Anybody starting to think they should put limitations on license exclusitivity deals?

[Kirk Foiden]

After the news that EA has taken exclusive PGA tour rights for another 6 years; does anybody else think that these very long exclusitivity deals are getting a little ridiculous? I don't think there's a politician that actually has that kind of guarrantee in office.

I know it's only a few sports games, one may say, but then again it also kind of kills competition as well. I'm not talking about simple things like 2K games or something; but it's one of those things that pretty much guarrantees we'll never see something the likes of Tecmo Super Bowl, for our age, ever again.

Maybe it's gotten to the effect that perhaps there should be a mandate that exclusitivity of license that isn't the direct intellectual property of the game creators, should be limited to a certain small number of years. That way, they don't impose that 'only one choice' aspect on an entire generation length of gamers. Back in the day, licenses could be bought, but they weren't exclusive. It gave a bunch of people a fair shake. These days, it's like buying political power. One that doesn't have checks and balances, nor terms surrounding it.

 

[norton9478]

The only people capable of limiting exclusivity are the console MFGrs....

 

[Technos]

It wouldn't be a problem if the games weren't shit. EA or whoever snap up the rights to the NFL and MLB, then just crank out crap games year after year. And they all sell a million copies.

I know it's only a few sports games, one may say, but then again it also kind of kills competition as well. I'm not talking about simple things like 2K games or something; but it's one of those things that pretty much guarrantees we'll never see something the likes of Tecmo Super Bowl, for our age, ever again.

Every TSB after the first SNES one is awful, I'd prefer not to see what kind of western garbage would be branded with the name in 2006.

-Tech

 

[ironish]

I don't really play sports games, but I was thinking the same thing.

 

[DangerousK]

The NFL license is one thing. The PGA Tour license is another. I don't particularly think it is all that big of a deal that EA has locked up the PGA Tour license. Golf is a different thing because games like Hot Shots Golf exist. If anything, you do not need officially licensed golf games to sell well.

Football is another story.

I think in this particular case the license is not much of an issue because honestly, how many people really give a shit about the PGA Tour license? I like golf but as seeing there was no one else even doing anything with officially licensed PGA Tour games, we're not losing out.

 

[Kirk Foiden]

It wouldn't be a problem if the games weren't shit. EA or whoever snap up the rights to the NFL and MLB, then just crank out crap games year after year. And they all sell a million copies.



Every TSB after the first SNES one is awful, I'd prefer not to see what kind of western garbage would be branded with the name in 2006.

-Tech

Well, it doesn't have to be exactly TSB, you know. I was saying something of the likes of in terms of another party turning out the greatness without being an EMPIRE the size of EA to do it. PGA Tour whether you pay attention to it or not, does often help it out. However, I think people are missing out on the whole picture. I'm not even just saying only those examples come into play. It can be more than that. I didn't even mention non-American Football (eg. Soccer), yet that FIFA license does make a great deal.