EA: Hardly a Generous Corporation - Page 3 - Operation Sports Forums
Home

EA: Hardly a Generous Corporation

This is a discussion on EA: Hardly a Generous Corporation within the Operation Sports Content forums.

Go Back   Operation Sports Forums > The News Desk > Operation Sports Content
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-05-2008, 01:23 PM   #17
MVP
 
stoncold32's Arena
 
OVR: 17
Join Date: Jul 2002
Re: EA: Hardly a Generous Corporation

Quote:
Originally Posted by jwn0303
actually ncaa football 09 is a great game this year.. just too easy.. live is good this year too.. i guess the "in" thing to do now is hate on EA no matter what

Really? How can it be great when it's lacking nearly all of the stuff that the PS2/XBox versions had 5 years ago? The last gen version is still so much deeper. The word "great" is thrown aroudn too much on here.
stoncold32 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2008, 01:38 PM   #18
MVP
 
spit_bubble's Arena
 
OVR: 27
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,650
Re: EA: Hardly a Generous Corporation

Quote:
Originally Posted by PioneerRaptor
I think this is just an unnecessary rant ;/
And this was just an unnecessary post.

Welcome to the internets.
__________________
All ties severed...
spit_bubble is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2008, 01:55 PM   #19
Rookie
 
htfdthewhale's Arena
 
OVR: 8
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: NYC
Blog Entries: 1
Re: EA: Hardly a Generous Corporation

"Those games are DIRECT COMPETITION! The fact that they don't sell well is because Rockstar makes a great game with EVERY GTA. They didn't feel content with the fact that GTA 3 was awesome, they improved it. If Saints Row was as good or better than GTA, the sales would go up. "

Rockstar doesn't create good games because competition exists. Their competition is so weak that it can barely be considered a factor in the effort Rockstar put into GTA IV. Rockstar creates great games because thats just what they do; the fact that some competition exists doesnt make them want to make a better game. They wanted to make a better game because that's what succesful people do. All I am saying is that the connection between competition and innovation/quality of releases is not as strong or evident or concrete as everyone has pointed out.

"What are you saying then? Look at Madden...no competition has hurt that series more than any other. Competition is human nature, without it some peoples motivation to over-achieve goes away, thus affecting how much a game improves on a yearly basis."

Madden didn't make any great strides from 2004 to 2005 either, when NFL 2k5 was around. Complaints against Madden simply being a roster patch with a fresh coat of paint are nothing new and have been around for years, even when competition was around. Maybe the fact that Tiburon isn't as good a developer as everybody thinks has something to do with it? Maybe the lack of competition has nothing to do with it. Again, all I was trying to point out is that the connection is not as strong or definitive as the article points out. Some developers have managed to do some pretty amazing stuff without the threat of any real competition. Tiburon in particular has not been able to. EA buying out Take-Two would NOT NECCESARILY stiffle innovation or negatively impact the quality of games. That's all I am saying.
htfdthewhale is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2008, 02:14 PM   #20
MVP
 
stoncold32's Arena
 
OVR: 17
Join Date: Jul 2002
Re: EA: Hardly a Generous Corporation

Quote:
Originally Posted by htfdthewhale
"Those games are DIRECT COMPETITION! The fact that they don't sell well is because Rockstar makes a great game with EVERY GTA. They didn't feel content with the fact that GTA 3 was awesome, they improved it. If Saints Row was as good or better than GTA, the sales would go up. "

Rockstar doesn't create good games because competition exists. Their competition is so weak that it can barely be considered a factor in the effort Rockstar put into GTA IV. Rockstar creates great games because thats just what they do; the fact that some competition exists doesnt make them want to make a better game. They wanted to make a better game because that's what succesful people do. All I am saying is that the connection between competition and innovation/quality of releases is not as strong or evident or concrete as everyone has pointed out.

"What are you saying then? Look at Madden...no competition has hurt that series more than any other. Competition is human nature, without it some peoples motivation to over-achieve goes away, thus affecting how much a game improves on a yearly basis."

Madden didn't make any great strides from 2004 to 2005 either, when NFL 2k5 was around. Complaints against Madden simply being a roster patch with a fresh coat of paint are nothing new and have been around for years, even when competition was around. Maybe the fact that Tiburon isn't as good a developer as everybody thinks has something to do with it? Maybe the lack of competition has nothing to do with it. Again, all I was trying to point out is that the connection is not as strong or definitive as the article points out. Some developers have managed to do some pretty amazing stuff without the threat of any real competition. Tiburon in particular has not been able to. EA buying out Take-Two would NOT NECCESARILY stiffle innovation or negatively impact the quality of games. That's all I am saying.
I agree with both stances. Obviously Rockstar knows if they throw the kitchen sink into their GTA efforts, they will be rewarded for it in terms of huge sales. They know they are guaranteed sellouts everytime regardless of what other games are on the scene.

