View Full Version : Ea Sports Needs To Go Live

04-29-2003, 03:14 AM

04-29-2003, 11:54 AM
I believe 'EA' have got it right not giving in to 'MS', because pure and simple 'MS' have no right to monopolise live gaming. Take for instance GR, when it came out we where told that we would get downloadable maps following its release. Then we where told we would have to buy the new campaign disk. I dont mind paying for online play but on top of your BB connection, XBL fees and buying games I think its a bit rich asking gamers to pay anything additional. For e.g. PSO in my opinion asking for more money on top of every thing else is a joke! Imagine MS xbox was the only console available, we would be held to ransom over everything. We need competition in the gaming world, it keeps it healthy. I would love to see EA go live but I see there point. IMO:watchout:

04-29-2003, 12:14 PM
Uh...for GR, we weren't told that there'd be upgrades via xbl since it wasn't built in. Ubisoft has said this time and time again that they didn't equip GR to have downloadable contents and that was the reason for the sale of the second disk, so I'm not sure where you got that information.

04-29-2003, 03:43 PM
UH....It was part of the hype about XBL along with halo2 hype.
In these forums you dare not criticise xbl. Are you trying to say you agree with all the charges that are coming our way( Gr issue aside) its a rip off pure and simple. Its so noticeable that when you take a swipe at MS, there are people desperate to go out their way to prove you wrong. :p

04-29-2003, 04:02 PM
I'm by no means denying that XBL is a flawed system. For the most part though, it's a very well designed system. The way that MS has it set-up, the developers didn't have to create their own servers, they didn't have to front the money for the purchase of those servers, and in doing so, they save the developers money. Yet, they're they bad guys? I'm sorry, but I'd rather pay a flat fee than having to pay per game as what (from all that I have read of EA), EA would rather have you do. Uh no, they would have gotten the money at the time of purchace, and they should be happy with that seeing as how horrible half of their ports to the XBox turn out. Sorry, I will never support EA for all the BS they have pulled, and the continued release of half-assed attempts at games. With that said, as I've said in the past...EA can go to hell as far as I'm concerned.

Also, sojourner...just make sure you have your facts straight...the talk about downloadable content is true about mech and unreal, but not ghost.

04-29-2003, 06:47 PM
Look brother, take it easy. I made a phone call to ubisoft quite innocently to query why I could not get round the co-op bug regarding the y axis problem of not being able to play a friend on different settings simultaneously. Anyway, I inquired as to what we could expect of live enabled and he said " You'll be able to download maps and fixes it will be immense. look out for raven shield it'll knock your socks off!"
This conversation took place way at the beginning of release and I had played the game at lenght. Ok, mabye I spoke to a nutcase, but it sure sounded like he knew the score. Friend, I made sure I got through to someone in the know, believe me. When I want to know something I ask questions and make a few phone calls just for interest. Obviously the guy was talkin ****, was'nt he?.
But seriously, the point Iwas really tryin to make was that MS should not be allowed to have the final say on every game or related abilities to live play. We need healthy competition in live play including PS2 online, it gives the whole gaming world a buzz. I'm a gamer and have been for years and like you, want to have an experience online that will rock. We need good forums and I believe XBA is as good as it gets. I hope you'll catch my drift with my comments.
It all comes down to $ at the end of the day or £ in my case and I still dont know what im paying next year. Take this reply in good faith and a big cheers from a fellow gamer!:cheers:

04-30-2003, 11:39 AM
Originally posted by sojourner
It all comes down to $ at the end of the day or £ in my case and I still dont know what im paying next year.
That is the big thing there, and I agree, I would like to know how much we'll be paying too, though I am certain that with one company presiding over it, it won't turn into a fiasco of multiple companies charging you different rates in addition to what you pay for Live. Though, unfortunately, as we've found, the MMORPGs will most likely charge a monthly fee on top of the live account. I guess we just won't know till the time truly comes, but again, if EA's only reason is that they can't charge on their own...then that just shows how greedy they are.

04-30-2003, 12:29 PM
Originally posted by sojourner
I believe 'EA' have got it right not giving in to 'MS', because pure and simple 'MS' have no right to monopolise live gaming.

MS has the right to charge anything they want for LIVE. You have the right not to buy it.

I probably won't renew until Galaxies comes out.

04-30-2003, 12:56 PM
No I dont think they can charge anything they like, purely because gamers like everyone else have a budget. That budget would not allow for overpriced games. live play and hardware. I believe that was the case for the drop in xbox prices, people where not buying xbox at the price MS would have liked. MS will probably load losses onto live gaming and try and rake back funds that they lost on their console. I think they underestimated the hold Sony has on the market. I am in business for myself and I cant charge ANYTHING I like, although the thought would be nice, reason being.....'competition'.
MS has started buying up shares in Telewest(25%) and NTL(20%). I'm always wary of major share buying by big companys because control is the target. And with control comes price fixing.:cheers: