- Joined
- Dec 25, 2002
- Posts
- 51,317
Assuming the new EA doesn't release multiplatform games.
Microsoft may purchase Electronic Arts
- Thread starter IsamuBlue
- Start date
Assuming the new EA doesn't release multiplatform games.
HeartlessNinny
Heartlessness is a virtue
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2005
- Posts
- 14,664
Well, presumably, MS wants to buy EA so they can keep all that lucrative Madden-type goodness to themselves. Obviously it's too early to make any broad claims, but if I had to guess, I'd say that if the deal goes through the whole EA catalogue would become 360 exclusive.
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2000
- Posts
- 2,542
I hope it doesn´t happens but if it does I doubt microsoft will make all EA games exclusives, they will be released first on the box and later on for other systems.
subcons
I take no official position on the issue.,
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2002
- Posts
- 3,519
If MS were to buy them up and limit their releases to their own hardware, that's a step towards a monopolization. I'm all for a free market, but I'm not pro-monopoly. Competition breeds better products.
I wouldn't see any point in MS dropping a ton of bank, which would likely be quite a large amount, to buy up EA and then allow them to release software across all platforms. That just doesn't make sense because MS is in the game with their own console now.
You guys calling this a monopoly are using the term pretty loosely. Sony and other devs are more than free to put competing software out on the market. The only thing this would create a monopoly of is the nfl license. And I have to wonder how long that would last if this came to pass.
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2001
- Posts
- 6,416
Perhaps, but if EA doesn't turn around (make a change) they won't be around, anyway. People have been treating EA as a "too big to fail" company.
Sony has other troubles. They've been cutting themselves for a long time in too many markets... and I remember a time when "sony is bad for the game industry" threads were flying back and forth.
It's not like EA's "day to day operations" have been the same over the past few years, anyway. Layoff/Absorb/Layoff City. So, don't give me that nonesense.
The longer I let your comments sink in the more I want to toss them aside.
Metal Slugnuts
Faggotier
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2006
- Posts
- 7,514
Do you really have to try to one up me every time I post something serious?
Go make your damn arcade sticks.
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2001
- Posts
- 6,416
...as if someone having the soul rights to produce NFL video games would somehow limit the ability of developers to make "better football" video games. The rules of football are fairly set in stone.*
Historically, "better" football games were usually made when when they weren't based on the NFL. The NFL brand limits the quality of the product.
*Legal question: Are the "rules of football" as I put it actually "NFL rules" (as the CFL has different rules... dunno about World League)? Or are those rules "rules of a game" in general a la "the rules of Chess".
Buro Destruct
Formerly known as, Buro Destruct, , Southtown Stre
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2002
- Posts
- 9,058
lmao, Wow.Do you really have to try to one up me every time I post something serious?
Go make your damn arcade sticks.
Loopz was essentially telling you that your subtle insinuation that EA is not a 'legit' game publisher is incorrect. Quality of products aside, EA has put their time and effort into maneuvering themselves into the position they are today.
Loopz
Formerly Punjab,
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2001
- Posts
- 12,871
Do you really have to try to one up me every time I post something serious?
Go make your damn arcade sticks.
It's not my fault you're a dense motherfucker who spouts off with NO sense of history of the industry at all. I wouldn't have a problem with you if you didn't endlessly troll this joint with your misinformed, 'gut-instinct' 4-chantastic-internet-meme three-second attention span bullshit.
If you get it wrong, prepare to be called on it. That is the essence of NG.com. If you're gonna swing your little stick and try to make noise, be informed. That's it. I have no problem with passion about this stuff, but I have every issue possible with flagrant, willful stupidity.
Heed my sig if you're gonna be a little bitch.
Metal Slugnuts
Faggotier
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2006
- Posts
- 7,514
I never made a "sublte insinuation" that EA wasn't legit.
I am well aware of EA's stellar track record pre-2000 but 5-6 years ago EA was viewed as the gaming industry's Big Brother and the example of a company too big for its pants. Especially after the Madden buyout people were up in arms about the evils of EA while other big publishers hardly got any press.
Now the situation has flipped: ActiBlizz is the big bad wolf while EA is finally getting its act together by putting quality above quantity/profits.
Seriously, what non-sports titles of note did EA publish/develop during last gen? Def Jam?
Metal Slugnuts
Faggotier
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2006
- Posts
- 7,514
Hold the fuck up.
You accuse me of being dense by not pointing out the great early EA titles but conveniently skip over the 98-06 period of soulless bullshit?
EA as a whole has had a remarkable shift in quality and diversity over the past 5 years. Like I said in the previous post, they went from being one of the most hated/flamed big publishers to one of the higher quality ones within this generation. That's what my original comment was insinuating, and I didn't need a 500 word text wall to explain it.
I know this is a classic gaming board but goddamn, get with the times.
