From past experiences, those types of deals have resulted in a lost of realism for more "pop" stuff. EA baseball franchise was at first, based on realism, then it moved to the Triple Play series and it became a pop game, based on home runs and high score rather than realism.
And High Heat became the first baseball game on the market over EA's Triple Play even with the more marketing from EA. If I recall correctly, EA bought High Heat and High Heat staff make the current EA baseball games.
Anyway, it went from 3 baseball games (High Heat, Microsoft, Triple Play) to only one. Same will happen to baseketball. But the move toward ESPN was innevitable. Their intention was never to compete with EA but to force EA into some kind of deal. Without being a competitor, ESPN did not have much negotiation leverage. By being a competitor, taking a huge market share from EA by selling the game at such a low price as they did, they forced EA into negotiation or confrontation. EA made the right call for EA, and ESPN for ESPN, but only time will tell if it turns to be a good move for the customers.
My opinion is that EA will no longer have a stong desire to innovate and improve the game to beat the competition. NBA LIVE's budget will be reduce, staff will be reduce also, and with it, the number of improvements. The ESPN game pushed EA to spend a lot of resources on innovation and reworking the Dynasty mode from scratched this year, but get used to the current design because it is the way the game will be for the next 3 to 5 years. It will take another competitior or huge drop in sales (disatisfaction from customers like us), to motivate them to raise budgets for NBA LIVE and innovate again.
Man, it felt like I was in business school again.
