Re: Why do Gamers Still Accept Yearly Sports Sequels?
 

Babsy, personally I think releasing a new [sports] game every year that has new modes, teams, players, jerseys, various free online modes, leagues etc, for 60 dollars 1 time, is a lot better than releasing a stream of DLC for 50-60 dollars for expansion, multiple times.

Look at WoW, for example. It was released 4 [or so, I don't know - I don't play it] years ago. It sold for [let's say] 65 dollars [on average, new].

It has 3 expansions which have new areas, and raise the level cap. This is all they offer. No new modes, no new graphics, no new engine. Just a higher level cap, and a new map. Each expansion [let's say] sells for about 60 dollars [new].

So you've now spent over 200 dollars on the game alone, that initially cost you 60 dollars. On top of that you have the monthly fee [being that it's an RPG]. Now, this game [in respects] is a very dated game. It's almost 5 years old. In video game terms, that's a long time.

When thinking of it that way, I am 100% okay with paying 60 dollars every year for a brand new NHL game, while getting free roster updates, new physics engine, 60+ new teams, new modes, and free online experience with my friends [mostly because of PS3, I suppose].

Re: Why do Gamers Still Accept Yearly Sports Sequels?
 

Neither one of those are true, btw.

The graphics have been updated. New modes have been added (arena, battle grounds, etc), and other new things like new classes and quests.

Re: Why do Gamers Still Accept Yearly Sports Sequels?
 

I stopped playing Madden after they removed Create a Play.

Re: Why do Gamers Still Accept Yearly Sports Sequels?
 

One big thing to remember, as a difference between sports games and your average game.. is that sports games represent reality, while other games with large updates represent a fantasy world that has no demand to "keep up" with reality.

I'm sure there are contracting issues when it comes to having a sports game that just updates to a new year too. There's been a ton of lawsuits filed for sports games as-is, I think buying the rights to a season that dosn't exist yet would just add to the problem.

I am pretty much in Typhoid's boat of being fine with yearly releases. Most sports games are more then the "same engine with new faces and voice overs" year to year... You should rent a few years worth of a sports game and get used to them to see the difference.

Now for college sports I'm ALL for it, since the games all seem to be so rushed, and there is no worthwhile updates to the rosters and announcers to make a new year mean anything. The games seem to suck more in general with college because they don't sell as well, so no company is willing to take the time to get it right. I cannot wait for 2k to get college hoops back.

Re: Why do Gamers Still Accept Yearly Sports Sequels?
 

Developer != team. It's quite common to have multiple teams per studio.