Let's do something, even if it doesn't work.

[pietasterp]

Quote: Originally Posted by Herd90XB

I agree with everything you've written. But some were saying that there wouldn't be a lack of choice. And some said that this wouldn't be bad for sports gamers. Does it do any good to whine about it? Probably not. I was just chiming in because of those that say it's not bad for sports gamers.

Yeah, but whining about it on a message board at least gives you some outlet for your frustration. I realize the admins/mods must be sick of these threads by now, but hey - what else is going on right now that we have to talk about?

[Herd90XB]

Quote: Originally Posted by pietasterp

Yeah, but whining about it on a message board at least gives you some outlet for your frustration.

Amen.

[pfunk880]

Quote: Originally Posted by hayvis

I'm sure most people would agree that $30 is a fairer price.

You think?

Heck, why don't we just give the games away? That would be even fairer.

[quietcool72]

As much as I can't stand any of these deals, I think this one pales in comparison to the NFL deal. EA seemed to be the only company jumping into the NCAA football fray anyway- not that its not a shame that nobody else CAN after this deal, but it really hasn't altered our football reality as much as the NFL deal did.

I'll be curious now that EA is obviously gonna pay the NCAA some LARGE sums of money, will the NCAA continue to take a hard line about player likenesses- and possibly even pressure EA to not even use correct numbers? (I think many of us had read that article linked here about the subject- the NCAA was coming down on game-makers about that.) I wonder if that gripe will be pushed under the table now that the NCAA just got what is probably a big, oversized trunk fool o' loot from EA for this deal. I hope that will be the case- if there's ANY positive that coud possibly come from this whatsoever. Hopefully this fresh loot will make them (The NCAA) ease up on the direction this issue was headed a few months ago.

Also- since the NCAA seemed to break their stance on no-exclusivity- at least on football games- I wonder if VC and EA are currently doing battle for the NCAA Basketball license. I think its a safe bet.

Still- if EA's games continue a trend of lackluster innovation and "same 'ol, same ol'" they simply won't pull me away from World of Warcraft as much, or Doom III, or Half Life 2. The same goes for VC's games with the spotty playtesting- I sure as heck hope that improves too on whatever games they make. Either way, for me -worst case- it wouldn't be "game over".. just "game different."

[pietasterp]

Quote: Originally Posted by quietcool72

Either way, for me -worst case- it wouldn't be "game over".. just "game different."

My thoughts exactly. Now to go get my newest DOC colt G1 eligible...

Quote: Originally Posted by Herd90XB

WTF is so hard to understand? The choice in sports gaming has been taken away. You can't agree with that?

Once again, if you don't like the game, DON'T BUY IT! You still have that choice. What is so hard to understand about that?

Quote:

Call me stupid if you wish, but as a consumer, I think it's much better to have choices between NEW SPORTS games rather than just having the option of buying one only or keeping what I had from last year and editing it.

You're not stupid to want to have choices, but trying to bring the FTC in to change something perfectly legal simply because you don't like is very stupid.

[cliburn]

To the Rescue!

[ODogg]

Anyone else ever noticed how people want the government involved in their lives only when it's convenient for them? Once again, I ask, what if you created a product and it became successful and you sold the rights to it to company A and then the government stepped in and said, no you cannot do that, give them their money back and continue to let everyone use your product as you were before for less profits. This is the exact situation you are all asking to put the NFL in.

And once again, capitalism isn't based on what is fair, it is based on what makes the person selling the product the most money. They can sell that product to whoever they like even if it makes consumers unhappy. The NFL could have sold their license to 989 sports and there'd not been a darned thing any one of us could have done about it.

You people who are saying it's an anti-trust violation or a monopolostic move obviously do not know anything about the law. It makes me have even less faith in the public school system than I had before, if that is possible. For the 100th time, no one is saying any company out there can't make a football or baseball game. In fact for those of you who say there is no competition, well I wonder what Konami would think of that considering they are making a pretty good looking Playmakers (tentative title) game already!!

I guess this sparring does pass the time but you would think we could find a better debate about other things (ODogg heads to the non-sports gaming forum)....

P.S. Nowhere in my above post did I say that these moves were good for the consumers and their choices, obviously they are not, but the difference that alot of you fail to see is that what is not good for consumers does not necessarily equate to what is an illegal activity for a company to do despite if its not exactly good for them or not.