NCAA Football 12 News Post

New Features Aren’t All Free in NCAA Football 12

09:13 AM - May 26, 2011 by Steve_OS

Kotaku's Owen Good chimes in with some of his thoughts surrounding the latest micro-transactions to make their way into NCAA Football 12.

Quote:


	There may not be any optimal time to tell gamers about all the microtransactions and DLC for which they can expect to pay extra in an upcoming release. But the official reveal of a game's main features -- the stuff folks expect to come with the $59.99 retail price -- would probably be the least optimal.

Game: NCAA Football 12Reader Score: 7/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3 / Xbox 360Votes for game: 104 - View All

NCAA Football 12 Videos

Member Comments

# 381 jeremym480 @ 05/31/11 04:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NDAlum


	To be the commisioner of multiple leagues last year you had to pay.

This is correct. Last year it costs 800 MS points ($10) to be the commish of 3 dynasties http://marketplace.xbox.com/en-US/Pr...f-000345410900 .

To be the commish of 5 dynasties cost 1200 MS point ($15).
http://marketplace.xbox.com/en-US/Pr...f-000445410900

This year it cost $6.99 plus you get the ability to advance weeks as well as, sumersim and call plays in supersimmed games. Other's can complain and call EA evil all they want to but, to me they're offering a fair price for a product that I want, that's even cheaper than last year might I add so, I call that a deal.

# 382 mattbooty @ 05/31/11 04:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bkrich83


	I have the same technical background, which is why I made what I would call an educated guess on the subject.

Yeah bandwidth absolutely will play a part of it. Advancing will use very little bandwidth as the server must be storing most of the data already so everything happens on the server side... actually calling plays on a game will require more but the data itself should be small in size and it looks like the graphics are pretty basic so they shouldn't require much to transfer and probably can be cached and re-used... (and I'm not arguing with you so please don't take it that way, just throwing out my own educated guess)

# 383 bkrich83 @ 05/31/11 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mattbooty


	Yeah bandwidth absolutely will play a part of it. Advancing will use very little bandwidth as the server must be storing most of the data already so everything happens on the server side... actually calling plays on a game will require more but the data itself should be small in size and it looks like the graphics are pretty basic so they shouldn't require much to transfer and probably can be cached and re-used... (and I'm not arguing with you so please don't take it that way, just throwing out my own educated guess)

I agree. I used the term bandwidth as a laymans term to be all inclusive. Most people associate bandwidth as all of those things.

# 384 ODogg @ 05/31/11 11:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kbmnm247


	How am I making their point for them? Their point was that EA didn't lobby for the deals when it is clear they did. Heck, they even tried to get NBA and MLB as well.

You made the point that EA, even if they really did offer mega-deals before they were approached (which no one has ever proven, just speculated) still were the suitor that could have been turned down just as the MLB and NBA has.

The "bad guy", if you don't like this exclusive situation as it currently stands, is the folks who run the sports themselves, the NFL and the NCAA not the company who brought the contract.

The bottom line here is that once the NFL and NCAA decided to go with the exclusive agreements then EA had to bid as much as they could to get the contracts. As for your comment about they had more money than 2K, yeah, so what? Usually the company who has more money wins a bidding war.

EA has nothing to be ashamed of in making a very sound business decision securing two of their most profitable products. If 2K or any other company had the resources they would have done the exact same thing.

So in summary, you made the other sides point for us when you brought up the NBA in your post. Your anger, or your dislike, of the exclusive agreements should be 100% directed at the NFL and the NCAA, if they had so desired they could have gone the route of the NBA and there would be multiple games by multiple devs. EA had no decision to make once the exclusive agreements became desirable to the NFL and NCAA..

# 385 ODogg @ 05/31/11 11:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kbmnm247


	I love how the only defense for what EA is doing here is 'well, other companies do it' 'it's only $3' Sometimes when everyone is doing something, it isn't necessarily the right thing to do, ya know?

