[jd369]

Quote: Originally Posted by Bobhead

I don't know how licensing works with regards to sports either, but your logic isn't that far off. In (good) movies, companies pay to have their products in a movie. I don't know if MLB is an issue here, and I'd imagine it is, but in a perfect world the same would hold true in video games, and a game development company could hypothetically profit from allowing brand names in their game. But like I said I'm sure the core issue here is that Bud Selig guy. Maybe he doesn't want these brand names accidentally misrepresented, and so MLB refuse brand incorporation altogether. Or maybe MLB requests chicken dinners that Russell refuses to part with.

Im sure the MLB is the reason for it (since MLB games are the only major sports game without licensed equipment). Is it that they want money on top of having to pay the equipment companies (I cant see how that would even be legal)? It would be nice to get an ACTUAL answer instead of the "we cant but cant tell you why" thats getting a bit old. No ones getting sued for saying "the MLB wants too much money etc etc" and if they are then theres more wrong with this world than getting some nikes in a baseball game.