Petition to bring back Porsche to FM 4

[boxox]

I'm not saying it's going to stop them, I'm saying it's not going to be a big plus in their book. Nobody's helping EA by picturing them as the bad giys, whether it's true or not.

Wow, that's pretty unbelievably cynical. Don't you feel at all played by Dan here? Do you see it as just doing your bit for Forza?

"These innuendos I'm spreading certainly don't help EA! They should do something about that, like cave in to do what I want!"

That's .... amazing.

Let's see, what changed from FM3 to FM4? The Shift franchise. Did it have Ferrari at first? Yes, on the Xbox. Who gave the license ot EA? MS. Did Shift sell well enough for MS to see Shift 2 as any more of a competitor to Forza than any previous NFS? I doubt that.

Last Ian mentioned they've done something like 8.5 million all up in Shift / 2 all formats so far. So - pretty competitive.

I see little reason for MS to pull the Ferrari sub-license on the Xbox there. For EA, on the other hand, it would make sense. They can't get the Ferrari license for all of their platforms from MS anyways, so cancelling each other is probably going to hurt MS mor than EA. The only major event that seemingly took place inbetween Shift 1 and Shift 2 was, in retrospect, T10 approaching EA in order to obtain a Porsche sub-license. And looky there, no more Ferrari in Shift afterwards.

And looky, we have someone - who was involved with that DLC - as well as with licensing Ferrari from MS for another project years earlier - saying that MS are being utterly hypocritical in this instance and that indeed the appearance of Ferrari in NFS probably was the game changer, because it gave EA an idea of what MS thought should be reasonable costs and restrictions for use of a licensed car brand.

Which are .. apparently acceptable conditions for MS to issue, but not receive.

The way I see it, there are decent reasons to believe that EA is at fault, at least moreso than MS. Of course, every party involved is to blame (including Porsche), but given what's happened so far, I think it's more reasonable to assume that EA started this whole mess. Also, looking at the NFL license, it's not like it's something they haven't done before.

Yes, there is no difference between MS and the FSF. They are totally reasonable about all IP they happen to own and pass it around willy-nilly to anyone who should happen to ask. Exclusivity? They've never heard the word.

Are you serious?

Every big company is (or at least, should be) used to negative exposure. That's not the point. The point is, it's not going to help their cause as has been suggested previously.

Well, maybe by optaining the license from whoever is in charge of it (and most likely isn't Microsoft)? I don't know who's in charge of it, but I highly, highly doubt that it's Microsoft. Gran Turismo wouldn't be having Ferrari then. So, if Microsoft can't grant it to EA, are they to blame for not being able to "share alike"?

Did you read Dan's message? They don't ... uh ... own the PS3 rights. It's right there!

I was on about the licensing deal. At the time that T10/MS started negotiating with EA, EA most likely still did care about Shift and would've had a reeason to try and get a leg up on MS and Forza by having Porsche exclusively to themselves.

Actually from what I recall EA internally view "Need for Speed" in the same way they view "EA Sports" - it's a container for whatever game and developer is in it at the time. I'm pretty sure they don't care what you thought of Shift.

FWIW the other thing Ian has consistently maintained is that the publicly available figures for Forza sales are actually distorted by pack-in sales and that they outsold it convincingly with Shift. But why start listening now?

 

[Spagetti69]

They have the NBA license too don't they and NHL.

 

[boxox]

FWIW here's what the last official EA person had to say about the absence of Ferrari from Shift 2 / HP:

The master list of reasons that are wrong about Ferrari's absence in the franchise:

1: Money
2: Modification or upgrading of the vehicle(s)
3: Physical damage to the vehicle mechanical components, exterior or interior
4: Losing to Hondas or otherwise "inferior" vehicles (lolwut?)
5: Police interaction or otherwise illicit activity

Ferrari's absence in Need for Speed is beyond control of the brand or it's development staff. Nothing further. Just that.

Step 6, "Mobilise army of easily lead dumbasses to harass license holder" must have been edited out ... sometime.

 

[zr1chris]

They have the NBA license too don't they and NHL.

I dont think its exclusive seeing as how 2K sports also has NHL and NBA games for both the PS3 and 360. However 2K Sports does have the exclusive MLB licence. They are the only company that has the ability to produce MLB games for all systems the same way EA has exclusive rights to NFL games.

