Judge Certifies Class-Action Football Game Pricing Lawsuit Against EA

[Tyrant8RDFL]

Quote: Originally Posted by khaliib

What EA does not want is for this case to go before a "Jury" of mostly older individuals who believe the current price tag for video games is way too expensive and most likely will focus on that aspect along with buying exclusive rights to be the sole maker for these games. It's different if the case would be determined by a judge who would go by the letter of the law. But instead, older individuals who mostly believe video games are an issue one way or another. This case will not be about an EA Sports Title by itself, but about their emotional feelings towards video games in general. Or they will get that individual that has been burned by purchasing an EA product before and wants such an opportunity to get back at them. It doesn't look good when during a year your competitor (a much smaller company than EA) sells their game at a lower price than EA's, then the following year an exclusive deal is done removing any/all pricing alternatives for consumers while increasing your price. Also, it might be hard for EA to justify an increase from $29.99 to $59.99 for their football title when this titles market was/has been driven by EA itself. There was/is no football market to say this is what drove the standard for pricing, because EA is the "ONLY" producer with the exclusive deal. Another area that doesn't look good for EA is that they forenew about the new Next Gen consoles hitting the market and the exclusive deal made them the Only football developers when the units were in "HIGH" demand which coinsides with the increase in price of their football titles. This really adds to the justification of the lawsuit that EA "Price Gauge" as the sole maker. On top of this, EA has lawsuits from players from both the NFL and NCAA which lends to the assumption that EA has/is doing something that is illegal. Again, not good to have this lawsuit decided by Jurors instead of a Judge. And to add more pressure, it's being submitted as a "Class Action" suit. Can EA, after closing one of their sites, afford to lose such a case? Can you imaging the cost of damages for this "Class Action"? On a good note to us that want a 2k Pro/College Football game, because the company is mentioned in the lawsuit, it has to mean that they are involved in pushing it in some way or another. I wouldn't be suprised if other game makers (989, Acclaim etc..) decided to participate on the grounds that they to were locked out of the football market. I would also say that this is not only about any future licenses, but damages due to the money lost because of the lock-out. **Remember the Exclusive football deals and price increase came right as the Next Gen consoles where in High demand. In 2006, everyone purchased Madden to play on these "New" consoles. This is very important within the lawsuit. If this is what it takes for another game developers to have the opportunity to provide the football community with alternatives, then I'm all for it.

What your forgetting is that the NFL ask for bidders to own the rights for the NFL license. Thats a huge piece of information. EA did not go to them. The NFL made it clear. You want to make a football game then you have to pay us!!!

The NFL does this with pretty much everything. Satellite TV anyone??? Hats??? Jerseys???

[mburke2]

Quote: Originally Posted by Tyrant8RDFL

What your stating makes sense, but it is very easy to see how EA can easily claim the reason for raising the price was due to increase cost on making games on the newer consoles. Just like what every other company stated. I see this as a waste of time. NBA2k and live sell their games for $59.99. Thats competition there, and the same with the Baseball titles. The cost in making games in the past was cheaper, but now things are more expensive. This case goes no where IMHO, but you never know. I just do not see it.

Now I'm no law expert so I may be wrong, but I think that you and some others are a little off base as to what this lawsuit is claiming. IMO it isn't relevant to current game prices, seeing as how all games nowadays cost $60. The lawsuit is a claim that their newest NFL title produced after signing for exclusivity (pre-next gen btw), was priced at a rate higher than they would have charged had there been market competition in NFL games, seeing as how the prior year they had to drop the price to compete with 2K. The suit from how I see it is claiming that back in 2005 or 2006 or whenever exclusivity started that EA raised the price above what they would have otherwise if there was competition. From my perspective it has little or no relevance to game prices today. But I could be wrong.

[mWolfe]

Quote: Originally Posted by Steve_OS

Gamasutra has some new info on the lawsuit. Gamespot chimes in as well. What do you think happens, out of all this?

