When a Patch is Just Too Late to Save a Game

[OMT]

Quote: Originally Posted by olliethebum85

Patches don't bother me in games like GoW and CoD, where people spend there time finding soft spots in the map. Those patches are good because that stuff in not forseen. Having to patch crap like sliders not working, entire gameplay elements being broken is just sad.

I agree. And while "sad" might not be the best word for you to use, it is a good word to describe how many of us on the team felt when these issues came up. These things are very upsetting because we want to deliver a patch that enhances the game... not something which fixes a bug we should have known about.

[rhombic21]

Quote: Originally Posted by rudyjuly2

I think in some ways you are asking too much. EA has their hands tied by MS with regards to patch size, largely because of the stupid 360 version that doesn't have a hard drive. The Madden team wanted to include accelerated clock in their patch but that feature alone was more than MS would allow so they dropped it. Sony allows a much larger patch size but EA doesn't want to provide a larger Sony exclusive patch either. You can't assume that the EA team doesn't want to patch more things than it can. Plus, some of these things would require more than a simple patch imo. There are flaws in the game that probably need a complete overhaul like the cpu QB AI (too many picks, never going deep). These things need to be fixed on release. I'll agree with you on some things. I still don't understand why EA thinks the average college kicker should be able to kick a 55 yarder with ease. The default settings really need to be looked at in a big way which is very important for you online guys. And the sliders need to have a greater effect for us fine-tuning the offline gameplay. I don't understand why they neutered the blocking sliders this year. And I don't buy the casual gamer likes some of this stuff either. The casual fan still wants realism.

Other manufacturers of sports games have released much more expansive patches for gameplay. 2K's patch rundown/fixlist for their basketball games always dwarfs what EA does for the football titles.

[rhombic21]

And I tend also think that EA needs to do more to go the extra mile to make it up to the consumers when they do release a product with massive bugs. Rather than cutting back on what you do as far as adding new content, you ought to take the perspective of going the extra mile to make it up to those of us that have been hardcore fans of the series.

I know that patches take away from the next year's development cycle, but the other reality is that it's 12 months between game releases, and when we end up with a game that has serious flaws or is missing key elements, we, as fans of the franchise, have to wait an entire year for you guys to release the next year's version. I shouldn't be sitting here in November and December and already be thinking that NCAA 2010 needs to hurry up and come out, just so some of these massive gameplay flaws will potentially be fixed.

I'm not saying that you should do it ever year, and I understand that it would get cost prohibitive, but IMO, after what happened this year, you guys should have found a way to make it up for us. Cut into profits or something, and divert extra resources to fixing the game and releasing continued content. Instead, what we got was a pretty weak patch effort that didn't release until a month and a half after the game came out, and then zero continued content from that point on. What kind of message do you think that sends? How can you claim to care about your consumers here? What it tells us is that you've essentially given up on the game, at least until next year, and that we should too. As a community, where does that leave us?

[youALREADYknow]

Quote: Originally Posted by OMT

The three months are getting it approved and the disks getting manufactured. We cannot make ANY changes in that period of time unless the game is failed by the 3rd party. Then we fix the bug they found and the whole process starts over again. They don't fail a game for not being good enough... they fail it for crashes, save/load... things like that.

Maybe console game development really is THAT different from PC software development, but that line of thought is ridiculous coming from my field of work. You create a new branch and develop off of that branch which becomes the basis for the patch.

I'm not employed at EA, so I'm not going to ask you to go back and forth with me on this but it's obvious that the current testing and feedback cycle is not working and I just hope that somewhere internally you guys are making some changes for the better for next year's game.

Contrary to the comments of some others, I believe NCAA 09 is actually a great game in the areas that work as designed... it's just the 20 other bugs and flawed logic that make the game seem as if it's held together by paper clips and Elmer's glue.

[OMT]

Quote: Originally Posted by youALREADYknow

Maybe console game development really is THAT different from PC software development, but that line of thought is ridiculous coming from my field of work. You create a new branch and develop off of that branch which becomes the basis for the patch. I'm not employed at EA, so I'm not going to ask you to go back and forth with me on this but it's obvious that the current testing and feedback cycle is not working and I just hope that somewhere internally you guys are making some changes for the better for next year's game. Contrary to the comments of some others, I believe NCAA 09 is actually a great game in the areas that work as designed... it's just the 20 other bugs and flawed logic that make the game seem as if it's held together by paper clips and Elmer's glue.

Right, we do branch it off for the patch. But I believe my quote was talking about the packaged game. The patch process is a lot faster because it is a direct download and doesn't have to be manufactured and shipped by truck to stores.

[Pared]

Quote: Originally Posted by OMT

You're misunderstanding me. We WANT to do small features in the patch, however we have had bugs that come up that are much higher priority. For NCAA 09 we wanted to add halftime highlights in the patch, but we had all our resources fixing bugs we wanted to tackle in the patch and couldn't get the halftime highlights polished enough to inclue.

