"It Was Just Going to be a Bad Game" - EA on Elite 11

[RaychelSnr]

While this news item is certainly a couple of days old now, I thought I'd bring recent comments made by EA Head of Worldwide Development Andrew Wilson to IGN:

Quote:

"But unlike those games, NBA Elite just wasn't going to make the kind of impact EA desired. "Ultimately," Wilson admits, "it was just going to be a bad game." That's not because the ideas of radically changing the controls (one stick for dribbling and shooter, the other for foot movements) was a bad one. In fact, if you ignore all the other issues with NBA Elite, the controls show a lot of promise. But it is all those other factors that just weren't up to snuff and would have netted NBA Elite poor review scores and unfavorable reactions from gamers. "I think that the goal of reinventing how people play basketball games and giving the gamer infinitely more control over the outcomes that appear on the screen in front of them, was something that just needed to take longer than we had," Wilson said. "We knew the goal was aggressive. But at the same time, we believed it was an important enough goal for the gamer, who'd been playing basketball games in a very similar way for a very long time."

Interestingly enough, I agree with EA's approach on this one. They were too bold too fast and got caught in a really bad situation. If they come back next year with a really solid game, which I feel they can, then I think that might be an endorsement of some kind for taking a year off from time to time.

While a lot of people, myself included, have criticized EA's offering of Elite 11 as being really bad -- the foundation and ideas that they were rolling with are things which will force the competition to change how it approaches the game of basketball. So given a more polished game than what we saw with the ill fated Elite 11, I think EA could end up ending up with nothing more than a small hiccup from a business standpoint.

[JerseySuave4]

as hard as we've all been on EA for how crappy Elite was going to be, at least they were willing to realize the game wasn't good enough and not just release the game and take people's money for a subpar effort. Sometimes it's nice to have a break of a year instead of just buying a new game every year. Maybe if developers took 2 years to make a game instead of 1 they can catch more of their mistakes and really take the time to get things the way it should be.

Imagine if Madden had just updated the rosters this year and then next release a game they've had 2 years to work on. Same for NBA 2k, Fifa, The Show, etc. We see EA doing it with Fight Night and THQ doing it with UFC but that is more so because of lack of need for a new game every year. The problem is there is such a demand each year for a new game, and they can make so much more money selling each year, that its not worth it for them to take 2 years to develop a game instead of 1.

They have somewhat of a base laid out. They need to figure out the direction they want to take this franchise. Now it needs to feel new and they have to deliever a strong effort next time out but really this franchise is 2 to 3 years away from where they need to be. This is basically a new franchise. EA needs to look at what makes NBA 2k11 so successful and figure out a way to get that in their game.

[Segagendude]

If only the 06 Madden team AND the NFL would've allowed this kind of thinking and delay before the next-gen jump.........

[Bumble14]

I don't think EA is going to rebound from this one. The damage done to the Live/Elite brand is devastating--do you even understand how good Elite/Live 12 is going to be to even get people somewhat interested? Basically think the greatest basketball game ever created....and then EA has to pray that positive word of mouth gets out to the masses that this is a better game than the competition.

They've dug themselves quite a deep hole--and 5 years into this current generation of consoles, EA may want to take a step back and decide to develop their basketball "ideas" so that it makes a huge splash come the next console generation. What's the point of releasing a product that is already so damaged commercially?

Regardless, I still do not understand why EA felt that they had to reinvent the wheel. Live 10 was showing such promise, and I can't be the only one who was hoping that EA built upon the Live 10 framework for this years game--I honestly think it could have competed with 2K--they were on the right track.

[khaliib]

Point blank, 2k has put a basketball game out that has raised the bar (even with its own issues).

I really believe 2k is trying to deliver a "Death Blow" to EA with basketball as EA did to 2k with football.

Even if they do put out a NBA game next year, they will be far behind a game getting rave reviews and feedback to improve upon.

Feedback is the biggest thing EA will not have. So will gamers get 2010 with tweaks or get a game that "WOWS" with NEW injections beyond visual?

I don't understand why they don't push the College Basketball game. They have the market all to themselves and they were on there way to having something good when they cancelled. There problem is that they refused to flesh the game out, taking baby steps towards improvements.

As for Live/Elite, I see just a regular basketball game being put out again. Nothing that will push gamers to the level of walking away from the 2k version at the register.

Oh well, "Live and learn"...

[DaReapa]

Quote: Originally Posted by MMChrisS

While a lot of people, myself included, have criticized EA's offering of Elite 11 as being really bad -- the foundation and ideas that they were rolling with are things which will force the competition to change how it approaches the game of basketball. So given a more polished game than what we saw with the ill fated Elite 11, I think EA could end up ending up with nothing more than a small hiccup from a business standpoint.

I wholeheartedly agree. The overall package was horrendous, but I was feeling what they were trying to accomplish with the right stick controls and could see the potential. And even though I haven't touched a full game of Live in about 7 years, I really hope they can comeback strong. Competition is always a good thing for the consumers.

[mrclutch]

Quote: Originally Posted by Bumble14

I don't think EA is going to rebound from this one. The damage done to the Live/Elite brand is devastating--do you even understand how good Elite/Live 12 is going to be to even get people somewhat interested? Basically think the greatest basketball game ever created....and then EA has to pray that positive word of mouth gets out to the masses that this is a better game than the competition. They've dug themselves quite a deep hole--and 5 years into this current generation of consoles, EA may want to take a step back and decide to develop their basketball "ideas" so that it makes a huge splash come the next console generation. What's the point of releasing a product that is already so damaged commercially? Regardless, I still do not understand why EA felt that they had to reinvent the wheel. Live 10 was showing such promise, and I can't be the only one who was hoping that EA built upon the Live 10 framework for this years game--I honestly think it could have competed with 2K--they were on the right track.

Agree with all of this. The Live/Elite brand may never recover. No doubt may of the Live loyal gamers have moved to 2K to get their basketball fix. Some we come back if given a chance. Other won't.

Like you I would have loved to played Live 11. I really think they were headed in the right direction. I hope whenever the next game comes out that so of best aspects of Live 10 will be included the offering.

[alfieb24]

Right before the demo came out, I swear I read posts from Reanimator talking about how fun Elite was, and how if we just played the demo and gave it a chance, we'd come to the same conclusion? So I think it's odd they all of a sudden admit that the game wasn't very good at all.