 

[Luminis]

Wow, that's pretty unbelievably cynical. Don't you feel at all played by Dan here? Do you see it as just doing your bit for Forza?

"These innuendos I'm spreading certainly don't help EA! They should do something about that, like cave in to do what I want!"

That's .... amazing.

I don't get what you're on about. Some people seem to think that shifting attention onto this whole mess will be free advertising for EA. It's not going to help them sell anything if they're having bad exposure, for what ever reason. I can't believe that that concept is so hard to grasp.

Last Ian mentioned they've done something like 8.5 million all up in Shift / 2 all formats so far. So - pretty competitive.

So, do you think Microsoft will care how much Shift sells on the PS3 or PC where it doesn't compete with Forza?

Shift 2 sold, according to vgchartz, around 220,000 copies on the Xbox360. Shift 1 managed somewhere around 1,8 million. Combined, that's less than what Forza 2 managed. Yeah, really competitive.

And looky, we have someone - who was involved with that DLC - as well as with licensing Ferrari from MS for another project years earlier - saying that MS are being utterly hypocritical in this instance and that indeed the appearance of Ferrari in NFS probably was the game changer, because it gave EA an idea of what MS thought should be reasonable costs and restrictions for use of a licensed car brand.

Which are .. apparently acceptable conditions for MS to issue, but not receive.

So, uh, a game that's only going to release on a single console should reasonably have to play by the same rules as a game that's going to release on the PC, Xbox360 and the PS3? I find that a bit strange, to be honest. But, anyways, isn't it strange how Ian fails to mention how EA also caused MS to jump through hoops prior to this? Maybe he just forgot to mention that...

Yes, there is no difference between MS and the FSF. They are totally reasonable about all IP they happen to own and pass it around willy-nilly to anyone who should happen to ask. Exclusivity? They've never heard the word.

Are you serious?

And that makes them the worse offender than EA? Yeah, right...

Did you read Dan's message? They don't ... uh ... own the PS3 rights. It's right there!

And yet, people are expecting that T10 somehow grants the license for EA to use as they please - on a multiplatform title. Strange, isn't it?

Actually from what I recall EA internally view "Need for Speed" in the same way they view "EA Sports" - it's a container for whatever game and developer is in it at the time. I'm pretty sure they don't care what you thought of Shift.

The funny thing is, I enjoyed Shift 2

FWIW the other thing Ian has consistently maintained is that the publicly available figures for Forza sales are actually distorted by pack-in sales and that they outsold it convincingly with Shift. But why start listening now?

Shift 2 didn't even break a quarter of a million copies sold on the Xbox. Even if we're talking about a 50%(!) inaccuracy here, FM3 would still be at roughly ten times the amount of copies sold. That's not even in the same ballpark, is it?

 

[Jamezinho]

I can, though, look at other cases where EA did the exact same thing they're being accused of here and draw parallels. But, yeah, how likely is it they'd do the same thing more than once, right?

We already know EA likes to incorporate strategies like this. They've done so with Fifa, their NFL games and the PGA, too. I'm sorry, but looking at that, I hardly need to wait for proof that EA continues with that kind of strategy. I also think that the theory that Ms is at fault because of whatever reason seems a bit farfetched, looking at how things went with EA so far.

But yeah, maybe they've changed their ways all of a sudden? Who knows, I'll beg for pardon if my suspicion turns out to be wrong.

I tend to agree with this. EA certainly have previous when it comes to using exclusive licensing to withhold or block content from rival games. EA killed Madden's rival from 2K Sports at a stroke, and have stopped PES from gaining access to the English Premier League and the German Bundesliga.

If this was an isolated incident from EA then I don't think there would have been such outcry. But EA seem to being doing their best to out-evil Activision at the moment with their online pass and the steam issue. Now this with Porsche.

It just leaves gamers saying "not again, EA".

They have the NBA license too don't they and NHL.

The NBA and NHL licences are not exclusive (thankfully) as they had more sense than to get involved with that. Just as well because the NBA 2K series is a favourite of mine and makes EA's efforts look rather sorry in comparison.

 

[Luminis]

If this was an isolated incident from EA then I don't think there would have been such outcry. But EA seem to being doing their best to out-evil Activision at the moment with their online pass and the steam issue. Now this with Porsche.

It just leaves gamers saying "not again, EA".

Exactly. If it was a first for EA, I think there would be more people wondering about what's going on. The way it is, though, it just seems like EA's usual way to keep their products 'competitive'.

