Porsche Not in FM4 Confirmed (Originally Porsche may be in Forza 4. Check this out).

[McLaren]

Both EA and MS can live without eachother but its will be a lose-lose situation. Games have become very expensive to make, especially the 360/PS3/PC ones, thats why they have to port them in those 3 platforms to have more potencial clients, EA abandoning MS will be just shooting themself in the foot because the loose almost the half of their posible customers, also will let activision will completely the war of call of duty vs Battlefield.

So is not as simple like you put it, both will lose millions and millions of dollars for a stupid thing.

I never said it wouldn't be a lose-lose.

However, in terms of who would be better off, it would be EA; they can fall back on the PS3, Wii, & other devices to sale their games, maybe even give incentives to stick it to MS. MS, though, would have to fall back on other games to make up for the loss of EA titles. Boxox already noted that as soon as EA threatened to make Madden a Sony-only title, MS backed down. Now throw in all the gaming series listed just below. MS aren't borderline mentally stupid, they know better than to risk losing out on hugely popular games.

People forget that EA controls arguably, the most popular sports games, as well as Burnout, Need For Speed, Battlefield, Mass Effect, & Medal of Honor. They also publish a lot of other series such as Harry Potter, Crysis, Skate, etc., etc.

That's a lot of games for MS to miss out on. EA will of course hurt themselves by losing the Xbox customers (they may still retain those who own other consoles alongside the Xbox like myself; If I can't buy for Xbox, I'll just buy it on PS3), but MS is going to take a harder hit. For every popular EA game that wouldn't be released on a Xbox, MS would have to hope something else would make up for it. That's incredibly difficult as EA is the most popular multi-platform developer in the gaming world & anyone missing out on an EA multi-platform game is going to regret it.


I'm not going to include Windows releases as part of MS' gaming sales because let's be real; Windows is the most popular of PC gaming & I highly doubt the folks who run Microsoft's Xbox division have any hear-say in what can & can't be developed for the PC, besides the Xbox-Live integration. The PC platform is huge & virtually open to anyone to develop something on.

 

[Whistle Snap]

Sorry but i think you are just assuming things, i dont believe for a momment that MS chose Atari with a so so game over EA with the NFS series, need for speed easily win in both critical acclaim and more important: in sales (which end up in money for MS).

Shift 2 on Xbox is the closest competitor to Forza/ 4 - Microsoft wanted it to be the only sim racer to feature Ferraris out of the box on 360, so they came to an agreement with Atari instead of EA for the use of their sub license, whilst sacrificing Porsche in the process.


This is also the reason why Microsoft didn't allow Ferrari Challenge and SuperCar Challenge to be released on Xbox 360.

 

[zr1chris]

Shift 2 on Xbox is the closest competitor to Forza/ 4 - Microsoft wanted it to be the only sim racer to feature Ferraris out of the box on 360, so they came to an agreement with Atari instead of EA for the use of their sub license, whilst sacrificing Porsche in the process.


This is also the reason why Microsoft didn't allow Ferrari Challenge and SuperCar Challenge to be released on Xbox 360.

Why are you acting like you know exactly what happened when the fact is you don't? The only people that truly know are the people that work for licencing dept at Microsoft, Porsche, Ferrari, Atari and EA. This rest is pure speculation and assumptions.

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

I know the Porsche 918 was exclusive to Shift 2. I actually rented the game just so I could drive the car but that game is a sack of crap. Anyone know if the 918 is exclusive until the end of time or what?

 

[Luminis]

Well, they've also claimed exclusivity on the Pagani Huayra, and Pagani is still featured in Forza...

 

[The_Paladin]

I never said it wouldn't be a lose-lose.

However, in terms of who would be better off, it would be EA; they can fall back on the PS3, Wii, & other devices to sale their games, maybe even give incentives to stick it to MS. MS, though, would have to fall back on other games to make up for the loss of EA titles. Boxox already noted that as soon as EA threatened to make Madden a Sony-only title, MS backed down. Now throw in all the gaming series listed just below. MS aren't borderline mentally stupid, they know better than to risk losing out on hugely popular games.

People forget that EA controls arguably, the most popular sports games, as well as Burnout, Need For Speed, Battlefield, Mass Effect, & Medal of Honor. They also publish a lot of other series such as Harry Potter, Crysis, Skate, etc., etc.

That's a lot of games for MS to miss out on. EA will of course hurt themselves by losing the Xbox customers (they may still retain those who own other consoles alongside the Xbox like myself; If I can't buy for Xbox, I'll just buy it on PS3), but MS is going to take a harder hit. For every popular EA game that wouldn't be released on a Xbox, MS would have to hope something else would make up for it. That's incredibly difficult as EA is the most popular multi-platform developer in the gaming world & anyone missing out on an EA multi-platform game is going to regret it.


