Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FIFA seeks $1B+ (per 4 years) from EA for name usage

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 95 posts

Re: FIFA seeks $1B+ (per 4 years) from EA for name usage

#71

Post by audiometry »

300bps wrote: post #36
that_guy_iain wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, I am not sure who is more disliked. FIFA or EA.

I’m sure there are a lot of people my age that remember EA extremely fondly for the things they did decades ago. M.U.L.E. and Seven Cities of Gold and Archon and many others were the best games some of us grew up on. I haven’t been involved in gaming except for the 2 I occasionally play with my kids so I’m blissfully unaware of anything EA has done recently. But back then, they were really amazing. https://www.euroga…

Mule was a beautiful game. Never had the chance to play it as four live players only two. Think that would have been a blast.

Re: FIFA seeks $1B+ (per 4 years) from EA for name usage

#72

Post by _v7gu »

criley2 wrote: post #64
_v7gu wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am quite upset about the war ending in the worst way possible. You talk like the war in Afghanistan "ending" was a good thing probably because you get to live far, far away from yet another region destabilised by US hands. Joe thought Afghans were too dumb to understand backwards induction, and put a nice islamic state over there. Military industry would sure be mad about the existence of new righteous wars to be f…

The idea that the war could have been ended any other way is Military Industrial Complex propaganda. It's a complete and total fabrication that relies on the ignorance of people to believe that just a little more war and death would magically create a stable government. The Afghan government was always going to collapse to the Taliban. 10 years ago, 10 years from now. There was no end to this war where the Afghan gov…

>The Afghan people deserve to rule themselves

What now? Did I miss the election? Maybe then Afghans should have thrown US out of the country if they didn't want their presence. Or do things just seem really easy to people who only lived near peace?

> You stand for nothing.

I stand for the rights of Afghans. Do it there, or take all of them as refugees. Your responsibility, I didn't start a war there for bullshit reasons. Just don't be hypocritical. How can cake be a big deal when you can leave people to be thrown down roofs without blinking?

> your desire to be their white man savior.

You come into my region, fuck everything up, and say this when I want you to clean up your mess?

Re: FIFA seeks $1B+ (per 4 years) from EA for name usage

#73

Post by harry8 »

criley2 wrote: post #55
fennecfoxen wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> used to sell artwork Yes, and only artwork, definitely not influence. The person responsible for anticorruption efforts, and rooting out any sophisticated, foreign disruptive agents’ access to the White House, by rejecting “abnormal” bids, is a New York art dealer named Georges Bergès. He seems reputable enough, right?

The idea that loser Hunter can sell "influence" into a White House that he has no role in, no influence in, and is actively kept from, is rank propaganda. Hunter serves this government in no capacity, official or otherwise, and has no ability to "sell influence". Ironically, anyone dealing with Hunter is black listed from the White House, as being around that loser is a red flag that slams doors shut in your face. Wh…

Is he selling influence? Meh. Is he selling the appearance of influence? What is he selling? How is he making any money at all?

I don't much care about a massive nothing like Hunter Biden. Really. Who does? Anyone who doesn't know and love him personally?

Well people care enough to buy his art for big money which is only the case because of the power of his father. Without his powerful father he doesn't make $5. He's no artist is about the most uncontroversial statement imaginable. Very shady Ukrainian business interests were paying him how much a month for his "business expertise?" More than the annual minimum wage? For no duties? Can you get that job? Can I? Can he if his father is Joe Average? Can he if his father is Michael Jordan, or Robin Williams, or Matthew McConnaughey, or Richard Feynman, or any other superstar achiever who isn't politically powerful with duties involving the Ukraine? Does Joe Biden exercise political actions for money or the money that Hunter gets? I actually strongly doubt it. But I'm only 99.8% sure of that. Does it compromise Joe anyway? Yeah, it looks terrible!

It looks terrible because it is terrible. Claiming Ivanka is worse has just gotta stop. Ivanka is irrelevant.

Claming Hunter is worse than Ivanka if you swing that way has just gotta stop. Hunter is irrelevant.

They both meet the threshold to turn your stomach. Regardless if you love the Don or love the Joe or love both (and seriously, good for you if you do. Things are better if you can bring yourself to like both candidates - I'd like to get there too).

Hunter and Ivanka both stink to high heaven. It is of zero consequence who is "worse" they both limbo effortlessly under any bar of decency. They are both shining, sparkling advertisements with fireworks to kids from disadvantaged backgrounds that nobody cares about "merit" or "cleverness" or "honesty" or "hard work" and that you, kid, were not born to succeed like they were and have through nothing more than ... Fill in your own ideas for what personal attributes comprise their financial success.

