.jpg?q=50&fit=crop&w=1140&h=&dpr=1.5)
EA and FIFA have been going at it for a while. FIFA thinks it doesn't need the developer to leverage its name in the video game industry, and EA thinks it no longer needs the football federation's name to sell its yearly game. The result of this is that we might soon see a football game by the developer without FIFA in the name.
Among the continuous one-two punches, was a recent comment made by EA's FIFA branding boss, David Jackson, in an interview with (Thanks, ). "[FIFA] has lots and lots of players [...] we don't see why that would change in the future," he said.
It seems that neither of the parties are worried about the split, as they feel that any loss incurred will be quickly made up for. While EA may not be able to use the FIFA name, it can still strike licensing deals with players and clubs, so you won't have to resort to playing with the likes of Bueno Hernandez from Manchester Together, or whatever. As for FIFA, the f💟ederation has stated its desires of wanting to branch ou🍃t with its naming rights.
"FIFA will adopt a new commercial positioning in gaming and eSports to ensure that it is best placed to make decisions that benefit all football stakeholders," said the statement made inღ October. "FIFA is bullish and excited about the future in gaming and eSports for football, and it is clear that this needs to be a space that is occupied by more than one party controlling all rights."
EA has also gone ahead and filed a trademark for the name 'EA Sports FC', suggesting that this will be th⛦e new name of the game if the two paꦚrties do finally decide on calling it quits.
If there's one thing EA might not have to worry about, it's the company's profits. According to its July–September financial results released earlier this month, almost two-thirds of it's $1.85 billion second quarter revenue came via live service games — that's about $1.1 billion. As long as EA can make the transition with FUT intact, it shouldn't be much of a problem.