Their recent financial report contained a statement from Chairman Larry Probst stating something along the lines of "lower than expected sales" of their catalog games. There are plenty of PSP threads talking about stacks and stacks of unbought EA games and sold out product of non-EA games. Combine that with their rumored plans to charge $54.99 or $59.99 for their PS3/XBOX2 games.....could this be the beginning of the end for the software giant, if it stays its course and refuses to see reason?
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Will EA pay dearly for their higher pricing plans?
- Thread starter Shadax
- Start date
FrenchMovieTheme
Member
most of their games are ok, but not many are worth even $49.99. the fact is that i would pay $59.99 for madden without a fight (even if it wasn't the only NFL licensed game). but as for their other shit, if i wouldn't pay $49.99 i'm sure as F not going to pay more than that. I think $29.99 is just right for the majority of EA's games.
:lol Lower than expected sales? Maybe EA shouldn't pump out so much mediocre crap.
When all consoles inevitably have a HDD, I hope EA and other studios spitting out yearly sports updates eventually move to a two year release schedule, offering roster updates via online services or update disks for a small fee during the off years. They could use this interim to make notable improvements and significant features instead of simply tweaking the existing engines and tweaking the presentation. I usually only buy one iteration of a sim sports franchise each generation, and I've never bought back-to-back iterations. It's incredibly rare that a yearly update is even worth $40, let alone $50 or $60.
Unfortunately, I can't ever see this coming to pass, at least not until it somehow becomes more profitable.
When all consoles inevitably have a HDD, I hope EA and other studios spitting out yearly sports updates eventually move to a two year release schedule, offering roster updates via online services or update disks for a small fee during the off years. They could use this interim to make notable improvements and significant features instead of simply tweaking the existing engines and tweaking the presentation. I usually only buy one iteration of a sim sports franchise each generation, and I've never bought back-to-back iterations. It's incredibly rare that a yearly update is even worth $40, let alone $50 or $60.
Unfortunately, I can't ever see this coming to pass, at least not until it somehow becomes more profitable.
I think that a lot of parents are going to refuse to pay some of these prices. I caught a lot of flak with game being $50. Now that Im on my own I understand why $50 is a bit to swallow during Holidays seasons especially when you're getting more than one game among other things.
I REFUSE to purchase a PSP game thats over $30. I'll simply wait for some idiot to overpay for a game and pick it up out of the bargain bin a few months later for 1/3 of the price.
Some games are worth the price most aren't.
I REFUSE to purchase a PSP game thats over $30. I'll simply wait for some idiot to overpay for a game and pick it up out of the bargain bin a few months later for 1/3 of the price.
Some games are worth the price most aren't.
FrenchMovieTheme
Member
wow, you just don't get it do you? no offense, but thank god EA doesn't think like you. i am about ready to chuck madden 2005 out the window because i want significant improvements. you are telling me you'd want EA to just say "here's a roster update, see you in 2006 with madden 2007!"? that is ridiculous. while most casual fans or EA/Football gaming haters will say "WHAT MAJOR IMPROVEMENTS!? The game is already like a roster update!", that is untrue and any major football fan knows it. we need yearly updates. infact, i will agree with what you're talking about if it were 8 months after release. Release madden 2006, then after the free agency/NFL draft period release a complete roster update for $5-10 to tide us over until madden 2007 came out. that is a good idea. but to skip a year and just do roster updates? what a joke
It's likely that games will be more expensive across the board for next gen. Dev cost gets higher all the time and there's no additional ways to recoup dev cost, unlike movies they can recoup cost from dvd sales, license to tv station, etc. It's a high risk and fairly low margine industry. Maybe if people would stop complaining about length of games it would help a little. :lol
lockii said:
I know that many people on the GAF boards aren't keen on Madden, and sports in general. If you have any friends who are fans of Madden, talk to them and ask them how much they would pay for a next-gen version of Madden. Many football fans own consoles just for their sports fix, and I can assure you that Madden could sell for much higher and still sell significantly well.
EA's really starting to thing they're the cock of the walk. $40 DS games, $50 for PSP game. $55 or $60 for Xbox 2 and PS3 games. They placate MS and Nintendo with shoddy support, kiss Sony's ass and can't make an original game to save their lives. They buy up developers and don't market their games in the slightest.
I'd have to be insane to give them $1 for the shit they release.
I'd have to be insane to give them $1 for the shit they release.
SonicMegaDrive
Member
EA won't pay dearly, but everybody who has to buy yearly football updates sure will.
