VC close on a deal

[brendanrfoley]

Re: VC close on a deal

WHAT?? With the rumored Take Two deal, there is still choice. What choice gives us is two or maybe three (come on Microsoft, do something with the High Heat engine) baseball games to choose from...

No, there isn't choice. Besides Sony's MLB series, not one first party publisher is making a baseball game. Nintendo has no interest, and Microsoft dissolved its sports division.

So, there's a choice if you own a PS2/PS3. But, if you own a XBox/XBox 2 or GameCube/Revolution, you have NO choice but ESPN. For owners of those systems, this is EXACTLY like the Madden scenario; one game or bust.

Secondly, your argument makes no sense because those that used to buy MVP will buy Sega's and 989's game...

You're making a lot of assumptions. How are you sure people WILL buy those games? There are plenty of people who aren't big fans of Sega's baseball, and even more who dislike Sony's. Buying a baseball title just becuase you really want one, but being unhappy with it isn't quality gaming.

My point was, and is, a MLB TakeTwo exclusive eliminates the number one selling baseball franchise in the market. EA's NFL deal killed off the minority (though a growing minority), TakeTwo's deal kills the majority. There's a difference; you should be able to see it.

Are you telling me that less people will buy baseball games because EA no longer makes them? Highly unlikely...

That's not what I said, or even suggested.

What I said is, in my opinion, this deal kills a quality title and leaves a lot of fans in the dust. It hrts gamers, plain and simple.

I hate the dichotomy in this situation. So many people were angry with EA for the NFL deal, but think TakeTwo's deal is brilliant. Both deals have the same impact on the gaming community, and the double standard is repulsive.

[brendanrfoley]

Re: VC close on a deal

WHAT?? With the rumored Take Two deal, there is still choice. What choice gives us is two or maybe three (come on Microsoft, do something with the High Heat engine) baseball games to choose from...

No, there isn't choice. Besides Sony's MLB series, not one first party publisher is making a baseball game. Nintendo has no interest, and Microsoft dissolved its sports division.

So, there's a choice if you own a PS2/PS3. But, if you own a XBox/XBox 2 or GameCube/Revolution, you have NO choice but ESPN. For owners of those systems, this is EXACTLY like the Madden scenario; one game or bust.

Secondly, your argument makes no sense because those that used to buy MVP will buy Sega's and 989's game...

You're making a lot of assumptions. How are you sure people WILL buy those games? There are plenty of people who aren't big fans of Sega's baseball, and even more who dislike Sony's. Buying a baseball title just becuase you really want one, but being unhappy with it isn't quality gaming.

My point was, and is, a MLB TakeTwo exclusive eliminates the number one selling baseball franchise in the market. EA's NFL deal killed off the minority (though a growing minority), TakeTwo's deal kills the majority. There's a difference; you should be able to see it.

Are you telling me that less people will buy baseball games because EA no longer makes them? Highly unlikely...

That's not what I said, or even suggested.

What I said is, in my opinion, this deal kills a quality title and leaves a lot of fans in the dust. It hrts gamers, plain and simple.

I hate the dichotomy in this situation. So many people were angry with EA for the NFL deal, but think TakeTwo's deal is brilliant. Both deals have the same impact on the gaming community, and the double standard is repulsive.

[Rekkapryde]

Re: VC close on a deal

I hate the dichotomy in this situation. So many people were angry with EA for the NFL deal, but think TakeTwo's deal is brilliant. Both deals have the same impact on the gaming community, and the double standard is repulsive.

I agree with you somewhat (especially if you're an XBox/X2) guy, but none of this crap would be happening if EA wasn't trying to get rid of their competition by their deals with the NFL/ESPN. NFL2K hurt Madden with their gain in Market share and EA and it's shareholders weren't having that with Madden as it's cash cow. It's not rocket science. But now that people are losing their favorite baseball game, they know how the NFL2Kers feel. It's all fine and dandy until you lose one of your favorite games. The Take Two/MLB deal is bad, but it's not as bad as there is still something of a choice unless you're an XBOX guy. If you're Take Two, you have no choice. What we are seeing is the domino effect of EA's punkified way of taking on the competition by elminating them. It sucks for all of us, but you can't tell that to EA and their shareholders. It's all about survival now and unfortunately Take Two had to do what they have to do in order to survive. It is sad, but like others said, EA started it.

[Rekkapryde]

Re: VC close on a deal

I hate the dichotomy in this situation. So many people were angry with EA for the NFL deal, but think TakeTwo's deal is brilliant. Both deals have the same impact on the gaming community, and the double standard is repulsive.

