EA Going Away From In-Game Ads? Microtransactions Proving Far More Lucrative

[jbrew2411]

I don't have a problem with EA wanting to add more DLC. I do have a problem if it takes features away from a mode. I don't purchase Madden or NCAA for the play now games or online gaming. I purchase both game for the franchise/dynasty modes. If I have to pay $59.99 for the game then have to spend more money to just play those features then I will not purchase the games at all. I have always felt like the DLC is marketed for the casual gamers which is not what I would consider myself. I don't mind them offering add-ons like the recruiting adviser in NCAA or max training. Those things don't bother me. Now if they started making roster updates as DLC then I would have an issue.
A place where I always thought EA dropped the ball was the naming of stadium rights. We have names like Tee Maker automakers. There was nothing I hate more then seeing 4-5 stadiums with the same name. I think if they had went about it a different way then they could make money.

[stp2081]

Quote: Originally Posted by jbrew2411

A place where I always thought EA dropped the ball was the naming of stadium rights. We have names like Tee Maker automakers. There was nothing I hate more then seeing 4-5 stadiums with the same name. I think if they had went about it a different way then they could make money.

That has sort of baffled me too, but I figure that if the game allowed you to rename Gillette Stadium as Pepsi Stadium, Gillette's parent (Procter & Gamble) might have a problem with it, moreso than if you rename it with an absurd fictional name like Vandelay Bank. But that's just a guess.

[toadiev]

Quote: Originally Posted by grunt

I remember Madden cards during the PS2. I don't like paying for things that used to be free. I also want value when a company can put all those MT in a game but doesn't touch their franchise mode. If anyone think the profits from MT is going to the development of the game, then I have a bridge to sell.

Doesn't it seem kind of a fine line here. You are ok with them making money but only so much? What is the threshold for too much money? When should they start giving you things for free?

If you feel they aren't treating you correctly, do not give them your money. Otherwise its just simple supply and demand. If people are willing to pay then why not charge?

[PacMan3000]

I admit that I don't follow other videos games as intently as I do sports games, especially the Madden franchise. But I feel, year after year, that I hear more about how EA plans to generate more revenue than I do about how they plan to simply make a better, stronger game for their avid fan base.

[dickey1331]

Quote: Originally Posted by permanent1

I am not against anyone making money that is just capitalism,BUT do they really need to make more money i mean it is not like they are not already making money hand over fist on madden they sell what 4-5 million copies atleast every year at $60 a pop,that is what around 240 million(in no way i am saying those numbers are correct) or so,no biggie really i guess just seems a little excessive.

Im not sure if you have paid attention to the news but EA is not hand over fist in money. If EA had "too much" money I dont think they would lay people off. Also I dont think anyone can have "too much" money. They are free to make as much money as they like.

[kjcheezhead]

Quote: Originally Posted by adembroski

Why are people so against companies attempting to make money?

Quote:

Grunt I remember Madden cards during the PS2. I don't like paying for things that used to be free. I also want value when a company can put all those MT in a game but doesn't touch their franchise mode. If anyone think the profits from MT is going to the development of the game, then I have a bridge to sell

This is how I feel as well. It doesn't bother me EA tries to make money, it bothers me they ignore franchise, superstar, the minigames and online franchise modes and proceed to pour most of their resources into MUT and Facebook apps.

Being the only football game getting produced, that's disrepectful to their fanbase and just plain greedy to me.

[ven0m43]

Sounds like they are going to to make an average game, and then decide that they are going to charge $60 for it, but only allow you to play 60-70% of the game and make you pay for the rest of it. At the same time they will be making a second version to be released next year.

If EA makes a game that everyone wants to play then they can work on getting DLC later on to sell. The DLC should be added stuff that they didnt have enough time to add to the game by release and would have been left out.

[Shinyhubcaps]

Quote: Originally Posted by toadiev

Doesn't it seem kind of a fine line here. You are ok with them making money but only so much? What is the threshold for too much money? When should they start giving you things for free? If you feel they aren't treating you correctly, do not give them your money. Otherwise its just simple supply and demand. If people are willing to pay then why not charge?

I take exception with your word "free" here. It would be nice to get stuff for free, but you don't get anything for free. At the very least, you pay $60 for the initial purchase.

As to your second paragraph, users understandably want to play a game. The problem is that EA is the only maker of NFL games, so people craving NFL games need to give their money to EA or not own such games at all. That's why people are more sickened that this comes from EA than another company; EA is already monopolizing the industry and screwing consumers in other ways.