One of the big reasons why EA is so hell-bent on having as many games as they can online (and also why they took so long to get on Xbox Live) is so they can control when to pull the plug on online play. If they released Madden 2006 (or whatever it will eventually be renamed) for the PS3 and allowed people to play it online for as long as the PS3 lasts, then many people wouldn't buy new versions of Madden. Therefore, EA simply lets a version be online for about two years, then pulls the plug and that version, forcing everyone who wants to play the game online to buy new versions.
I'm really afraid of this, because EA could basically force people (who want to play online) to buy a version of the game every year, by stopping the game server for the previous year's particular version when the new year's version is released, thereby making the old game an offline-only game and worthless to the online player. Once that happens, it's another $60 in EA's bank every year.
If online gaming really takes off in the next gen like everyone is predicting, you'd better hope to hell that EA doesn't get this greedy. Even so, you would like to see an online game stay online for as long as you want it, which is one of the better points of (the non-EA area of) Xbox Live.
I'm really afraid of this, because EA could basically force people (who want to play online) to buy a version of the game every year, by stopping the game server for the previous year's particular version when the new year's version is released, thereby making the old game an offline-only game and worthless to the online player. Once that happens, it's another $60 in EA's bank every year.
If online gaming really takes off in the next gen like everyone is predicting, you'd better hope to hell that EA doesn't get this greedy. Even so, you would like to see an online game stay online for as long as you want it, which is one of the better points of (the non-EA area of) Xbox Live.
EA = big with casual gamers.
casual gamers dont by systems in the first week they come out.. so, no big surprise EA isnt selling a ton of them ATM. I suspect that is a big part of their sales problems on PSP right now.
but yeah, expect to pay 60-70 bucks for Madden from now on.
casual gamers dont by systems in the first week they come out.. so, no big surprise EA isnt selling a ton of them ATM. I suspect that is a big part of their sales problems on PSP right now.
but yeah, expect to pay 60-70 bucks for Madden from now on.
FrenchMovieTheme
Member
wow, you are incredibly out of touch with the football gaming scene. why don't you sign onto Madden 2004 on PS2 and see how many people are playing online in relation to madden 2005. you say many people wouldn't buy new versions of madden if you could play online longer than 2 years, but do you realize how small the online userbase is for madden? Lets say (and i am being AWFULLY generous here) that 40,000 people across all platforms play madden online. Do you know how much madden sells across all platforms? Lets also be modest and say the TOTAL number of copies of madden sold (for online versions only) is 2.5 million. So, you have 1.6% of the userbase participating in online gaming, and how much of that 1.6% do you think HONESTLY wants to play the older games for years into the future when newer versions are out?
like i said, you are out of touch with what people want. Sports gaming isn't like Halo/Phantom Dust/Etc.
dskillzhtown
keep your strippers out of my American football
Two things come clear in this thread:
1. People who know nothing about sports gaming shouldn't be commenting on what is wrong with it.
2. Alot of people don't understand that most gaming companines want EA to come out with a high price for their games so that EA sets the standard. Remember the Activision concall when they criticized Sega/Take Two for the $20 price take on their sports games? Most companies want that high dollar premium on their software. That means more money for them. With the price of gaming becoming so high and the fact that major publishers (not only EA) are buying up smaller companies seemingly every month, the business of gaming is more expensive than ever before. With all the overhead, I am thinking that 50-60 is about as high as it can go. That is if they want people to buy more than 5 titles a year.
1. People who know nothing about sports gaming shouldn't be commenting on what is wrong with it.
2. Alot of people don't understand that most gaming companines want EA to come out with a high price for their games so that EA sets the standard. Remember the Activision concall when they criticized Sega/Take Two for the $20 price take on their sports games? Most companies want that high dollar premium on their software. That means more money for them. With the price of gaming becoming so high and the fact that major publishers (not only EA) are buying up smaller companies seemingly every month, the business of gaming is more expensive than ever before. With all the overhead, I am thinking that 50-60 is about as high as it can go. That is if they want people to buy more than 5 titles a year.
Madden could easily sell for $80 (approx $60 - 65 US) and still sell amazingly well. As for the rest of the games they put out, they should probably sell for $45 - $50 can ($30-$40 US). Games like Oddworld probably would have sold more out of the gate with a retail price like that. As for the garbage games they put out,,,,,well I think they deserve to be quite a bit lower. But I think they should increase the price of NFPSU just so it stops topping sales chart. 
I hate seeing that game get so much love. Yes it's fun but it should not have outsold half the games that it did.