If only one of those two turns your stomach you have drunk some partisan kool-aid. The benchmark for the actions of the US president and direct family members has to be higher than "Not actually illegal" Whoever the president may be.

If we have a partisan preference maybe we should work out in advance what evidence would turn us against them. What would be bad enough that we might not support them anymore. So if it should happen we're mentally prepared to turn on them so there's some chance of consequences.

Both of Ivanka and Hunter will be fine. The prospect of consequences for them or the political fortunes of their family members are so far below what would be a good thing their story is only illustrative of how bad and endemic the corruption has become.

But yeah you saw those evil gnomes at Fox/MSNBC are rallying around Rachel/Tucker because, that side is so EVIL ... Delete as applicable. As awful as all that is it's actually less depressing than the reality of it all.

Re: FIFA seeks $1B+ (per 4 years) from EA for name usage

#74

Post by criley2 »

harry8 wrote: post #73
criley2 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea that loser Hunter can sell "influence" into a White House that he has no role in, no influence in, and is actively kept from, is rank propaganda. Hunter serves this government in no capacity, official or otherwise, and has no ability to "sell influence". Ironically, anyone dealing with Hunter is black listed from the White House, as being around that loser is a red flag that slams doors shut in your face. Wh…

Is he selling influence? Meh. Is he selling the appearance of influence? What is he selling? How is he making any money at all? I don't much care about a massive nothing like Hunter Biden. Really. Who does? Anyone who doesn't know and love him personally? Well people care enough to buy his art for big money which is only the case because of the power of his father. Without his powerful father he doesn't make $5. He's…

Once again, this is rank false equivalence which elevates non-corrupt outsider acitivity with actual corruption by public officials elevated to high office corruptly.

I refuse to fall into the low-IQ cynicism of both-side-isms.

It's worse for a public servant, with actual influence and power, to be corrupt, than it is for a child of a politician to make money.

Yes, Hunter is irrelevant because he's not in our government.

NO, Ivanka was not irrelevant, because she was a member of our government elevated to have power in our country.

These differences fundamentally matter. And no amount of both-sides-ism or false equivalence will change the reality that public servants must be held to a higher standard than children of politicians.

It is not "partisan kool-aid" to hold public servants to a higher standard than private children, and to suggest otherwise is ignorant and immoral.

Re: FIFA seeks $1B+ (per 4 years) from EA for name usage

#75

Post by Bilal_io »

that_guy_iain wrote: post #10
vultour wrote: post #2

Sales of games like this always amazed me. It seems like every year somebody tweaks a yaml config with the player details and hits build - voilà brand new game is out, time to shell out another $60.

From my experience with the NHL franchise. If you're a casual or light player of the game you probably won't notice a difference except for the time rosters. But if you play the game on a regular basis you will also notice the new feature or the thing they've improved. If you play FIFA 2015 and then play FIFA 2022 you'll notice a massive difference yet people will have been saying for years that they don't change any…

> But if you play the game on a regular basis you will also notice the new feature or the thing they've improved. If you play FIFA 2015 and then play FIFA 2022 you'll notice a massive difference yet people will have been saying for years that they don't change anything. That is because every year they improve a single aspect of the game.

I think that's the point people are trying to make. If you're making a very small change,why are you charging people for the full price again? They could push an update for a small free each year. And resell the game for full price every 4 years.

Re: FIFA seeks $1B+ (per 4 years) from EA for name usage

#76

Post by fredoralive »

dejw wrote: post #46
djmips wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds more like extortion. EAC built this franchise from the ground up since 1993 and FIFA had nothing to do with it other than four letters.

and now EA is milking teenagers with builtin gambling mechanics. there's always a bigger fish and in this case I am happy to see that. Didn't FIFA also have an exclusive contract which prevented PES (Pro Evolution Soccer) from acquiring licenses for team names?

Buying exclusive rights to teams / leagues to cripple the competition is a fairly standard EA play. However it is important to note the exclusive contracts are between EA Sports and the teams / leagues, not FIFA.

The main things FIFA brings to the table for EA is the name, and the World Cup competition. EA clearly things they aren't worth as much as FIFA wants for them, hence the current wrangling.

If the deals falls through then "EA Sports FC" (or whatver it ends up being called) will still have all the teams / leagues locked up. So a theoretical FIFA game from someone else would presumably still have the same disadvantages as Pro Evo etc.