 

[boxox]

I don't get what you're on about. Some people seem to think that shifting attention onto this whole mess will be free advertising for EA. It's not going to help them sell anything if they're having bad exposure, for what ever reason. I can't believe that that concept is so hard to grasp.

It is free advertising! This is what amazes me about the whole mess - best depicted in the hilarious jalopnik blog entry - where it is those monsters at EA and Porsche, keeping the car brand away from a certain videogame. I mean - let's pretend for a moment that this is some uninterested party writing about the car industry - why not write about the coup for EA? Or that Porsche have wisely allied themselves with the biggest selling racing game franchise of all time? Or insist that all fans of Porsche must now be into EA games featuring Porsche and follow their favourite manufacturer?

But no, it's about the ... videogame first? A certain videogame with which they have a commercial relationship. So the angle is, Porsche doesn't care about people who play videogames. Who play on 360, specifically, and play Forza, specifically.

Hmmm. That's some quality automotative journamalism, that is.

Here is a tale for you - a tale of woe, for those who think boycotts have any particular influence on sales:

So, do you think Microsoft will care how much Shift sells on the PS3 or PC where it doesn't compete with Forza?

Absolutely MS is concerned about what happens on PS3 and has since the first XBox done quite a number of things to subsume the Windows platform for gaming in favour of trying to own the couch gaming space.

Shift 2 sold, according to vgchartz, around 220,000 copies on the Xbox360. Shift 1 managed somewhere around 1,8 million. Combined, that's less than what Forza 2 managed. Yeah, really competitive.

Go to neogaf.

Type "vgchartz" in a post.

Observe the effect their reputation for accuracy has upon your post.

So, uh, a game that's only going to release on a single console should reasonably have to play by the same rules as a game that's going to release on the PC, Xbox360 and the PS3? I find that a bit strange, to be honest. But, anyways, isn't it strange how Ian fails to mention how EA also caused MS to jump through hoops prior to this? Maybe he just forgot to mention that...

Has any of that actually been confirmed by anyone who works in any capacity for T10? I googled around but it kind of seems more like one of those urban myths that just get repeated around the internet because someone heard something once that sounded plausible.

I mean for example,

one could not actually replicate this on one of the Ferrari cars for Shift because one of those hoops seemed to be that no visual customisation was to be allowed whatsoever on the Ferraris.

And that makes them the worse offender than EA? Yeah, right...

It's hard to know where to start with this (have you ever read even something like slashdot in your life?) but for one such example we need look no further than, say, this un for MS's approach to throwing their weight around on the 360.

To say nothing of the (faintly ridiculous) aspect of the conversation where we are discussing a ... 360 exclusive racing game published by MS on MS's platform only. I mean. At what point does it occur to a person that maybe MS are, hmm, kind of dicks about things they own given half a chance?

And yet, people are expecting that T10 somehow grants the license for EA to use as they please - on a multiplatform title. Strange, isn't it?

I seriously have no idea what this even means in relation to what was said. Just saying.

The funny thing is, I enjoyed Shift 2

Shift 2 didn't even break a quarter of a million copies sold on the Xbox. Even if we're talking about a 50%(!) inaccuracy here, FM3 would still be at roughly ten times the amount of copies sold. That's not even in the same ballpark, is it?

Again, vgchartz has a well earned reputation.

 

[Luminis]

It is free advertising! This is what amazes me about the whole mess - best depicted in the hilarious jalopnik blog entry - where it is those monsters at EA and Porsche, keeping the car brand away from a certain videogame. I mean - let's pretend for a moment that this is some uninterested party writing about the car industry - why not write about the coup for EA? Or that Porsche have wisely allied themselves with the biggest selling racing game franchise of all time? Or insist that all fans of Porsche must now be into EA games featuring Porsche and follow their favourite manufacturer?

But no, it's about the ... videogame first? A certain videogame with which they have a commercial relationship. So the angle is, Porsche doesn't care about people who play videogames. Who play on 360, specifically, and play Forza, specifically.

Hmmm. That's some quality automotative journamalism, that is.

I don't get your point. We all know that you could spin this to make it look like you want it to - the matter of the fact is that free advertising is supposed to make your company look good. Does this make EA look good to you?

So far, I haven't read one article or whatever that would make EA look good in this whole deal. So, how exactly, is it free advertisement?

