Does EA honestly think consumers are stupid?

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

http://www.joystiq.com/2006/09/20/fi...ea-gyps-again/

This kind of stuff is really getting old. Last gen systems can hold all kinds of information, but new systems cannot? Then we get fed the 'it took so much work to rebuild the engine that we didn't have time to input the stats for all the leagues'. I haven't bought an EA game in 3 years now and they're doing nothing to change my mine in the next generation. Unbelievable.

[Ben E Lou]

I don't have to read the link, or your comments. The answer is this:

No, they don't think consumers are stupid. They KNOW consumers are stupid.

[Ben E Lou]

OK....Now I'll go and read what you're talking about..

[AgustusM]

If I had known how much the 360 was going to lag behind current gen, I would have never bought it. for the life of me I don't understand why MS isn't pounding EA on this, everyone of the EA games is better on the older systems - you would think that is the opposite of the strategy MS is looking for.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by AgustusM

If I had known how much the 360 was going to lag behind current gen, I would have never bought it. for the life of me I don't understand why MS isn't pounding EA on this, everyone of the EA games is better on the older systems - you would think that is the opposite of the strategy MS is looking for.

Yeah, I'm considering the purchase of a PS3. But if I only get neuteured game features in the sports games, I may consider just holding off for a year. It's the same reason I haven't felt the need to break down and get a 360 in the meanwhile. The early games for the next-gen systems have been very disappointing and I think I'm honestly being generous with that statement.

I can keep myself busy with Guitar Hero I & II for another year or two.

[Super Ugly]

I agree. Madden 07 will soon be traded in for something else, and I can't see myself buying another EA game until they get it together.

Next-gen games have been fairly disappointing so far, with Oblivion being the major exception. It's made me hopeful for the future.

[TroyF]

Traded in Madden and a couple of older titles today, for NHL2K7.

I think it was as much about geting the 360 version of Madden out of my face as anything else.

[dawgfan]

Thinking off the top of my head, there's a few possibilities that come to mind:

1. It's not uncommon at the start of a new console cycle for the games to be somewhat limited - the first generation of games on a new console are being developed prior to the systems being completely finalized, and they are essentially blazing a new technology trail. The longer a console is on the market, the better the games get - developers have more accrued time to figure out how to maximize performance on that specific hardware, but the flip side is the first wave of games on a new system usually don't take full advantage of the system.

2. EA could be hedging their bets somewhat; they might not have wanted to expend maximum resources for this round of sports titles given lack of competition and uncertainty over how well the 360 would perform in the marketplace. These teams would've started production well before the 360 was launched and well before it was known how expensive the PS3 would be when it comes out - they might not have highly confident of how well the 360 would sell.

3. EA could also be playing games with Microsoft in favor of Sony. EA was a huge part of the success of the PS2, and they were more reluctant partners on the Xbox, not agreeing to be a part of Xbox Live until very late in the original Xbox's life cycle. It will be interesting to see how hobbled (if at all) the first-gen EA Sports titles are for the PS3 - if the PS3 versions have full capabilities matching the concurrent 360 versions, this will be evidence that EA may be playing favorites.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Thinking off the top of my head, there's a few possibilities that come to mind:

1. It's not uncommon at the start of a new console cycle for the games to be somewhat limited - the first generation of games on a new console are being developed prior to the systems being completely finalized, and they are essentially blazing a new technology trail. The longer a console is on the market, the better the games get - developers have more accrued time to figure out how to maximize performance on that specific hardware, but the flip side is the first wave of games on a new system usually don't take full advantage of the system.

2. EA could be hedging their bets somewhat; they might not have wanted to expend maximum resources for this round of sports titles given lack of competition and uncertainty over how well the 360 would perform in the marketplace. These teams would've started production well before the 360 was launched and well before it was known how expensive the PS3 would be when it comes out - they might not have highly confident of how well the 360 would sell.

3. EA could also be playing games with Microsoft in favor of Sony. EA was a huge part of the success of the PS2, and they were more reluctant partners on the Xbox, not agreeing to be a part of Xbox Live until very late in the original Xbox's life cycle. It will be interesting to see how hobbled (if at all) the first-gen EA Sports titles are for the PS3 - if the PS3 versions have full capabilities matching the concurrent 360 versions, this will be evidence that EA may be playing favorites.

Oh goodness. Where to start on this one........

