EA is right on one thing, they've never charged supra-competitive prices. For years they have been releasing the same games over and over again and people have been buying them so that they could have the latest and the baddest.
All that I take away from it is that someone is pissed over the fact that EA is the only one that makes footballgames while charging too much for those for those games in the process.
Common sense dictates that the people who bought those games at a premium WANTED those games at the advertized price. Responsible consumerism dictates that those people should've asked themselves if they wanted to buy those particular games at the advertized price.
It's mostly smoke and mirrors from the claimers' side, implying that EA bullied itself into a position where only they could develop football-games, without investigating if there even was interest amongst other studios/publishers to develop a football-game. The market for that is too localized. Maybe the Codemasters would entertain the idea to create a cheap knock-off football-game, but other than that, I can't think of any other studio/publisher who would develop such a targetted game for such a localized audience. Maybe if they had some high-yield IP's on the side that can cover the inevitable caps between budget and profit that will occur, but I don't see any studio develop a football-game as it's major IP. It's not worth it.
So there's no monopoly if EA is the only one willing to develop a yearly series of football-games that hardly differ from one iteration to the next.
I also have a hard time believing that someone would buy a game, play it, and then get a lightbulb going like, 'Heeeeeeey... this game is EA and I paid normal price for this game! This calls for a class-action lawsuit!' -.-
am I wrong or doesn't EA have exclusive rights somehow to the NFL? No other company could make an NFL player game even if they wanted to.
That's the point I'm making... who would want to have a slice of that pie? Football is right up there with Nascar. It has no international appeal (even though both organizations are working tirelessly to make it so.). I mean, who's going after Cabala for having a monopoly on wildlife killing simulators?
Electronic Arts denies Plaintiffs’ allegations. Electronic Arts asserts that (i) there is no such thing as a discreet “market” for league-branded, simulation football videogames; (ii) the NFL and its Players’ Association, the NCAA, and other licensors asked Electronic Arts and other game publishers to bid for the rights to make videogames using their trademarks and other intellectual property rights; (iii) EA did so and was awarded certain rights to make videogames using these licensors' trademarks and other intellectual property rights; (iv) it is not illegal to bid on trademark licenses, exclusive or otherwise, that intellectual property owners choose to offer, (v) exclusive trademark licenses are commonplace and widely accepted in commerce and under the law as one legitimate way for an intellectual property rights holder to maximize the value of its property, (vi) the conduct challenged by Plaintiffs has not injured consumers, and (vii) Electronic Arts has never charged supra-competitive prices for its videogames.
The Court has not decided whether Electronic Arts did anything wrong, and this Notice is not an expression of any opinion by the Court about the merits of any of the claims or defenses asserted by any party to this litigation.
I don't think that the lack of international appeal means much, when we're talking about the NFL. Here in the states it's huge. Hell, both my sons routinely receive clothing with the Patriots logo despite the fact that nobody in my house watches football. I'll admit though, even as somebody who doesn't give a crap about football, Madden games are REALLY fun.
And I could be wrong, but didn't the NFL want to grant exclusive rights to only one company? If 2K bid highest, would this same lawsuit be against them? Or is this just more EA hate?
I don't think that the lack of international appeal means much, when we're talking about the NFL. Here in the states it's huge. Hell, both my sons routinely receive clothing with the Patriots logo despite the fact that nobody in my house watches football. I'll admit though, even as somebody who doesn't give a crap about football, Madden games are REALLY fun.
And I could be wrong, but didn't the NFL want to grant exclusive rights to only one company? If 2K bid highest, would this same lawsuit be against them? Or is this just more EA hate?
The world is larger than the USA. I'm looking at this from a business point of view. Many publishers will want to publish games that can be shifted world-wide. EA doesn't really care in that respect, they have enough IPs going to throw in a football game.
None EA devs/publishers will probably think twice about getting in that market. And even if they could get in on that market, what different can you do with a football game from the next guy? The rules are written in stone, the pitch is the pitch and the athletes are wearing entire sports-stores.
When you look at budgets for games, a none EA dev/publisher will not divert much money into it, which will result in a shoddy game with lousy controls no one wants to play. Football might be huge in the States, but it isn't Footy which has a much better international appeal.
The world is larger than the USA. I'm looking at this from a business point of view. Many publishers will want to publish games that can be shifted world-wide. EA doesn't really care in that respect, they have enough IPs going to throw in a football game.
I still think you're underestimating the popularity. Just because NFL has a very limited geographical appeal doesn't mean the demand is comparable to another game with international appeal. The numbers are comparable to FIFA - another interesting comparison when you consider that the average stupid American has no idea how popular the "other" football is, well, everywhere on the planet.
CrypticCat wrote:
None EA devs/publishers will probably think twice about getting in that market. And even if they could get in on that market, what different can you do with a football game from the next guy? The rules are written in stone, the pitch is the pitch and the athletes are wearing entire sports-stores.
Can't argue here. Reading through the history of the EA/2K/NFL relationship, there's more discussion about 2K5's price point than if the game is actually better than EA's $60 series.
