited by pk500 on Tue Dec 14, 2004 12:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
"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
You also write as if both the NFL and EA sold their souls on an equal level to make this deal. That's horsesh*t.
This deal is WAY more important to EA than the NFL. Where would EA be without Madden? A hell of a lot poorer, facing a ton of market pressure from Sega or another major publisher and not in position to make this deal financially. Madden is EA's second-largest franchise behind The Sims, right?
And where would the NFL be without the EA licensing deal? Still rich as hell from its deals with countless other licensees and still the colossus in American sports for the foreseeable future.
EA is just another licensee for the NFL. But the NFL is THE deal for EA. So EA puts a lot more importance and is much more willing to sell its soul as a company that puts gamers' needs first than the NFL does as a company that does the right thing for football fans.
Not every football fan plays video games. But I presume nearly every NFL football video gamer is a football fan, so EA risks pissing off a hell of a lot more of its core customer base than the NFL does with this deal.
And I'm one of those pissed customers.
Out,
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
Jared wrote:Does anyone know if the NFL players have the right to overturn a deal once it's made? For example, could they vote down a deal if they felt like it wasn't in their best interests? (Not that they would....but I'm brainstorming here...)
Most of them play Madden tho...
On the PS2 as well. They don't give a sh*t who makes the game as long as they have their dual shock.
You also write as if both the NFL and EA sold their souls on an equal level to make this deal. That's horsesh*t.
This deal is WAY more important to EA than the NFL. Where would EA be without Madden? A hell of a lot poorer, facing a ton of market pressure from Sega or another major publisher and not in position to make this deal financially. Madden is EA's second-largest franchise behind The Sims, right?
And where would the NFL be without the EA licensing deal? Still rich as hell from its deals with countless other licensees and still the colossus in American sports for the foreseeable future.
EA is just another licensee for the NFL. But the NFL is THE deal for EA. So EA puts a lot more importance and is much more willing to sell its soul as a company that puts gamers' needs first than the NFL does as a company that does the right thing for football fans.
Not every football fan plays video games. But I presume nearly every NFL football video gamer is a football fan, so EA risks pissing off a hell of a lot more of its core customer base than the NFL does with this deal.
And I'm one of those pissed customers.
Out,
PK
I can't give the NFL a free pass just because they don't need the deal as much as EA. They are still liable for what they do. The NFL is not a bunch of idiots; they knew that this deal effectively would kill the competition. They didn't care. They should be held accountable for that.
Perhaps, I have given the impression that EA is blameless; while *I* certainly don't blame them I can entertain the idea that people are quite sore at them, and they certainly played their part. But acting like the NFL is a blind dummy in this game is ridiculous. You yourself said earlier,
"I don't blame the NFL one bit for this deal". To use your own terminology, I find that viewpoint simplistic.
"Whatever, I don't know why you even play yourself to that degree,
you laugh at me?" - Del
