Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Take Two in Talks with Major League Baseball

Posted by Zonk on from the hit-back-with-a-bat dept.

After EA's ESPN announcement yesterday, it hardly comes as a surprise that GamesIndustry.biz is reporting a possible deal between Take Two Interactive and Major League Baseball. The deal, first reported in the Wall Street Journal, appears to be for exclusivity rights similar to EA's arrangements. While the move wouldn't hurt EA's baseball franchise, it would squeeze out other competitors who have used the MLB license in the past.

21 of 129 comments (clear)

  1. This would hurt EA by crunk · · Score: 2, Interesting
    the move wouldn't hurt EA's baseball franchise

    Why not? EA won't be able to use real players in their baseball games. That will definately hurt them.

    --
    It's the battle of the minds, and everyone's unarmed.
    1. Re:This would hurt EA by mgs1000 · · Score: 2, Informative
      They would need an exclusive deal with the MLB Player's Association to keep EA from using real player names.

      A deal with MLB would just prevent them from using the Team names. Anybody remember Tecmo Baseball on the NES?

  2. Yet another EA article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Did EA crap in CmdrTaco's Wheaties or something?

    1. Re:Yet another EA article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      man that's like 10x worse than someone pissing in your cornflakes.

  3. Reactions... by bje2 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I don't know what the numbers are like, but i'm guessing this isn't as big of a deal as the NFL contract...something tells me that there are a whole lot more copies of Madden and ESPN2kX football being purchased then that are of MVP Baseball and it's cometitors...

    one thing i don't get though...the article says that
    "A deal between MLB and Take Two wouldn't change EA's plans in the area, though, as EA doesn't use the MLB branding on its baseball title, MVP Baseball - but smaller rivals in the sector would certainly be squeezed out, such as Sony's MLB range, the latest iteration of which is due out in March."
    ...but EA Sports titles would certainly be hurt, right? sure, they don't use the name MLB 2004, (like NBA Live and NHL 2004 titles) but they do use all of the players, and teams, and stadiums, etc...i would have to assume that if the exclusive deal went through, they would lose the right to all that content? right?...

    Somewhat related to this is the fact that just announced today MLB awarded exclusive rights to fantasy games to MLB's own MLB Advanced Media that controls MLB.com...presumably this means that other baseball fantasy game companies (ESPN, Sandbox, CBSSportsline, etc) would have to buy licenses from MLBAM in order to run fantasy games...
    --

    "Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true." - Homer Simpson
    1. Re:Reactions... by bucket74 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Depending on the details of the sports collective bargaining agreement - licensing of league properties (team names/logos, stadia) may be separate from that of the players names.

      I know this has been the case with MLB in other areas. Ever gotten those free baseball cards in a cereal box or something? You know, the ones with the team logos airbrushed off the players' caps. That was because the company producing the cards had permission from the players union, but not MLB.

    2. Re:Reactions... by rlwhite · · Score: 2, Informative

      Generally in MLB, the players union controls licensing of player names, including for video games. Since Barry Bonds pulled out of the union to have control of his own licensing, video games have replaced him with fictional versions. Other players (like Kerry Lightenberg, formerly of the Braves) have long been replaced with fictional versions in video games because they were banned from the union. (Lightenberg and others crossed the picket line during the '94 strike, thus the ban.)

  4. It doesn't use MLB branding? by spotter · · Score: 4, Interesting

    the article claims that, but EA's web page for the title, clearly has the MLB logo

    http://www.easports.com/games/mvp2004/home.jsp

  5. Just like NHL hockey ! by AtariAmarok · · Score: 2, Funny
    "soon EA will own the sports gaming industry...everyone else will be left with make-believe teams"

    Just like with NHL hockey!

    --
    Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
  6. In Other News... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Competitive gaming industries race to the NHL to work out a deal with them.

    Oh, wait, there needs to be a hockey season first.

  7. Player Modeling by anonicon · · Score: 3, Funny

    That's fine and fancy, but the burning question for me is whether TakeTwo will put out a game with "Steroids-On" and "Steroids-Off" options.

    Chuck

    1. Re:Player Modeling by Lifereaper0 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Where would they get the data for steriods-off?

  8. This hurts consumers by teiresias · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I think this endrun to sign exclusive deals is detrimental to the sports electronic gaming industry (admittely not my favorite but I enjoy the occasional game of EA curling as much as the next person). Exclusive deals lead to single lines of games. Exclusive deals curtail the inventive process and remove competition. It's not that this hurts EA, it's how this hurts consumers.