I agree with you somewhat (especially if you're an XBox/X2) guy, but none of this crap would be happening if EA wasn't trying to get rid of their competition by their deals with the NFL/ESPN. NFL2K hurt Madden with their gain in Market share and EA and it's shareholders weren't having that with Madden as it's cash cow. It's not rocket science. But now that people are losing their favorite baseball game, they know how the NFL2Kers feel. It's all fine and dandy until you lose one of your favorite games. The Take Two/MLB deal is bad, but it's not as bad as there is still something of a choice unless you're an XBOX guy. If you're Take Two, you have no choice. What we are seeing is the domino effect of EA's punkified way of taking on the competition by elminating them. It sucks for all of us, but you can't tell that to EA and their shareholders. It's all about survival now and unfortunately Take Two had to do what they have to do in order to survive. It is sad, but like others said, EA started it.

[Radja]

Re: VC close on a deal

What I said is, in my opinion, this deal kills a quality title and leaves a lot of fans in the dust. It hrts gamers, plain and simple.

I hate the dichotomy in this situation. So many people were angry with EA for the NFL deal, but think TakeTwo's deal is brilliant. Both deals have the same impact on the gaming community, and the double standard is repulsive.

you are correct that exclusive licenses are bad. but a TT/VC actually saves gamers in some ways. if only one developer, EA, produces games then gamers as a whole are screwed. the only way for choice is if the licenses are spread over different developers. if both EA & TT/VC puts out some licensed and generic games each, then we have a choice.

i for one, love winning eleven even without the licenses. i would buy a generic game IF it was better than the licensed game any sport. EA hockey sucks. EA soccer sucks. TT/VC put uts out some high quality games also. if we lose TT/VC's version of hockey, football and college hoops that would be far, far worse than getting a generic MVP.

if EA were to win the sports genre war all out, then we are screwed out of some great titles. madden is quality, ncaa football should return to quality, mvp is quality, but thier other games leave a lot to be desired.

[Radja]

Re: VC close on a deal

What I said is, in my opinion, this deal kills a quality title and leaves a lot of fans in the dust. It hrts gamers, plain and simple.

I hate the dichotomy in this situation. So many people were angry with EA for the NFL deal, but think TakeTwo's deal is brilliant. Both deals have the same impact on the gaming community, and the double standard is repulsive.

you are correct that exclusive licenses are bad. but a TT/VC actually saves gamers in some ways. if only one developer, EA, produces games then gamers as a whole are screwed. the only way for choice is if the licenses are spread over different developers. if both EA & TT/VC puts out some licensed and generic games each, then we have a choice.

i for one, love winning eleven even without the licenses. i would buy a generic game IF it was better than the licensed game any sport. EA hockey sucks. EA soccer sucks. TT/VC put uts out some high quality games also. if we lose TT/VC's version of hockey, football and college hoops that would be far, far worse than getting a generic MVP.

if EA were to win the sports genre war all out, then we are screwed out of some great titles. madden is quality, ncaa football should return to quality, mvp is quality, but thier other games leave a lot to be desired.

[UkTribe]

Re: VC close on a deal

No, there isn't choice. Besides Sony's MLB series, not one first party publisher is making a baseball game. Nintendo has no interest, and Microsoft dissolved its sports division.

So, there's a choice if you own a PS2/PS3. But, if you own a XBox/XBox 2 or GameCube/Revolution, you have NO choice but ESPN. For owners of those systems, this is EXACTLY like the Madden scenario; one game or bust.



You're making a lot of assumptions. How are you sure people WILL buy those games? There are plenty of people who aren't big fans of Sega's baseball, and even more who dislike Sony's. Buying a baseball title just becuase you really want one, but being unhappy with it isn't quality gaming.

My point was, and is, a MLB TakeTwo exclusive eliminates the number one selling baseball franchise in the market. EA's NFL deal killed off the minority (though a growing minority), TakeTwo's deal kills the majority. There's a difference; you should be able to see it.



That's not what I said, or even suggested.

What I said is, in my opinion, this deal kills a quality title and leaves a lot of fans in the dust. It hrts gamers, plain and simple.

I hate the dichotomy in this situation. So many people were angry with EA for the NFL deal, but think TakeTwo's deal is brilliant. Both deals have the same impact on the gaming community, and the double standard is repulsive.

Brendan - it is folly to try and suggest that one deal is somehow more bad than the other. Any deal that reduces or eliminates competition is bad. Period. Ok so Madden Football and Sega Baseball may survive but where is the competition to motivate them to innovate? 2006's titles might be alright but by 2010 both will have turned into what Triple Play baseball was - a 50 dollar roster update.

