I find it amusing, in a very sick way, that this lousy government still doesn't do anything to prevent monopolistic activity such as this.

Make it a good day: boycott EA today.

You don't truly understand what a monopolistic action is, do you?

-------------
Doomriders: the first new band worth a signature - http://www.deathwishinc.com/

Buying park place?

How many exclusivity deals does EA have now? I know they have the NFL, and they may be getting the NHL by the sounds of it, but do they have the NBA already and FIFA stuff? NCAA?

So far the NFL exclusivity agreement hasn't been good for gamers, the latest version of madden is doing ok and all the EA games on the Xbox are getting a luke warm welcome at best.

It was mentioned earlier this week that the EA stock fell 4% after 4th quarter profits were falling short of expected. I hope this is due largely to their lack of effort put into their most recent line of titles.

Would be a sad day if EA was the only company able to put out sports games in every major league for consoles. No reason for government to get involved but would suck for us.

I want a Nintendo Revolution controller TV remote.

You can just picture the board meeting at EA talking about the next NHL game.

"Realistic players' faces... brilliant!"
"Brilliant!"
"Lots and lots of goals, people love that. No defense! Brilliant!"
"Brilliant!"

I love hockey, not the moles on Mike Modano's ass being lovingly rendered in 3D. EA's NHL games don't even get a second glance anymore when I go to pick up a new version each year.

Two private businesses making a deal with each other is not a monopoly. This is like saying if Coke decides to distribute its soda exclusively at one particular grocery store that it's a monopoly. The monopoly would be if coke forced other soft drink companies out of business. Other game makers don't have a right to use sports team logos and player names, the leauges are other privately owned businesses.

That's the legal side of it anyway - I do think EA is lame as hell for doing it, but there's nothing illegal or monopolistic about it.

and FIFA stuff?

Not to all football. They produce FIFA World Cup games (exclusively, I think) but there are so many other football games that they'd have a hard time sewing that up. Also, even if they did grab FIFA, that'd only deal with the (remarkably few, World Cup aside) FIFA tournaments. UEFA run the Champions League and European Championship competitions, and individual countries have their own football associations - the FA in the UK, La Liga in Spain, etc. So tying down the rights to football is much harder.

___________________________________
This post is shamefully brought to you using someone else's unsecured wireless network

This is good.. the 2k series hockey games are FAR superior to EA's

You don't truly understand what a monopolistic action is, do you?

Actually he does, you certainly don't. Exclusivity is a monopolisitc practice. Monopolies are illegal in the U.S., at least they used to be not that long ago. Corporations now run America for certain.


"Many defendents get religion when they want mercy from the court. When you see me coming out for Jesus, you'll know they really have something on me."
- HST

Of course, the main difference about soccer (football) is that no-one in the US really knows any players/teams anyway, so it's not like it's a huge letdown if they're forced to make them up to get around an exclusivity deal.

So... if the deal is with the player's union, what teams will they play on? Does EA expect the NHL to allow the use of team branding?

Actually he does, you certainly don't. Exclusivity is a monopolisitc practice. Monopolies are illegal in the U.S., at least they used to be not that long ago. Corporations now run America for certain.

No, this is not a monopoly, not in that sense.

Steel, being an important resource, being available exclusively from one company is a monopoly.
Two companies signing an agreement to work together is not a monopoly.

If the NHL going exclusively with EA is a monopoly then so would King Kong going exclusively with Ubisoft.

People can still make hockey games. People can still form other hockey leagues. Therefore this is not a monopoly.

-------------
Doomriders: the first new band worth a signature - http://www.deathwishinc.com/

Actually he does, you certainly don't. Exclusivity is a monopolisitc practice.

I believe Halsy needs to stop thinking that his political science degree also makes him an expert in economics, business and law.

How many exclusivity deals does EA have now? I know they have the NFL, and they may be getting the NHL by the sounds of it, but do they have the NBA already and FIFA stuff? NCAA?

NBA, yes. NCAA, yes (at least for College Football, not sure about basketball). FIFA...Who knows? Who cares.
EA also signed an exclusive deal with the Arena Football League.

And, ofcourse, as predicted by just about everyone, Madden 2006 sucked fucking ass. As will Madden 2007. All the way up to 2012, when I believe the deal expires.

Any commissioner that allowed this exclusivity bullshit should be removed from the job. But ofcourse, all the owners just see money, so they're happy. Who gives a rat's ass about the fans? So what if all the new games will suck? Fans are annoying anyways. Can't we just do without them?

Creston

I love hockey, not the moles on Mike Modano's ass being lovingly rendered in 3D

That was very funny

This comment was edited on Dec 22, 16:57.

You don't truly understand what a monopolistic action is, do you?

I sure do. You might want to take a look:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=monopolistic

-Exclusive control by one group of the means of producing or selling a commodity or service.
-A company or group having exclusive control over a commercial activity.
-Exclusive possession or control.

That site (dictionary.com) is also there for other terms you don't understand.


This comment was edited on Dec 22, 17:51.

Is what EA's doing monopolistic? Perhaps not. Anti-competitive? Absolutely.

Parallax Abstraction
Ottawa, Canada
www.pxa.ca
MK DS Friend Code: 210513038300

I sure do. You might want to take a look

And of those three definitions EA only fits into the third, which also happens to be the most broadly defined and does not fit the economic definition of a monopoly. Try again.

There are four criteria that a firm needs to meet if it's going to be a monopoly (this is taken from my old microeconomics textbook by the way):

1. Single Seller- The industry in question must have only a single firm producing the good or service. EA, while having the largest market share, competes with several other publishers in the game industry.

2. No Close Substitutes- The good or service has to be unique beyond being a different brand and there can't be any substitutes for that good. In the case of sports video games, other companies can make non-NFL or NHLPA sports titles which would be adequate substitutes for an EA title.

3. Barriers to entry- Their must be barriers preventing others from entering the industry. EA can certainly try to purchase a game company but they cannot prevent a game company from entering the market.

4. Price Setter- A monopoly has total control over the supply of a product and can therefore adjust total supply to affect the good or services price. If EA tried to raise the price of sports games they'd never be able to sell them, their are too many substitute goods.

EA is not a monopoly. They don't even have a monopoly on sports games. What they have is the largest market share but that alone is not enough to make a firm monopolistic.

I have an idea! Let's stop the semantics argument then, and call them down for being scum, huh?

They come along and flash money that other, smaller, (better), developers and publishers don't have, and buy up all opportunity for popular sports league titles, so that they and only they can develop software for it. If that doesn't fit a particular person's interpretation of the word monopoly, then use a phrase that's more appropriate for you. One way or the other, it is a practice that should be forbidden, and definitely not supported by any gamer who has his and colleague's interests at heart.

You only want to stop so you don't have to admit to being wrong.


What EA is doing is annoying. It is in no way illegal.

-------------
Doomriders: the first new band worth a signature - http://www.deathwishinc.com/

You only want to stop so you don't have to admit to being wrong.

See, you're one of the reasons why stupid arguments never end around here. The guy was trying to end the argument by saying let's stop whining at each other about a word and just say that EA is not a company that's doing what is best for gamers. But oh no, everyone has to say you're right. Must every thread turn into this?

Parallax Abstraction
Ottawa, Canada
www.pxa.ca
MK DS Friend Code: 210513038300