Is it all 2k's fault?

[dgoak]

Just curious, why exactly is there only two companies with licensing rights to make a MLB authorized game?

I've never really posted in forums for video games in my life (I'm 30 and been gaming since I was 10). Just goes to show how frustrated / disappointed I was with this game. For as much as 2k has been bashed (and I do believe they deserve it as this has been going on for years with them), shouldn't the MLB players association or whoever is in control of granting the rights be also held accountable to some extent?

I think the biggest issue here is that there is a monopoly on the video game baseball market. I'd much rather protest with my wallet by buying a competitors game, but there isn't one, if you don't have a PS3.

I never understood why EA lost it's rights in the first place or why some other company couldn't in addition to sony and 2k also jump in the mix? Or to make it at least fair have Microsoft offer a title exclusive to the xbox / pc market?

It should be survival of the fittest, you make a bad game, you lose sales, you lose sales, you lose the license. then the best would rise to the top. I just don't see how it's in 2k's interest to fix what is broken, they already got their money.....they can sit back and take their time with a patch or none at all. It's not like they have to worry about losing market share since they are locked in until what 2012......

[goh]

Re: Is it all 2k's fault?

MS could make a game for 360 if they wanted to.

2K has exclusive 3rd party rights wich means Sony,Microsoft and Nintendo are free to make their own MLB games if they want but Sony is the only ones that do. MS has the rights to the High Heat franchise but haven't done anything with it.

It's believed this happend because EA bought the exclusive NFL rights and they're the ONLY ones that are allowed to make NFL games so 2K got the MLB lisence and kept it from EA.

[Zalf]

Re: Is it all 2k's fault?

Just curious, why exactly is there only two companies with licensing rights to make a MLB authorized game?

I've never really posted in forums for video games in my life (I'm 30 and been gaming since I was 10). Just goes to show how frustrated / disappointed I was with this game. For as much as 2k has been bashed (and I do believe they deserve it as this has been going on for years with them), shouldn't the MLB players association or whoever is in control of granting the rights be also held accountable to some extent?

I think the biggest issue here is that there is a monopoly on the video game baseball market. I'd much rather protest with my wallet by buying a competitors game, but there isn't one, if you don't have a PS3.

I never understood why EA lost it's rights in the first place or why some other company couldn't in addition to sony and 2k also jump in the mix? Or to make it at least fair have Microsoft offer a title exclusive to the xbox / pc market?

It should be survival of the fittest, you make a bad game, you lose sales, you lose sales, you lose the license. then the best would rise to the top. I just don't see how it's in 2k's interest to fix what is broken, they already got their money.....they can sit back and take their time with a patch or none at all. It's not like they have to worry about losing market share since they are locked in until what 2012......

I am pretty sure Microsoft could make an MLB licensed game for the 360 but it would have to be with their own developers and not a 3rd party like 2k or EA. That is why Sony has their own baseball game just for PS. I'm not sure if this is just for the MLB exclusive or if it works the same for all sports game exclusive contracts.

2k's interest in fixing what is broken lies within recouping the cost of the license. I am sure there are some restrictions and penalties in the deal but that would all come down to lawsuits and there would have to be significant incentive to go to that expense and invest that kind of time. Easier for MLB to sit back and collect the license fee. MLB isn't losing or gaining anything based on how good a game 2k9 is. The only possible angle could be that 2k9 is so bad that sales for 2k9 and subsequent MLB games tank to the point the next exclusive license contract is worth less.

I mean look at EA's Nascar exclusive. They are pretty much sitting on the exclusive and only producing a family game for the wii this year.

[dgoak]

Re: Is it all 2k's fault?

I guess what I don't understand is why is it "exclusive" in the first place? MLB is selling their image essentially which really costs them nothing, so the more people paying to use the rights would mean more money for the MLB. The MLB or any major sporting organization should be the only one to "grant" rights to their name.

989 sports (sony's in house team) made the show originally if I'm correct even before it was called "the show". it was my understanding that they did this to make money since they take a loss on console sales for the first year or two. I was under the impression they (sony) made their money from selling the rights to 3rd party developers to publish a game on their console. HAving an in house team to produce a game without having to pay rights fees was easy way to recoup money lost from console development. that being said, I find it odd that microsoft doesn't do the same thing. Or am I completely wrong on my assumptions?

[Trevytrev11]

Re: Is it all 2k's fault?

I guess what I don't understand is why is it "exclusive" in the first place? MLB is selling their image essentially which really costs them nothing, so the more people paying to use the rights would mean more money for the MLB.

It depends, exlusivity definitely has a premium cost associated with it because it basically eliminates competition for whoever gets it. Say they could sell the rights to their product for $25M a year to say 3 companies or they were offered $150M from one company for exclusive rights. The basic math says take the $150M as it's $75M more than they could get from the others combined.

They would have to raise the fee to $50M to earn that same profit, but maybe one of those three isn't willing to pay that much and drops out. Now MLB gets $100M when it could have had $150M.

(just making up numbers).

Now on the other side for 2K, they have to assume that they are going to more than make up for the fee in incramental sales based (and leverage created from a larger potential revenue base) on their increased and now dominant market share.

[Trevytrev11]

Re: Is it all 2k's fault?

989 sports (sony's in house team) made the show originally if I'm correct even before it was called "the show". it was my understanding that they did this to make money since they take a loss on console sales for the first year or two. I was under the impression they (sony) made their money from selling the rights to 3rd party developers to publish a game on their console. HAving an in house team to produce a game without having to pay rights fees was easy way to recoup money lost from console development. that being said, I find it odd that microsoft doesn't do the same thing. Or am I completely wrong on my assumptions?

989 would have still had to pay the same fee's as other baseball game makers for the rights/license to the MLB and MLBPA.

The difference is when the products sold back then, the entire profit went back to Sony instead of the majority going back EA/2K/Activision, etc.

Basically 2K paid a huge chunk of change to prevent other third party developers from making a MLB licensed game. If Nintendo, Sony or MS want to make a MLB game, they can, but they still have to pay whatever fee the MLB/MLBPA charges.

[rjsuperfly66]

Re: Is it all 2k's fault?

989 would have still had to pay the same fee's as other baseball game makers for the rights/license to the MLB and MLBPA.

The difference is when the products sold back then, the entire profit went back to Sony instead of the majority going back EA/2K/Activision, etc.

Basically 2K paid a huge chunk of change to prevent other third party developers from making a MLB licensed game. If Nintendo, Sony or MS want to make a MLB game, they can, but they still have to pay whatever fee the MLB/MLBPA charges.

Yeah 2k is ********. They tried so hard to keep the rights from 2k, and now they basically a 2 game franchise (MLB, NBA). They got rid of College Hoops, which was 10x better than March Madness, all because All-Pro Football and Prizefighter were expensive failures, and NHL is close behind. Way to go 2k. In the current economy it might not be to long before they fold. Thats why I'm surprised they just didnt join EA last year and make Super Sports Gaming Franchise.

[nyisles16]

Re: Is it all 2k's fault?

Closing down.. Too many threads posted all over these boards about the same thing..