Obviously EA and Sega "fanboys" do exist. But what a lot of them are failing to see is that their favourite developer's exclusivity is almost as bad for them as their hated developers exclusivity - in the long run anyway.

I had a very lively discussion with one person who was delighted with the EA NFL exclusive who refused to accept that competition drives innovation. He has been strangely quiet since the VC baseball speculation broke.

[UkTribe]

Re: VC close on a deal

No, there isn't choice. Besides Sony's MLB series, not one first party publisher is making a baseball game. Nintendo has no interest, and Microsoft dissolved its sports division.

So, there's a choice if you own a PS2/PS3. But, if you own a XBox/XBox 2 or GameCube/Revolution, you have NO choice but ESPN. For owners of those systems, this is EXACTLY like the Madden scenario; one game or bust.



You're making a lot of assumptions. How are you sure people WILL buy those games? There are plenty of people who aren't big fans of Sega's baseball, and even more who dislike Sony's. Buying a baseball title just becuase you really want one, but being unhappy with it isn't quality gaming.

My point was, and is, a MLB TakeTwo exclusive eliminates the number one selling baseball franchise in the market. EA's NFL deal killed off the minority (though a growing minority), TakeTwo's deal kills the majority. There's a difference; you should be able to see it.



That's not what I said, or even suggested.

What I said is, in my opinion, this deal kills a quality title and leaves a lot of fans in the dust. It hrts gamers, plain and simple.

I hate the dichotomy in this situation. So many people were angry with EA for the NFL deal, but think TakeTwo's deal is brilliant. Both deals have the same impact on the gaming community, and the double standard is repulsive.

Brendan - it is folly to try and suggest that one deal is somehow more bad than the other. Any deal that reduces or eliminates competition is bad. Period. Ok so Madden Football and Sega Baseball may survive but where is the competition to motivate them to innovate? 2006's titles might be alright but by 2010 both will have turned into what Triple Play baseball was - a 50 dollar roster update.

Obviously EA and Sega "fanboys" do exist. But what a lot of them are failing to see is that their favourite developer's exclusivity is almost as bad for them as their hated developers exclusivity - in the long run anyway.

I had a very lively discussion with one person who was delighted with the EA NFL exclusive who refused to accept that competition drives innovation. He has been strangely quiet since the VC baseball speculation broke.

[BrianFifaFan]

Re: VC close on a deal

This is getting good. It is wonderful to see that both sides are seeing the negative impact that all of this brings. I can never prove that EA is the driving force behind all of this madness; I still will always strongly suspect it.

While unfortunate, I am also glad that the EA gamers are finally able to see the VC gamers side of things. Maybe now they'll quit with whole "shut up, we won" drivel. This is a new age in gaming, with the big players divying up the gamescape. Is it good for us? Heck no! I miss having a choice. It's been my whole arguement/gripe. It isn't even a question of one perfect game. Vanilla ice cream is good;so's chocolate. Give me that choice.

At least the NBA seems to be holding firm,for now. And baseball is only granting the third party deal; as speculated. I'm sorry for EA fans, but here's a fact. Every agreement they've either signed or offered is for exclusivity. No one else gets to play. So, if you can't play with the other kids, get off the playground.

I do hope, however, that the bleeding stops with this(MLB) agreement; if it occurs. It isn't good for gaming, or the companies. Many people have brought up the opinion that the games will improve without competition. That's bunk. I can you examples of cable companies, car makers, and other industries that stagnated due to lack of competition. There is no need to innovate. It becomes a matter of profit management. EA and all the other gaming houses need to remember a fundamental truth: you aren't corporations that feed stockholders; you are the makers of dreams........
If they get back to that philosophy, the profits will come.

[BrianFifaFan]

Re: VC close on a deal

This is getting good. It is wonderful to see that both sides are seeing the negative impact that all of this brings. I can never prove that EA is the driving force behind all of this madness; I still will always strongly suspect it.

While unfortunate, I am also glad that the EA gamers are finally able to see the VC gamers side of things. Maybe now they'll quit with whole "shut up, we won" drivel. This is a new age in gaming, with the big players divying up the gamescape. Is it good for us? Heck no! I miss having a choice. It's been my whole arguement/gripe. It isn't even a question of one perfect game. Vanilla ice cream is good;so's chocolate. Give me that choice.

At least the NBA seems to be holding firm,for now. And baseball is only granting the third party deal; as speculated. I'm sorry for EA fans, but here's a fact. Every agreement they've either signed or offered is for exclusivity. No one else gets to play. So, if you can't play with the other kids, get off the playground.