    Perhaps every sports game that comes out of this will be great but my money is on the fact that they will become stagnant and boring.

    --
    -Teiresias
  9. Whaaa! Mommy! He cheated! by numbski · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This is starting to sound like what I put up with anytime I go online to play football.

    No one likes losing, so a large group of people start cheating in order to win.

    So the people who don't like the cheaters wind up having to learn to cheat themselves in order to keep the cheaters honest.

    Outcome? No one wins. No one can get an honest game.

    This is degenerating into a rights-grab, and only one company per sport will have rights.

    I can hear the whiny-children in my head:

    EA: Wha! He beat me. I don't like losing. I know! I'll cheat!

    VC: Hey! I won fair and square!

    EA: *raspberry* I'm taking my ball and going home!

    VC: That's not your ball!

    EA: It is now!

    --

    Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).

  10. Don't get upset, just usual /. double-standard by stratjakt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While the move wouldn't hurt EA's baseball franchise ...

    A lot of you are wondering why it wouldn't hurt EA any more than anyone else. Of course, it would, but remember - we're supposed to hate EA.

    If we admitted that this could "hurt" EA, in the same way EA's deals could hurt Take Two (et al), we're admitting that competition in the video game market is alive and well, and that exclusive rights are par for the course in the industry.

    Activision has exclusive rights to make Spiderman games, but you don't see any articles about that, do you?

    So basically, just think of EA as Microsoft, and Take Two as Apple.

    DRM in Media Player is an affront to our rights online, and threatens our very freedom. DRM in iTunes is a brilliant business strategy from a company that "gets it". Or, MSFT pursuing action againt mikerowesoft.com (even though they HAVE to defend trademarks) was evil, but Apple suing a kid for passing on a rumor about the mini mac, well that's different because, umm, iPods have neato little scroll wheel things.

    I hope this clears things up. Slashdot is best read and understood when peering through your navel, with your head shoved far up your ass.

    --
    I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
  11. /me doesn't care by mr.+methane · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ... since I've found that the presence of a high-recognition brand-name on any game almost guarantees that it's (A) boring, and (B) overpriced by about $20.

  12. Mod parent up +5: Totally Gets It! by goldspider · · Score: 2

    Thank you for the unique perspective. You hit the nail right on the head.

    --
    "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
  13. Remember the good ol' days? by Mofo196 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Remmber back when videogames didn't NEED a pro licence to be good? Those of us may recall games such as Double Dribble, Bases Loaded, Blades of Steel (otherwise known as boxing on ice) and the glorious Nintendo Ice Hockey?

    All of these games were great and didn't have one legit team.

  14. Great! by doombob · · Score: 3, Funny

    We can only hope for more high-quality games like Outlaw Golf 2!

    Favorite Quote in Outloaw Golf 2 Promo:

    The shameless bunch from the Outlaw series returns to the repressed world of golf with their outrageously twisted antics.

    I love twisted antics!

  15. It's probably just me, but... by jd · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I think that sports and player stats should be Public Domain. Given that premise, I don't believe it should be possible for anyone to have "exclusive rights" to any simulator based said sports and player stats.


    I don't think anyone would consider it reasonable for Boeing to give Microsoft "exclusive rights" to simulate their aircraft. That would be stupid. Motor racing teams and racing tracks haven't set up "exclusive deals" on who can do what.


    I might not be able to call a simulator "official", but if I wanted to write a game based on the Silverstone track and the typical behaviour of the various Formula 1 cars, I don't think anyone would seriously complain. And that's for a sport with a turnover ten times that of major league baseball.


    Lock-ins are no good for the sport, as people are LESS likely to buy over-priced, over-hyped products in the long run, which means there's going to be a decay in interest over time.


    If games manufacurers are so lacking in confidence that they can compete, they need to spend more money on development and less on "special deals" with organizers.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  16. in related fantasy baseball news... by bbkingadrock · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If anyone is interested in rotisserie baseball, check this article out. Turns out there are some legal snafus about licensing. I play for free on Yahoo, and last year Barry Bonds was called "Outfielder" or "SF Outfielder" or something because of a licensing issue. It looks like some places will potentially lose their rights to use the players names.

    http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/sportsbusiness/news /story?id=1970454