EA: How About Auctioning off the Madden Cover Spot to a Player?

[DoctorFinger]

I don't know whether this story makes me want to cackle maniacally, or put my head down and cry. Peter Moore, president of the EA Sports division, knows how much the illustrious cover spot on his Madden series of games means to NFL players (Madden curse aside). So Moore is floating a radical idea: auctioning off the cover spot to NFL players.

Peter Moore, president of video game-maker EA Sports, said discussions are taking place within his company that could have the front cover of its biggest-selling ``Madden NFL'' football game sold to the highest bidder, with all proceeds going to the United Way, the NFL's charity partner.

NFL players tend to be huge fans of the title, and charity games between players have been organized in the past. But Moore's assertion that players would pay for the privilege of being on the cover is, to say the least, bold.

Sources - Bloomberg; 1UP.

[pomeroy]

It's for charity...I don't see the problem.

[quidmonkey]

Originally Posted by pomeroy

It's for charity...I don't see the problem.

Even if it wasn't, I don't see the problem. I'd love to see some no name player make the cover and become infamous.

[Karak]

Ah Peter Moore. Impressive most impressive.
He is what of my favorite guys.

[Doctor Setebos]

Yes, the money is going to charity, but this is a particularly ominous situation. Now, the Madden cover is essentially for sale. Maybe the money goes to United Way for a couple of years, and then when Madden 2012 is ready, they quietly neglect to mention the charity, but still hold the cover auction. Then, they start doing it for ALL their sports covers. They make billions.

It's EA. Don't think for a second it isn't possible.

Also, I like how this article is tagged "greed". :rolleyes:

[pheriannath]

I've got no problem with this, especially if they're gonna donate the proceeds to charity.

[Loki_09]

Originally Posted by Doctor Setebos

Yes, the money is going to charity, but this is a particularly ominous situation. Now, the Madden cover is essentially for sale. Maybe the money goes to United Way for a couple of years, and then when Madden 2012 is ready, they quietly neglect to mention the charity, but still hold the cover auction. Then, they start doing it for ALL their sports covers. They make billions.

It's EA. Don't think for a second it isn't possible.

Also, I like how this article is tagged "greed". :rolleyes:

I've been thinking for a few seconds that it isn't possible. If it somehow got to the point where the charity wasn't involved anymore, I would bet the majority of the players would not be willing to shell out millions for their face on a game cover. And if a player is stupid enough to shell out the $$ for it (minus the charity), kudos to EA for exploiting over-paid athletes.

[TheFlyingOrc]

Because it's like paying to get injured next season.

[Wraith]

I just wonder if there would ever be a situation where the winning bidder isn't really who EA wants on the cover.

[Orca]

Pacman Jones would buy it, just to spite the commish.

[agentgray]

I want some rich kid wannabe from Malibu to outbid and win.

[Wraith]

Originally Posted by agentgray

I want some rich kid wannabe from Malibu to outbid and win.

SLR Guy would be perfect...

[JayVe]

Honestly, I'm shocked this hasn't been done already.

[itchyeyes]

Originally Posted by Doctor Setebos

Yes, the money is going to charity, but this is a particularly ominous situation. Now, the Madden cover is essentially for sale. Maybe the money goes to United Way for a couple of years, and then when Madden 2012 is ready, they quietly neglect to mention the charity, but still hold the cover auction. Then, they start doing it for ALL their sports covers. They make billions.

I still don't see how that's a problem. I mean, it's a freaking cover. As long as it doesn't effect what's inside the box, I don't see how it hurts anyone. In fact, I find it vastly preferable to in-game advertising, which these games are already soaked through with.

No offense, but it seems like some people just get some violent negative reaction every time they see the words EA and money in the same sentence. Maybe I'm just not seeing this the right way, but I cannot figure out how this would negatively impact anyone involved. And with the proceeds going to charity, I really have to question the judgment of people who are objecting to this.

[digitalErich]

I fully endorse separating obscenely rich people and their money and then giving that money to a good cause. Nice work Mr. Moore.

People complaining about this just see EA and feel compelled to complain, even if it makes no sense.

[Doctor Setebos]

Originally Posted by itchyeyes

I still don't see how that's a problem. I mean, it's a freaking cover. As long as it doesn't effect what's inside the box, I don't see how it hurts anyone. In fact, I find it vastly preferable to in-game advertising, which these games are already soaked through with.

No offense, but it seems like some people just get some violent negative reaction every time they see the words EA and money in the same sentence. Maybe I'm just not seeing this the right way, but I cannot figure out how this would negatively impact anyone involved. And with the proceeds going to charity, I really have to question the judgment of people who are objecting to this.

I reject your reality and substitute my own.

[Telefrog]

1. The money goes to charity. What's the problem?

2. Even if this does degenerate into later EA Sports titles just offering the cover for sale, so what? They're already chock full of ads. Don't all the ads just "make sports games more realistic" according to some of you anyway?

[pomeroy]

Originally Posted by Telefrog

2. Even if this does degenerate into later EA Sports titles just offering the cover for sale, so what? They're already chock full of ads. Don't all the ads just "make sports games more realistic" according to some of you anyway?

I get that they are ads, but some of them really do make the game feel like realistic. In NCAA '09, the Pontiac Game Changing Performance replay is exactly like what goes on when you watch a game. So it doesn't really upset me.

It gets weirder in stuff like NBA games where you buy name brand shoes. More realistic, but it doesn't really add anything either.

[Mot Wakorb]

Here's the thing: Peter Moore on saying this kind of thing, while bold, probably has Supreme Overlord Goodell happy - makes the NFL players look good because it's all going to the United Way, makes EA look good for it, makes the United Way some charity money, I'm failing to see the problem. If Goodell gets involved, you can be damn sure that EA won't make a dime off of the cover athlete because what the Supreme Overlord wants, he gets. It's his world, we're just playing in it.

Good on EA for giving it to charity.

[shunoshi]

Originally Posted by TheFlyingOrc

Because it's like paying to get injured next season.

This is so true, why would you want to pay to get injured for the season. That doesn't sound like a good idea to me...even for charity.