[Sleazell]

I think he is right to a degree. Using the ratings systems to back up his theory is wrong however I do agree that time, money and resources (talent) are the main factors in making a great game. The problem is in business there really is no true competition. True competition is when you would go all out to beat the other guy. Businesses for the most part determine their market share and decide how much time, money and resources they should allocate to reach their targeted market share. So lets say NFL 2K did make a comeback. Why would EA pump more into development when now there is a chance they will sell less? From a true competition sense of course you would want to stomp the competitor but from the business side you wouldn't want to take the risk of spending more money and not gain a significant amount of the market share. In a genre where they have to come out with a game year after I doubt any business would dump the extra money necessary to try to truly out do their competitor (apparently game development is just damn expensive). Thus EA did the next best thing with our beloved football and bought the licensing agreements. Either way I think the consumer is hosed but at least with competition you have a choice to possibly satisfy your need to have a feature that one of the competitor didn't have.

Good article by the way. It's always good people to discussing things no matter what side of the fence they are on.