Slashdot Mirror
Sports Titles Named Misleadingly?
According to an accusatory column in the sports section of the New York Post, naming the 2003-season sports videogame titles as 'Sports Game Title 2004' is dishonest. The writer suggests that "..when it comes to selling video games.. Major League Baseball and all big-league sports eagerly sell their licenses and logos to manufacturers who can't or won't tell the simplest and most significant of truths.." Have you been confused by this naming method, or do you think it's fair and understandable?
"YOU think it would make news if the salespersons at Bud Selig's car dealerships were trained to deceive customers into thinking that they'd purchased 2003 models when they actually bought 2002 models?"
Isn't it Ironic.
Besides, this is not exactly something people are unfamiliar with. I graduated from high school in the Class of '97, which means I began my senior year in the fall of 1996 and completed my senior year in the spring of 1997. This is exactly the same way sports games are numbered. Sports seasons are more formally called the "2002-2003 season," but if you want confusing, look at a couple of those next to each other. ("Do I want 2001-2002, 2002-2003, or 2003-2004?") Besides, "NHL 2k3" is much easier to say that "NHL 2k2 to 2k3." If you have to pick one year, at least for hockey, it makes sense to pick the second year, which is where the majority of games fall. Ditto for basketball, I think (but I'm not sure).
The guy who wrote this article is basically an idiot. You know what? I have never gotten the wrong sports game. Nor have I even come close. I looked at the box, saw one number, and then thought "Oh, it must be like graduation dates." I then confirmed my guess by looking at the price tag. A game that's a year old is not going to sell for $50. If it is, you're shopping at the wrong store. The EA Sports games sell for about $20 6 months after they come out. So it's very simple, even if you don't understand the reasoning at all: the most expensive product is the newest. Anyone who's spent more than $15 in his entire life should already be familiar with this rule, since it applies to everything.
If a gamer's buying a sports title in, say, 2003, and he's confused about which to buy, here's what's going to happen. He goes in to a store and sees:
Madden 2003 - 19.95
Madden 2004 - 49.94
Which is he going to think is the more recent title?
How hard is this to figure out? Please, show me one case where a gamer has been seriously swindled by this.
In other news, EA Sports recently reset their baseball franchise back a year to correct this.
To sum up: Yes, it's silly that sports games are usually named a year ahead of where they should. Is it really that big of a deal? No. Go find something more important to bitch about.
"Moderate drinking can help prevent amputated limbs" -- Abigail Zuger, NYTimes, 12/31/02
First, if they change it, then what do they call the first title with the new naming scheme? The old one was "Madden 2k3", and the new one will be... "Madden 2k3"? That won't work. Will they call it "Madden 2k3 2.0"? I don' think that will work either. They can't call it "Madden", because most people would probably assume "Madden 2k3" (the older title) would be newer than the one named "Madden".
But more to the point, if one company changes things and names it correctly (so the game that comes out in 2k3 is called 2k3, not 2k4) then they are at a LOSS compared to the competition. If Joe Schmoe goes to buy a football game for his PS2/XBox/GCN and sees the following three things, which one is he least likely to buy:
I say he will be least likely to buy Madden (all else being equal to him) because it seems "older" than the other titles. So unless EVERYONE in the industry switches at once, it seems like it's not in the best intreset of any of the publishers to correct the naming problem. I think this is just something that we'll all just learn to accept like the naming of cars model years.
PS: Sorry to pick on Madden, it's just the name of the first football game to come to my mind, so I used it as an example. I haven't played ANY football games in years (not my thing) so don't go fanboy on me and take it as some kind of judgement.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
Acclaim released All-Star Baseball 2004 on just 28 February of this year. Unless Reggie Jackson was "Mr. January" and not "Mr. October", the World Series will be played this fall, in 2003. 989 Studios (PS2) has a current title: MLB 2004. 3Do's "High Heat 2004" is due out soon. Midway publishes MLB 20-04 for the GBA.
Contrarily, EA Sports' current offering is "MVP Baseball 2003".
MORTAR COMBAT!
Even so, when I was a kid asking my parents to buy video games for me I made certain to give them the exact title of the game. I knew the difference between "Street Fighter," "Final Fight," "Streets of Rage," and "Street Fighter 2 Turbo," would be lost on my mother, so I made certain to point out which one was the right one. I think this would be the case with most kids who are far more interested in gaming than their parents. Even if the kid wasn't as thoughtful as I was (=D) the parent would more than likely ask if confused over the naming of a title.
How's my typing? Call 1-800-eta-shut