I see what they are getting at but where is the real suit because exclusive happen all the time and price what would bring in revenue to offset the cost, everybody in the business does that. This lawsuit does not help bring in competition, nor should EA pay back anybody because it is a choice to buy something you want but do not need. If you don't want to buy Madden or NCAA then don't. I bought NCAA 11 but not Madden 11 because I have Madden 08 on the PC to pass my time until certain things in Madden change for the better. This lawsuit reminds of the other lawsuit that that guy who is suing an RPG Game maker for a million dollars cause he cant function properly in life because he is to addicted to the game. I don't know about y'all but I don't see this boding well for EA if it goes to trial, because everyone always wants to rip apart big money making businesses. Perfect example of this was the old lady that spilt her coffee because she put it between her legs. I know one thing, I am definitely smart enough never to put any thing hot that close to my, well you know.

[icemanfrost]

Quote: Originally Posted by jaymee13

Ummm how is this possible? EA charges as much for a video game as every other new game on the market. $60 xbox 360 and ps3, $50 for Wii, and $40 for ps2 (I think). I for one will not be joining this lawsuit because I don't find it right to fault a video game maker for landing exclusive rights to make the game and not charge any more than any other game. The only object I feel that falls under that assumption is apple's iPhone and the AT&T exclusivity.

Well the Iphone situation is a lot different considering we have other and better options with the android phones
EA has the only Nfl license

[UMhester04]

I am praying to the Holy Fonz that EA loses this and 2k makes a return. Im not a Madden basher I just want a choice.

[J.Bauer24]

Quote: Originally Posted by solidsnake916

uhhh Where can we join the litigation..? lol Well very interesting. One day hope to see another 2k football on the next gen.

Go HERE to join in on the lawsuit.

I just signed up, so hopefully Hagens Berman will contact me.

[khaliib]

Tyrant8RDFL;
What your forgetting is that the NFL ask for bidders to own the rights for the NFL license. Thats a huge piece of information. EA did not go to them. The NFL made it clear. You want to make a football game then you have to pay us!!!

I'm not forgetting anything.

The article spoke of a Class Action being brought agains "EA Sports" for possible violation of "AntiTrust Law(s)".

AntiTrust being the key word.

If EA's Exclusive deal is found to break any AntiTrust Laws, the NFL could/would be included as a co-partner of such agreement that violated such law(s).
EA is easier to take head on than the NFL. NFL pockets are much deeper than EA.

My point is that this EA's exclusive deal came right at the "Boom" of Next-Gen consoles which pricing was increased by $30 from the selling price of the prior year as the only football game on an Open Market.

AntiTrust Laws are established to prevent a certain market from being cornered, then having Exclusive at-will pricing on an "Open" market.

The issue with an Exclusive agreement is that it contradicts the fairness of trade on an Open Market by not allowing others the opportunity to develope a generalized product.

If this practice was accepted.
Only one company would be able sell Christmas Trees for $200 each.
Only one company could make hamburgers for $25 each
One pizza maker selling for $40 each etc....

AntiTrust is established to prevent such practices which would allow price gauging the consumer without an alternative.

[Dazraz]

In regards to the pricing I don't really think an argument exists. There is a large cost involved in developing games & at the end of the day Madden retails at the standard RRP's for titles on their respective platforms.

That said they is certainly a case to argue against the fairness of exclusive license agreements. Consumers want an NFL licensed product without doubt. But, they want a quality product. This is where exclusivity poses the problem. It is clear to everyone that EA are guilty of letting the Madden franchise become stale with the lack of innovation in the wake of signing the exclusive license. Madden 05 (the last release before said agreement) was the best Madden. Since then we've had only small changes in the game with a heap of rehashed ideas.

As i said, in regards to pricing I don't see a case here. In regards to the interests of consumers there certainly is one. Exclusivity deals need to be quashed. Competition in any industry leads to increased effort & more creative ideas. That can only benefit the end user.

Look how EA turned around their NHL & FIFA titles in the wake of competition from 2K & Konami. Would NBA 2K be the game it is today if 2K had exclusive NBA rights?