I do hope, however, that the bleeding stops with this(MLB) agreement; if it occurs. It isn't good for gaming, or the companies. Many people have brought up the opinion that the games will improve without competition. That's bunk. I can you examples of cable companies, car makers, and other industries that stagnated due to lack of competition. There is no need to innovate. It becomes a matter of profit management. EA and all the other gaming houses need to remember a fundamental truth: you aren't corporations that feed stockholders; you are the makers of dreams........
If they get back to that philosophy, the profits will come.

[Blaise]

Re: VC close on a deal

With everyone going back and forth on these boards about recent developments, we as consumers should look at the big picture 1st, before placing blame.

EA is the Microsoft of the VG world. Meaning, they have the money to buyout most of their competition, but also, other companies outside the VG industry look to them when it comes to licensing, and making new products.

I honestly dont think that EA sought out the NFL, or seek out ESPN.

The NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, FIFA, PGA, NASCAR are all in the business of making money. That being said, they have people, teams of people that crunch numbers and look at different vantage points to see how they can increase their bottom line.

So, if they NFL says, "Hey, we're licensing our name to three different companies, for a total of $500 million over the next 5 yrs, can we license our name with one company over those same 5yrs for $750 million dollars?" Its the exact reason why Cable doesnt have NFL Sunday Ticket, they make too much $$$ with Direct TV over here in the States. (In Canada, Sunday Ticket is avail. on Cable, go figure)

Basketball will be next, if the rumors that they are looking for games to be developed according to genre (arcade & sim). I guarantee that if it goes that route, EA would get the arcade games, since they have no "real" competition, and they will find a way to get the sim games as well. But it will probably go to Take Two/Sega/VC

Baseball however is more interesting. From the minute I read the article on Tuesday, I kept thinking, the MLB is going to screw themselves if they side with Take Two/VC. Reason being, its a 3rd Party exclusive license, therefore, games that are published by a 1st party can still be make (e.g. 989). Key word, <b>Published</b>. This means, EA can still develop MVP, but as long as its <b>published</b> by a 1st party publisher, its all good. (Kinda like when EA published FFX, and had that US-Japan agreement with Square)

Think about it, EA makes the #1 selling baseball game across platforms, console makers already get a cut from each game sold anyway, but now EA says, instead of 10% (example) from each game sold, you publish our game, will give you 35%. It cost Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft nothing, and in the case of Nintendo and MS, it becomes "their" game, with no in-house comp. Sony and EA have always been good pals, so I would think their agreement would extend into other areas as well, so as to balance out the money they may lose by publishing 2 games in the same sport.

MLB wouldnt really be getting the same money from the games being published by a 1st party comp as they would if it was 3rd party company like EA, furthermore, what real incentive do MS, Sony, and Nin have to have VC's game on their system? Their not making nearly as much money on it, and could lock them out.

Obviously its just my theory. All parties involved are here to make money, thats it. I know alot of us feel jilted by whats going on, but its business.

And asked yourself, if Take Two/VC was in EA position, would they do the same thing? If you answer no, your fooling yourself, and should stop daydreaming and come back to reality.

[Blaise]

Re: VC close on a deal

With everyone going back and forth on these boards about recent developments, we as consumers should look at the big picture 1st, before placing blame.

EA is the Microsoft of the VG world. Meaning, they have the money to buyout most of their competition, but also, other companies outside the VG industry look to them when it comes to licensing, and making new products.

I honestly dont think that EA sought out the NFL, or seek out ESPN.

The NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, FIFA, PGA, NASCAR are all in the business of making money. That being said, they have people, teams of people that crunch numbers and look at different vantage points to see how they can increase their bottom line.

So, if they NFL says, "Hey, we're licensing our name to three different companies, for a total of $500 million over the next 5 yrs, can we license our name with one company over those same 5yrs for $750 million dollars?" Its the exact reason why Cable doesnt have NFL Sunday Ticket, they make too much $$$ with Direct TV over here in the States. (In Canada, Sunday Ticket is avail. on Cable, go figure)

Basketball will be next, if the rumors that they are looking for games to be developed according to genre (arcade & sim). I guarantee that if it goes that route, EA would get the arcade games, since they have no "real" competition, and they will find a way to get the sim games as well. But it will probably go to Take Two/Sega/VC

Baseball however is more interesting. From the minute I read the article on Tuesday, I kept thinking, the MLB is going to screw themselves if they side with Take Two/VC. Reason being, its a 3rd Party exclusive license, therefore, games that are published by a 1st party can still be make (e.g. 989). Key word, <b>Published</b>. This means, EA can still develop MVP, but as long as its <b>published</b> by a 1st party publisher, its all good. (Kinda like when EA published FFX, and had that US-Japan agreement with Square)

Think about it, EA makes the #1 selling baseball game across platforms, console makers already get a cut from each game sold anyway, but now EA says, instead of 10% (example) from each game sold, you publish our game, will give you 35%. It cost Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft nothing, and in the case of Nintendo and MS, it becomes "their" game, with no in-house comp. Sony and EA have always been good pals, so I would think their agreement would extend into other areas as well, so as to balance out the money they may lose by publishing 2 games in the same sport.

