EA/NFL Extend NFL Exclusive License by One Year to 2013

[EddieV]

Quote: Originally Posted by mestevo

Now you're backpeddaling from your original point of EA making less money. The inventory is purchased, it's the retailers sacrificing margin and then some to get you to buy from them (typically to either get you in the store and/or with the expectation of you buying more than just that item). Retail 101.

You're wrong, dude. Retailers aren't stuck -- just look at the millions EA has set aside in reserve for unwanted copies of EA Active 2. You really think Best Buy is gonna sell Madden or any other game for less than what it paid? LoL.

[Only1LT]

Quote: Originally Posted by ryan36

Ok based on this statement , I will say maybe EA doesn't listen. Ok, I will accept this as true. See the two posts above...but no when I wrote that I was just being general, LT. If EA doesn't care , why bitch? Just don't buy the game and be done with it. Most people offer criticism in the hope of a better product. If you assume EA doesn't listen you MUST also assume they aren't listening to you. It's a logical fallacy to do otherwise... and therefore a waste of time to come here. "Exercise our power and don't buy the game." There's no need to for that though...if people don't like a game, or it's not as good people want, they won't buy it. My guess is it's already happening with people who don't like it... so what you're really saying is "people who like it still shouldn't buy it." It's like certain people are simply INCAPABLE of grasping that they're in the minority...and how little power they have. I don't think Madden is GOAT, but I would NEVER tell someone who likes a product not to buy it. I just hate the rhetoric. EA doesn't listen, let's make a noise in the forest where nobody's around to hear.

I hear what you are saying, but if you listen to people, not just on the forums, but everywhere, there are definitely people that buy the game, every year, and who aren't really happy with it. We can debate whether these people need psychiatric care or not, but by their own admission, this is the case.

And for the record, none of these companies really listen. The devs have their idea of how they want their game to play. Most game devs are gamers themselves, and have their own idea of what a kickass game is. They are also open to SOME feedback on SOME of their ideas, provided they are in line with their own thinking of how the game should be developed in the first place. In a sense, they don't take feedback as much as they give you options of ideas that they have already themselves thought of and decided on a different one. Not to say that they don't do something that they never planned based on consumer feedback, but again, it would have to fall under either something that is cosmetic, inconsequential, and easy to implement, or that doesn't go against their original vision.

The suits? They have two motivations. Motivation number one is how much money they want to spend. Motivation number two is, subsequently, how much they want to make. They are open to giving the devs as much latitude as they want in developing the game, right up until the point where it infringes upon motivation number one or two.

Out of those two some what oppositional objectives, comes a game that some love, some hate, and many other opinions spanning the gamut of what is in between. But no where in there is anyone, really, truly, listening.

Companies "listening" does not happen in the really, real world.

[ryan36]

Quote: Originally Posted by mestevo

For some reason I have the impression NCAA11 is the best I've seen, maybe because the game is a bit slower?

Well I only played post patch/tuner NCAA before I traded it in...I gotta tell you, I didn't think it was that much better. Running any spread option play didn't work, which ruined the college FB experience for me...esp. the broken read option, which is like the most fun ever.

[ryan36]

Quote: Originally Posted by Only1LT

I hear what you are saying, but if you listen to people, not just on the forums, but everywhere, there are definitely people that buy the game, every year, and who aren't really happy with it. We can debate whether these people need psychiatric care or not, but by their own admission, this is the case. And for the record, none of these companies really listen. The devs have their idea of how they want their game to play. Most game devs are gamers themselves, and have their own idea of what a kickass game is. They are also open to SOME feedback on SOME of their ideas, provided they are in line with their own thinking of how the game should be developed in the first. In a sense, they don't take feedback as much as they give you options of ideas that they have already themselves thought of and decided on a different one. Not to say that they don't do something that they never planned based on consumer feedback, but again, it would have to fall under either something that is cosmetic, inconsequential, and easy to implement, or that doesn't go against their original vision. The suits? They have two motivations. Motivation number one is how much money they want to spend. Motivation number two is, subsequently, how much they want to make. They are open to giving the devs as much latitude as they want in developing the game, right up until the point where it poses a infringes upon motivation number one or two. Out of those two some what oppositional objectives, comes a game that some love, some hate, and many other opinions spanning the gamut of what is in between. But no where in there is anyone, really, truly, listening. Companies "listening" does not happen in the really, real world.

I'd say the Dev Team listens. Ian wanted to make a new game from scratch, they said no. So it's a level higher than Ian that has this issue.

But if LT, as you say, your input doesn't matter, why waste your time giving it?

[EddieV]

Quote: Originally Posted by ryan36

But if LT, as you say, your input doesn't matter, why waste your time giving it?

I'm not LT, but if you were told that you could never eat another McDonalds hamburger again -- only Wendy's, or that you could never drink another beer other than Coors (assuming that's not your favorite), would you just shup up and take it, or would you complain about it? Same thing here, really.

[Only1LT]

Quote: Originally Posted by kjcheezhead

I disagree. Almost every problem the past games had is still there or worse. For example, both games have had defenders running routes before wr's. However, ps2 has individual press coverage and wr shading. So if I shade a wr to the inside and he runs an out route, he will get seperation. The current version I just have to pray the cpu plays good defense for me without any input. So which game has better gameplay for pass defense? The one where the cpu makes all the decisions or the one where the gamer is allowed to have input on how his secondary plays?

I hear what you are saying, but I could also say that locomotion lessens the impact of psychic DBs, because even if they run the route with them, if their Spd, Agil, and Accel aren't the same, then the receiver will still be open.

You don't have to tell me that 11 has issues. Believe me, you don't have to tell me that lol. What I'm saying is that all of them are in the past Maddens. All of them. There are even a couple that are worse. So it just has never computed to me how anyone can say PS2/XBOX = great and PS3/360 = trash. They are the same game. It has been for a very long time. Not exactly the same, but pretty damn close.

The games on this gen have been developed to play like the games on last gen. Guess what? For the most part, mission accomplished. If 11 is bad, then all Madden's are bad. There is no logical way to dispute that.

[ryan36]

Quote: Originally Posted by EddieV

I'm not LT, but if you were told that you could never eat another McDonalds hamburger again -- only Wendy's, or that you could never drink another beer other than Coors (assuming that's not your favorite), would you just shup up and take it, or would you complain about it? Same thing here, really.

I'd complain if I thought it mattered. If the premise is "EA doesn't listen" the action "Complain and hope EA hears" is a fallacy.

[Only1LT]

Quote: Originally Posted by ryan36

I'd say the Dev Team listens. Ian wanted to make a new game from scratch, they said no. So it's a level higher than Ian that has this issue. But if LT, as you say, your input doesn't matter, why waste your time giving it?

I don't know what other people's motivations are for posting on this site, but I've stated many times what mine is. I give my opinion on the game in discussion with other posters, because the gaming industry, in general, and Football gaming, specifically, is what I have a passion for. That's what I'm going to school to, hopefully, someday do.

I have never, ever posted with the intent of getting a dev to listen to me. You will not find a single post of mine, ever, in any wish list.

Given what I believe (know) about how the game development process really is, to actually come on here, with the expressed intent of the devs listening to my revolutionary changes, would be as good of proof, as any, that I'm certifiable lol.

That's why when TNT goes ballistic about people asking for changes to the game, I can barely see my keyboard through the tears I have at crying laughing to his responses. He has no idea how ridiculously unfounded his fears actually are.