NCAA Football 14 News Post

SEC, Pac-12, Big Ten Won't License Trademarks in Future Video Games

10:56 AM - August 14, 2013 by vhhsfu0509

The Southeastern Conference announced today that it will not, as a conference, license its trademarks in the EA Sports NCAA Football video game. This decision does not involve member universities as of yet, as this only involves the SEC conference name and logo.

However, this could be the type of event that opens the flood gates to future defections from the game. While the future of the College Football series looked somewhat on stable ground after EA and the CLC agreed to a three year deal, this news rattles the very foundations and future of the series.

"Each school makes its own individual decision regarding whether or not to license their trademarks for use in the EA Sports game(s)," the SEC said in a statement. "The Southeastern Conference has chosen not to do so moving forward. Neither the SEC, its member universities, nor the NCAA have ever licensed the right to use the name or likeness of any student to EA Sports."

This is another move in response to the Ed O'Bannon case which could end collegiate video games forever given unfavorable rulings from the courts.

Today's news only brings more questions as to the viability of the product going forward.

UPDATE: ESPN's Kristi Dosh is reporting that the Big XII says they have yet to make a decision on the inclusion of their marks in future College Football video games.

UPDATE #2: ESPN is now reporting the Big Ten is out as well.

UPDATE #3: In a statement to Joystiq, a CLC representative said "150 collegiate institutions, including SEC schools, have approved renewal of the EA college football license, to begin with the 2015 edition. As with any licensed product, individual schools continue to make their own decisions."

We are putting in a question with the CLC on whether this means schools can still opt out of the game at any time or not as the wording certainly seems to leave that possibility open.

Update #4: Jeremy Fowler of CBS is reporting that the Pac-12's marks also won't be in the new game.

Game: NCAA Football 14Reader Score: 8/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3 / Xbox 360Votes for game: 54 - View All

NCAA Football 14 Videos

Member Comments

# 161 bad_philanthropy @ 08/14/13 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aholbert32


	Hold on. I'm not attacking you. This is just a discussion. I'm really trying to understand your thought process here. I just dont get in this age why someone would not buy the game because of a logo. The confusion should be lessened by marketing and by the amount of info available on the web. Back in 1994-95, when EA released its last unlicensed game, I could see people being confused because most people didnt have the internet and marketing budgets were much smaller. Just cant see that happening now. Also saying "there are dark times ahead" is kind of a declarative statement.

I think appearance of logos and authentic images do a lot for some people in terms of immersion. Just look at FIFA vs. PES. For a while PES was by far the superior game, but in terms of licenses FIFA had the lions share. Now FIFA sold more largely on the basis of brand recognition, but I have to believe that if FIFA didn't have the Premier League brand it would be less of a draw even if it had some facsimile "English" league.

I think the draw of simulation video games goes beyond representation of its subject authentically in terms of gameplay and only somewhat authentically off the field and in visual details. There is a keen focus on details these days including getting all the licensed equipment and visual icons in the game. If this was never thought to produce any draw in the first place why license anything really? FIFA loves to announce whenever they've signed a new league or team to a deal.

It seems people generally want sports games to resemble what they see in real life, and the presence of authentic images an icons—no matter how shallow it seems—is bound to be a big part of capturing that sense realism.

Is there a difference between caring if a conference is visually represented authentically versus a specific team? What is the line about what is and isn't an acceptable level of visual authenticity?

# 162 aholbert32 @ 08/14/13 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bad_philanthropy


	I think appearance of logos and authentic images do a lot for some people in terms of immersion. Just look at FIFA vs. PES. For a while PES was by far the superior game, but in terms of licenses FIFA had the lions share. Now FIFA sold more largely on the basis of brand recognition, but I have to believe that if FIFA didn't have the Premier League brand it would be less of a draw even if it had some facsimile "English" league. I think the draw of simulation video games goes beyond representation of its subject authentically in terms of gameplay and only somewhat authentically off the field and in visual details. There is a keen focus on details these days including getting all the licensed equipment and visual icons in the game. If this was never thought to produce any draw in the first place why license anything really? FIFA loves to announce whenever they've signed a new league or team to a deal. It seems people generally want sports games to resemble what they see in real life, and the presence of authentic images an icons�no matter how shallow it seems�is bound to be a big part of capturing that sense realism.

The difference is there was a game with the leagues and logos (Fifa). If 2k was releasing a college football game with the SEC, I could understand your point. But next year its EA or nothing. I cant believe a college football fan would choose not to play a college football video game just because the SEC logo isnt in the game.

I could see people complaining ("Why isnt the SEC in the game. Why is it called South 14") but still buying it because Bama is in the game.

Also if Fifa had the 20 teams but not the premier league branding, people would still buy the game

# 163 SIX------ @ 08/14/13 03:03 PM

As long as the schools are there everything else can be worked around just like the naming of the rosters. I dont care if the game doesnt come with the SEC conference if i can just go name it that after i get the game.

# 164 pietasterp @ 08/14/13 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aholbert32


	Hold on. I'm not attacking you. This is just a discussion. I'm really trying to understand your thought process here. I just dont get in this age why someone would not buy the game because of a logo. The confusion should be lessened by marketing and by the amount of info available on the web. Back in 1994-95, when EA released its last unlicensed game, I could see people being confused because most people didnt have the internet and marketing budgets were much smaller. Just cant see that happening now. Also saying "there are dark times ahead" is kind of a declarative statement.

Yeah, no worries man - I didn't think you were attacking me, certainly nothing personal (I always enjoy your input into these discussions and over on the ol' boxing forum). I just mis-read the tone of your replies. Tone is really hard to convey/interpret properly on the internet. Mea culpa.

