19-01-2005 03:28									#1
	EA to be shut out of Baseball Games Market? Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

What goes around, comes around:

http://sports.ign.com/articles/580/580468p1.html

quote: January 18, 2005 - I can't ever remember a more tumultuous time in the history of sports video games. And just when you think you know it all, another bomb is dropped on your lap. EA buys the NFL exclusive. EA buys the ESPN exclusive. But now, here comes the counterpunch. Rumors are circulating that the Take Two/Visual Concepts team is in negotiations to buy the exclusive MLB license, and negotiations are almost final. Visual Concepts is the company I had mentioned in a previous column as the ones who went out and locked up a long term deal with Major League Baseball after the NFL exclusive was announced, and now it looks like they were not only granted a long term deal, but are about to make it an exclusive. Word is, it could be an exclusive third party contract, meaning first-party publishers like Sony (989), Microsoft, and Nintendo will still be able to publish games using the real players and teams, but surprisingly, it's mega power EA who will be cut out of the loop. On the NBA front, rumors are spreading throughout the industry that the league is now looking to sell genre-specific exclusives once current deals expire, meaning they want one company to publish sims (NBA Live, NBA 2K5), one to publish street-style games (NBA Street V3, NBA Ballers), and one to publish portables. Sources tell IGN Sports that there is already some major money on the table for each deal, and it will be interesting to see how it all shakes out. The NBA has rejected initial bids for the all-encompassing exclusive, taking the competition from the courts to the negotiating table.

Take Two / Visual Concepts, btw, is the developer behind SEGA's sportsgames.

	19-01-2005 03:32									#2
	Got spare money?

Taketwo, hmm. The Pete Rose Baseball Gamble? The Revenge of the Black Sox? Steroid City?

	19-01-2005 04:52									#3
	Increase Your PM Length

Let me see if I got this right:

Because of this EA is among the few who is not allowed to use baseball names (or whatever this is about) for their games?

	19-01-2005 07:03									#4
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Correct.

	19-01-2005 11:42									#5
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Well you have to know context. EA bought exclusive rights to NFL (American football) meaning no one else can use it in video games (including SEGA). NOW, SEGA's developers are close to a deal excluding companies like EA from being involved in baseball games!

It's a can-you-top-this MAD strategy.

	19-01-2005 16:50									#6
	Put an end to popups!

its going to be crazy - and it will do everything but encourage good game making.
I'll put money on it, that in the long run some legal challanges simular to the one Microsoft had to go through about anti-fair competition practices, will cost the companies involved in this more than they will ever get out of having the 'exclusive' rights

It all goes to show that the people running the games industry as it is in the mainstream today, dont deserve the jobs they hold.
Well definately the guys at EA, but i'm sure they are not the only ones.

This is bad for games and gaming

	19-01-2005 20:49									#7
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

It's too bad Baseball games sell like crap compared to Football games.

	19-01-2005 21:16									#8
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Apparently the CFL is looking to get into the video game business.

TSN.ca reported this today.

	20-01-2005 03:30									#9
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by child of Thor its going to be crazy - and it will do everything but encourage good game making. I'll put money on it, that in the long run some legal challanges simular to the one Microsoft had to go through about anti-fair competition practices, will cost the companies involved in this more than they will ever get out of having the 'exclusive' rights It all goes to show that the people running the games industry as it is in the mainstream today, dont deserve the jobs they hold. Well definately the guys at EA, but i'm sure they are not the only ones. This is bad for games and gaming

I dont see how one can blame this on the game publishers. Its the decision of the copyright owners, IE the NFL and MLB to decide to whom to license. They can choose to license to multiple firms if they wish, or to grant an exclusive license.

Its the NFL thats the real monopoly. The USFL (United States Football League) sued them some years ago, for specific practices and got only a symbolic judgement.

I dont see how anyone could sue them over giving an exclusive license. They have as much right to, as say Time Warner has to give an exclusive license for Harry Potter games.

Major League Baseball is exempt from US antitrust, by act of Congress.

It may be a bad business decision to grant exclusive licences. You cant blame game companies for wanting them, though. Although it is possible theyve overpaid for them.

	22-01-2005 01:13									#10
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

True - its easy to forget it takes two to tango. Still its very much an aggresive move on the behalf of EA in the industry it wants to be in(ok sorry they really want to 'own' it all ).
Cut out the hard-nose buisness postureing and you have what could be one of the most creative industries to work in.
In the good ol days(tm) game designers from the big companies(EA included), would meet up and share idea's and technology for games. It was all about trying to make the best games possible with the technology available.

It seems to me a move like this from EA is completely setting itself up against all the other companies.

Its not a great model for foreign policy, as its not a great model for making a better game making marketplace

In situations like these you will end up finding out thats its just not possible for one to own all. And getting to the realisation will cause alot of collatoral damage in the meantime. Everyone ends up worse off

But yeah boo to the NFL/MLB for agreeing to it too

hmmm...it would be interesting to know if game companies outside of the USA are going with this strategy?

	22-01-2005 02:18									#11
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Still its very much an aggresive move on the behalf of EA in the industry it wants to be in

The NFL came to EA and offered them exclusive rights and said there were others interested if EA didn't want them. It was the NFL's idea in the first place.