If that's the only defense you see in this thread you're selectively reading. There have been far more posts from users who are ok with DLC in regards to pricing to the consumer vs. costs of a game to develop than "other companies do it" or "it's only $3".

But then again, it's far easier to just ignore the arguments that are actually integral as to why those who are ok with the DLC are defending it and focus on the arguments that are shallow and easier to belittle as baseless.

# 386 poopoop @ 06/01/11 12:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ODogg


	You made the point that EA, even if they really did offer mega-deals before they were approached (which no one has ever proven, just speculated) still were the suitor that could have been turned down just as the MLB and NBA has. The "bad guy", if you don't like this exclusive situation as it currently stands, is the folks who run the sports themselves, the NFL and the NCAA not the company who brought the contract. The bottom line here is that once the NFL and NCAA decided to go with the exclusive agreements then EA had to bid as much as they could to get the contracts. As for your comment about they had more money than 2K, yeah, so what? Usually the company who has more money wins a bidding war. EA has nothing to be ashamed of in making a very sound business decision securing two of their most profitable products. If 2K or any other company had the resources they would have done the exact same thing. So in summary, you made the other sides point for us when you brought up the NBA in your post. Your anger, or your dislike, of the exclusive agreements should be 100% directed at the NFL and the NCAA, if they had so desired they could have gone the route of the NBA and there would be multiple games by multiple devs. EA had no decision to make once the exclusive agreements became desirable to the NFL and NCAA..

Please, the NFL/NCAA isn't exempt from any blame either. They share it with EA.

# 387 ODogg @ 06/01/11 12:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kbmnm247


	You guys have to be trolling. Once again, I'll state.... WHAT OTHER COMPANY CAN I BUY AN NCAA OR NFL FOOTBALL GAME FROM ON MY XBOX 360 OR PS3?

First of all there have been competing products on the consoles since the exclusive agreements were signed:

Backbreaker
Black College Football Experience
Backyard Football
Family Fun Football
All Pro Football 2K8
Blitz II the League

Seems like all of those are football games to me. Sure they don't have the NFL or NCAA license but they are football. And as I've stated before, if you don't like the fact that other companies don't have the right to make an NFL game or an NCAA game then TAKE IT UP WITH THE SPORTS.

There is no merit at all here to criticize EA for DLC due to the exclusive agreement. This would be occurring just the same as it would if we had ESPN 2K11 coming this fall. Why you say? That's not true you say? If there was competition EA would not be doing it you say? Uh yeah they would because there's no one out there in their right mind who is going to say "Wow, I was going to buy NCAA 12 by EA over ESPN2K12 College football but then I don't like the fact that you have to pay $2.99 to advance the dynasty so now I'm going to buy ESPN's game instead."

Don't believe that? Think that argument is bogus? Well how about this, if there was a 2K NFL/NCAA game you can almost bet on the fact that there'd be some sort of DLC made by that company as well. The bottom line here though is the DLC is, as has been stated, a minor feature that is not going to influence anyone here as to be a game changer in the product they are buying in regards to competition vs. no-competition.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kbmnm247


	You are comparing another company, in a different genre, with a totally different DLC than what EA Sports is offering. How is that one sided at all?

EA's football games compete against ALL sports games. Some people can only afford a couple of sports games a year and often they will choose between Madden or NBA...or NCAA football vs. MLB the show. This whole argument of apples vs. apples is nonsense...if you're hungry and you're at the market you're looking at all the various fruits, they are all competing for your money.

So even if one throws out the entire argument of EA has competition from other football products, even without them being licensed, it's pretty ridiculous to say that they have no competition considering the quantity and quality of sports (and even non-sports) games that sit on the shelves beside Madden and NCAA now every year.

# 388 ODogg @ 06/01/11 12:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by poopoop


	Please, the NFL/NCAA isn't exempt from any blame either. They share it with EA.

Not only is the NFL/NCAA not exempt from some of the blame, they are 100% accountable for ALL of the blame. Because there is no way EA could have made the exclusive agreements without those who run the sports agreeing to such a deal.