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2000
- Posts
- 60,434
Fuck history and Fuck EA. EA makes me want to kill Buddhist monks and lemurs.
Loopz
Formerly Punjab,
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2001
- Posts
- 12,871
I don't get this arbitrary, magical '98-'06 timeline you're getting at. Madden comes out every fucking year, and every year, every magazine on Earth is too chicken shit to give it what it really deserves.
Actually, EA (via EA Canada/BIG) did have a good thing going in the early part of this decade with both SSX (not really a sports title per se, more like Wipeout on a snowboard) and NBA Street (yes, a sports game, but with much more of an arcade flair). Both series got mostly good reviews until they sort of hit the wall the last few years.
So...you've either got a weird idea rooted around some article you read, or you're just sorta talking out of your ass at this point.
Metal Slugnuts
Faggotier
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2006
- Posts
- 7,514
Nah, EA started to be shit after the 16 bit era died.
Most of the good PS1/Sat/N64 games were either PC ports or 3D reimaginings of 16 bit games.
16 bit Madden was great and the 3D versions were jaw-dropping for the time but come the PS2 era it started to falter out.
Outside of Need for Speed and Def Jam almost every goddamn thing out of EA was sports/licensed. I'll give you SSX (never played it but heard good things) but seriously, did EA release anything of note? The LotR games were decent but not standout and they did fuckall with the Marvel license outside of that Nemesis game.
Here's the cliff notes version of the shit they pulled in case you don't remember.
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2000
- Posts
- 60,434
Fuckin Fuck EA. Fuck John Madden.
J. Max
judas,
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2002
- Posts
- 2,531
I call BS on this. The FTC would NEVER let it happen, and Sony would probably counteroffer. If it was real, there would be a wave of fear washing over every part of the video game industry, and it isn't happening.
This is really much ado about nothing.
This is really much ado about nothing.
Murray
Akari's Big Brother
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2005
- Posts
- 2,533
It has nothing to do with accurate rules and everything to do with branding. John Q. Asshole customer wants to play with real pro players in real stadiums with real stats. Having the NFL license is the only way that can happen.
Edit: Also, this isn't going to happen. Check this update. Thread over.
Last edited:
HeartlessNinny
Heartlessness is a virtue
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2005
- Posts
- 14,664
Perhaps, but if EA doesn't turn around (make a change) they won't be around, anyway. People have been treating EA as a "too big to fail" company.
Sony has other troubles. They've been cutting themselves for a long time in too many markets... and I remember a time when "sony is bad for the game industry" threads were flying back and forth.
It's not like EA's "day to day operations" have been the same over the past few years, anyway. Layoff/Absorb/Layoff City. So, don't give me that nonesense.
The longer I let your comments sink in the more I want to toss them aside.
None of what you say is false or anything, but I don't see how that changes the fact that EA's operations would change a lot under MS ownership. I would be very, very surprised if they just kept right on making games the same way they are now.
And sure, Sony has dropped the ball a bit, but they're on the rebound now, and this wouldn't be doing them any favours. That's pretty much all there is to it.
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2004
- Posts
- 2,948
I don't have a 360 and I don't play EA games
In other words, I don't give a shit, bitch
In other words, I don't give a shit, bitch
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2003
- Posts
- 9,327
did everyone just totally miss when activision overtook ea?
ea is no longer the evil corporate overlords pumping out their yearly sports games. activision is the new evil empire to hate on.
lol really?
if ea's games become exclusive to ms all that means is better competition coming from other 3rd parties for sales on sony/nintendo.
ea is no longer the evil corporate overlords pumping out their yearly sports games. activision is the new evil empire to hate on.
lol really?
if ea's games become exclusive to ms all that means is better competition coming from other 3rd parties for sales on sony/nintendo.
subcons
I take no official position on the issue.,
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2002
- Posts
- 3,519
...
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2001
- Posts
- 6,416
On the contrary. Microsoft *wants* EA to continue what they're doing now that EA has figured out what they should have been doing years ago. The change they've gone through over the past 2 years is exactly why Microsoft is interested... because they can scoop them up before others take notice and EA increases their realized value. Similarly again to the Marvel/Disney deal: Marvel has crazy profitability coming up over the next 4 years when they were going to make money on their own movie productions (instead of having other studios make movies on their IP). Disney saw the value in that and wants Marvel to keep doing exactly what they're doing - but buy them up before they do it.
Whether or not the acquisition would do anyone else "any favours" doesn't matter... If EA decides they just want to dissolve the company the SEC isn't going to step in and say, "Hey, Sony needs you!". It would suck for a lot more people than Sony. That's the truth with any buyout.
Curious: If this were Sony buying EA what would people be saying?
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2001
- Posts
- 6,416
John Q. Obvious.
My question was a legitimate legal question. It had nothing to do with business.
