Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Gaming' started by Paul_Fisher, May 8, 2003.
Read this from IGN, they are at E3 with details on Madden 2004 for xbox.
still NFL2k series for me then
Does this really come as any surprise?
No, but I'm still pissed.
Custom Soundtracks??? In a football game?
Does this seem like a worthless and poorly thought-out feature to anyone else?!
Well, I'm not saying I wouldn't prefer Live -- it would cause me to buy the Xbox version rather than the PS2 version. But I'm not sure the few sales EA is going to lose over this issue are going to sway them.
I don't think this is a case of only losing a few sales. Initially, Madden on the ps2 outsold Nfl2k3 by a 9 or 10 to 1 ratio. On the xbox madden outsold nfl2k3 by a 2 to 2.5 to 1 ratio. Nfl2k3 does much better on the xbox on a comparative basis, and one of the main reasons is the online functionality.
I'm a longtime madden fan, I bought madden 2001 and 2002 for the ps2, I bought madden 2002 and 2003 for the xbox. When I owned a dreamcast I didn't buy the nfl2k football games. Now that I'm on xbox live, madden is history. This year nfl2k4, possibly fever 2004, but madden has been put on waivers. See you, John, it was nice knowing you.
It's kinda funny that they'd put custom soundtracks in Madden and not NBA Street Vol. 2. What an ass-backwards way to do business.
Well, that news makes my decision on which football game to buy this season. EA! Get with the program!
EA will never support Live. They want the ability to:
1)shut down the previous games servers when the new version comes out.
2)they are thinking about implementing there own network with monthly fees.
3)they want to have there own servers.
Basically I don't see this as a big deal unless sega screws up NFL 2K4.
Man, what is up with them?!
I was looking forward to NASCAR Thunder 2004 online, but if I want that, I guess I have to fire up the good'ole inferior PS2.
I'd also like to add that Microsoft charges EA if they put a game online through Xbox Live. So I don't feel that it is completely EA's fault.
Where'd you read this? It is my understanding, and I could be wrong, that there is no fee to developers to put a game on Live unless they have persistent worlds (MMORPG). Her's a really old quote, but all I have right now:
"Dispelling the belief that publishers or developers have to pay for incorporating Xbox Live services into their games, Henson indicated that there is no extra fee or royalty required to launch a free game on the service. A premium service will be offered to those who wish to implement pay-for-play or subscription services, and of course those users will be charged an extra fee for services rendered."
From what I've read, Microsoft has spent all the money to set up its online gaming.
According to this article on gamespy which compares the different online strategies between the three platforms:
Microsoft "offers the most controlled (and simplest) experience for the user, but the costs are steep and game developers are limited to using the Microsoft service for online play. "
Now I find it very hard to believe that Microsoft is going to spend all this money setting up Xbox Live and not want some sort of royalty for it. Do you think that Microsoft is going to host and manage all online games on its servers for free? Yes, the user is paying a subscription fee, but I am sure that Microsoft is getting a higher royalty fee if you want to put a game online using their servers.
That's one hell of an old article, may 24, 2002. And it really doesn't provide much in the way of useful information. From what I understand of xbox live and I'm no expert here, players host the games and you're not playing off microsoft dedicated servers. That's why your experience can vary greatly on xbox live. If the hoster has a poor connection, you can experience plenty of lag. If the connection is superior, then the lag is minimized, and you'll have a better time.
Thanks Peter. That makes sense. I could quite possibly be wrong. I couldn't find a strong enough link to counter Dave's.
Lets just hope that EA and Microsoft come to some sort of agreement soon.
Don't hold your breath. There's a WSJ article titled "Electronic Arts Snubs Microsoft"
You Need An Account to View the Article
The president of EA is quoted in there as saying that EA is "going to build something big and its not going to be with Microsoft". Basically laying out in plain english that EA isn't giving up on their online investment yet. They wholly intend to have their own version of Live, only for EA games only and not specific to a console. Wouldn't that be great if all publishers tried to build their own network ? I rarely hope for a company's downfall, but I really hope that EA's hubris sees it sitting on the sideline of the online arena as MS and Sony build proprietary, closed networks (as I think Sony will do with the next PlayStation iteration).
Sega sports for me!
Means PS2 Madden for me this year. Microsoft's stubborness to work with EA will cost them sales. I believe that Microsoft needs EA a lot more then EA needs Microsoft...
The mouse that roared.