EA Sports UFC Will Not Have Fighter Share, Will Release Late Spring - Possibly Summer

[ManiacMatt1782]

Quote: Originally Posted by vthallman

I think this has very little to do with property rights and everything to do with DLC sales. Don't let their smokescreen fool you. That's where EAs making a killing now and CAF sharing would significantly cut into those sales. Can't really blame them.

It might be a factor, but not as big as you think.

[Azamien]

Quote: Originally Posted by aholbert32

Wrong. The O'bannon comparison doesnt work. In NCAA, EA was creating players with similar likenesses, numbers, height and weight to real people. EA was doing the creating. The issue with EA was never the fact that people could edit the players.....it was that EA was using likenesses even before people edited the game. There are very few things I know about and this is one of them. I serve as litigation counsel for one of the biggest media companies in the world. We deal with both sides of this issue. People using our content and people posting other people's content on our sites. You couldnt be more wrong about Youtube. They dont bend over backwards. I'll give you an example: Lets say you post one of my company's shows on Youtube. I see it and I send Youtube a takedown notice and they immediately take it down. That should be it right? Nope. Youtube will send you a takedown notification and all you have to do is say "That content is owned by me" without providing any evidence that it is....and Youtube will restore the video to your account. The only option my company has is to file suit (which costs us money) and forward the complaint to Youtube. Youtube will then take down the video until the matter is resolved. We dont have an option to sue Youtube and if we did the case would be dismissed under the DMCA. Same goes for EA. There are hundreds of file share sites that have used the "we only host" defense for years and have been very successful. The ones that fail are the ones like MegaUpload that refuse to respond to DMCA takedown notices or dont have a takedown policy. EA is overreacting to Obannon when it has nothing to do with fighter share. They are two different things.

I was only using "O'Bannon" in verb form as an amusing (although apparently not) way to say that a game franchise could get killed by a lawsuit. I know there wouldn't be a any real similarity between the two cases.

As for the rest, thanks for the info.

[papa_midnight]

the excuse by EA is a load of bull. how come 2K/THQ have been able to have a fantastic and in-depth fighter share system in their wwe game without a problem? It's just a pretty lazy excuse by EA when they realised it was a feature that people actually wanted.

[SHAKYR]

I think it's a way to sell more DLC characters. They are hurting a fan base that loves creation modes and sharing their work. Me personally I was a huge fan of Fighter Share and anything dealing with customization and editing characters.

[Coolade]

Lazy? I don't think there's anything lazy about trying to avoid litigation. It's just smart business all around, avoiding problems and profiting from future fighter scanned DLC. I don't you people realize a CAF won't come nearly as close as a completely body scanned person. It's not that big of a feature for a FIRST installment of a new annual series.

[aholbert32]

Quote: Originally Posted by Coolade

Lazy? I don't think there's anything lazy about trying to avoid litigation. It's just smart business all around, avoiding problems and profiting from future fighter scanned DLC. I don't you people realize a CAF won't come nearly as close as a completely body scanned person. It's not that big of a feature for a FIRST installment of a new annual series.

Huh? You just argued both sides of the argument. If as you say "CAF won't come nearly as close as a completely body scanned person" then it doesnt matter if EA has fighter share or not. They will profit from DLC no matter what.

Lets say you create Conor McGregor using Gameface and uploaded it to Fighter Share. It looks like Conor but because of CAF limitations it doesnt have accurate tattoos and gear. Lets say EA then creates Conor with his accurate face, tattoos and gear and sells it as DLC. Most of us including myself would spend the 2-5 bucks to get EA's Conor even if you had a decent one on Fighter Share.

Also EA (or any other game company) has never been sued for content in a CAP share feature. NEVER. Sony has this feature in The Show. 2k has this in the NBA 2k and WWE 2k. THQ had it in WWE and other UFC games. ****, EA had this in EA MMA and FNC. EA was sued because they were creating content not because they are hosting content. Its an overreaction to Obannon and its the easy way out. The law doesnt support damages stemming from a site hosting copyrighted content. EA would rather eliminate a feature used by tons of people than deal with having to spend nominal money (for a corporation that big) to defend (and win) against a lawsuit that isnt coming.

Finally, stop saying this is the first series of annual series. One, more likely than not this series will be biannual based on what most EA guys are saying. Two, this series has borrowed features from EA MMA and FNC so lets not act like leaving out Fighter Share was because of lack of time. EA has already admitted the reasons they left it out.

[redsrule]

I don't have a X1-PS4 right now because I was waiting for a game to make me get the new systems, but I don't think this will be it. The more info I hear the more disappointed I get. MMA-Caf is a GREAT website, but not having a CAF share is just garbage. This really makes me think they are going to have a low CAF limit and have a lot of DLC. Hope I'm wrong though.

[SHAKYR]

Quote: Originally Posted by aholbert32

Huh? You just argued both sides of the argument. If as you say "CAF won't come nearly as close as a completely body scanned person" then it doesnt matter if EA has fighter share or not. They will profit from DLC no matter what. Lets say you create Conor McGregor using Gameface and uploaded it to Fighter Share. It looks like Conor but because of CAF limitations it doesnt have accurate tattoos and gear. Lets say EA then creates Conor with his accurate face, tattoos and gear and sells it as DLC. Most of us including myself would spend the 2-5 bucks to get EA's Conor even if you had a decent one on Fighter Share. Also EA (or any other game company) has never been sued for content in a CAP share feature. NEVER. Sony has this feature in The Show. 2k has this in the NBA 2k and WWE 2k. THQ had it in WWE and other UFC games. ****, EA had this in EA MMA and FNC. EA was sued because they were creating content not because they are hosting content. Its an overreaction to Obannon and its the easy way out. The law doesnt support damages stemming from a site hosting copyrighted content. EA would rather eliminate a feature used by tons of people than deal with having to spend nominal money (for a corporation that big) to defend (and win) against a lawsuit that isnt coming. Finally, stop saying this is the first series of annual series. One, more likely than not this series will be biannual based on what most EA guys are saying. Two, this series has borrowed features from EA MMA and FNC so lets not act like leaving out Fighter Share was because of lack of time. EA has already admitted the reasons they left it out.

You are on point!

Quote: Originally Posted by redsrule

I don't have a X1-PS4 right now because I was waiting for a game to make me get the new systems, but I don't think this will be it. The more info I hear the more disappointed I get. MMA-Caf is a GREAT website, but not having a CAF share is just garbage. This really makes me think they are going to have a low CAF limit and have a lot of DLC. Hope I'm wrong though.

I agree. I think they are going to re-add it as a new or brought back fan wanted addition in future games.