I'm not going to include Windows releases as part of MS' gaming sales because let's be real; Windows is the most popular of PC gaming & I highly doubt the folks who run Microsoft's Xbox division have any hear-say in what can & can't be developed for the PC, besides the Xbox-Live integration. The PC platform is huge & virtually open to anyone to develop something on.

I know you see a lose, but what im trying to say is: the blow will be as big for EA as it would be for MS, EA need to sell lots of copies to make their games more profitable, you just dont trow away someone that have the 28% of the market and is clearly dominating both USA and UK market. Plus EA havent seen good results with hardcore games in Wii.
They would drop their sales for atleast a 40% and thats a lot, big damage.

The thing is, none of this 2 companies will ruin years and years of relationship for a stupid thing like a Porsche deal, both have lots to lose if they behave like idiots.

Shift 2 on Xbox is the closest competitor to Forza/ 4 - Microsoft wanted it to be the only sim racer to feature Ferraris out of the box on 360, so they came to an agreement with Atari instead of EA for the use of their sub license, whilst sacrificing Porsche in the process.


This is also the reason why Microsoft didn't allow Ferrari Challenge and SuperCar Challenge to be released on Xbox 360.

Explain me why Need for Speed Hot Pursuit doesnt have Ferrari then, is not a direct competition of Forza series.

Theres a chance of Forza 4 having Porsche still, but not being able to show them, for a glimpse of tha second with have an image for a car that seems to be a Porsche 911 Turbo in the E3 trailer released last week.

I have heard that EA ask to exclude any promotion of Porsche, maybe MS is asking the same thing for Ferrari to those games that are a treat to Forza and if EA didnt agree with that it would explain why theres no Ferrari in Need for Speed and why Ferrari Challenge isnt either.
Also it could be something between Ferrari and EA, that would explain a lot more.

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

Do we really need all these people arguing via novels on a topic they don't have first hand experience with?

I don't think any of you have the credentials to run either EA or Microsoft. Do us all a favor and take your **** measuring contest elsewhere.

Well, they've also claimed exclusivity on the Pagani Huayra, and Pagani is still featured in Forza...

Pagani yes, but not the Huayra. As far as I know that car specifically was exclusive to Shift 2. The 918 was in NFS: Hot Pursuit (which I have never experienced) followed by Shift 2. I'm just hoping the 918 pops up in a Sim. Beautiful car!

 

[McLaren]

I know you see a lose, but what im trying to say is: the blow will be as big for EA as it would be for MS, EA need to sell lots of copies to make their games more profitable, you just dont trow away someone that have the 28% of the market and is clearly dominating both USA and UK market. Plus EA havent seen good results with hardcore games in Wii.
They would drop their sales for atleast a 40% and thats a lot, big damage.

I just don't believe it would. As long as EA is continuing to have sales on other consoles, MS will be taking the harder blow, imo. EA loses a good chunk of sales, MS loses the sale altogether. EA Sports games are already profitable enough; 1 can argue they're hardly ever updated over the previous game besides a new feature & updated rosters/locations.

The thing is, none of this 2 companies will ruin years and years of relationship for a stupid thing like a Porsche deal, both have lots to lose if they behave like idiots.

The 1 thing we agree on.

Do we really need all these people arguing via novels on a topic they don't have first hand experience with?

I don't think any of you have the credentials to run either EA or Microsoft. Do us all a favor and take your **** measuring contest elsewhere.

How about we continue discussing it anyway as long as we're making a decent topic out of it & you do us all a favor by just scrolling over it, keeping your obviously unwanted comments out of it?
You have no more credentials than Paladin or I, so you're in no position to tell us what we can & can't discuss, so hush your hole.

Hmm? How about them apples?

I know the Porsche 918 was exclusive to Shift 2. I actually rented the game just so I could drive the car but that game is a sack of crap. Anyone know if the 918 is exclusive until the end of time or what?

You might want to check your facts....

 

[Mr Fox]

Wow all this fuss over a squashed beetle, tbh i hope porsche is in, just so i dont have to hear people moaning over the loss of one of the ugliest cars ever to grace the market for the next two years.

 

[Da-Bomber]

Again EA didn't use Ferrari due to the backlash from non 360 owners as Ferrari would only be on the 360 version from Need for Speed. The comment "Porsche exclusive to Need for speed" was talking about a single car not the brand, it was the 918 spider. Man this EA and MS hating each other is so misinterpreted. They don't hate each other as Microsoft sold them a Ferrari license just last year. They also had Porsche as dlc in forza 3 late in 2010 when the new deal was signed. There's even a picture proving Porsche is in.

