New Features Aren’t All Free in NCAA Football 12

[poopoop]

Hilarious watching people claim over and over again they're done, then come back again and again to offer up more defenses.

Also no idea why people keep bringing up cell phones, car dealerships and cable companies. Companies that have direct competition and have a lot more motivation to give me the most value for my dollar. Cable companies around me give deals to try and get my business. These companies aren't perfect either but I don't think it's a very good analogy. I guess I'll just be happy I have a choice what cell phone company to choose, who to get cable from, and where to buy my cars. And that the threat of me choosing a competitor, helps prevent companies from going overboard.

Quote: Originally Posted by jeremym480

Oh yeah and I'd also like for them to let me have HBO, Showtime & all UFC PPV's for free. That would be real nice of them.

I have gotten showtime for free, as a reward for signing up with a cable company before. Was great.

[Cubfan]

I will just speak with my wallet and not buy NCAA 12. It is not ok to nickle and dime your customers after spending $60.

[thejoker3624]

These microtransactions are really beginning to turn me off from gaming, especially sports games. It's bad enough that we pay $60 every year for what is essentially a roster update, but now the games are missing features? One really good example is Tiger Woods 12. The game doesn't include several courses. What this means is that I'm paying $60 for half a game or a game that is not complete. That is bull!

Some may overlook this and say it doesn't matter but this is only the tip of the iceberg. Companies like EA are tested the waters to see how guliable and stupid we gamers are. You are going to see a lot more of this in the future as long as we keep buying these games that are virtually incomplete. I would be ok with this if they lowered the price of the games to about $30 and then let me decide what features I want. But that will never happen.

Sports games' values are already over-inflated. 6 months down the road they aren't even worth half what they were when they were released. No other genre of video games go down in value as fast as a sports game. Think about it. Would you pay $60 for Halo once a year if it was the same exact game as last year's but with a couple of added features? Of course you wouldn't. But sports games get away with this, mostly because they stop adding roster support for the old games and rosters are everything to a sports gamer.

Don't get me wrong. I love my sports games. I'm willing to pay the $60 for the roster updates. But I draw the line in the sand at the point where companies like EA think they can release an incomplete game for $60. At that point I will start waiting for these games to go down in price or not buy them at all. Or I will just start buying them every other year. I'm loyal but only to a certain point. I've put up the Madden garbage for the last 6 years (exceptection Madden 11 was much better.) This seems like a total ripoff to me. EA is going to lose a lot of customers down the road.

[thejoker3624]

Quote: Originally Posted by poopoop

Hilarious watching people claim over and over again they're done, then come back again and again to offer up more defenses. Also no idea why people keep bringing up cell phones, car dealerships and cable companies. Companies that have direct competition and have a lot more motivation to give me the most value for my dollar. Cable companies around me give deals to try and get my business. These companies aren't perfect either but I don't think it's a very good analogy. I guess I'll just be happy I have a choice what cell phone company to choose, who to get cable from, and where to buy my cars. And that the threat of me choosing a competitor, helps prevent companies from going overboard. I have gotten showtime for free, as a reward for signing up with a cable company before. Was great.

Nothing in life is free.

[coogrfan]

Quote: Originally Posted by thejoker3624

These microtransactions are really beginning to turn me off from gaming, especially sports games. It's bad enough that we pay $60 every year for what is essentially a roster update, but now the games are missing features? One really good example is Tiger Woods 12. The game doesn't include several courses. What this means is that I'm paying $60 for half a game or a game that is not complete. That is bull! Some may overlook this and say it doesn't matter but this is only the tip of the iceberg. Companies like EA are tested the waters to see how guliable and stupid we gamers are. You are going to see a lot more of this in the future as long as we keep buying these games that are virtually incomplete. I would be ok with this if they lowered the price of the games to about $30 and then let me decide what features I want. But that will never happen. Sports games' values are already over-inflated. 6 months down the road they aren't even worth half what they were when they were released. No other genre of video games go down in value as fast as a sports game. Think about it. Would you pay $60 for Halo once a year if it was the same exact game as last year's but with a couple of added features? Of course you wouldn't. But sports games get away with this, mostly because they stop adding roster support for the old games and rosters are everything to a sports gamer. Don't get me wrong. I love my sports games. I'm willing to pay the $60 for the roster updates. But I draw the line in the sand at the point where companies like EA think they can release an incomplete game for $60. At that point I will start waiting for these games to go down in price or not buy them at all. Or I will just start buying them every other year. I'm loyal but only to a certain point. I've put up the Madden garbage for the last 6 years (exceptection Madden 11 was much better.) This seems like a total ripoff to me. EA is going to lose a lot of customers down the road.

Quote: Originally Posted by coogrfan

The OD offered out of the box is "fully featured" (your phrase, not mine) in the sense that none of the enhancements (there's that word again) being offered are necessary to participate in an online dynasty. The commish can advance the dynasty as necessary via his console. Any participants who wish to can sim their games on their consoles using the same sim-playcalling style of play that will available via the web. In short, users don't have to spend one penny over the retail price of the game to get the "full online dynasty experience" (except for the cost of XBL, obviously).

One other excellent point on this topic from a poster over at TGT:

Quote: Originally Posted by PaaKaa10

People have gone crazy for a mobile text-sim-ish game in iOOTP (iOut of the Park Baseball) which can only be played on a mobile device and costs $4.99 by itself. By comparison, SuperSim on the Web would appear to offer a similar level of control over the game as it is played--and gets a "bonus" through being directly connected to the console version of NCAA Football 12--and costs $2 less. As I understand it from the blog, you could potentially purchase SuperSim on the Web and Advance OD on the Web and play a single-player Dynasty mode in NCAA Football 12 as though it were a mobile simulation game and never have to turn on your console again!

