In my opinon.......

[ballerzinc]

it was Sega that brought this upon themselves. I don't like the idea of this deal in any way. But if Sega wouldn't have lowered prices to $19.99 I don't think any of this would've happened. But who knows maybe I'm completely wrong.

[Jimplication]

Quote: Originally Posted by ballerzinc

it was Sega that brought this upon themselves. I don't like the idea of this deal in any way. But if Sega wouldn't have lowered prices to $19.99 I don't think any of this would've happened. But who knows maybe I'm completely wrong.

I can see it as being true.. I'm sure their lowering of prices definitely cut into EA's sales.

However, after reading that bit from the EA producer, he mentioned the NFL's desire to get a exclusive deal with one of the companies, and as expected, EA was the highest bidder.

Not really sure how much truth there is in that, but it's hard to doubt that Sega's price cuts did get EA's attention.

[sdrotar]

Quote: Originally Posted by ballerzinc

it was Sega that brought this upon themselves. I don't like the idea of this deal in any way. But if Sega wouldn't have lowered prices to $19.99 I don't think any of this would've happened. But who knows maybe I'm completely wrong.

If they "brought this upon themselves" by providing consumers with a quality alternative product at an excellent price, then that's a damned sad commentary on today's culture...

What are we saying, then? Don't even bother trying to accomplish something special?

[bucs44]

The problem is VC is the only developer that really listened to our ideas for game implementation. Madden generally tries to copy other products ideas, add new graphics when new machines launch and same engine.

[NCHelix]

To an extent, VC did tick off the NFL by lowering the prices. I read somewhere that the NFL was not happy to see VC cut into their own profits by dropping the price of their ESPN 2k5 game. You mix that with the demand by the NFL to get an exclusive contract (much like the DirecTV Sunday Ticket deal) for more money, and it's a mixture of stuff you can't control and nobody really could do anything about.

In my own opinion, it's said and done, and there isn't really much more to say.

[mark1726]

I read the same thing in gamespot.com where an analyst felt the NFL may not have liked the $19 price tag, sounds stupid to me. The NFL would want it's name all over the place as much as possible, 2k6 did nothing to diminish that. I then re-read the article and the analyst said that the NFL may not have liked the price tag because in the future that would cause all NFL video games prices to lower and in turn cause lower profits to the NFL because the license wouldn't cost as much. Of course this analyst refuses to acknowledge that the price of 2k5 was a one or two year thing to grab market share (which it did), it was going to go back up to $50 so that Sega could make more profits from it.

To say Sega brought this on themselves is ludicrous. EA has secured the exclusive rights to other major sports and has been trying for years to get the NFL exclusive rights. It is smart buisness for them, eliminate the competition. Don't be naive.

Given the chance I will say that Sega would have done the same thing, but they couldn't.

[ufox1810]

I agree that to say Sega brought this one themselves is a little much. It's just the nature of business. They made a decision to lower prices and it was working. EA then made a business decision of their own and eliminated the competition.

But to also say that Sega was going to raise the price back up next year or the year after is a little much as well. They would lose many of those casual gamers (i.e. kids just getting enough allowance together to buy the game, those people that don't know as much about gaming and follow it as closely as we do, and parents just buying for their kids). These gamers would not suddenly understand a $30 increase in price from one year to the next. And then the choice is not as easy. Most of those gamers I mentioned bought ESPN this year because it was less than half the price of Madden at release. The choice was easy because they wanted to save money. With Sega raising the prices back to the original level, these people would suddenly have to make a decision again and there's no way 100% would chose ESPN.

You have to remember that not everyone is like us. The great majority of customers don't go as much into the purchasing decision as we do being die hard gamers. They look at price and name recognition. Sega had both this year being $30 cheaper and having a more recognizable name with ESPN over Madden (yes there are a lot of people out there that don't have a clue who Madden is). To go back to the $50 price level would have been a very bad business decision.

In reality if both games were to continue to exist (kinda pointless at this time since we know this isn't happening)...but if both were coming out next year, odds are we would see a lower priced Madden and not a higher priced ESPN. Madden would have to do something otherwise they would experience another year like this one where Sega really cut into their sales.

[fossen]

Quote: Originally Posted by sdrotar

If they "brought this upon themselves" by providing consumers with a quality alternative product at an excellent price, then that's a damned sad commentary on today's culture... What are we saying, then? Don't even bother trying to accomplish something special?

I think it's saying "If you share a tiny room with an 800 lb. gorilla, try not to piss the gorilla off."

VC's tactics worked, they cut into the EA userbase. And EA responded in the way that EA could best. Up til now, the war had been fought on VC's terms - smart marketing, release date games, price cuts, risk taking. EA finally took the engagement to where they had the advantage - sheer dollars and size.