 

[t.o.]

Again EA didn't use Ferrari due to the backlash from non 360 owners as Ferrari would only be on the 360 version from Need for Speed. The comment "Porsche exclusive to Need for speed" was talking about a single car not the brand, it was the 918 spider. Man this EA and MS hating each other is so misinterpreted. They don't hate each other as Microsoft sold them a Ferrari license just last year. They also had Porsche as dlc in forza 3 late in 2010 when the new deal was signed. There's even a picture proving Porsche is in.

Could you clarify this? Porsche was always in FM3. I'm not understanding this "new deal" you're talking about.

 

[McLaren]

Again EA didn't use Ferrari due to the backlash from non 360 owners as Ferrari would only be on the 360 version from Need for Speed. The comment "Porsche exclusive to Need for speed" was talking about a single car not the brand, it was the 918 spider. Man this EA and MS hating each other is so misinterpreted. They don't hate each other as Microsoft sold them a Ferrari license just last year. They also had Porsche as dlc in forza 3 late in 2010 when the new deal was signed. There's even a picture proving Porsche is in.

Nobody said the 2 hated each other, just that it was unlikely MS could bully EA into giving them a Porsche sub-license. EA is more than likely on solid terms with everyone b/c EA helps nearly any device that can play a video game.

I also don't know where you saw that MS sold EA the Ferrari license b/c I can't recall any EA game having a Ferrari in it past the Shift 1 DLC. If there is a game since Shift 1's Ferrari DLC that is published by EA & does have a Ferrari in it, please point it out. Since then, though, Ferrari has mainly only appeared in Eden's TDU2 who chose them over Lamborghini, Gran Turismo, & Forza.

 

[Chad Esposito]

Nobody said the 2 hated each other, just that it was unlikely MS could bully EA into giving them a Porsche sub-license. EA is more than likely on solid terms with everyone b/c EA helps nearly any device that can play a video game.

I also don't know where you saw that MS sold EA the Ferrari license b/c I can't recall any EA game having a Ferrari in it past the Shift 1 DLC. If there is a game since Shift 1's Ferrari DLC that is published by EA & does have a Ferrari in it, please point it out. Since then, though, Ferrari has mainly only appeared in Eden's TDU2 who chose them over Lamborghini, Gran Turismo, & Forza.

And nobody said that MS would bully EA into the license.

I started all this and said: EA will have to give a license to MS, because EA will benefit from that more than from not giving it, because MS is a huge commercial partner for them.

You were the one saying that EA would be ticked and stuff... Thus starting this "hate" and "power" argument.

 

[McLaren]

Let's go back to what you said.

I think that EA somehow HAS to give MS a Porsche sub-license. I believe that MS is one of their major commercial partners, via XBOX and Windows, which are very important platforms for them.

Why does EA have to give MS anything? What makes MS's partnership anymore valued than Sony's? Nothing afaik, so EA won't just give MS a sub-license for Porsche.


As I said before, I don't count Windows games as the same thing as Xbox ones; I could make a game for Windows right now & chances are, MS wouldn't do anything. Making it for the Xbox may be a different story depending on how offensive I could actually make it.

I just can't imaging EA saying: "Screw you MS"...

This is where it looks like you're saying that MS would be just given a sub-license for nothing b/c they're "partners" & EA wouldn't do a thing about it b/c they wouldn't dare tell MS to piss off.

EA hasn't become the gaming giant it is by just giving things away. They will say, "Screw you" if they think they're not getting a fair deal. EA already controls their DLC & option to unlock content early in their games & that alone makes people believe that EA screws over the consumer.

Who'll lose much more?

As I stated in my opinion, MS. EA loses MS sales, but will retain other platforms to sale the games on. MS misses out on a large library of games all together for the Xbox.

If the Porsche thing on Forza 4 depends on EA's approval, we can almost count on it.

Right?

So long as EA gets what it wants in return, possibly.

I started all this and said: EA will have to give a license to MS, because EA will benefit from that more than from not giving it, because MS is a huge commercial partner for them.

What in the hell does EA have to benefit from just giving the Porsche license to MS to use in Forza?

"Yes, let me just give you a brand I retain the rights to for free so that you can use it against me later on in a rival video game series as a selling point".

Tell me where EA benefits from giving MS the right to use Porsche in another video game, all together. Please, enlighten me on how that would be a wise business strategy.

 

[Chad Esposito]

Let's go back to what you said.