Re: FIFA seeks $1B+ (per 4 years) from EA for name usage

#77

Post by owenmarshall »

pg_bot wrote: post #32
Bayart wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not talking about revenue. Football isn't really an industry, and it's not rational. If you want to compare the cultural and social footprint of football to something it's video games as a whole, not EA on its lonesome.

I mean you could probably supplant the entire FIFA organization with $10B if you wanted to take a really big swing. Money talks and if you funnel the right amount of money to the best players you will create the best sports league.

The biggest clubs in the world tried this several months ago - the $3.2 billion European Super League didn’t even last a week before it fell apart.

FIFA survives because it effectively sanctions competitions at every level. Take Manchester United: they play in the English Premier League. That competition is sanctioned by the English FA - a member of UEFA, the European body of FIFA. If United make it into European competition, they play in a competition organized by UEFA. Their players represent their national teams all over the world, and compete in matches run by UEFA, CONMEBOL, and other FIFA governing bodies.

When Manchester United announced they were joining the Super League in lieu of the UEFA sanctioned European competitions, the FA announced that they were at risk of expulsion from the English league structure because the FA bylaws say you can only play matches sanctioned by FIFA/UEFA - essentially pulling the league and cup competitions away from them and turning them into a glorified exhibition team. And the fans went ballistic at this, for good reason.

Was the ESL a trial balloon? Almost certainly, and we will see something similar, possibly to just force UEFAs hand in negotiating things like revenue sharing. But supplanting FIFA would be much harder than “throwing money at the problem”.

Re: FIFA seeks $1B+ (per 4 years) from EA for name usage

#78

Post by RegnisGnaw »

siva7 wrote: post #18
harry8 wrote: post #3

Such a good opportunity for EA to mount an Anti-FIFA corruption campaign in game. Mess with some trade rules. Images of Sep Blatter bathing in the rain of cash at the press conference. Force players to choose between FI-FI-FA legacy league and the new hotness. FIFA are corrupt from top to bottom. EA have a direct channel to a huge slab of their market to tear the FIFA politicians with their snouts in the trough a new…

Comparing the power of FIFA to that of EA would be more akin to that of Walmart and a mom-and-pop store. There is no way EA could win this power struggle. So it remains a mystery what the tactic of EA is.

How so? The only thing that FIFA licensed is the words "FIFA", the logo, and the World Cup. All the other stuff (player likeness, etc) are separate licenses.

So if EA loses the licenses to say EPIC, then what? People really gonna play a FIFA game with players like "Kristiano Ronalda"?

Re: FIFA seeks $1B+ (per 4 years) from EA for name usage

#79

Post by RegnisGnaw »

tut-urut-utut wrote: post #11
vultour wrote: post #2

Sales of games like this always amazed me. It seems like every year somebody tweaks a yaml config with the player details and hits build - voilà brand new game is out, time to shell out another $60.

If the only value proposition of the game, as compared to competition, is to have real team and player names and their real up-to-date stats, then it's only fair to pay properly for that business advantage. 250M per year seems fair to me. If they don't want to, I'm sure there'll be another company willing to pay that amount for their game can be called “FIFA 2022”. AFAIK, oil companies also has to pay for the right t…

The FIFA license doesn't cover the the teams and/or player names. It only covers the words FIFA, the logo, an the "World Cup". The player names and likeness is covered by a separate license.

Re: FIFA seeks $1B+ (per 4 years) from EA for name usage

#80

Post by loudmax »

300bps wrote: post #36
that_guy_iain wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, I am not sure who is more disliked. FIFA or EA.

I’m sure there are a lot of people my age that remember EA extremely fondly for the things they did decades ago. M.U.L.E. and Seven Cities of Gold and Archon and many others were the best games some of us grew up on. I haven’t been involved in gaming except for the 2 I occasionally play with my kids so I’m blissfully unaware of anything EA has done recently. But back then, they were really amazing. https://www.euroga…

Absolutely! The first time I heard of Electronic Arts was from Archon in the early 80's. It's a positive association, and I thought the name "Electronic Arts" was pretty damn cool for a video game company, maybe even bordering on pretentious. I lost most interest in PC games as I got into Linux and open source, but for me EA had a generally positive connotation due to Archon.

And on reflection, while Archon was a good game it didn't have enough much depth to make it something truly groundbreaking. Maybe someone should make an updated version of the game. I'm afraid that whatever today's EA would put out would only tarnish my positive memories though.

Post reply on HN