1. It doesn't take blazing technology to add in the player and team names and team logo in a database that already exists in the game. There's plenty of room on the disk. No reason they couldn't do that in a few days at the most. The real reason is that they have to add back in the extra rosters next year so people will purchase the V2.0 next year.

2. Resources are fully available. Once again, it doesn't take a genius to add rosters to a game. This game is severly crippled from a roster standpoint. Another perfectly good example is this year's Tiger Woods game. They state on the site that they have all new courses on the game, yet roughly half those courses have already appeared in previous iterations of Tiger Woods golf. That's not 'new' at all.

3. No need for Xbox 360 fanboyisms here. You can rest assured that the PS3 EA games will be just as crippled as the 360 games. There's no conspiracy here other than EA milking the gamer for all they're worth with an inferior product.

[stevew]

Yeah, go ahead and rip into the guy that programs on Xbox360s for a living...makes you look smart...Dawgfan undboubtedly knows what he's talking about.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Oh goodness. Where to start on this one........

1. It doesn't take blazing technology to add in the player and team names and team logo in a database that already exists in the game. There's plenty of room on the disk. No reason they couldn't do that in a few days at the most. The real reason is that they have to add back in the extra rosters next year so people will purchase the V2.0 next year.

I certainly wouldn't put it past EA to intentionally hobble this round of games to make the next versions look more appealing.

However, I'm also unsure to what extent the league functionality in this game had relied on using a hard drive - obviously, for the Xbox this wasn't an issue since the hard drive was built-in. With the 360, it is an issue - there is some memory built in to the controller, but nowhere close to what is available on the hard drive, but of course the hard drive is an option.

Now, I would surprised if they needed much memory for their league functionality, so this could very well not be the problem, but without knowing more specifics about it I wouldn't rule it out.

2. Resources are fully available. Once again, it doesn't take a genius to add rosters to a game. This game is severly crippled from a roster standpoint. Another perfectly good example is this year's Tiger Woods game. They state on the site that they have all new courses on the game, yet roughly half those courses have already appeared in previous iterations of Tiger Woods golf. That's not 'new' at all.

Sounds like marketing speak to me - the new courses are "all new".

3. No need for Xbox 360 fanboyisms here. You can rest assured that the PS3 EA games will be just as crippled as the 360 games. There's no conspiracy here other than EA milking the gamer for all they're worth with an inferior product.

Well, we'll see won't we? EA and Sony made a lot of money off of each other with their relationship on the PS2, and EA was famously slow to fully embrace the Xbox, so it's not out of the question to think that EA might be playing games here.

Another factor to consider is that many publishers held off on creating first-gen games on the 360 because they wanted to time their development to match the PS3 launch, thereby consolidating development costs by sharing as much as work as possible for both platforms. EA may have decided that expending a lot of effort on the first SKU of 360 games wasn't worth it, and to save their full efforts for the following versions that would be sold on all 3 new consoles.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by stevew

Yeah, go ahead and rip into the guy that programs on Xbox360s for a living...makes you look smart...Dawgfan undboubtedly knows what he's talking about.

You are seriously on point with your analysis in many threads today, bravo!

[GoldenEagle]

I have the 360 but the only EA game I have is NCAA 07, which is not too bad. The other two games I have I really enjoy but they are not made by EA.

[Kodos]

I have NCAA, Call of Duty 2, and College Hoops. Out of the 3, Call of Duty is probably the best.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by stevew

Dawgfan undboubtedly knows what he's talking about.

He could have all the programming knowledge about 360's that's fit to print. It still doesn't excuse the obvious point that there's no way on God's green earth that EA shouldn't be able to put all those rosters on the game.

I would also assume that Dawgfan looks at EA games and realizes that they are the model of how not to make a good and innovative game. If he does that, then he's probably making a good game.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Another factor to consider is that many publishers held off on creating first-gen games on the 360 because they wanted to time their development to match the PS3 launch, thereby consolidating development costs by sharing as much as work as possible for both platforms. EA may have decided that expending a lot of effort on the first SKU of 360 games wasn't worth it, and to save their full efforts for the following versions that would be sold on all 3 new consoles.

If I'm buying what you're selling here, how does that explain away the debacle that was the Madden release for the Xbox 360 this year? With all those resources together working on this year's release, why were there so many problems? From a gameplay standpoint, there were several elements that actually regressed from the previous iteration.

[Eaglesfan27]

Originally Posted by TroyF

Traded in Madden and a couple of older titles today, for NHL2K7.