I hate seeing that game get so much love. Yes it's fun but it should not have outsold half the games that it did.FrenchMovieTheme
Member
you are being an idiot because i made your point look stupid. look at what you said:
lol, MANY people!? that is flat out bullshit. i would bet you a trillion dollars that EA could say "Ok friends, here is madden 2006, we will make it playable online until 2016" and the dent in sales to madden 2007 and beyond would be so neglible that no one with any common sense would bother reporting it.
like i said before, the percentage of people who feel the way you do are such a small minority (and what i mean by "people who think like you" is the people who would actually PLAY one madden game over the life of the system and be satisfied) that there is no way EA or any other company who makes sports games would give two shits about keeping their sports games online for 7 years after release or whatever you are suggesting.
i will close by saying there will likely never be an instance where the majority (51%+) of a sports games userbase play the game online. and even if there WERE a case like that, i bet you a majority of that majority would want a new version every year to play online.
jesus christ anti-EA people are really stretching this shit
FrenchMovieTheme said:
Actually, I do get it. I understand that yearly Madden iterations, while better than their direct predecessors, typically do not deliver huge improvements in terms of gameplay, graphics, and value at a $50 price point compared to updates/sequels in most other genres.
It seems most sports franchises get a notable bump in quality at the beginning of a new generation (obviously) and near the midpoint of a generation when there are cumulative and/or significant overhauls to existing engines, presentation, and AI. Madden 2005 was the sweet spot for me, good enough for me to plunk down $50 at release. I'm sure the growing pressure from ESPN Football also helped spur a more competitive product. Going from 2002 to 2003 and then 2004, however, was rather underwhelming, relegating them to rental status.
No offense, but it is the crack addict level of demand that allows EA to charge full price every year by offering barely passable improvements. The Madden franchise has been around for nearly 15 years, yet every year complaints are inevitably heard within a couple of days after launch about how aspects of the game are still "broken" or how it needs to be "properly played" to maintain the spirit of the game. Just look at the Madden Challenge each year. It's bullshit. At least entertain the possibility that if EA were given more time between releases, features such as the Hit Stick, the versatile defensive audibles, and the superior LB and DB defensive AI found in 2005 may have been implemented years ago. Of course, such a scenario would hinge on EA not wanting to milk the franchise for maximum profit which would be like Nintendo not milking Mario Party, but I digress.
Don't get me wrong, I love playing Madden 2005. I face off against my best friend whenever I get the chance, and I've played through 10 seasons in my franchise, never even skipping a single preseason game. I realize you and I will probably never see eye to eye on the issue, rendering the discussion pointless. However, allow me to pose a purely hypothetical question...
If you could skip an iteration of Madden for one year, receiving only roster updates, but in exchange you'd receive the next iteration with a feature set one or two years ahead of current games, would you make the trade? For instance, Madden 2001 is released (as we know it). Madden 2002 is not published, but roster updates are issued at a nominal fee. Madden 2003 is then released, but it also sports the features found in Madden 2004/2005 (again, as we know them). Rinse and repeat.
Would it be worth it?
I'd probably pay $60 for Madden but I cant see me buying any other titles at that price. I'll just hold off on most titles (or get them super cheap off outpost.com) like I've been doing the past year or so. I cant see me buying any other of their titles for that price though. I know I will be holding off on most all PSP titles -- I've simply become too accustomed to getting games for cheaper than their launch prices.
FrenchMovieTheme
Member
that is all subjective. what is a huge improvement? better graphics or more gameplay mechanics? madden 2005 was a HUGE improvement on the defensive side of the ball (AI and other gameplay controls added) over madden 2004.
madden has always had terrible presentation. and no pressure from VC/NFL 2kx changed that. madden has always been tops in the gameplay department, and I do agree with you that the jump from 2002 to 2003 was a joke. but the jump from 2004 to 2005 was excellent, and this was coming off a year in which they killed VC 14 to 1 in sales (Madden 2004 vs. ESPN NFL 2004). so what you're saying is that they were pushed to the limits by a game they throttled in sales? By that logic, madden 2005 would have regressed, and it did not.
look at the madden challenge, look at the NFL 2k5 tourney, look at the tekken 5 regional tournies, or soul calibur, or smash brothers, or whatever tournament you want to look at. here is the bottom line: some people are so desperate to win, they will resort to complete garbage to do it. this isn't exculsive to EA OR madden. it IS EA's fault (and other companies) that they don't regulate official tournament play to ban bullshit, but then again these companies should find the exploits to start with. that's true, but keep in mind these are videogames and there will always be exploits. again, this isn't all madden, this is every game of all time. bottom line is people want a football game every year, if you want to skip a year and pretend that EA didn't work on madden 2006, that is awesome. you will be even more stoked about madden 2007.
no. i'm not saying no to prove a point or purposely disagree with you, but we see improvements on different levels. i see the defensive improvements (AI and otherwise) from madden 2004 to 2005 as a HUGE feature and one that i couldn't live without. i honestly could not have played madden 2004 for another 12 months to wait for madden 2006. and i can't play madden 2005 for another 18 months to wait for madden 2007. EA will improve madden and make it fresh again (for me) as they do every year. that is what i want. i dont want a revolution to madden, i want it to continue evolving.
