[QUOTE=Blzer]The fact is, 2K Sports picked up Take-Two because they had a great financial plan after selling terrifically from Grand Theft Auto. Take-Two, because they already were loaded, came up with the great plan to get their name out there.
They were no longer known... Sega was gone, and ESPN was in.
So, Take-Two started with ESPN NFL 2K5. They got a whole storyboard planned out for a huge early release date at a very cheap price. Was this because the game was worth $20? You could say that... but you can't say that it was if ESPN NFL Football was worth $50. The fact is, they got their name out. IMO the lamest excuse for the $30 drop is because they were finally making games that were just as bad as their price tag said.
Basically, the trend carried on with the other games... and consumer sovereignty would depend on the prices for the games to follow. For instance, NHL 2K6 was $20 and NBA 2K6 was $40... again, because of consumer sovereignty. People were still willing to buy an NBA game at $40 because it was an inelastic demand. Once the name was out, it was all about keeping that fan base for as long as possible.
At any rate, games should be $20 to $30. Now I'm not only saying this because this has happened... which is what many posters on here would do, right? For instance... if an NFL game came out this year from 2K Sports and it was at $50, people would complain saying they are overpricing the game. If ESPN NFL 2K5 was never $20, not one person would say that. I would, though... I've said it every year a game has come out.
In conclusion, MVP 06 NCAA Baseball is a very lackluster and piss-poor game. I know this, because EA is selling it for $29.99.
Ok, I agree with some of what you said, but I know for a fact that $20 does not pay for the development costs of ANY game out there. I just finnished a 2 year program in Vancouver in Game design and production and I know for a fact, having a few teachers who worked for EA/Rockstar and the like, that development costs are doing nothing but rising simply because teams are requiring more content and/or special treatment(textures,normal maps,higher polygon models etc) thus costs go way up. People around the industry are saying that games for the 360 and PS3 are costing double or tripple what current gen games cost to produce. Sega/Taketwo/2k dropped their prices in order to counteract the demand for EA's games and thus make up ground in the market share department (which they were losing badly I might add...not counting NFL which was doing amazingly well compared to madden, but it still came no where close to the same sales marks). This was not the debate however. In order to justify a $30 price drop, budget cuts must happen. You can't produce a game that would ordinarily sell for $50 and sell it for $20, there isn't a business model in the world that can account for a 60% revenue drop without making up for it somewhere. Granted, EA and 2k work in much the same way with their sports titles in that they work on 3-5yr dev cycles, meaning they use the same engine for the game so that they only have to spend their dev budget on it once every 3-5yrs and not on a yearly basis. This brings me to your last point of MVP NCAA being lackluster because it is going for 29.99. EA is in the final throws of using the current MVP engine, and ANYTHING they get for NCAA is better than getting nothing for the MLB game they can't release. Also, barriers to entry in any market make it so that a new product must have a selling point, NCAA's is it's lower price for the same quality gameplay minus the MLB licence but plus ESPN and NCAA. I'm not saying that 2k's games are "just as bad as their price tag said" becaues I believe that their games are good ones, just not as good as they could be because they have had to shift their focus and put more of an emphasis on meeting budget constraints and less on quality. I am also not saying that EA makes games of superior quality ALL THE TIME, but when it comes to baseball that is my stance. I prefer the NFL 2k series to madden but that makes no difference any more. I'm torn between NHL 06 and NHL 2k6 because i like the sim qualities of 2k but I like the graphics and animation of 06, sadly the latter has not appeared on the 360 yet so I'm without comparison for that console. But having owned both on the xbox and both baseball titles as well I can say for a fact that there are redeeming qualities to all of them but all in all EA's games are far less glitchy and have higher production values. The 360 version of NHL 2k6 does not look next gen, even on a HD tv it looks only marginally better than it's xbox counterpart yet cost $60 just like the other 360 games because that's the price to pay for next gen games. EA went the route of dropping features in order to make their games look next gen and still get them out on time.
p.s. I'm not arguing with you just to be a pissant, but because I like your reasoning and you seem to know what you're talking about and a good debate never hurt anybody. It's when it turns into a lame flamewar that things get silly. I started our own thread so as not to clog up the interview questions one and piss off the moderators.
