Yearly Installments of Games - The Search for More Money

Anyone who knows me that I am desperately awaiting July 13th because it is the release date of NCAA Football 2011. And before you get to wondering about whether or not I will reviewing that game. I will be. I will be playing it so much that I will find every flaw in that game, including the flaws that they have undoubtedly not fixed this year, because they haven't fixed them in the last 7 years. But I digress. The reason I bring this up is because I have a bone to pick with the producers of these games. No, not just EA, but 2K games, Konami, and whoever made the Backyard sports franchise. My problem is that these games come out with yearly installments that don't include enough new stuff.

EA Sports Collections - The only real difference is that Soccer apparently became more popular than NASCAR - photos courtesy of Amazon.com

From an earnings perspective it makes sense to come out with these games every year. Fans of the sport and fans of the games will buy them every year. But why? These games are never that different from their predecessors. They may throw in some new play mode that most people play once or twice and then never again, like Mascot games, or tug of war in the NCAA Football games past. But, on the whole, these new versions give the player little more than roster updates and the occasional new playbook option.

I for one would love it if a bunch of deacons beat up Sparty in real life - Photo courtesy of ign.com

So there is really very little incentive to get the new versions other than having up to date stats. Isn't that something you could fix with a simple patch update, or some downloadable content? Are the new names and numbers really worth $60?

They must be worth it because games like Madden are some of the top selling game franchises ever. And there is no way Americans are so dumb that they pay $60 for the same thing year after year? Right?....Right? Ok, so we are that dumb and we all know it. But is it really fair of EA and other to take advantage of that stupidity like that? Ok, yeah, its fair of them to do that because we shouldn't be that stupid.

'Nuff said - Photo Courtesy of everythinghealth.net

What I want is for EA, the most predominant sports video game producer, to take up the cause of making one good sports video game per sport. And then for the next two years they just release patches to correct rosters and stats. Then, while we are enjoying their good game for 2-3 years with the patches, they spend that time fixing problems with the previous game and coming up with legitimate improvements in gameplay, so that when they release the next version, calling it Sports Game 2 instead of Sports Game 2012, it is no longer a good game but a great game.

They can even charge us for the patches if they are just concerned with making money off of the roster changes. It wouldn't cost as much as a whole new game. But then again, it wouldn't cost them as much to make the patch as it does to make a whole new game. And then when they come out with the new game, it actually feels worthwhile...because it is worthwhile.

This idea can be carried over to other games too, like Halo. Instead of coming out with a new game, they could come out with new map packs and...oh...you say they already do that? Ok, well how about in a game like Dragon Age Origins, they could come out with new missions and short storylines for you to play...oh they do that too? Wow, you mean successful games release extra content and updates to the game instead of new games, and they are still profitable. Gosh, its almost like its a good idea or something. Well I know they don't do it for Pokemon, maybe they could come out with an MMO version of Pokemon where you create a character who walks around the world catching pokemon and battling other trainers, and when they wanted to add new pokemon, they'd release a patch. But that's a topic for another post.

So will I be buying the next yearly installment? Yes, I will, I just wish I didn't have to.