New Features Aren’t All Free in NCAA Football 12

[kevj349]

Quote: Originally Posted by Scooby803

You must not have read my whole reply

I read it and I was just saying that the things we are talking about are really ad ons. I didn't think anyone was talking about the DLC from last year, kinda irrelevant to this talk.

[Bullet Sponge]

Quote: Originally Posted by kevj349

I feel like these is actually a ton of competition. If you aren't happy with the game then go out and buy something else. Sure there aren't other NCAA football games but why not buy another genre? It is kinda like music, this may be the only one of this style, but you may like another style more. There is a ton of competition against video games in general. Complain your heart out and just play Mass Effect or Skyrim when it comes out untill they do what you want

The problem with that argument is it casts all media of a certain type as the same thing, but it's not. If I love Jazz music I'm not going to be just as happy buying Death Metal. Same goes for games. Just because I enjoy NCAA Football video games does not in any way mean I'd enjoy a first person shooter simply because they're both video games. Or that if I like Romantic Comedy films I could as easily swap it out for Transformers 3. There is no competition in the football arena for EA simply because the licenses are exclusively theirs.

[roadman]

Quote: Originally Posted by poopoop

Good to see kotaku speak out against this. Someone has to, because apparently a lot of people enjoy being charged more.

Why should I be bothered by something I won't pay for and use? If others want to pay for this extra feature, no problems with that.

Vanilla cone or dipped chocolate cone? If I want something extra than a vanilla cone, I will be charged 30cents more for the dipped chocolate cone.

Not a hard concept to digest, no pun intended.

A little to do about nothing.

[kevj349]

Quote: Originally Posted by Bullet Sponge

The problem with that argument is it casts all media of a certain type as the same thing, but it's not. If I love Jazz music I'm not going to be just as happy buying Death Metal. Same goes for games. Just because I enjoy NCAA Football video games does not in any way mean I'd enjoy a first person shooter simply because they're both video games. Or that if I like Romantic Comedy films I could as easily swap it out for Transformers 3. There is no competition in the football arena for EA simply because the licenses are exclusively theirs.

EA doesn't own NCAA football rights, only Madden. There are other football games. Backbreaker, Blitz, not all are new but they are there and could be made. Don't blame EA for making a good game that no one else can compete with. The market is too small for someone to make another NCAA game. I'm not saying you can swap NCAA out for just any game, but you can look for an alternative. I like the Beatles, it is too expensive so I look for something similar, or just try to find something else I like.

[poopoop]

Quote: Originally Posted by kevj349

Which brings me to another question, if this is such a problem is COD releasing map packs bad? They could have just waited a little to release the game and add them. What determines what goes into the original $60? Oblivion had like a whole expansion pack you could buy. If EA released the game then released these features a month or so later would you be upset that you had to buy them? I know I am rambling ha

Man Oblivion was released March 27th. 2006. One of their main expansion packs came out 8 months later, the other one like 12 months later. Not talking about a sports game with a one year dev cycle.

That being said they did have some DLC that was questionable, like charging people for horse armor. And they were criticized for doing so.

[poopoop]

Quote: Originally Posted by roadman

Why should I be bothered by something I won't pay for and use? If others want to pay for this extra feature, no problems with that. Vanilla cone or dipped chocolate cone? If I want something extra than a vanilla cone, I will be charged 30cents more for the dipped chocolate cone. Not a hard concept to digest, no pun intended. A little to do about nothing.

UHHH.

You already are. You pay $60 for a game that includes mascot mode, online dynasty, online play now, offline dynasty, offline play now, road to glory... Maybe you're the rare guy who plays each and every one of these modes but I doubt it. Paying for modes you'll never use is pretty common with sports games.

It'd be one thing if there were selling the game a la carte but that's not the case here.

[nonnel]

I haven't read through all 8 pages of this thread... but this is just ridiculous.

I'm tired of these video game companies constantly taking advantage of it's consumers, and EA is the biggest offender. First, with releasing games completely full of bugs since they can just "patch" it later when they feel like it... and now with the trend of charging even more money for "extras" when the games are becoming more inferior than the last.

I've gradually switched away from EA over the past few years without even noticing. Not to take some sort of stand, but apparently just as an unsatisfied customer. I skipped NHL and Madden this year (which I've bought every year since I was a little kid), and went to 2k for the NBA years ago. Even with no alternative, I think I'll probably save the 60+ bucks and skip NCAA this year too.

Good luck in the future, EA.

[roadman]

Quote: Originally Posted by poopoop

UHHH. You already are. You pay $60 for a game that includes mascot mode, online dynasty, online play now, offline dynasty, offline play now, road to glory... Maybe you're the rare guy who plays each and every one of these modes but I doubt it.

I pay $60.00 for every game on this generation, it's the same money I paid for a Magic Johnson basketball game 25 yrs ago on NES that didn't have any other modes, but one, and it was crap and had Pepsi advertisement all over the place.

Sorry, don't play mascot mode, just 1 or 2 times for kicks, but the other modes I do.