	22-01-2005 02:26									#12
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

You have to keep in mind that the OXM is hardly a reputable publication, and their issues are prepared months before they're released. They've been wrong on so many things so many times.

	22-01-2005 02:58									#13
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui quote: Still its very much an aggresive move on the behalf of EA in the industry it wants to be in The NFL came to EA and offered them exclusive rights and said there were others interested if EA didn't want them. It was the NFL's idea in the first place.

But that doesn't make them right for taking it does it?

How about this. Lets just imagine for a momment that the people who run the games industry were from a gaming background exclusively.
Lets say that all the CEO's had been playing games since the ealry days of the home computer, and all the people who worked under them, were also gamers.
No one from Hollywood or the music industry.
No one from purely buisness.

And lets say they all held the advancement of gaming as a medium, to be of the utmost importance.
So they set up a gaming body of some kind, where they all would go to discuss their industry and what was in their long term best interests.

In this fictional world, when someone like the NFL comes knocking they atleast can provide a united response. They wont get pushed by fear or greed. They know that deep down its in all their best interests to not let monopolies start to get a foothold, not in a creative industry anyway. That would just lead to an eventual staleness in the games that got produced, a certain sameness when there should be diversity



So EA could have said no - they had a choice. heck they could have gone to any of the other potential buyers and explained what was going on. But i dont think this even crossed their minds. They are greedy, interested in greed above all else and jumped at it. Knowing what this could trigger. Now they cant make base-ball games if they wanted(well not ones that people would buy year after year to get the latest names).

So i still maintain they were misguided, if for no other reason than this is a whole new can of rather nasty worms that will not do anything to make gaming a better place to be.

The wrong kind of people run games these days. You would have to fire them all and put the right people back in to give gaming a brighter future imho.

Thats why i'm generaly pessamistic that i dont believe i will grow into a gameing OAP, maybe i have another 5-10 years left before games become so stale, so uniteresting that i cant bare to buy them anymore.

EA has still been bad in my view, again. And they used to be so damn cool

	22-01-2005 03:37									#14
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by child of Thor But that doesn't make them right for taking it does it? How about this. Lets just imagine for a momment that the people who run the games industry were from a gaming background exclusively. Lets say that all the CEO's had been playing games since the ealry days of the home computer, and all the people who worked under them, were also gamers. No one from Hollywood or the music industry. No one from purely buisness. And lets say they all held the advancement of gaming as a medium, to be of the utmost importance. So they set up a gaming body of some kind, where they all would go to discuss their industry and what was in their long term best interests. In this fictional world, when someone like the NFL comes knocking they atleast can provide a united response. They wont get pushed by fear or greed. They know that deep down its in all their best interests to not let monopolies start to get a foothold, not in a creative industry anyway. That would just lead to an eventual staleness in the games that got produced, a certain sameness when there should be diversity So EA could have said no - they had a choice. heck they could have gone to any of the other potential buyers and explained what was going on. But i dont think this even crossed their minds. They are greedy, interested in greed above all else and jumped at it. Knowing what this could trigger. Now they cant make base-ball games if they wanted(well not ones that people would buy year after year to get the latest names). So i still maintain they were misguided, if for no other reason than this is a whole new can of rather nasty worms that will not do anything to make gaming a better place to be. The wrong kind of people run games these days. You would have to fire them all and put the right people back in to give gaming a brighter future imho. Thats why i'm generaly pessamistic that i dont believe i will grow into a gameing OAP, maybe i have another 5-10 years left before games become so stale, so uniteresting that i cant bare to buy them anymore. EA has still been bad in my view, again. And they used to be so damn cool

well I certainly think that the most creativity will come from small developers and publishers - just the kind of firms that probably wouldnt be buying licenses even if the licenses were NOT monopolies.

If I could get all the large publishers in a room to save the industry, I wouldnt have them focus on negotiations with the NFL (BTW, THAT might very well BE a violation of antitrust in the US) I would have them focus on promoting the PC as a gaming platform, and establishing better technical standards to deal with spec creep, operability, and quality standards (as in bugginess, not gameplay). Those are things holding the platform back.

	22-01-2005 04:40									#15
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by lord of the mark well I certainly think that the most creativity will come from small developers and publishers - just the kind of firms that probably wouldnt be buying licenses even if the licenses were NOT monopolies. If I could get all the large publishers in a room to save the industry, I wouldnt have them focus on negotiations with the NFL (BTW, THAT might very well BE a violation of antitrust in the US) I would have them focus on promoting the PC as a gaming platform, and establishing better technical standards to deal with spec creep, operability, and quality standards (as in bugginess, not gameplay). Those are things holding the platform back.

Yes all these kinds of things are part of what should be happening to a much greater degree than they do already, and specifically in the PC market(which i believe the big guys want to move out of) with buggyness and tech issues etc.
Even the console market has started to see a slight increase in the acceptable buggyness of the games.

At the momment its the one against the other and 'last man standing' mentality that has and is causing some of the problems that i'd rather not see in an industry that i care about and want to do well.

I certainly dont have all the answers for how to make sure everyone gets paid what they should in the development end, and how to make sure we gamers dont have to go through yet another expensive waste of time with any new games we might buy.

But i got a gut feeling that stuff like this EA-NFL/No EA MLB fiasco just isn't the answer to all our problems.