[kbmnm247]

Quote: Originally Posted by coogrfan

One other excellent point on this topic from a poster over at TGT:

In my opinion, and it's not just that I am on the side against microtransactions, the responses to WHY ARE WE AGAINST microtransactions have been much more logic, stat, and fact based than the side FOR microtransactions which just brings up other industry analogies or tries to shoot down posts by saying "they have no credit", like EA would be posting blogs about how they are lobbying for NFL exclusivity. Why would they ever do that publicly? And OBVIOUSLY NFL would go to 2K after EA is lobbying for exclusivity to see what 2K would pay. It's called competition fellas and it works wonders.

For example coogr, and obviously no offense intended towards you or any other posters I respond to in this thread, but your post was talking about iOOTP and comparing it to NCAA 12's web content. Let's be honest, OOTP is a great sim and is MUCH more in depth and offers much more replay value than supersim/advance a week in NCAA 12 mode. If you've ever seen OOTP and played it you would realize that paying $5 for that full game is a lot different than a $3 addon to an already $60 game.

I, like propoop, just don't see why everyone defends this method of DLC. It's like if we are against it somehow we are the devil. I would think everyone would be for paying the least possible for a video game. I also know that businesses are in the business to make money. However, it seems to me that EA Sports is making plenty of money off of Madden/NCAA as is (otherwise how could they pay about $1 billion for these exclusivity deals). What should upset the consumer, and what upsets me and propoop, is that it's obvious that EA is sinking more $ into exclusivity deals to eliminate competition rather than reinvesting that same money into making the actual game better for their consumers.

Also, 2k5 online league ESPN integration was miles ahead of anything I've seen from EA regarding online dynasties and that was 6 years ago. They didn't charge me anything for that, and they charged $20 for the game. I admit they were not going to continue charging $20 but it's funny that after they did that EA's method of attack was to buy up the licenses because they had the funds rather than trying to create a better video game, because they had the funds. How a mindset like this can be defended by consumers is troubling.

[kbmnm247]

Quote: Originally Posted by coogrfan

The OD offered out of the box is "fully featured" (your phrase, not mine) in the sense that none of the enhancements (there's that word again) being offered are necessary to participate in an online dynasty. The commish can advance the dynasty as necessary via his console. Any participants who wish to can sim their games on their consoles using the same sim-playcalling style of play that will available via the web. In short, users don't have to spend one penny over the retail price of the game to get the "full online dynasty experience" (except for the cost of XBL, obviously)

I HATE the car analogy but I just want to use it right here to define what "fully featured" in your mind, is.

What do you consider a car that is fully featured?
What do you consider a car that is not fully featured?

I consider a car that has everything it could possibly have that the "developer" created to be a "fully featured" car. I consider any car that is missing one of those items to not be fully featured.

Therefore, the online dynasty that I get with my game, is not "fully featured" if I have to turn around and pay $X for another feature. Enhancement, feature, whatever word you want to use it's the same thing. Just saying enhancement to try to defend the charge.

The analogies with other industries do not work with this case because there are other companies making the same products so if one lags behind the other they were meet their doom in due time. The problem here is unique. We have a gaming company who bought out the rights to a license that effectively creates a monopoly in a genre that pumps out annual releases where it is accepted (even by me) that the change in the game from year to year is very small in relation to the changes in iterations that different genres have. Think about what goes into a new Halo game and compare that to what goes into a new NCAA game. They have last years tweaked version (after months of testing by the consumers because they obviously don't test enough themselves) and the same engine and they add graphical tweaks and one addition to the engine, get the roster information and sell millions of copies at $60 a pop. They don't test the rosters to make sure they seem legit, they don't thoroughly test their modes to make sure they all work correctly (for example, progression in dynasty mode, gamebreaker gameplay two years ago which pretty much made this NCAA blitz). Whereas Halo for example has to create a whole new story line, whole new maps, whole new graphic models, whole new sounds, testing, etc. It's basically a whole new game whereas NCAA is simply an "update" that we have come to accept every year.

And now you want me to pay more $ for "new features" now? I have to come to accept that too? I think that's where me and propoop are viewing this from. At what point does it stop?

Hypothetical question, let's say they charge for Pro Combat uniforms, is that also defendable because it is an "enhancement"? Or is that something that we should get along with the $60 we are paying for the game?

Also, just came to mind, it's going to be great when/if EA stops supporting the online dynasties that people are still running on NCAA 12 by the time NCAA 14 comes out. If I paid $ for those extra features and they were taken away from me down the line because the "server costs" are too high by then I would be GREATLY upset.

[kbmnm247]

Quote: Originally Posted by jeremym480

I would like that, as well. I'd also like for my cable company to let me select the channels that I want and pay for them a la carte. That a way I don't have to pay for Oxygen, Lifetime, CMT and a plethora of other channels that I've never watched. However, it ain't happening. Oh yeah and I'd also like for them to let me have HBO, Showtime & all UFC PPV's for free. That would be real nice of them.

Let me ask you a question, do you have on demand service?

If you do, do you pay extra for on demand for the channels you do currently pay for? Because that would be what is happening here. EA is asking you to pay extra for an "enhancement" to a feature that you already paid for.

I,for one, know I do not pay extra for on demand services for the channels I do have so I appreciate the easy analogy you allowed me to make.