I think it was as much about geting the 360 version of Madden out of my face as anything else.

I bought NHL2k7 straight up, but if the patch only fixes fatigue, I'm going to trade Madden towards NBA 2k7 next week.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

With all those resources together working on this year's release, why were there so many problems?

SD already answered that question:

They KNOW consumers are stupid.

Geez, read the friggin thread next time

[Noble_Platypus]

I think its BS that EA has sole rights to use official names ad logos. Even if there is a better game out there they cant make it look official. EA knows consumers are stupid and that they have several major things in their favor, so there is no need for them to put out quality games from the start. Who are they competing against?

[Pumpy Tudors]

Originally Posted by Eaglesfan27

...if the patch only fixes fatigue, I'm going to trade Madden towards NBA 2k7 next week.

This will probably be my strategy. I've held on to Madden for much longer than I intended to, but NBA 2K7 is enough to make me get rid of it. I'm thisclose to saying that I'll just go without Madden this year. It almost doesn't even seem worth it to go for the PC version now, although I can be convinced otherwise.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

SD already answered that question. Geez, read the friggin thread next time

I will give EA credit for one thing (and only one thing). Their marketing department is an absolute machine. The commercials, tournaments, internet marketing, etc. is top-notch. Obviously, they 'work' with the magazines and internet sites as well as many of you know. If the actual programmers and testers at EA were at a level anywhere near the marketing department, we'd have a juggernaut on our hands.

[Noble_Platypus]

Maybe that is part of the answer. If they are selling a ton of games and everyone hears about them al of the time through marketing and tournaments why would they bother to make the game better? Its not hurting sales to just throw out what they have been.

[Anthony]

just cuz dawgfan works as a programmer doesn't mean he's privy to the ins and outs of the industry. for programming discussions, then yes, we should defer to him. but this is about a company running its business. how many of you work in a company and know exactly everything that goes on and the reason for it all? i worked for a major record label not too long ago and damned if we knew what was going outside our bubble.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Pumpy Tudors

This will probably be my strategy. I've held on to Madden for much longer than I intended to, but NBA 2K7 is enough to make me get rid of it. I'm thisclose to saying that I'll just go without Madden this year. It almost doesn't even seem worth it to go for the PC version now, although I can be convinced otherwise.

i saw a commercial for EA's NBA game and that game looked amazing. it was actual gameplay footage too, looked great.

[Kodos]

NBA2K7 will be far superior to Live.

[stevew]

The last several versions of Live I bought were very meh-tastic. I would welcome a good version.

[Eaglesfan27]

Originally Posted by Kodos

NBA2K7 will be far superior to Live.

Without a doubt.

Pumpy, at least the patch for Madden is supposed to be out by this weekend, so we can make a final informed decision on whether to trade in Madden.

[wade moore]

Anyone know the release date for College Hoops 2k7? I just can't get into the NBA games...

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Noble_Platypus

Maybe that is part of the answer. If they are selling a ton of games and everyone hears about them al of the time through marketing and tournaments why would they bother to make the game better? Its not hurting sales to just throw out what they have been.

You can be sure that it's the ONLY reason that they are selling Madden games right now. The name and marketing alone will sell 3 million copies.

Take the sales figures that most people trumpet as showing the franchise's success. They sell 5 million copies by the end of the product's life. Nearly half of that occurs in the first couple of weeks of sales and is where they make the money. The amusing part is that trade-ins on games in regards to Madden is VERY high. Many of those people simply buy the game, play it for a few weeks and then trade it in for $25-30 after that. EA is happy because they got full-price for the game. The gamer basically ends up paying for a long rental. If the resale market wasn't available, I think more people would think a bit harder before purchasing an EA game. As it is, people can still get some money for the game if it turns out to be nothing new.

[Eaglesfan27]

Originally Posted by wade moore

Anyone know the release date for College Hoops 2k7? I just can't get into the NBA games...

At this time, the release date for the 360, PS2, and Xbox versions is November 20th. PS3 version is TBA, likely in 07.

Not much word yet on what new features will be in the game. I imagine since it is College and they can't use player's names, they won't have signature styles for the real players. However, I'm hoping they might implement some of it randomly to give players more individualistic feel.

[dawgfan]

Just to clarify, I'm an animator, not a programmer. I don't know all the ins and outs of how the code works or how the hardware works. However, having worked in the games industry since 1998 I have a pretty good grasp of the basics of how these things work.