Here is a tale for you - a tale of woe, for those who think boycotts have any particular influence on sales:

So, because some guys on Modern Warfare are doing their boycott wrong, starting a petition about Forza and Porsche is doomed from the get go? I don't have to understand that kind of logic, do I?

Absolutely MS is concerned about what happens on PS3 and has since the first XBox done quite a number of things to subsume the Windows platform for gaming in favour of trying to own the couch gaming space.

Competing with the PS3 as a system is one thing, as that concerns the Xbox as a whole. However, the sales of Shift 2 on the PS3 are hardly relevant when we're comparing it to Forza 3, no? But, anyways, PS3, Xbox360 and Pc combined, Shift 2 managed roughly half a million sales. A tenth of what FM3 managed. So, the point is basically moot, I guess.

Go to neogaf.

Type "vgchartz" in a post.

Observe the effect their reputation for accuracy has upon your post.

So, posting no source is better than posting what I can gather from vgchartz? Going by a source which neogaf considers bad is worse than just typing some random numbers? Okay...

Has any of that actually been confirmed by anyone who works in any capacity for T10? I googled around but it kind of seems more like one of those urban myths that just get repeated around the internet because someone heard something once that sounded plausible.

I mean for example,

one could not actually replicate this on one of the Ferrari cars for Shift because one of those hoops seemed to be that no visual customisation was to be allowed whatsoever on the Ferraris.

In case you haven't read your on post properly:

The master list of reasons that are wrong about Ferrari's absence in the franchise:

So, yeah, what hoops? Ian didn't seem very keen aboutt sharing anything in particular, either.

It's hard to know where to start with this (have you ever read even something like slashdot in your life?) but for one such example we need look no further than, say, this un for MS's approach to throwing their weight around on the 360.

And MS not picking up previously PSN exclusives is related to messing around with EA's sublicense in what way again?

To say nothing of the (faintly ridiculous) aspect of the conversation where we are discussing a ... 360 exclusive racing game published by MS on MS's platform only. I mean. At what point does it occur to a person that maybe MS are, hmm, kind of dicks about things they own given half a chance?

So, let me just get this straight.

EA competes with Konami and buys exclusive licenses to the Premier League and the Bundesliga to get a leg up on them.
EA competes with 2K sports and buys the exclusive license to the NFL to get a leg up on them.
EA competes with other racing games on the Xbox and all of a sudden, Forza doesn't get access to the Porsche sub-license anymore.

So, I'm supposed to turn two blind eyes to not see the pattern just because " MS are, hmm, kind of dicks about things they own given half a chance"? And you'd still have to wonder why everything worked out fine until the Shift sub-franchise came along...

I seriously have no idea what this even means in relation to what was said. Just saying.

This means that I kinda don't get how MS and EA could "share and share alike" when the games that are concerned are released under completely different situations - for example, MS not being able to gran the Ferrari license for EA's PS3 games.

Again, vgchartz has a well earned reputation.

Okay, from here on out, I shall not provide any source on sales numbers anymore. Unless, of course, you have something more reliable than that.

 

[Jamezinho]

I guess we're unlikely to get EA's side of the story here. Did they outright refuse the Porsche sub-licence or was it because of money?

If EA upped their price for the sub-licence in order to get back at MS over Ferrari, then why did MS not just accept that what goes around comes around and pay whatever was needed to keep Porsche in their flagship title?

What chance do you guys think there is for a deal to be done post-release so that we can have Porsche DLC?

 

[Luminis]

What chance do you guys think there is for a deal to be done post-release so that we can have Porsche DLC?

This probably depends solely on Porsche. From what I've read, the exclusive deal with EA is supposed to expire in 2012 - so, if Porsche isn't willing to renew it, MS could acquire a license (not an exclsuive one, just a normal one) from Porsche to include their cars as DLC for FM4.

But if the contract wwith EA is renewed - well, I'd say that the chances to see Porsche in a non-EA game are basically zero.

 

[Jamezinho]

Hopefully Porsche are intelligent enough not to enter into another exclusive agreement with EA. Get the Porsche brand out into Forza, GT5, NFS and any other game that wants it. Surely multiple licensing agreements are worth more money and are far, far better for brand awareness and promotion.

 

[Northstar]

Wouldn't the license fall under VAG now that Porsche is fully owned by them?

I'm sure they just kept the agreement to avoid a buyout or lawsuit.