It can be argued that EA has not ever really had any competition when making the NCAA series, but yet at one point that series was great. I think EA just got complacent and stopped pushing themselves for whatever reason. Although I'm sure lack of motivation from no competition had something to do with it. It has to.
stoncold32 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2008, 02:25 PM   #21
Rookie
 
OVR: 16
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Stanwood, WA
Blog Entries: 6
Storm - I think we have the same opinion on this, I was using the GTA example to stay consistent with the person I quoted. I think not having the option to play another NFL game really does hurt competition.

Sports licenses and games are used to recreate a reality whereas FPS are only limited by creativity. Football fans want authenticity and realism, and that is a goal for some FPS, but you can make anything you want with a FPS, and there are many different options and gametypes.

thewhale - Madden might not have made huge strides in 04 and 05, but from 00-05? I think the changes made and the competition, not just from when the game was on XBox, but Dreamcast as well, were much bigger and better in those years. I think it has a lot to do with games being more mainstream now, we didn't have presidential advertising back then

I do not think EA is a company aimed at making the best product for gamers. Those companies take pride in their work, and strive to make the best products, from the CEO on down. EA focuses more on the money (which they can't really be blamed for), whereas smaller companies will try to make better games. I really do believe that competition is only good for gamers, and a lack of competition curbs creativity and advancements in our games.

PaulZweber is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisements - Register to remove
Old 11-05-2008, 02:34 PM   #22
MVP
 
StormJH1's Arena
 
OVR: 13
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Twin Cities, MN
HartfordWhaler, you're ignoring the elephant in the room in that whole Madden/NFL 2k battle in 2004, which was the fact that 2k5 sold for $19.99!!! This isn't even talked about anymore, but it's important to keep in mind that EA did run for cover and buy out the license because 2k5 was so technically superior or because they didn't want to have to improve their game. The decision to lock 2k out of football had EVERYTHING to do with the fact that 2k undercut the market with an extreme price drop, and EA was so freaked out by it that they dropped their retail price to $29.99 by the end of the year.

Madden was always going to sell to some degree, even if 2k could emerge as a legitimate equal in football gaming (which it never actually did), but the REAL nightmare scenario was one where EA had to start selling millions of copies of Madden for $30 instead of $50 or $60 to keep their sales up. Given that scenario, it's easy to understand the business reasons why EA would need the shelter of exclusivity.

Last edited by StormJH1; 11-05-2008 at 02:41 PM.
StormJH1 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2008, 02:40 PM   #23
MVP
 
StormJH1's Arena
 
OVR: 13
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Twin Cities, MN
Yeah, agreed with PaulZweber about the fact that Madden WAS progressing and innovating in those early years of the PS2 (MUCH more than it is now). Also, 2k's game didn't make any revolutionary strides from 2003 - 2004 either. Again, it wasn't like 2k5 came out of nowhere and suddenly became a threat to Madden on its merits. The only reason EA perceived it as a threat was because of the price drop.

Given the choice between a $50 Madden game and a $40 or $50 2k football game appreciated only by disgruntled former Dreamcast fans, Madden was doing just fine. But when 2k opened the door to a much larger audience by offering a pretty solid football game for only $20, that changed everything. It looked like a great thing for gamers at the time, but it turned out to be a bad thing because EA bought out the license before 2k and EA ever actually got the chance to compete as "equals."
StormJH1 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2008, 03:29 PM   #24
Pro
 
asu666's Arena
 
OVR: 34
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Blog Entries: 8
"Madden didn't make any great strides from 2004 to 2005 either, when NFL 2k5 was around."

That's not exactly true. Madden 2005 was considered one of the best ever because EA finally let the defense catch up to the offense. The NHL series is praised today after EA eliminated the turbo button and got back to working on a simulation of the sport. The greatest advancement EA has contributed to this generation of sports games is varied CPU playstyle that mimics real life. It's in NHL and FIFA. Those are the two games that everyone praises the most.

There is the potential for sports gaming bliss being laid on us by EA and people get upset because its progress is so measured and it buys up licenses and doesn't do anything special with them. I am 100% sure that if there was an ESPN NFL 2K9 this year Madden and NCAA would both be further along than they are today.
asu666 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply


« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

« Operation Sports Forums > The News Desk > Operation Sports Content »


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:15 PM.

Top -