They were no longer known... Sega was gone, and ESPN was in.
So, Take-Two started with ESPN NFL 2K5. They got a whole storyboard planned out for a huge early release date at a very cheap price. Was this because the game was worth $20? You could say that... but you can't say that it was if ESPN NFL Football was worth $50. The fact is, they got their name out. IMO the lamest excuse for the $30 drop is because they were finally making games that were just as bad as their price tag said.
Basically, the trend carried on with the other games... and consumer sovereignty would depend on the prices for the games to follow. For instance, NHL 2K6 was $20 and NBA 2K6 was $40... again, because of consumer sovereignty. People were still willing to buy an NBA game at $40 because it was an inelastic demand. Once the name was out, it was all about keeping that fan base for as long as possible.
At any rate, games should be $20 to $30. Now I'm not only saying this because this has happened... which is what many posters on here would do, right? For instance... if an NFL game came out this year from 2K Sports and it was at $50, people would complain saying they are overpricing the game. If ESPN NFL 2K5 was never $20, not one person would say that. I would, though... I've said it every year a game has come out.
In conclusion, MVP 06 NCAA Baseball is a very lackluster and piss-poor game. I know this, because EA is selling it for $29.99.
Ok, I agree with some of what you said, but I know for a fact that $20 does not pay for the development costs of ANY game out there. I just finnished a 2 year program in Vancouver in Game design and production and I know for a fact, having a few teachers who worked for EA/Rockstar and the like, that development costs are doing nothing but rising simply because teams are requiring more content and/or special treatment(textures,normal maps,higher polygon models etc) thus costs go way up. People around the industry are saying that games for the 360 and PS3 are costing double or tripple what current gen games cost to produce. Sega/Taketwo/2k dropped their prices in order to counteract the demand for EA's games and thus make up ground in the market share department (which they were losing badly I might add...not counting NFL which was doing amazingly well compared to madden, but it still came no where close to the same sales marks). This was not the debate however. In order to justify a $30 price drop, budget cuts must happen. You can't produce a game that would ordinarily sell for $50 and sell it for $20, there isn't a business model in the world that can account for a 60% revenue drop without making up for it somewhere. Granted, EA and 2k work in much the same way with their sports titles in that they work on 3-5yr dev cycles, meaning they use the same engine for the game so that they only have to spend their dev budget on it once every 3-5yrs and not on a yearly basis. This brings me to your last point of MVP NCAA being lackluster because it is going for 29.99. EA is in the final throws of using the current MVP engine, and ANYTHING they get for NCAA is better than getting nothing for the MLB game they can't release. Also, barriers to entry in any market make it so that a new product must have a selling point, NCAA's is it's lower price for the same quality gameplay minus the MLB licence but plus ESPN and NCAA. I'm not saying that 2k's games are "just as bad as their price tag said" becaues I believe that their games are good ones, just not as good as they could be because they have had to shift their focus and put more of an emphasis on meeting budget constraints and less on quality. I am also not saying that EA makes games of superior quality ALL THE TIME, but when it comes to baseball that is my stance. I prefer the NFL 2k series to madden but that makes no difference any more. I'm torn between NHL 06 and NHL 2k6 because i like the sim qualities of 2k but I like the graphics and animation of 06, sadly the latter has not appeared on the 360 yet so I'm without comparison for that console. But having owned both on the xbox and both baseball titles as well I can say for a fact that there are redeeming qualities to all of them but all in all EA's games are far less glitchy and have higher production values. The 360 version of NHL 2k6 does not look next gen, even on a HD tv it looks only marginally better than it's xbox counterpart yet cost $60 just like the other 360 games because that's the price to pay for next gen games. EA went the route of dropping features in order to make their games look next gen and still get them out on time.
p.s. I'm not arguing with you just to be a pissant, but because I like your reasoning and you seem to know what you're talking about and a good debate never hurt anybody. It's when it turns into a lame flamewar that things get silly. I started our own thread so as not to clog up the interview questions one and piss off the moderators.
Comment