 

[Luminis]

The VAG still is in posession of "only" 49.9% of Porsche. The whole company is now lead by VW, though, so it's hard to tell who'd be in charge of the licensing.

 

[Jamezinho]

For what it's worth, this was posted on Forzamotorsport.net forums today:

I saw this on Gamefaqs:

"I heard from a semi-credible friend that the Porsche-EA contract is due to expire in December, and it doesn't appear that Porsche wants to re-sign it.
Basically, it looks likely that a Porsche pack is in our future."

"The reason is EA are ass____s and there contract is up in December I don't think Porsche wants to keep the contract with them any longer so there for we might be getting a Porsche car pack from Forza later this year or 1st quarter 2012"

If anyone knows the status of the license, that would verify the above. Really, I don't know why any car manufacturer would not want their cars to be in as many games as possible.

 

[Akira AC]

For what it's worth, this was posted on Forzamotorsport.net forums today:

I heard, from the guy who heard from the other guy who happens to listen...

Pretty reliable.

 

[Jamezinho]

I heard, from the guy who heard from the other guy who happens to listen...

Pretty reliable.

Hence "for what it's worth".

 

[Vaxxtx]

So, because some guys on Modern Warfare are doing their boycott wrong, starting a petition about Forza and Porsche is doomed from the get go? I don't have to understand that kind of logic, do I?

You are going to believe what you want no matter what. Blind faith without knowing all the facts. EA is bad....we get it.

And yes, a boycott IS doomed from the get go. It is about as effective as an online petition.

Please point me to a source were a game company has been ruined, or forced into doing something by a boycott or online petition.

 

[Northstar]

Boycotts work if you get enough people to do it.

The problem is that it's a very small percentage of sales go to "hardcore" players, it's an even smaller number that are even on sites like this which means about 20,000 people even know about the boycott and of those maybe 1,000 might go through with it. Really don't think EA will even notice 1,000 people not buying their games.

Petitions are about as pointless as people complaining SPEED shows to much NASCAR(which they do), it doesn't work just complaining about it, you have to actually work to change things or nothing happens.

 

[Jamezinho]

And yes, a boycott IS doomed from the get go. It is about as effective as an online petition.

Please point me to a source were a game company has been ruined, or forced into doing something by a boycott or online petition.

Of course, unless a boycott is done en-masse then it's not going to have any noticeable impact on EA. They are such a huge company with games across all genres. Their target market is the casual gamer who most likely doesn't read forums and couldn't care less about the Porsche licence.

For me it's not about trying to ruin EA nor forcing them into a decision for the reasons above. On a personal level EA has done so much to damage the games I love with it's use of exclusive licensing that I've decided enough is enough. They will get no more money from me.

It's as simple as that.

 

[Da-Bomber]

I hate how Badned told us the RSR was in autovista. This makes me hate EA even more.

 

[Vaxxtx]

You are going to believe what you want no matter what. Blind faith without knowing all the facts. EA is bad....we get it.

And yes, a boycott IS doomed from the get go. It is about as effective as an online petition.

Please point me to a source were a game company has been ruined, or forced into doing something by a boycott or online petition.

I still would like someone post a source for this. Seriously, I cant find one.

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

I still would like someone post a source for this. Seriously, I cant find one.

Who cares. If members want to petition and boycott let them do it. It is not affecting you at all.

 

[Vaxxtx]

Who cares. If members want to petition and boycott let them do it. It is not affecting you at all.

Who cares. If I say a boycott is pointless, let me say it. It is not affecting you at all.

 

[cuco33]

I am hoping the rumors of Porsche exclusivity will be over by December and open up anyone/everyone to the brand. T10 can easily impliment a Porsche pack, or 2, or 3 and I'll buy ALL OF THEM. PD could even add Porsche via DLC, paid or not and I'll have ALL OF THEM. But that's all based on rumors and assumptions.

I'm still bitter over Porsche being gone from Forza. And I agree, hearing the RSR was going to be an AutoVista car... it would have been my first attempt at the new mode

 

[mykem]

Presenting a video that will make the pain, oh, so much more painful

[YOUTUBEHD]L06EXRXIO_I?hd=1[/YOUTUBEHD]

 

[Bogie 19th]

Who cares. If I say a boycott is pointless, let me say it. It is not affecting you at all.

Cool, we got it..you think it's pointless. You have stated your opinion, now you can move along.