What THQ's Swipe at EA really means about the MMA Video Game Market
by Zak Woods on Mar 1, 2010 12:10 PM EST
in Analysis
Email
Print
THQ executive vice president, Don Gold, talked to Gamespot and fired a verbal broadside at Electronic Arts and their upcoming MMA game:
"EA, which is a very well known company and who makes big sports games, they couldn’t get our license. They were not fans of the UFC, they were not fans of mixed-martial arts–and they decided to change their business plan and became a "me-too" company and create a "me too" fighter. They couldn’t get what they really wanted, so they tried to create a game that would compete with us. We have a lot of respect for them, but there’s nothing in that game that would entice me or anyone I know that’s an MMA fan to buy it. If you want stars, the best organization, the best graphics, you’re going to stick with what you bought last year because this year’s game is even better. And the fact that we didn’t cheat or cut corners in 2010, I think our fans are going to be very happy."
Gold's "Dana Whitesq" comments received a fair amount of play for their incendiary nature but there is more to it than just "our game is better than yours" gusto.
First it is important to understand that video games are essentially built on three pillars: gameplay, brand and software. A game might have great core gameplay but its framerate or graphics might be below average making the game unplayable. On the other hand a game might have a great brand, say the Terminator license, but if it fails to deliver compelling gameplay it might not matter how many T-888's you can kill. Or a game could come from a great franchise and have superb graphics yet have the gameplay equivalent of watching paint dry. It is upon this tripod of elements that game developers and studios constantly attempt to balance.
It is through this prism that we truly understand what Don Gold is saying; that branding is the end all be all to MMA video games. It won't matter if the EA license has better graphics, frame rate or gameplay because they won't have the fighters or the brand to get people to buy it.
It is possible that Gold is one hundred percent correct and that there aren't enough MMA fans in the market who will sacrifice branding for gameplay or graphics to make EA's foray worthwhile. That is, assuming that EA will be able to make technical advances above THQ's product, which Gold also doesn't believe.
WKR can't help but feel troubled about these statements. For the sake of argument let's assume that the EA title is a really good game. Then it stands to reason that it should do well in the market. But if it ends up being a flop then what does that say about the health of the MMA community when not tied to the UFC brand? That is a question that WKR doesn't really want to know the answer to.
19 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Their are many good games that dont do well in terms of buys. Yakuza 3 was a GOTY in Japan, but Sega was very hesitant in releasing it in the US because they felt it would not sell well.
I use this example. If the Arena football League came out with a 10/10 game and lets say Madden 2010 was an 8.5/10 would you by the Arena Football League game because its a better football game? The short answer is No, because people like to play as their favorite teams/players etc….Sports licensing is crucial
Sports licensing is crucial
Very true but I would add that we are talking about a fighting game, which crosses over appeal outside of just the sport.
watchkalibrun.com
It’s not a traditional fighter like Tekken or Street Fighter though. Those appeal to a wide audience. MMA games aren’t those traditional fighters so the crossover won’t be as great.
twitter.com/thisredengine
Obviously you won’t have hadonki like attacks but people buy boxing games because they like fighting games not because they want to play as Pacquiao or Ali.
watchkalibrun.com
Couldn't compete if it wanted to
The gameplay isn’t balanced and flexible enough to compete with low-end fighters, let-alone what 2010 has coming up.
Although I’m of the belief that they should be aiming at this level of playability.
by asa on Mar 1, 2010 1:44 PM EST up reply actions
its about goalposts, which I prob should have added.
I don’t think anyone at EA thinks they will come anywhere near 3.5 million units sold. But if its 500K that’s a pretty nice showing for a game that will have deficiencies in branding.
What I am worried about is that it is a good product but it does >100K units sold. I don’t think it would be a stretch to say that such a showing is proof of the limits of the MMA community versus the UFC community.
watchkalibrun.com
Ahhh, I see.
The game industry isn’t the best at assessing its own weaknesses, so I wouldn’t be surprised if they’ll blame lack of branding and lack of non-UFC support. from the MMA community.
That’s probably why they’re floating this “EA aint HARD2CORE” propaganda, so there’s one disappointing game before they’re the only ones left “SEE?? We were HARDCORE!!”
by asa on Mar 1, 2010 1:56 PM EST up reply actions
What are the odds that, supposing EA’s game really is phenomenal in both graphics and gameplay, Zuffa and EA team up to make Undisputed down the road? I know there’s some sense of loyalty to THQ for making the first Undisputed, but if the EA game really is that much better than THQ’s product I wouldn’t be surprised to see Zuffa try to get a deal with them instead.
Without pain, without sacrifice, we would have nothing.
"Yo everybody meet Mr. Me Too..."
Unless it’s changed, one big problem with EA’s game is it’s not coming out until 4th quarter of 2010. So THQ (out in May) will have two games out in the MMA battle before EA does. So not only will EA have to deal with fans who are extremely used to THQ’s game, but all the other holiday games that will be out. I’m guessing Undisputed 2010 is going to be even better so the likelihood of it being a flop is very small.
If reviews are good enough I’d play EA MMA, but it wouldn’t surprise me if their game doesn’t do as well. UFC has the majority of fans in the world, some people (including Dana White at times) refer to the sport of MMA as UFC, lol. Plus the economy limits people spending habits, and some fans will simple say “I don’t need two MMA games”
by Doors Hate MMA Fighters on Mar 1, 2010 1:32 PM EST reply actions
if it comes out in the 4th quarter then it benefits EA
You dont realize how fickle, and how short of an attention span people have, within days a new game is always resold, especially sports games.
thats why some games get delayed, so they don’t have to compete, and even though we are in a recession people are still spending just as much on games.
by TheBiggertheyare... on Mar 1, 2010 2:57 PM EST up reply actions
he's got some mixed messages in his quote
So first EA didn’t care about the UFC, but now they’re disappointed they couldn’t get the deal?
Besides the logical errors, that’s like Dana saying HBO doesn’t like MMA because they wouldn’t give Dana control. I’m thinking EA wanted none of the control freak vibe that Dana brings to the table for an unproven fad-sport that’s a technological nightmare to design.
EA MMA will have better graphics than EA MMA though, and the create a fighter download thing which will own. All the popular ufc fighters will be created and downloadable within a week.
Big bang then then a fizzle?
EA makes good sports games that fans seem to like. What I do wonder though is how much year on year improvement EA MMA will have compared to THQ’s UFC games. EA has a habit in a number of their franchises of making small tweaks each year and charging people full price for the priviledge of the updated competitors roster. I hope that’s not the case here.
I think what might work against EA is the lack of cohesion in their game. The UFC games have the fact that you play in the UFC world and career mode puts you right in the center of it. If all you have is a random collection of fighters who’s rights you could get and maybe Strikeforce as a promotion (not the most organised one in real life either) then the gameplay beyond one off fights isn’t as compelling.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