Why does EA have to give MS anything? What makes MS's partnership anymore valued than Sony's? Nothing afaik, so EA won't just give MS a sub-license for Porsche.


As I said before, I don't count Windows games as the same thing as Xbox ones; I could make a game for Windows right now & chances are, MS wouldn't do anything. Making it for the Xbox may be a different story depending on how offensive I could actually make it.


This is where it looks like you're saying that MS would be just given a sub-license for nothing b/c they're "partners" & EA wouldn't do a thing about it b/c they wouldn't dare tell MS to piss off.

EA hasn't become the gaming giant it is by just giving things away. They will say, "Screw you" if they think they're not getting a fair deal. EA already controls their DLC & option to unlock content early in their games & that alone makes people believe that EA screws over the consumer.

As I stated in my opinion, MS. EA loses MS sales, but will retain other platforms to sale the games on. MS misses out on a large library of games all together for the Xbox.

So long as EA gets what it wants in return, possibly.

What in the hell does EA have to benefit from just giving the Porsche license to MS to use in Forza?

"Yes, let me just give you a brand I retain the rights to for free so that you can use it against me later on in a rival video game series as a selling point".

Tell me where EA benefits from giving MS the right to use Porsche in another video game, all together. Please, enlighten me on how that would be a wise business strategy.

Ok, McLaren.

1.- You don't count stuff just because you don't count stuff.
2.- The license was going to be for free just because you decided so.
3.- In your world, EA won't benefit from granting a license and getting money for it, while also maintaining a very good and fruitful relationship with one of its biggest commercial partners. As if EA's success was based or depended on Porsches only playable on their game, and as if MS was EA's most voracious competitor before anything else.

Please write on your next post a full essay on "wise business strategies", and dissect every word from my post to support your "points". You will leave me speechless for sure...

 

[McLaren]

See now you want to bring money into it. Before, you said EA would HAVE to give MS the license. That doesn't necessarily imply actually receiving money for it.

Saying "HAVE to" can imply a demand. You HAVE to give me your account. Porsche should HAVE to give the license to MS.

Nowhere does it imply in exchange for money when you use it as you chose to.

But, part of my point still stands; EA doesn't have to give MS anything if they don't want to. They control the contract, they can do what they want.

I'm not going to humor the rest of your post now that you actually want to bring some sense to the discussion.

 

[jabofu]

Isnt the fact that nobody really knows whats going on? We dont know what happens behind closed doors, nore does anybody knows what the contracts really say.

This is just wild guessing and doesnt make any sense. Porsche is in or not, lets wait for the official confirmation.

 

[Mr Latte]

Double Post

 

[Mr Latte]

Ive got an idea, why not just assume that the game has Porsche cars and then if it doesnt just live with it.


How some people on here can presume the inner details of who/what is in ANY licensce agreement is beyond me. If such people have proof of FACTS then just link them. Discussion of such speculation is exactly only speculation and not factual circumstances. Its not worth debating in such detail and to be honest has become a bore without the facts available or evidence to back up a persons claims.

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

How about we continue discussing it anyway as long as we're making a decent topic out of it & you do us all a favor by just scrolling over it, keeping your obviously unwanted comments out of it?
You have no more credentials than Paladin or I, so you're in no position to tell us what we can & can't discuss, so hush your hole.

Hmm? How about them apples?

Seems I am not the only one who wants the useless "EA and Microsoft" argument to stop.

It seems you are neither an employee of either company nor a knowledgable journalist. Since there is no point to what you have to say concerning the licensing agreement and backlash of "IF they did this or that" there is really no reason for you to continue besides showing forum members that you have a better opinion than they do.

Members are coming here for facts on Porsche's role in FM4. Not for your opinions, so stop with the predictions.

You might want to check your facts....

Pagani yes, but not the Huayra. As far as I know that car specifically was exclusive to Shift 2. The 918 was in NFS: Hot Pursuit (which I have never experienced) followed by Shift 2. I'm just hoping the 918 pops up in a Sim. Beautiful car!

You might want to learn to read.

 

[McLaren]

Edit*
Just not worth my time.

 

[Chad Esposito]

See now you want to bring money into it. Before, you said EA would HAVE to give MS the license. That doesn't necessarily imply actually receiving money for it.

Saying "HAVE to" can imply a demand. You HAVE to give me your account. Porsche should HAVE to give the license to MS.

Nowhere does it imply in exchange for money when you use it as you chose to.

But, part of my point still stands; EA doesn't have to give MS anything if they don't want to. They control the contract, they can do what they want.

I'm not going to humor the rest of your post now that you actually want to bring some sense to the discussion.