MLB wouldnt really be getting the same money from the games being published by a 1st party comp as they would if it was 3rd party company like EA, furthermore, what real incentive do MS, Sony, and Nin have to have VC's game on their system? Their not making nearly as much money on it, and could lock them out.

Obviously its just my theory. All parties involved are here to make money, thats it. I know alot of us feel jilted by whats going on, but its business.

And asked yourself, if Take Two/VC was in EA position, would they do the same thing? If you answer no, your fooling yourself, and should stop daydreaming and come back to reality.

[BigTim]

Re: VC close on a deal

Why does everyone bash EA for buying what was offered to them?

The NFL said that they want ONE company to make their games, who has the highest bid? EA came in with the highest bid. From all accounts I have seen is that the NFL approached the game devs, not the other way around.

In this case, VC/Take2 went to MLB and offered this deal to them. I could be wrong on this, as nothing has been released, but it doesnt affect my first point about EA/NFL.

[BigTim]

Re: VC close on a deal

Why does everyone bash EA for buying what was offered to them?

The NFL said that they want ONE company to make their games, who has the highest bid? EA came in with the highest bid. From all accounts I have seen is that the NFL approached the game devs, not the other way around.

In this case, VC/Take2 went to MLB and offered this deal to them. I could be wrong on this, as nothing has been released, but it doesnt affect my first point about EA/NFL.

[Drag66]

Re: VC close on a deal

No, there isn't choice. Besides Sony's MLB series, not one first party publisher is making a baseball game. Nintendo has no interest, and Microsoft dissolved its sports division.

So, there's a choice if you own a PS2/PS3. But, if you own a XBox/XBox 2 or GameCube/Revolution, you have NO choice but ESPN. For owners of those systems, this is EXACTLY like the Madden scenario; one game or bust.



You're making a lot of assumptions. How are you sure people WILL buy those games? There are plenty of people who aren't big fans of Sega's baseball, and even more who dislike Sony's. Buying a baseball title just becuase you really want one, but being unhappy with it isn't quality gaming.

My point was, and is, a MLB TakeTwo exclusive eliminates the number one selling baseball franchise in the market. EA's NFL deal killed off the minority (though a growing minority), TakeTwo's deal kills the majority. There's a difference; you should be able to see it.



That's not what I said, or even suggested.

What I said is, in my opinion, this deal kills a quality title and leaves a lot of fans in the dust. It hrts gamers, plain and simple.

I hate the dichotomy in this situation. So many people were angry with EA for the NFL deal, but think TakeTwo's deal is brilliant. Both deals have the same impact on the gaming community, and the double standard is repulsive.

Believe me, I am not saying it is good for us gamers, all I am saying is that Take Two's deal is less restrictive because Microsoft and Sony can still make baseball games. If you hate Sega's offering, buy 989's and vice versa. With EA's deal it is Madden or nothing. Hence, no choice.

I understand your statement regarding the consoles, but do you really think Microsoft won't do something baseball wise if this deal goes through? I sure as heck think they will do something. Plus, consoles are pretty dirt cheap right now (new and used). You can buy a console instead of buying 2 or 3 games. I have a PS2 and XBOX and so do many others I know. As for the next gen systems, I see your point (they will be expensive), but I believe Microsoft will step up to the plate (no pun intended).

As for my argument regarding MVP players buying another game if the deal goes through, I loved ESPN NFL 2k5 last year, but I am buying Madden this year because it is the only game in town. I assume you loved MVP, so then you will just play the 2005 version for the remainder of Take Two's MLB deal? I think most people will buy a new baseball game each year. Hey, I loved the ASB franchise, but Acclaim's dissolution will not prevent me from buying Sega's or Sony's game this year. I will admit I didn't like MVP last year, but I do not want to see it eliminated. I am not a fanboy and I love the fact that we used to have choice. I pick the game I like best regardless of who makes it.

We can discuss this all day regarding which deal is better, but the reality is that they both suck. The elimination of any competition (whether it be the highest seller or lowest seller) affects quality and in the end, hurts us.