EA Sports looking into possible subscription program future

by Xav de Matos { Jul 30th 2008 at 11:00AM }

During yesterday's EA conference call, EA Sports boss Peter Moore briefly mentioned concepts the studio is considering for the future of their various titles. Moore stated they were looking at instituting "subscription programs" to the EA Sports library in order to "take advantage" of customer loyalty. Of course this could translate to a number of ideas so before we get bent out of shape we should consider it doesn't have to be a bad thing.

Consider a subscription based model that would drop by-the-minute roster updates for your favorite sports games over multiple seasons rather than having to plunk down another full retail chunk of change. While we can't guess what might, if anything at all does, come of this idea we can at least credit EA for being one of the publishers that keeps trying to innovate. Whether some like it or not.

Tags: ea-sports, fifa, fight-night, madden, nba-live, nhl, peter-moore

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

Nick @ Jul 30th 2008 11:18AM

I like it

Obese Stickman @ Jul 30th 2008 11:19AM

Oh this will go over well.
Just like the BF:BC gun unlocking. Expect to have the internets tubes overflowing with hate and Petitions :(

m0rb1d @ Jul 30th 2008 11:20AM

EA still sucks!

Cal @ Jul 30th 2008 11:20AM

Don't we already, in effect, pay a £30/year subscription to get the almost latest transfers and a new feature or two for our game of choice anyway?

Michael Paul @ Jul 30th 2008 11:32AM

Actually, no, WE don't. I picked up Madden 2006 for $10 a few months back but that was the first version I've bought in years.

I guess EA noticed that some of us weren't playing along as expected, and is looking for help from the more gullible...

MC Double Def DP @ Jul 30th 2008 11:24AM

roster updates for new seasons instead of making customers pay another $60? won't happen!!! EA can try a subscription plan but it will fail like the paying for guns.

mirage @ Jul 30th 2008 12:28PM

Actually, what they should do is change the cycle to every 2-3 years and actually fix the games via patches and do roster updates in the interim. I think gamers would much prefer this model to getting a perpetually broken version released each year that never gets patched.

Perno @ Jul 30th 2008 12:44PM

@mirage I completely agree. I only buy Madden every 3-4 years now anyways since I maily play Franchise mode and don't know any players names after a few seasons anyways. Just not enough innovation to get me to pay $60 for a couple new features and "The Best Madden Ever!!!". I'd be way more inclined to spend about $20 on yearly downloaded updates, especially for next year when the Chicago Bears are Super Bowl Champions here in Tampa. End dream sequence.

Timur Tabi @ Jul 30th 2008 11:29AM

I've never played any sports games, so I don't know what they're like, but wouldn't it be easier just to make the player/team updates available via normal DLC? If you have Madden 2009, and next year you want to play with the 2010 roster, how hard could it be to charge 800-1600 points to download the new roster into the game? If you want better graphics or new gameplay, then buy Madden 2010.

If Harmonix can make their DLC from Rock Band 1 compatible with RB2, then I think EA can do the same with their sports games. No need to invent a new pricing model, which is just going to make things more complicated and expensive.

monkeywithnoeyes @ Jul 30th 2008 11:32AM

you know what this will more likely be... another additional charge to use EA dedicated servers. And a tenner says it would only be enforced on console owners because..well..pc gamers know better.

This is what happens when a company charges for what others offer for free and makes a profit..all those offering it for free get green eyed with envy. EA's a clever business.. it buys up all the developers leading to most big name games coming in the next few years to be published by then. They can pretty much do what they want with regards to charges in that. I'd be surprised if in 10yrs time EA didnt have their own console out.

Tess @ Jul 30th 2008 11:34AM

Hmmmm... Xav de Matos.... that name looks familiar.....
(nice to see it up there again)

Sean @ Jul 30th 2008 1:05PM

So they are allowing those foreigners to post again!?!

But are they getting paid?

Merehorseplay @ Jul 30th 2008 11:38AM

Vote with your wallet.

horngreen @ Jul 30th 2008 12:10PM

I don't play many sports games but if I did and could still play online without a roster update then it's not such a big deal. However if it says "NEED UPDATE TO PLAY ONLINE" and I have to drop money just to see different names on the jerseys then they can suck it.
As an older fuck I'm not so sure the younger people know just how much they are nickle and dimed to death in this tech world. ISP, cable, phone,cell phone, text, ringtones, LIVE, DLC, sattelite radio, mag subscriptions, domain name and so on. Toss in a mortgage and a car payment/gasoline along with gas and electric and setting any money back becomes hopeless. Oh and let's not forget the "little" things like FOOD!

blueGrassTubb @ Jul 30th 2008 12:26PM

"While we can't guess what might, if anything at all does, come of this idea we can at least credit EA for being one of the publishers that keeps trying to innovate."

You're kidding, right? EA Sports is about the one gaming division that I can think of that has stifled innovation, especially in football. They don't try an innovate, they try and take the space over by buying out exclusive licensing deals and squashing any competition which just might force them to innovate.