# 389 Senator Stone @ 06/01/11 12:26 AM

I don't play MLB 2k11, so I don't know for sure.....but it's my understanding that it doesn't contain any DLC. However, MLB The Show does. So there are competing baseball games, but one has DLC and one doesn't.

How is it exactly that if we had 17 different NCAA games available, the best one wouldn't still charge for a premium extra as DLC?

# 390 poopoop @ 06/01/11 12:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ODogg


	Not only is the NFL/NCAA not exempt from some of the blame, they are 100% accountable for ALL of the blame. Because there is no way EA could have made the exclusive agreements without those who run the sports agreeing to such a deal.

It takes 2 people to sign a deal. Both of them bear responsibility. You want to paint EA as some victim who had no choice whatever. It'd be one thing if this was a single occurance and the NFL was the only exclusive deal they had. But they also have signed exclusive deals with NASCAR, AFL, ESPN and NCAA football. Guess who the one common denominator is.

# 391 ODogg @ 06/01/11 12:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by poopoop


	It takes 2 people to sign a deal. Both of them bear responsibility. You want to paint EA as some victim who had no choice whatever.

EA doesn't bear any responsibility at all here when it comes to gamers not liking having a choice. Because if EA had passed on the deal then the license simply would have gone to another company.

Quote:

Originally Posted by poopoop


	It'd be one thing if this was a single occurance and the NFL was the only exclusive deal they had.

That's because in many industries it's quite common to have one exclusive provider of a product, such as DirecTV being the only NFL provider for the NFL package. It's not because EA is some evil corporation buying up the world, it's the choice of those who own the product to go this route, i.e. the NFL and the NCAA.

Quote:

Originally Posted by poopoop


	But they also have signed exclusive deals with NASCAR, AFL, ESPN and NCAA football. Guess who the one common denominator is.

EA has more than most companies for one simple reason, they have more money and have produced games for longer than most companies. If 2K sports had more money and more industry clout then they'd have the majority of exclusive deals. It's simply how business works.

I'm not sure what your point here is other than to infer that having more exclusives indicates some sort of evil or corrupt plan by EA to screw consumers, if so that's laughable, the only plan at work here is a business plan to make a profit by publishing a game that their client who sold the said exclusive agreement (in this case the NFL/NCAA) is satisfied with...

# 392 bkrich83 @ 06/01/11 01:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by poopoop


	It takes 2 people to sign a deal. Both of them bear responsibility. You want to paint EA as some victim who had no choice whatever. It'd be one thing if this was a single occurance and the NFL was the only exclusive deal they had. But they also have signed exclusive deals with NASCAR, AFL, ESPN and NCAA football. Guess who the one common denominator is.

For ESPN, 2k's contract with them had expired and 2k declined to extend the deal. My understanding is that 2k did not even bid on the AFL or NCAA deals. However in the NCAA's case I am not 100% sure.

# 393 poopoop @ 06/01/11 01:07 AM

No my point is it's "laughable" to act like EA doesn't have any (0%) responsibility. I don't care what Direct TV does, I'm talking about EA and a pattern of behavior they've established over the years. You choose to ignore it, fine whatever.

They're not doing it with the goal to screw over consumers, that's ridiculous. Does it happen as a result? Well you could argue it does, but that's not their goal.

# 394 bkrich83 @ 06/01/11 01:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by poopoop


	No my point is it's "laughable" to act like EA doesn't have any (0%) responsibility. I don't care what Direct TV does, I'm talking about EA and a pattern of behavior they've established over the years. You choose to ignore it, fine whatever. They're not doing it with the goal to screw over consumers, that's ridiculous. Does it happen as a result? Well you could argue it does, but that's not their goal.

If those entities put it up for sale what exactly do you expect EA to do? The NFL is to blame for this mess. EA is just a convenient and easy target.

# 395 poopoop @ 06/01/11 01:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bkrich83


	For ESPN, 2k's contract with them had expired and 2k declined to extend the deal. My understanding is that 2k did not even bid on the AFL or NCAA deals. However in the NCAA's case I am not 100% sure.