I completely agree that if another dev/pub was to take a crack at NFL, it runs the risk of being a clone or a half-assed attempt at Madden. A creative developer could make a really great football game with or without licensing, but that's not the point of the suit. The point is if somebody wants to play as Tom Brady or Mark Sanchez, they are forced to do so under EA's terms.
EA is right on one thing, they've never charged supra-competitive prices. For years they have been releasing the same games over and over again and people have been buying them so that they could have the latest and the baddest.
All that I take away from it is that someone is pissed over the fact that EA is the only one that makes footballgames while charging too much for those for those games in the process.
Common sense dictates that the people who bought those games at a premium WANTED those games at the advertized price. Responsible consumerism dictates that those people should've asked themselves if they wanted to buy those particular games at the advertized price.
It's mostly smoke and mirrors from the claimers' side, implying that EA bullied itself into a position where only they could develop football-games, without investigating if there even was interest amongst other studios/publishers to develop a football-game. The market for that is too localized. Maybe the Codemasters would entertain the idea to create a cheap knock-off football-game, but other than that, I can't think of any other studio/publisher who would develop such a targetted game for such a localized audience. Maybe if they had some high-yield IP's on the side that can cover the inevitable caps between budget and profit that will occur, but I don't see any studio develop a football-game as it's major IP. It's not worth it.
So there's no monopoly if EA is the only one willing to develop a yearly series of football-games that hardly differ from one iteration to the next.
I also have a hard time believing that someone would buy a game, play it, and then get a lightbulb going like, 'Heeeeeeey... this game is EA and I paid normal price for this game! This calls for a class-action lawsuit!' -.-
am I wrong or doesn't EA have exclusive rights somehow to the NFL? No other company could make an NFL player game even if they wanted to.
That's the point I'm making... who would want to have a slice of that pie? Football is right up there with Nascar. It has no international appeal (even though both organizations are working tirelessly to make it so.). I mean, who's going after Cabala for having a monopoly on wildlife killing simulators?
Electronic Arts denies Plaintiffs’ allegations. Electronic Arts asserts that (i) there is no such thing as a discreet “market” for league-branded, simulation football videogames; (ii) the NFL and its Players’ Association, the NCAA, and other licensors asked Electronic Arts and other game publishers to bid for the rights to make videogames using their trademarks and other intellectual property rights; (iii) EA did so and was awarded certain rights to make videogames using these licensors' trademarks and other intellectual property rights; (iv) it is not illegal to bid on trademark licenses, exclusive or otherwise, that intellectual property owners choose to offer, (v) exclusive trademark licenses are commonplace and widely accepted in commerce and under the law as one legitimate way for an intellectual property rights holder to maximize the value of its property, (vi) the conduct challenged by Plaintiffs has not injured consumers, and (vii) Electronic Arts has never charged supra-competitive prices for its videogames.
The Court has not decided whether Electronic Arts did anything wrong, and this Notice is not an expression of any opinion by the Court about the merits of any of the claims or defenses asserted by any party to this litigation.
I don't think that the lack of international appeal means much, when we're talking about the NFL. Here in the states it's huge. Hell, both my sons routinely receive clothing with the Patriots logo despite the fact that nobody in my house watches football. I'll admit though, even as somebody who doesn't give a crap about football, Madden games are REALLY fun.
And I could be wrong, but didn't the NFL want to grant exclusive rights to only one company? If 2K bid highest, would this same lawsuit be against them? Or is this just more EA hate?
The world is larger than the USA. I'm looking at this from a business point of view. Many publishers will want to publish games that can be shifted world-wide. EA doesn't really care in that respect, they have enough IPs going to throw in a football game.
None EA devs/publishers will probably think twice about getting in that market. And even if they could get in on that market, what different can you do with a football game from the next guy? The rules are written in stone, the pitch is the pitch and the athletes are wearing entire sports-stores.
When you look at budgets for games, a none EA dev/publisher will not divert much money into it, which will result in a shoddy game with lousy controls no one wants to play. Football might be huge in the States, but it isn't Footy which has a much better international appeal.
I still think you're underestimating the popularity. Just because NFL has a very limited geographical appeal doesn't mean the demand is comparable to another game with international appeal. The numbers are comparable to FIFA - another interesting comparison when you consider that the average stupid American has no idea how popular the "other" football is, well, everywhere on the planet.
Can't argue here. Reading through the history of the EA/2K/NFL relationship, there's more discussion about 2K5's price point than if the game is actually better than EA's $60 series.
I completely agree that if another dev/pub was to take a crack at NFL, it runs the risk of being a clone or a half-assed attempt at Madden. A creative developer could make a really great football game with or without licensing, but that's not the point of the suit. The point is if somebody wants to play as Tom Brady or Mark Sanchez, they are forced to do so under EA's terms.
If one would like to pretend he is one of those people and EA offers that opportunity, then why would one agitate against that? o.0
So, I recieved a check for $64.14 from the EA today because of this