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

81–90 of 95 posts

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

#81

Post by that_guy_iain »

Bilal_io wrote: post #75
that_guy_iain wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 smal…

Who said they make a very small change? I said they improve a single aspect. The aspects are normally massively changed.

And the point people are making is they can't spot the differnce and for them there is no difference. No there is, but they're not good enough to feel or see the difference. It's like saying there isn't a difference between each version release of a programming language. If you're a newbie programmer you won't notice the difference but if you're an advance user you notice it instantly and it changes how you do things.

One of the reasons I normally upgrade every year is that I found if I missed a year the number of changes that I would experience with basically overload me when I did upgrade.

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

#82

Post by Bayart »

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.

Those players would be excluding themselves from all known international football and from transferring to and fro all current clubs and leagues on earth. That would be _complete suicide_. They'd become nobodies overnight.

10B probably isn't even enough to buy out the PL, much less the world football pyramid.

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

#83

Post by harry8 »

criley2 wrote: post #74
harry8 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 governm…

Look at what Hunter has been doing and how that makes the President and his office look. Think about how you feel about that. Ivanka is completely irrelevant to that analysis. Ivanka is not a standard of behavior.

Surely Biden's DoJ will prosecute Ivanka for each and every law breaking activity. Why wouldn't they? Hunter is completely irrelevant to that.

Corruption has to go no matter who, no matter where, no matter what, no matter how politically inexpedient. There's plenty of legal corruption. Pick the 5 kinds of corruption you think are the worst for the nation and also are not illegal. It's harder than it sounds but not because you can't get to 5.

Anyway this is ceasing to be productive as is so often the case. "Those guys suck, my team is fine." The disease of corruption rages on with no real change in sight.

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

#84

Post by LuisMondragon »

that_guy_iain wrote: post #81
Bilal_io wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 smal…

Who said they make a very small change? I said they improve a single aspect. The aspects are normally massively changed. And the point people are making is they can't spot the differnce and for them there is no difference. No there is, but they're not good enough to feel or see the difference. It's like saying there isn't a difference between each version release of a programming language. If you're a newbie programm…

I agree. It's a typical error of judgement from people that know things superficially. "All electronic music sounds the same", "all FIFA games are the same", "all soccer matches are the same". We simplify things that we know little about or things where we have poor proficiency. But experts can see the slightest differences and nuances.

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

#85

Post by tzs »

kasperni wrote: post #28
pg_bot wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Madden hasn't changed in a decade and it still tops the sales charts every year. It has to have the best economics of any game franchise in existence.

American football is a niche sport outside of the US. I've never heard of anyone playing Madden or seen it on any top sales lists.

But the US is a really big market. Something can be a niche everywhere else and still make a ton of sales.

Madden has cumulative sales, according to Wikipedia, of 250 million copies. The FIFA series has cumulative sales of 325 million.

I'm having a hard time finding consistent annuals sales numbers. Random Googling suggests each new FIFA year sells around 24 million, and each new Madden year around 5 or 6 million.

But Wikipedia says Madden was at cumulative 100 million in 2013, which combined with them saying it is 250 million now, gives an average of over 18 million a year.

Maybe the numbers I found on annual sales were only counting sales of whatever was the latest version? In that case, if a significant number of people who buy Madden X do not do so until after Madden X+1 comes out that could explain it. Madden X could sell 6 million to the people who want the latest version, and then another 12 million in subsequent years to people who wait until it is a bargain bin game.

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

#86

Post by siva7 »

RegnisGnaw wrote: post #78
siva7 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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"?

Regarding all the criminal and cartel-like activities of FIFA, it wouldn’t surprise me if EA would get in trouble with the other licenses as well. The fee might as well be at this point protection money to not lose also other license deals.

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

#87

Post by siva7 »

vasco wrote: post #53
raverbashing wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Monetary size doesn't matter in this case. In the least Do you think, in a (more moral than financial) dispute between EA and NBA who would win? It's like that but x10 Most people don't even know who EA is, they just want to play FIFA.

Pretty much every kid that has ever played FIFA knows and repeats the "EA sports - it's in the game" blurb so I'm pretty sure everyone is aware of EA.

Sure, but besides some geeks no one cares if the next FIFA is from EA or Epic. That’s the problem EA has

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

#88

Post by siva7 »

pg_bot wrote: post #14
Bayart wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Force players to choose between FI-FI-FA legacy league and the new hotness. FIFA has the approval of nation-states and there's massive cultural capital invested in FIFA, especially regarding the World Cup. Nobody's leaving it, especially not players. FIFA also doesn't have leagues of its own. > 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…

> EA is chump change compared to world football. They've got no leverage, and despite the dislike for FIFA everywhere, a power struggle between the two with EA casting itself as the righteous party will only invite backlash. You sure about that? EA's revenue for the last fiscal year was 5.6 billion dollars. FIFA's revenue for the last 4 years is about equal to that dollar amount. There's a lot more money in video gam…

See it this way. If FIFA decides to award the License to another Publisher, then also other license givers will award them to the new publisher instead of EA. No football executive cares much about the relationship with a gaming studio but for sure about their goodstanding within the corrupt FIFA system.

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

#89

Post by tephra »

dncornholio wrote: post #51
tephra wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a somewhat frequent player. While yes player updates are a part of it there's is more. Firstly players and rosters usually gets updates throughout, so if I open my FIFA 21 now it would certainly update rosters. In new titles usually we'll get some new leagues (nice for people who wants to play a team/league in their country). IIRC in FIFA 22 you can create your own team now (waited for that one for a long time).…

All your comments validate the parents post though. Nothing but yaml and UI tweaks :)

Apparently they also did some very detailed motion capture on individual players.

Without access to the codebase of course I (or you/parent) don't know how much code they had to change of course but if the game is better I'll happily pay for it to enjoy it.

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

#90

Post by karmakaze »

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…

Make all the in-game presentation accurate but comical so it falls under 'parody'.
Post reply on HN