FrenchMovieTheme said:
True, it is particularly subjective in terms of gameplay, though the graphics, not so much. Of course, the fact that Madden is a yearly release often sets it back on the value curve compared to titles that spend multiple years in development, given they have comparable staffing. I suppose we could compare and contrast man hours and/or production values of your average non-sport sim franchise title with EA's typical cost for hashing out a Madden title, though I doubt those number easy to come across, and are also subjective on various levels.
Also, I'm not arguing Madden 2005 wasn't a notable jump in the series (Owner Mode in 2004 didn't really entice me
), hence my previous comments about the mid-generation "sweet spot" and why I bought 2005.No, by my logic I'm saying EA was still concerned the competition could gain a small foothold with potential for growth, especially with ESPN's aggressive pricing strategy (which wasn't in effect during the 2K4 series). I'm assuming EA aquired NFL exclusivity as a part of a business strategy, not just for shits and giggles and to further laugh and kick sand at VC.
I realize people "cheese" their way through other tournaments, but it doesn't seem quite as blatant or effective in many of the titles in the fighting genre, especially amongst the elite. Perhaps one of the tourney savvy folk on GAF could comment, as I can't say for sure.
I have seen some 2K5 videos, though... :lol Yikes.
Well, I guess this is the part where we have to agree to disagree...
I should also note that I didn't mean to single out Madden. NBA Live and NCAA share the same symptoms. Aside from the dunk contest, NBA Live 2005 sucked ass and felt like a step back in many ways from 2004. I don't think I even need to mention NCAA 2005...
FrenchMovieTheme
Member
oh yes it's a business strategy, but can you tell me with a straight face that you think EA will release yearly roster updates and that is all? yes, logic tells you "they have no incentive to be great!" but keep in mind that tiburon is not EA. EA owns tiburon. and if tiburon wants to keep themselves afloat and keep developing madden titles for EA, then they better be on their A-game on EA can easily shift one of its other developers over. it is not as cut and dry as saying "Welp, no other football games pack it in boys we're done until madden 2007!"
i can tell you right now i played in a couple soul calibur 2 tournaments and it was a complete fucking joke. all anyone would do is either pick nightmare or that spawn-created guy and do some cheap fucking 3-hit combo. yes, it could be stopped by a competent player, just as i could have stopped that cheap fuck in the madden tourney (on offense anyways
). or how about long ago the tekken 3 tournament when everyone and their mom picked eddie gordo or whatever that bitches name was and just mashed X, O, X, O and did those bullshit kick combos that were tough to defend. it happens everywhere, but perhaps seems more prevelent in madden because we are football fans and that magnifies the BSnba live 2005 sucked complete ass online. on xbox, it was pretty decent offline and with the sliders (to slow it down and so on). nhl 200whatever is pretty shitty too. nfl street 2 sucked, nba street vol 3 sucked, all the lord of the rings games sucked, burnout 3 was awesome, mvp baseball is awesome, and so on and so on.
EA as a whole releases some shitty games. i am a madden fan not necessarily a huge fan of EA's other games.
p.s. christ dont get me started on the abomination that was ncaa 2005... especially on xbox... that deserves another thread unto itself
FrenchMovieTheme
Member
did you ever play NCAA on xbox? because it was about 10 X worse than the ps2 version.
the game itself was shitty out of the box, case closed. but ADD to that shittiness the fact that the xbox version had major slowdown most of the time and you have one of the biggest disappointments of all time
the game itself was shitty out of the box, case closed. but ADD to that shittiness the fact that the xbox version had major slowdown most of the time and you have one of the biggest disappointments of all time
Go Go Ackman!
Banned
A wise man on these forums once said "junior members and hypothetical questions - a match made in heaven." I think that applies to this thread.
FrenchMovieTheme
Member
only shadax isn't a junior member
If they charge $60 for games, I sure as hell ain't buying their products. I thought we were done with this kind of prices during the SNES/Gensis era. I was just getting used to the $40 price of PSX games, and now we're back up to $50, and I'll be damned if I pay any more than that for a game. I rarely pay $50 for a game now.
Similar threads
- Poll