Seeing as how I was in competition with EA for 6 years, I'm not exactly an EA apologist by nature. And I have no doubt that EA is going the maximize the massive expenditures they made for their exclusive licenses by putting forth what they consider is the bare minimum effort in terms of resources (i.e. staffing).

I'm also fairly sure that this statement probably holds a great deal of truth in this matter:

Another factor to consider is that many publishers held off on creating first-gen games on the 360 because they wanted to time their development to match the PS3 launch, thereby consolidating development costs by sharing as much as work as possible for both platforms. EA may have decided that expending a lot of effort on the first SKU of 360 games wasn't worth it, and to save their full efforts for the following versions that would be sold on all 3 new consoles.

All that said, as someone who has worked through two new console development cycles now, there are definite patterns in how development on the first gen of titles on those new platforms unfolds. Relative familiarity with the hardware is at its lowest point for these first gen games, and there is a confluence of over-amped expectations on the part of developers in terms of what the new hardware can handle vs. the steep learning curve of figuring out how to maximize what's available in the system.

As I said, I'm not sure exactly how EA's programmers handle data storage for their leagues. And, I'm not sure of how big their save files get for their career or season modes, nor am I sure exactly how much memory storage there is available on the base model 360. Without knowing any of this, I can't say for sure whether lack of a hard drive as standard equipment on the 360 affected the number of leagues they decided to ship with on the latest FIFA. It's possible that this is a factor though, and unless Mizzou has some first hand knowledge of the points I've just made here, he's making wild assumptions.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

As I said, I'm not sure exactly how EA's programmers handle data storage for their leagues. And, I'm not sure of how big their save files get for their career or season modes, nor am I sure exactly how much memory storage there is available on the base model 360. Without knowing any of this, I can't say for sure whether lack of a hard drive as standard equipment on the 360 affected the number of leagues they decided to ship with on the latest FIFA. It's possible that this is a factor though, and unless Mizzou has some first hand knowledge of the points I've just made here, he's making wild assumptions.

So they can include all that information on every other console except the one that is the most cutting edge at this point. OK, that seems about right. (end sarcasm)

They'll have all those leagues in the game in 1-2 years without a single change in the hardware specs. Guaranteed.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

So they can include all that information on every other console except the one that is the most cutting edge at this point. OK, that seems about right. (end sarcasm)

They'll have all those leagues in the game in 1-2 years without a single change in the hardware specs. Guaranteed.

excellent post.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

So they can include all that information on every other console except the one that is the most cutting edge at this point. OK, that seems about right. (end sarcasm)

OK, I did a little research on FIFA - here's EA's claim (according to the IGN preview):

"EA has made a point to build from the ground up with its next-gen sports titles, as we've seen with Madden, NBA Live and the upcoming NHL 07"

"Off the pitch, only 157 teams are included, compared to more than 500 on current-generation platforms. Only the top leagues and top divisions made the cut, and EA says it was just too difficult to bring everyone over to the 360. This did allow for a more dynamic and deep player rating system. Players have the traditional attributes, yes, but they now have a long list of traits, such as being able to play out of the corner or having certain dribbling abilities.

In Manager Mode, you earn experience points after each match that can be used to improve player attributes or buy new traits. You could "sell yourself to the devil," as EA put it, and sell a trait like Injury Prone. Basically, you risk injury, but you get some currency to improve other attributes like speed and power. Of course, you could break your leg the next game as well.

This represents a departure from the current Manager mode, and EA calls it more of a "pimp my team mode" than a traditional manager mode. Normally, players have traits and that's it. Now you can customize not only your team but your players, as if they were cars in Forza Motorsport."

So what does that mean? They've changed their database system within the game and added a large number of new variables assigned to each player. What that translates into is much greater memory storage needs - each datapoint for each player needs to be stored.

It is entirely possible, given this information, that EA can't store all of this data for every player for all 500+ teams they included in previous iterations without requiring users to have a hard drive on their 360. I'm no database expert, but it could very well be that the number of additional traits they are tracking for every player raises the memory needed for each player by multiple factors, necessitating a reduction in the overall number of players (and by extension teams and leagues) in order to make sure they can store all of this information on a core 360 system (which only has 64MB of memory built-in).