Anyway, I guess the point I was trying to make was ultimately not that sophisticated...sort of a "what's good for the goose is good for the gander" type of argument, which is to say if the conferences are making the determination that the risk/benefit profile of staying in business with EA is slanted too far to the downside, it would make sense to me that at least some of the individual schools would use the same analysis. But that may be over-simplifying things.

I don't think that people would be 'confused' per se about the lack of the SEC or B1G conferences in the game, and I wasn't making that argument. I don't think it's a matter of marketing, I just think that in this day and age, the expectation is that the EA NCAA College Football game will contain anything and everything that comes with watching a Saturday of college ball on TV. Anything that takes away from that experience, it seems to me, would drive at least some people away from the game.

And I have to admit, embarrassed as I am to do so, that not having the major conferences branded is a major negative for me...I don't know why, I never would have guessed that about myself since mostly I just care how the game plays, but I guess I've been conditioned to expect a "if it's in the game..." type experience. Sad, right? That may be grounds for OS dismissal to admit....

# 165 pietasterp @ 08/14/13 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nortobc


	Yeah, but there was another NFL game out there that had the NFL teams and players.

Touche, nortobc.

# 166 areobee401 @ 08/14/13 03:13 PM

I'd be totally on board with a college football game with generic schools, conferences and players. If given the option to edit player and school names, rearrange conferences, and upload our own logos into the game, I think it could be for the better. You could either recreate what the NCAA looks like today or make something completely unique.

Could even make online dynasties more fun than they already are.

But of course it would all come down to how much customization the user is allowed to have.

# 167 BA2929 @ 08/14/13 03:13 PM

NAIA Football 15?

# 168 herropreese @ 08/14/13 03:20 PM

Still not that big of a deal.

I would still buy the game if say, the Big 12 didn't sign on.

# 169 ncaa98 @ 08/14/13 03:21 PM

What if we could swap Team Builder Schools where it could mirror real life???

# 170 GisherJohn24 @ 08/14/13 03:21 PM

Haven't read all the posts, but does this mean that the conferences that pulled out, could tehy let another company do game and give permission to that new developer, say if 2K made a new NCAA game?

# 171 Ramminyou @ 08/14/13 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BA2929


	NAIA Football 15?

Well at least kansas would still be in the game.

# 172 Darkwolf90 @ 08/14/13 03:27 PM

Well that sucks indeed.... I probably wont buy an College Football game with out the Major Conferences, not having the SEC is a deal breaker for me. Being a Huge fan of the SEC and LSU, I couldn't see myself playing a game that doesn't have the Real Conferences and Team.

# 173 GisherJohn24 @ 08/14/13 03:30 PM

EA thanks again for ruining the video game industry yet again.

# 174 lere2001 @ 08/14/13 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GisherJohn24


	EA thanks again for ruining the video game industry yet again.

Yeah, because this is definitely EA's fault.

C'mon man. Give your head a shake

# 175 Ky3217 @ 08/14/13 03:33 PM

Well there goes the PAC-12

@ralphDrussoAP
Pac-12 says it decided not to renew its current licensing agreement with EA Sports.

# 176 kehlis @ 08/14/13 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GisherJohn24


	EA thanks again for ruining the video game industry yet again.

EA?

Not sure you understand what's going on.

# 177 RandyBass @ 08/14/13 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LowerWolf


	My best guess: If the SEC is pulling out, Mike Slive will "suggest" that its member schools do as well. And they'll most likely listen to that suggestion. And after years of pushing up against the line in terms of using player likenesses, EA won't go near that line when it comes to conferences and schools.

Yeah I thought for sure that the NCAA dropping out wouldn't make a difference, but this here news changes things, and I'm not so sure anymore. The dominos seem to be falling, and really it's probably only going to take one major school to undermine the whole thing.

If EA is smart they are coming up with a plan to ensure that no, and I mean absolutely no, player likeness will be in the game. That includes letting people name rosters. Thing is, if that's the case, that just might be another domino.

Don't know what to say about it. On the one hand I will miss the luxury of having that option out there if I want, on the other hand I think what's happening here is right. Exploitation of college athletes has gone too far for too long. It's time to get back to using these institutions to grow young people, not exploit them.

# 178 GisherJohn24 @ 08/14/13 03:35 PM

Wouldn't a team editor and roster share fix everything regardless if we got a license or not? We can share rosters anyway right?

# 179 Hunkerdown @ 08/14/13 03:36 PM

They (EA) have to look at this from a business perspective.

1. Loss of NCAA logo and name - hit to market share and brand awareness, but still could sell.
2. If all conferences - big hit to market share for marketing brand awareness
3. If teams follow suit - even bigger hit to market share and brand awareness, and would only allow a fully generic title. Would this be worth it to there bottom line?
4. They have already shown mediocre products for several years, just new game with same old problems. But, they have always had the full brand awareness to keep the consumer coming back.
5. Just see PES soccer games sales compared to FIFA(fully licensed) soccer games to see market share comparison. PES only having certain teams and champions league, but still not attractive to most gamers, they want that brand awareness and to play with there or other real teams. Yes they have customization that helps, but this does not reflect in sales compared to FIFA. FIFA in units sold compared to PES is like 25-1.

# 180 Darkwolf90 @ 08/14/13 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GisherJohn24


	EA thanks again for ruining the video game industry yet again.

It's not EA's fault, it's the SEC and Big 10 pulling out, EA can't control that, all they can do is try to get them back. You can falsely blame EA if you want, but this blame falls on Ed O'Bannon and the Conferences who decide to pull out.

« Previous 1 2…6 7 8910 11 12…21 22 Next »

More Links

SEC, Pac-12, Big Ten Won't License Trademarks in Future Video Games