Fair enough as I can understand that. Having spoken with developers plenty of times I can follow what you're saying here now.

Some of the other comments by rhombic and youalreadyknow are very on point.

SOMETHING needs to be done, whether it be a change in how your team operates, more weight to the community leaders opinions... something... that will not lead to these "major" (and I use that term loosely) not being a problem every year. Let's be real here, you can't get to every single bug, and most in the community know that.

With NBA Live, we were given free reign to tell the developers exactly what we think. I didn't hold back... and being open and honest goes a long way with people, even your customers. I didn't say "you suck at life" but offered input on how the defense shouldn't be as defenseless as it is. Since the CD happened so late in the dev. cycle, there was no way the appropriate changes could be made in time. If that's the case, have the CD's earlier (and I have mentioned this to Will as well) and put more weight on the guys who are not only a harsh critic of your game, but willing to work with you as well.

Most of these problems traditionally arise from the way the CPU AI reacts to the way a human plays. The CL's should be given more time with the AI IMO. I understand not everything is in place but take a day out of your schedule, sit down and game with these guys and pick their brain. If your engineers are football guys too, throw them in there just to listen. I know some of them are socially inept, don't speak English well and so forth, but not all of them are that bad. All these are minor steps towards releasing a game the community (the individuals who read previews, hunt for pictures online and discuss your work for hours) will be very happy with.

It goes without saying your hands are tied at times but I really think you have to sell your co-workers on this. Our interaction will only be beneficial for us all, as you make more money from sales and we get the game we really want. It's a win-win if handled appropriately.

Sorry for the long post, but perhaps this helps you understand why I look at a patch as a crutch; It's because that's all it has been the last few years. Until something changes where a patch can have enough ability to add new features AND you can address the issues you might need to (damn MS and their patch size limitations) something needs to be done to help ease the game making process for us all so we have a product we all enjoy.

[OMT]

Quote: Originally Posted by Pared

Fair enough as I can understand that. Having spoken with developers plenty of times I can follow what you're saying here now. Some of the other comments by rhombic and youalreadyknow are very on point. SOMETHING needs to be done, whether it be a change in how your team operates, more weight to the community leaders opinions... something... that will not lead to these "major" (and I use that term loosely) not being a problem every year. Let's be real here, you can't get to every single bug, and most in the community know that. With NBA Live, we were given free reign to tell the developers exactly what we think. I didn't hold back... and being open and honest goes a long way with people, even your customers. I didn't say "you suck at life" but offered input on how the defense shouldn't be as defenseless as it is. Since the CD happened so late in the dev. cycle, there was no way the appropriate changes could be made in time. If that's the case, have the CD's earlier (and I have mentioned this to Will as well) and put more weight on the guys who are not only a harsh critic of your game, but willing to work with you as well. Most of these problems traditionally arise from the way the CPU AI reacts to the way a human plays. The CL's should be given more time with the AI IMO. I understand not everything is in place but take a day out of your schedule, sit down and game with these guys and pick their brain. If your engineers are football guys too, throw them in there just to listen. I know some of them are socially inept, don't speak English well and so forth, but not all of them are that bad. All these are minor steps towards releasing a game the community (the individuals who read previews, hunt for pictures online and discuss your work for hours) will be very happy with. It goes without saying your hands are tied at times but I really think you have to sell your co-workers on this. Our interaction will only be beneficial for us all, as you make more money from sales and we get the game we really want. It's a win-win if handled appropriately. Sorry for the long post, but perhaps this helps you understand why I look at a patch as a crutch; It's because that's all it has been the last few years. Until something changes where a patch can have enough ability to add new features AND you can address the issues you might need to (damn MS and their patch size limitations) something needs to be done to help ease the game making process for us all so we have a product we all enjoy.

Yeah.. I agree. Will needs to get comunity day earlier. The problem is that Madden is the big game and they are on a different dev cycle. So if you guys are brought in with enough time for NCAA changes, then Madden isn't showable.

[Pared]

That stinks... I think a split of the group to two smaller ones might be better if that is the case. I know NBA and NCAA hoops share many of the same CL's... but if it isn't working for the football titles, have them choose the title they would like to focus more on.

Probably not the best situation for the CL's that enjoy coming out there to see both games and enjoy the 3-4 four day extravaganza but it seems like it would be the best interest in the quality of both games.

Take your NFL heads and NCAA heads, split them up, and bring them out when possible. It just seems to me that the way CD is run for football it doesn't really benefit NCAA at all, and Madden ever so slightly. IMHO this should change and I think we're in agreement there.

Just some suggestions. From my discussions with Will it seems like he's a good guy. I just feel there needs to a better focus on what the CL's are there to accomplish. From speaking with some of the current and former CL's, that seems to be key that needs addressing.

I sincerely believe it will result in a better game. There are many intelligent individuals out there who just enjoy being involved in the process, myself included. Working with them seems to be doing wonders for other games.