989 Sports takes a off year as well

[JoeyN]

On the heels of Microsofts XSN year off announcement.989 is also taking a year off

 

You can read the article at gamespot

[Camp]

[sarcasm]After years of fine game making they deserve some time off[/sarcasm]

[foogledricks]

[sarcasm]After years of fine game making they deserve some time off[/sarcasm]

Back on the PS1, gameday was my only alternative to Madden, and I really liked it actually. Critics loved it too. It was the NFL2K of yesteryear. Before that was Sega's NFL series (a.k.a Joe Montana and then Primetime). The one constant unfortunately was Madden. I tried it almost every years since 1992, and have never liked it as much as the alternatives.

[The Daisy]

I honestly think this is a good thing. More companies making sports games should take the time off. They're just bilking us for cash each year the way it is now.

 

Glen

[Scarface7]

Back on the PS1, gameday was my only alternative to Madden

 

I used to like Gameday back then too, but that was before 989 sports took over development. Anyone remember who did the early Gameday's?

[dogbert]

On the heels of Microsofts XSN year off announcement.989 is also taking a year off

 

PS3 in 2005 then with the next rev of 989 sports games as launch titles?

[Camp]

I used to like Gameday back then too, but that was before 989 sports took over development. Anyone remember who did the early Gameday's?

 

Weren't they called Sony Imagesoft back then?

 

PS3 in 2005 then with the next rev of 989 sports games as launch titles?

 

Good analysis. Though it might be better for the industry if they just went away for good.

[tiac]

Its proves they need time to work stuff out when MLB 2005 promo material says "the only baseball game one PSone"

[HoolieMan]

I agree with the thought it is a good thing. Maybe EA Sports should release every other year as well. I would much rather buy a much improved product every other year than a semi-upgrade every year. In fact, this is pretty much what I have been doing. I only buy one baseball/football/etc game every couple of years. The only sports game I have purchased two consecutive years was Tiger Woods and that was because they were $15 and best buy.

[foogledricks]

would much rather buy a much improved product every other year than a semi-upgrade every year

Yeah, but would the games improve more or less do you think with a two year cycle. I myself think that buying a game every two years, when there is a one-year development cycle, yields better games than if I bought a game every two years with a two year development cycle. More specifically, would NFL2K5 be as good if there were no NFL2K4?

[Camp]

I only buy sports games when there is a significant feature or engine improvement. The year doesn't matter to me.

[The Daisy]

Maybe EA Sports should release every other year as well.

 

I think they just look at the [Carl Sagan voice]Billions and Billions[/Carl Sagan voice] of dollars they make off Madden and NCAA each year and will just keep on pumping out the same titles every year.

 

Glen

[Calvin]

This is good news,mainly because the 989 games have been awful. Hard to believe at one point the Gameday series (which I loved on the PSOne) got so awful on the PS2.

[HoolieMan]

Originally posted by kfredericks@May 6 2004, 11:21 AM

Yeah, but would the games improve more or less do you think with a two year cycle.

I guess you can't say which one would produce better results. I do think that a two year cycle would cut down on gameplay bugs that should never make it to release. On the other hand, they would probably be less aggressive with new features. Personally, I am not so much into new fancy features (like manage your dream baseball team into the nuclear holocaust!) as I am in a solid game of baseball. I guess that is why I am still so stuck on Baseball stars for the NES.