Additionally, I don't know to what extent they are trying to mimic real players and thus need scouting reports in order to fill out all of these new trait fields for every player, but if they are trying to mirror reality to a reasonable extent (as they do in the other sports titles) it may well be they didn't have enough time or didn't feel like spending the money this time around to get those expanded scouting reports and have to fill out those database fields for players on 500+ teams.

They'll have all those leagues in the game in 1-2 years without a single change in the hardware specs. Guaranteed.

Well, if I'm right they will have all of the leagues and teams (or a lot more than they currently do) for the launch version for the PS3, since it has a hard drive built-in. Additionally, we'll see if they make future versions of FIFA require a hard drive for 360 users, or whether they require a Live connection so they can store the data online (not sure if Live is set up to handle this or not, but it's a possibility). If they are able to deliver all of the leagues and teams on the 360 without dropping data fields and don't require either a hard drive or a Live connection, then memory obviously wasn't a major issue.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Hell Atlantic

excellent post.

It would be if the previous iterations of FIFA and the current one were the same - they're not. They've re-programmed the game and include a lot more information per player now, which would naturally expand the memory requirements for each player included.

[Oilers9911]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

It would be if the previous iterations of FIFA and the current one were the same - they're not. They've re-programmed the game and include a lot more information per player now, which would naturally expand the memory requirements for each player included.

OT, but Winning Eleven>>>>>>>>>>FIFA

[Eaglesfan27]

Originally Posted by Oilers9911

OT, but Winning Eleven>>>>>>>>>>FIFA

Word. That is another 360 game that I'm really looking forward to.

[Celeval]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

It would be if the previous iterations of FIFA and the current one were the same - they're not. They've re-programmed the game and include a lot more information per player now, which would naturally expand the memory requirements for each player included.

Not to mention just doing the player ratings. It's not like all they have to do is say "Thierry Henry, Arsenal" and he's in the game. FM has how large of a volunteer staff doing their ratings?

I don't doubt they'll find a way to get the information into the hard drive - any good software design (and bugs aside, the design has to be decent) would be sure to fit things storage-wise. Actually creating the ratings - and animations, faces, etc. etc. etc. - I imagine would take a not-insignificant amount of time.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

You can be sure that it's the ONLY reason that they are selling Madden games right now. The name and marketing alone will sell 3 million copies.

Take the sales figures that most people trumpet as showing the franchise's success. They sell 5 million copies by the end of the product's life. Nearly half of that occurs in the first couple of weeks of sales and is where they make the money. The amusing part is that trade-ins on games in regards to Madden is VERY high. Many of those people simply buy the game, play it for a few weeks and then trade it in for $25-30 after that. EA is happy because they got full-price for the game. The gamer basically ends up paying for a long rental. If the resale market wasn't available, I think more people would think a bit harder before purchasing an EA game. As it is, people can still get some money for the game if it turns out to be nothing new.

Seems like you continue to answer your own question. If EA sold 5 million copies of each game they put out, they can care less if the gamer resales the game afterwards. Especially when they know that the following year there are going to sell another 5 million copies to many of the same people resold their games the year before. So who exactly are the bad guys here, EA or the people who accept less than acceptable products year after year? When the sales drop significantly, EA will get the message that you are trying to send.

[aran]

In regards to the "Pimp my team" data storage issues.

You need 1 more 32-bit or 64-bit integer per player. THAT IS SUCH AN ENORMOUS DEAL! THEY ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO DELAY RELEASING A COMPLETED GAME ANOTHER DECADE!

Either their excuse is a complete cop-out, or they have no idea how to program.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by aran

In regards to the "Pimp my team" data storage issues.

You need 1 more 32-bit or 64-bit integer per player. THAT IS SUCH AN ENORMOUS DEAL! THEY ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO DELAY RELEASING A COMPLETED GAME ANOTHER DECADE!

Either their excuse is a complete cop-out, or they have no idea how to program.

Sounds like you have some experience with databases. If so, question for you - let's say, hypothetically, they've gone from storing 8 distinct attributes per player to, say, 16 or 24 - how much does that multiply the size of the save file per player? Is it a straight linear progression, or are there ways to minimize the expansion of the save file?

[aran]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Sounds like you have some experience with databases. If so, question for you - let's say, hypothetically, they've gone from storing 8 distinct attributes per player to, say, 16 or 24 - how much does that multiply the size of the save file per player? Is it a straight linear progression, or are there ways to minimize the expansion of the save file?