Ok, you can keep analyzing and interpreting dissected words like "have to", take things out of context, focus on secondary stuff that nobody argued (like EA's absolute liberty to do stuff) if that makes you happy, and ignore the main idea of a discussion.

Yeah, part of your point stands, and it is a really absurd one, because your point is exactly what constitutes a very unwise business decision.

In other words: the money (symbolical or real) that EA will make from licensing Porsche to MS is irrelevant compared to all the benefits of keeping a super strong and profitable relationship with maybe their biggest commercial partner.

As a bonus, in the future EA not only will have the money for the license, but can even ask for some benefit when they really need it since they did them "a favor" previously.

Corporations also play those games, you know.

You insist on grabbing a tree, while letting the forest totally ignored.

P.S. EA's Porsche control in racing games is not their most important asset you know, it is not like Coca Cola's secret formula.
P.P.S. MS is one of their biggest commercial partners, not their competitor as such.
P.P.P.S. EA's business is developing and publishing games, not sub-licensing cars.

 

[Da-Bomber]

Nobody said the 2 hated each other, just that it was unlikely MS could bully EA into giving them a Porsche sub-license. EA is more than likely on solid terms with everyone b/c EA helps nearly any device that can play a video game.

I also don't know where you saw that MS sold EA the Ferrari license b/c I can't recall any EA game having a Ferrari in it past the Shift 1 DLC. If there is a game since Shift 1's Ferrari DLC that is published by EA & does have a Ferrari in it, please point it out. Since then, though, Ferrari has mainly only appeared in Eden's TDU2 who chose them over Lamborghini, Gran Turismo, & Forza.

Sorry I meant a sub license. The reason you don't see more need for speed games with Ferrari is because it would only be on 360 and cause problems for other system owners. This is on the EA forums so take it for what you will.
And the post above when I said new deal I meant the new exlcusive deal with EA and Porsche, yet Forza 3 still had a Porsche released 4 months after this deal. I'm about to be back to show you guys something strange.
http://www.hookedgamers.com/blogs/m...ve_deal_with_porsche_for_nfs_hot_pursuit.html
Why would they have an exclusive deal with the 918 to be exclusive to Hot pursuit after the new deal with Porsche if other games won't have Porsche. This leads me to assume that there's another game with porsche and I assume that's Forza as they even had Porsche dlc 4 months after this.

 

[Chad Esposito]

Sorry I meant a sub license. The reason you don't see more need for speed games with Ferrari is because it would only be on 360 and cause problems for other system owners. This is on the EA forums so take it for what you will.
And the post above when I said new deal I meant the new exlcusive deal with EA and Porsche, yet Forza 3 still had a Porsche released 4 months after this deal. I'm about to be back to show you guys something strange.
http://www.hookedgamers.com/blogs/m...ve_deal_with_porsche_for_nfs_hot_pursuit.html
Why would they have an exclusive deal with the 918 to be exclusive to Hot pursuit after the new deal with Porsche if other games won't have Porsche. This leads me to assume that there's another game with porsche and I assume that's Forza as they even had Porsche dlc 4 months after this.

That could mean that the new license might not be exclusive from Porsche to EA, or has new limitations that as a side effect will benefit other games involved, like Forza.

 

[Chad Esposito]

Really guys, if we want to know the details in a precise manner, any of you can take a look at the license agreement by doing some research at the USPTO. I am not in the country now and can't invest time on that, but that license is public since it is "recorded" there for anybody to see, as far as I know.

I am a musician, and may be wrong, but that stuff was covered in a congress I attended like 15 years ago in Denver about musician rights, and related issues. Hope things haven't changed by now.

 

[Da-Bomber]

That picture is proof enough that Porsche is in. Can anyone disprove that it's not a Porsche in that trailer?

 

[paskowitz]

You know why Porsche is not in FM4? Because they would have addressed the issue by now.

 

[zr1chris]

You know why Porsche is not in FM4? Because they would have addressed the issue by now.

Pointless post. They are not required to address it.

 

[Da-Bomber]

You know why Porsche is not in FM4? Because they would have addressed the issue by now.

No that would mean the opposite as turn 10 is quick to point out what's in or out.

 

[jabofu]

Really guys, if we want to know the details in a precise manner, any of you can take a look at the license agreement by doing some research at the USPTO. I am not in the country now and can't invest time on that, but that license is public since it is "recorded" there for anybody to see, as far as I know.

I am a musician, and may be wrong, but that stuff was covered in a congress I attended like 15 years ago in Denver about musician rights, and related issues. Hope things haven't changed by now.

Thats a good idea. I searched for myself a bit, but could not find anything useful. Maybe if somebody else can find the agreement. It must be open to the public.

This would make things more clear.