That's fine, I'm not claiming otherwise. And of course 2k never bid on the AFL license, I'm pretty sure they never even made an AFL game. All I'm saying is EA has exclusive deals with multiple people and at some point a pattern develops.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bkrich83


	If those entities put it up for sale what exactly do you expect EA to do? The NFL is to blame for this mess. EA is just a convenient and easy target.

Both of them are to blame. Neither is completely innocent.

# 396 bkrich83 @ 06/01/11 01:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by poopoop


	That's fine, I'm not claiming otherwise. And of course 2k never bid on the AFL license, I'm pretty sure they never even made an AFL game. All I'm saying is EA has exclusive deals with multiple people and at some point a pattern develops. Both of them are to blame. Neither is completely innocent.

So what is your point? That EA buys licenses that are for sale? Excluding MLB of course. Do you criticize 2k for doing the same thing?

# 397 poopoop @ 06/01/11 01:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bkrich83


	So what is your point? That EA buys licenses that are for sale? Excluding MLB of course. Do you criticize 2k for doing the same thing?

If it wasn't for me absolutely hating baseball then yeah I'd have beef with 2k buying up the MLB deal. I'm not a fan of exclusive deals at all, I'd criticize any any company or league that participates.

# 398 bkrich83 @ 06/01/11 01:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by poopoop


	If it wasn't for me absolutely hating baseball then yeah I'd have beef with 2k buying up the MLB deal. I'm not a fan of exclusive deals at all, I'd criticize any any company or league that participates.

Who is a fan of license exclusivity? I have a hard time blaming a company in todays dog eat dog business world for buying them. If they didn't someone else would.

# 399 ODogg @ 06/01/11 01:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by poopoop


	Both of them are to blame. Neither is completely innocent.

Nope, only those who sell their licenses as exclusives, that'd be the NFL and NCAA, can be blamed for the lack of competition. As I said, if EA had passed then someone else simply would have bought the exclusive. The point is someone was going to be the exclusive provider once the NCAA/NFL decided that was the route they were going to go.

The entire argument of EA is 50% or whatever to blame is laughable!!!! Let me give you an analogy to what you're saying:

Let's say your parents let you live in a house they owned for several years. One day they needed money from the house and decided to sell it to a random guy off the street named Joe Smith. Joe shows up and evicts you and moves into the house.

Would you direct your anger to Joe Smith over having no place to live?? Is it Joe Smiths fault you are now homeless? Wouldn't it make sense to realize if Joe Smith had never been born that you'd still be homeless because instead of Joe Smith buying the house it'd just have been another random person?? Would anyone in the world think you to be sane if you stalked, harrassed and threatened Joe Smith? Wouldn't it make much more sense to fault your parents for selling your house out from under you without warning???

This is exactly the point why EA shares ZERO culpability here and should have ZERO anger directed at them for the exclusive agreements and this whole lack of competition thing. EA simply made a smart business decision that had to be made, passing on the agreement would have made no sense. If not EA it'd have been 2K sports, if not 2K sports it'd have been (fill in company here).

If you want to be mad at EA for how their football game plays, the features that are missing you want, etc. that's fine. But being mad at EA, or laying any sort of blame at their door, for the exclusive deal(s) is just completely and wildly misguided and utterly senseless.

# 400 kehlis @ 06/01/11 01:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by poopoop


	If it wasn't for me absolutely hating baseball then yeah I'd have beef with 2k buying up the MLB deal. I'm not a fan of exclusive deals at all, I'd criticize any any company or league that participates.

How can you criticize the league or company for making a deal that benefits them equally.

As bkrich83 mentioned, exclusive deals don't benefit consumers at all but I don't see how you can fault a business for trying to maximize profit. I'm pretty sure that is the point of any business after all.

Sorry but this isn't just a video game trend...

« Previous 1 2…14 15 16 17 18 192021 22 Next »

More Links

New Features Aren’t All Free in NCAA Football 12