At worst it's linear. It's not a multiplier; It's flat addition on to the length of each player's record. it's probably no more than 64 more bits (notice BITS, not bytes) per player if they do it as a bit mask. If they use booleans, it probably isn't much worse, though it may inflate the time it takes to select records from the database by an unnoticable amount.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by aran

At worst it's linear. It's not a multiplier; It's flat addition on to the length of each player's record. it's probably no more than 64 more bits (notice BITS, not bytes) per player if they do it as a bit mask. If they use booleans, it probably isn't much worse, though it may inflate the time it takes to select records from the database by an unnoticable amount.

Sounds like I need clarification of terminology here - if it's a linear progression, and there are say twice as many data fields as before, does that not mean a doubling of the memory footprint?

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by aran

Either their excuse is a complete cop-out, or they have no idea how to program.

I'm not sure this is news.

[aran]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Sounds like I need clarification of terminology here - if it's a linear progression, and there are say twice as many data fields as before, does that not mean a doubling of the memory footprint?

The strings that contain Name, Birth Date, Birth Place, etc. take up MUCH more space than a 64-bit integer. A single ASCII character is 8-bits. Thierry Henri's name takes 8 * 12 = 96 bits. And that's not even a long name.

You can see how an increase of 32-bits in one field per player is not as significant as EA makes it sound.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by aran

The strings that contain Name, Birth Date, Birth Place, etc. take up MUCH more space than a 64-bit integer. A single ASCII character is 8-bits. Thierry Henri's name takes 8 * 12 = 96 bits. And that's not even a long name.

You can see how an increase of 32-bits in one field per player is not as significant as EA makes it sound.

Further clarification - if the number of player rating fields (which are presumably 2-digit numbers from 00-99) doubles or triples (as an example), that doesn't double or triple the file size since other fields containing longer strings are larger than the player rating fields. However, it would be accurate to say that, in terms of parsing out just the player rating fields, increases in the number of such fields results in a linear expansion of the memory footprint for those fields.

[aran]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Further clarification - if the number of player rating fields (which are presumably 2-digit numbers from 00-99) doubles or triples (as an example), that doesn't double or triple the file size since other fields containing longer strings are larger than the player rating fields. However, it would be accurate to say that, in terms of parsing out just the player rating fields, increases in the number of such fields results in a linear expansion of the memory footprint for those fields.

I thought we were talking about how much the db would expand given new added "special abilities" that are purchasable.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by aran

I thought we were talking about how much the db would expand given new added "special abilities" that are purchasable.

That's correct.

EA has indicated they've greatly expanded the number of player rating attributes for each player in the new FIFA. I've never played the game, so I have no idea what the previous attributes were or what the new ones are; I can take a guess though, based off of their other games.

I also don't know how many new attribute fields they've added. If it's just a few, that probably has little effect on the size of the save files. If they've added a lot, then the size impact might be more significant. As well, any attempt at accuracy in those ratings would imply a significant amount of busy work in setting those new ratings fields, as well as testing and adjusting the effect of adding those new fields and fine tuning the ratings to get the players to simulate reality.

It would also be interesting to know if the new version of FIFA is the same on the current platforms as it is on the 360, and if the current gen versions also feature far less teams than before.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

I don't have to read the link, or your comments. The answer is this:

No, they don't think consumers are stupid. They KNOW consumers are stupid.

Well, 1 post in the question the thread asked was answered. Why is it still going?

SI

[aran]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

That's correct.

EA has indicated they've greatly expanded the number of player rating attributes for each player in the new FIFA. I've never played the game, so I have no idea what the previous attributes were or what the new ones are; I can take a guess though, based off of their other games.

I also don't know how many new attribute fields they've added. If it's just a few, that probably has little effect on the size of the save files. If they've added a lot, then the size impact might be more significant. As well, any attempt at accuracy in those ratings would imply a significant amount of busy work in setting those new ratings fields, as well as testing and adjusting the effect of adding those new fields and fine tuning the ratings to get the players to simulate reality.

It would also be interesting to know if the new version of FIFA is the same on the current platforms as it is on the 360, and if the current gen versions also feature far less teams than before.

Isn't there more space on modern memory cards/harddrives than there used to be? Even if the save size doubled or quadrupled, that still wouldn't matter. Storing a 2MB save on a modern SD card (512MB, most likely) beats the crap out of saving a 512kb save on a 4 or 8MB PS2 memory card.