EA Sports is the exact opposite of innovation.

juju187 @ Jul 30th 2008 12:32PM

As long as the Dumb ass madden nation keep spending $60 on the same game there is no reason to Release one madden and just update it every year which is totally possible and at half the price.
Why must you fill the intrawebz with lies EA.
Cash over innovation

thisguyrighthere @ Jul 30th 2008 12:35PM

Subscription fees mean I will stop playing the game or continue to play the game without whatever it is the subscription is giving me access to. If that access included playing online on top of paying my Live subscription then I wouldn't bother buying the game.

If more companies followed suit and I had to pay multiple subscription fees plus the Live bill I just wont play anything at all.

I moved from PC gaming to console because the constant need to buy new hardware every 4 months was ridiculous. Hit me with more fees on the console and I'll just sell all my gear and pick up a new bike or a couple of new firearms and spend more time outside.

mirage @ Jul 30th 2008 3:51PM

I hadn't looked at it like that. Knowing EA they aren't doing this with the consumers in mind so it probably would be like trying to chare a fee to be in online leagues and things like that. I would absolutely not pay to play in a bug filled online experience. If this is their plan than it will absolutely fail!

FalconRS @ Jul 30th 2008 1:36PM

Having purchased a new, full-retail copy of NBA Live incarnation going all the way back to the "Lakers vs. Celtics" PC title from the late-80's (followed by Genesis, PSX, Xbox, and now Xbox360 versions), I can honestly say this concept really intrigues me.

pkilla @ Jul 30th 2008 2:56PM

Your first mistake was buying Live the last 2 yrs. 2K8 - 2K7 >>>>>>>>>>> Live 08, 07

pkilla @ Jul 30th 2008 2:58PM

Your first mistake was buying Live the last 2 yrs. 2K8 - 2K7 >>>>>>>>>>> Live 08, 07

FalconRS @ Jul 30th 2008 7:49PM

I disagree. I've given the 2k series a chance. The controls are clunky (vs. the evolutionary controls the Live series employs...no sweeping changes, just tweaks) and the players are controlled far too much by poor animations. The past couple of years of Live have been a disappointment from that standpoint...while some of their animations are smooth and well sorted out, I've been caught a couple of times in sequences that have no outcome but and out-of-bounds whistle. Still much better than 2k, and I'll take it any day over Mutombo lighting me up on fade-away 20 footers, which has always been my biggest gripe with 2k.

mirage @ Jul 30th 2008 4:03PM

"While we can't guess what might, if anything at all does, come of this idea we can at least credit EA for being one of the publishers that keeps trying to innovate."

I have a problem with this sentence and it may just be a case of Internet sarcasm not being understood. Before you can innovate you need to ensure that you are delivering the best quality product possible. The problem with EA is they are trying to innovate broken products. Once they release a game they give it minimal attention because unless it is absolutely broken there is no benefit to patching a million-selling game. Certain bugs like the ones hampering the current iteration of NCAA are so egregious that they have to fix it.

We should not give EA any credit for innovating until they start releasing quality, bug-free products on a regular basis. THAT would be innovation for them!

h0mi @ Jul 30th 2008 4:58PM

Will this mean no more shutdowns of EA servers?

Could this mean NBA Live 06 et al can return?

MastrCake @ Jul 30th 2008 5:16PM

God, every time I see that picture, I think Mr. Moore is singing an Opera... about Xbox!!!

Or maybe he is so happy he is getting ready to cry...

JerkfacedFed @ Jul 30th 2008 5:57PM

sounds like a good idea for games that dont change from year to year. if the price is right it will work nicely.

Charmed @ Jul 30th 2008 9:34PM

EA can still kiss my ass for monopolizing the NFL license. That's the only way they could get the NFL 2k series out of the way because it was a much better game. Exclusive licenses are the way to go when you don't wanna spend money on design. Tiger Woods still sucks because they won't fix the gallery as just one example.

Sometimes, you get stuck buying an EA game but I really do hate this company. It's rare that I ever root for a company to fail because competition is good for the whole industry but EA hurts the industry because they don't believe in competition.

Ryan @ Jul 30th 2008 9:49PM

The NFL wanted a single licenser and EA offered more money. It's business. Too bad. But don't blame EA for that. Just be happy that Madden has been getting better every year on next gen consoles.

And why would you want 2k to come back anyway? Their sports franchises are going down he toilet. NHL, MLB, and now even the NBA franchise are all declining in quality.

APF2K8 was a huge disappointment, and any other developer would take at least 2-3 iterations to make a good football game.

Verodio @ Jul 30th 2008 9:37PM

Charmed @ Jul 30th 2008 9:38PM

sorry, double post and I wasn't sure which name I had this under

Charmed @ Jul 30th 2008 10:14PM

EA hasn't made a good madden since the the days of Super Nintendo and Sega Genesis. It doesn't get better each year. Notice the amount of comments from people who buy a new one every 3-4 years? That's why EA wants to do subscriptions. You're a blinded fanboi to think that it's for any other reason.