by ignatu on Wed Jan 19, 2005 1:56 pm
NFL rights for games held exclusively by EA doesn't mean there are no more possible NFL games besides theirs. Is the game about the marketing, glitz and hype of the player names, graphics, sound and music, etc? or is it about gameplay? EA didn't buy an exclusive license to great game play, did they?
This gives other companies a chance to focus on the game play and the experience of YOU THE PLAYER as the center of attention in a game rather than on virtual simulations of real life athletes. I worked with EA on the Madden Challenge - made the rules, format, and was commish for 2 seasons - and when players made a long TD people would say "what a catch by Randy Moss." But it wasn't Randy making the catch, it was the guy holding the sticks (Big Gene, or the Beast, or the Natural etc.)
The same goes for basketball games if NBA sells the license exclusively. Yes, people want to see the real stars, but will a good game without the real names not be good? It will give players a chance to make their own franchises, maybe focus more on head to head play, and instead of LeBron flying in for a dunk or making an assist, it will be "GENERIC NAME" or more importantly YOU.
EA's MVP baseball is a good game, not terrific, but good. It has the real players, stadiums, good music, sound, graphics, etc. along with some pretty good game play (yes there are some problems with the game play.) But have you tried Ultimate Baseball Online? It puts you as one player on a team of nine. The graphics aren't great, it's no where as polished as MVP, but the game is a lot of fun because it is YOU trying to build a character and working to become a star.
ESPN isn't the end all and be all of sports. Losing the ESPN name won't stop Sega from putting out more games. How about "NBA On NBC" or "TBS/TNT NBA Basketball"? IF EA gets exclusive license with NBA, or if someone else does, it won't stop others from a quality product. Maybe it will motivate them to look for ways to put the player more in the middle of the experience. Build a star in your own league, instead of mimicking the stars in the real NBA. How about a game where you are one player on a team of five, playing against another team of five human controlled players? Ever played NBA Live 2 on 2? It's a blast being the guy cleaning up the boards as much as it is to be the guy scoring the points.
EA tried streaming real scores in NBA Live via the Internet. It didn't go over well because when people played the game, they weren't there to see the scores of real games. Features like the game dynamically setting rosters based on the real NBA starting rosters game by game is interesting, as would be setting hot and cold streaks based on the hot and cold streaks of real life players. But people don'y only play NBA Live game by game along with the real season. I don't want my rosters changing because Kobe got injured in real life, or because someone got suspended, or because someone got hot.
Don't worry about sports games. The competition won't end if EA corners the market on all the pro sports. EA makes great games, and some interesting features may come of this. Other companies will keep producing quality features as well.
As for me, I want to see an NBA Live Challenge and some focus on those competitions as a brand of their own.