Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Businesses Entertainment Games

Take-Two Cements MLB Rights 31

Posted by Zonk from the cement-in-the-shoes-no-doubt dept.
GamesIndustry.biz has a story on Take-Two interactive and their efforts to tighten up agreements with Major League Baseball. From the article: "As with the MLBPA deal, the new arrangement gives Take Two exclusive rights among third party publishers only..but a loophole identified by many analysts has been sealed up, with third party publishers prohibited from developing and releasing titles in partnership with the platform holders."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Take-Two Cements MLB Rights More

Take-Two Cements MLB Rights

Comments Filter:

  • Take Two Wins; Consumer is ultimate loser (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Skuggamara ( 853341 ) * on Tuesday February 01, 2005 @04:33PM (#11544030)
    While it's a shame to see these exclusive (or semi-exclusive as the article points out) deals being made, it is nice to see Electronic Arts getting a bit of it's own medicine.

    These exclusive deals are bad for the games industry and bad for the consumer as they stifle innovation and competition from smaller, more creative game developers.

    • Re:Take Two Wins; Consumer is ultimate loser (Score:4, Interesting)

      by fireduck ( 197000 ) on Tuesday February 01, 2005 @05:11PM (#11544549)
      I don't normally follow sports games, so I didn't really think there were than many MLB games available. So this really couldn't have been that bad a deal? Wrong. Just a quick look at Gamecube baseball titles shows we've got baseball games from Acclaim (All Star Baseball), Infogrames (backyard baseball), Sega (home run king), Midway (MLB slugfest) and MVP Baseball (EA). 5 different developers, not one of which is Nintendo. This'll get paired down to 1 developer next year. That is a big blow to innovation/competition.

      Interesting thing about these games, is that there's not a single non-MLB licensed baseball game available for the GC. One of the counter arguments is that locking up MLB (or any other sports association), frees other developers to be more independent. However, the lack of non-name brand sports games indicates that there really isn't much of a market for non-League games.

      Although to be fair, there are 2 non-NBA games (one by disney) and 2 non-NFL games (disney + an ncaa game) out there (but one can't honestly expect the disney games to appeal to adults). So in all the currently available sports games for the 3 big sports, there's really only 2 that don't involve a national professional league. I guess that makes your choice a bit easier.
    • The only thing Take Two (and EA for that matter) did was buy up franchise naming rights. Whoop-de-fuckin'-do. In the same way a shirt is still a shirt regardless if it has an Abercrombie and Fitch logo smeared across it or not, a baseball game is still a baseball game regardless if it uses "official" names and logos. If a baseball game can not be a success without the proper logos and celebrity player names smeared across it, that is a commentary on the people who buy these games the lack of creativity o
  • I pray now that Take Two can have an exclusive deal with the NBA, if not the And-1 league. The EA NBA live series hit rock botton in 2003. Tried to make a come back in 2005 and it's still a joke.

  • Its a good thing that Take Two was able to get this deal done, if this had not happen I am sure that EA would have been after a MLB exclusive since they don't seem able to create their own games anymore w/o locking up the market before hand.

    On another note, its about time that EA Sports changed their catch phrase from "It's in the game" to "It's not in any other game."

    • Re:Good Thing (Score:3, Insightful)

      by obsid1an ( 665888 )
      So let me get this right. EA does it, it is bad. Take Two does it, it is good because it stops EA. You understand there are more than two publishers out there right? Oh well, typical Slashdot hypocrisy.
      • EA has certainly generated alot of bad press and bad feelings lately. There is alot of animosity towards EA, and seeing them "lose" a battle is something that makes some people happy.

        I mean, I'd rather these deals didn't happen at all, but they are happening, and I'd rather not see EA having an exclusive deal on every sports franchise.
        • I can agree with you, I think things would be best for the consumer if there were no exclusive deals. But its easier (and more than likely cheaper) for EA to buy an exclusive contract than to attempt to make a better product than the competition.
  • "Seattle Mariners owner Nintendo last week announced Pennant Chase Baseball for the GameCube, indicating the exemption of platform holders from Take-Two's 7-year exclusivity deal with the Major League Baseball Players' Association could leave T2 with plenty of competition."

    Source: Nintendo baseball title underscores Take-Two's non exclusivity [gameplanet.co.nz]
  • ...buys a new baseball video game every year? I mean, there are probably some people, but I always figured they represented a minority consumer base. How much really changes between years in baseball video games?

    But then I saw this: (From TFA)

    [There is] a strong possibility that this means the firm will release new titles both for the start of the baseball leagues in spring, and for the busy holiday sales period which starts in mid-autumn.

    Who would buy a new baseball game in Spring if they just g
    • Who buys baseball cards every year? I mean, how much really changes between years with baseball cards?
      • Who buys baseball cards every year?

        But baseball cards, if kept in mint condition, can at least be worth something in the future. Think of buying baseball cards each year as making a minimal-risk investment each year.

        A baseball video game (like almost any obsolete video game) won't be worth anything in a few years, though.

        • Re:Who... (Score:3, Insightful)

          by ivan256 ( 17499 ) *
          But baseball cards, if kept in mint condition, can at least be worth something in the future. Think of buying baseball cards each year as making a minimal-risk investment each year.

          Hah!

          First of all, most baseball cards are *worthless* in the future. Buying to find the potentially valuable ones is essentially gambling.

          Secondly, most of the people who buy baseball cards don't keep them in mint condition. I'm sure many do, but most end up in a shoe box that gets thrown out by said purchaser's mom when they

    • Re:Who... (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      You buy one in the spring to play out the season. Then you buy one in the fall to play out the pennant chase and the World Series.

      There is usually a good turn over in rosters just prior to September as teams make trades for the stretch run, and there are also players who get injured or come out of nowhere.

      There will be a purchasing audience at that point who would like to see the rosters in the game match the rosters in real life and the performance of the players match what's been going on that year.
  • I want to be sitting here snickering about how EA is reaping what it sowed, but really competition is the only thing that produces a better game. This not only restricts the options that people are going to have (admittedly in a market that is not the largest to start with), but it limits the drive to produce a game that really is competitive and fresh, compared to simply the next thing off the production line.
  • So, where is all the outrage against Take-Two? Where are the calls for boycotts, the anger at anti-competitive business practice, the hatred for companies that buy up other companies, and put other teams out of business?

    Nowhere.

    This is proof positive that people hate EA not because of what they do, but because they just repeat what they are told. EA gets the blame for everything the game industry does, and all the other companies get a free ride. Honestly, how can you give a crap about exclusive licences

    • When a bully sucker puches a little guy isn't it fun to see the little guy get a blow in on the bully?

      I don't know about Take 2's games, but the EA football games sucked and they were possibly going to start losing share to Sega with the cheap game plan working out. So we watched a very competitive market with interesting things happening get oblitherated.

      Now Take 2 is fighting back, and even if it is dirty fighting it feals good.
    • The same things are being said now about this deal that were said of the EA deal. That is, the consumer loses on this deal. The anger and outrage isn't there for a few reasons. In no specific order.

      First, Take-Two does not have a history of buying up all of its competitors. That made EA's buy of the NFL license an extesion of its "buy all developers so there's no competition" scheme.

      Second, when the NFL made 300 million from the deal I'm sure every other sports enterprise wanted some so the smaller sp

Slashdot Top Deals

Software production is assumed to be a line function, but it is run like a staff function. -- Paul Licker

Close