EA sports and the lack of depth in gaming

[White Out]

**I posted this on the Madden forum but it's about all EA games and I wanted to make sure hockey gamers saw this too... if the mods feel this is too much I apologize**

Let me start off this post by saying that if you don't agree with me, that's great, please respond with a thought out and constructive reply. I'm taking my time to write this out and would appreciate it doesn't turn into a flame war or a stupid argument.

My background as an avid EA gamer began with NHLPA 93. To this day I consider that 3~ years of gaming on Genesis a golden age of sports gaming. Madden was amazing and was becoming well polished, and NHL 95 was perhaps the all time climax of hockey games. Back then tho, there was no franchise mode or real depth. They were simply great hockey games that you could play for hours on end by yourself or with friends. I consider this the old era of gaming, while it wasn't perfect it had its charms.

The time from 1997~ to early 2000's was very hit and miss for me. After genesis there was no real great sports console. I played some video games on PC more than ever... especially later in the 2000's. Editing of NHL on computer was available to anyone willing to learn it, and it was very rewarding. I'd also like to make a mention and a big point here about how Sega made a huge splash with the 2k series. Perhaps this is what got EA going again in the mid to late 2000's. NFL 2k was a phenomenal series with staying power, and in my mind was better than Madden for 2 full years. Last time this happened was NFL Gameday 98 (or 97 I cant remember which). Unlike Gameday 2k and Sega looked like they had staying power and could threaten EA. Then... the NFL ruined video games by selling exclusivity to EA and killing competition.

I'm not going to drone on and on about a thousand seperate things but I'm going to tell you about a few things that EA could have done years ago to help boost the immersion of the game. I firmly believe that one important, vital part of a video game is to NOT remind players they're playing a video game. It's one thing to make a game realistic looking, but you can't stop there. So with that in mind here is a list of changes or additions that are largely easy but also could make things so much better.

1) Crowd noise. Some EA games have this better than others, but even the best of them fail. The crowd should cheer when it's appropriate and sit on their hands when they should be.

2) Eliminate canned video. NCAA is really bad for this, as is NHL. Stay with me on this and imagine it in your minds eye, I know reading this may come across confusing or not translate as well as it should.
-Let's take a NCAA entrance. All the players are already coded the same they are on field, they aren't super high def or anything. So there is code that tells them how to run out, and where to go. So instead of making a canned animation... do it like a gameplay. Players come out the tunnel and randomly celebrate as they come out. Let's say the clip takes 60 seconds... and you use 6 camera angles. You could use any camera angle in the stadium and randomly choose the order in which they appear. Now each and every entrance for the game looks different with players doing unique things (+ you can see stuff like Miamis smoke from say the 2nd deck one game and right on field level the next). I know this seems like a small change but ask yourself this, do you even bother to watch these intros? No because they remind you that you're in a game and are boring and stale after a week.

3)more Camera work
-Take my above point and apply it to game winning celebrations. Each player should have a list of 5-10 random ways to celebrate and there should be 5~ fixed camera angles or more. Mash them up, and you have unique super bowl winning sequences every time.

4) more depth for the management of your team. Why is EA removing things like medical redshirting? Academic suspensions? For Madden... I can't even count on my hands and feet how many things were removed. Stop removing features, then adding them back 4 years later as a new improvement.

5) COMMON SENSE. Each year progression for both games, NFL and NCAA is a massive headache. Here's a quick fix... take the number of players and dive by sum of the overall ratings. Lets just say that means each team is an average of 82 * 52 players... 4264 overall points per team... * 32 teams 136, 448. Great... now make a super nice and easy formula that will adjust each season to be within 2% of that number each season, and distribute the ratings evenly based on stats. DONE. No more ridiculous regression in the quality of players/teams over 5-10 years, because there cant be.

6) Common sense continued. If you can't release these games without massive bugs being reported by our community each year that are at the game breaking level (fake pump backwards for TD's each play) that means you need to start releasing a beta to thousands of people so they can play test for you. We will happily do this for free.

7) MORE common sense. If QB scrambling is too high one year, don't over compensate and make them useless one year. Same goes for defenses. For 5 years now at least over compensating has put EA in hot water every single year, especially with Madden, and its just mind boggling to think that no one has picked up on this at EA.

8) Presentation, Presentation, Presentation. NFL 2k had amazing presentation with amazing weekly wrap ups. Why is it that 5 years later on a newer gen system the Madden series is still not as good? Why is it that on NHL nothing like this exists at all?

9) Winning the big one. From Fifa, to NCAA, to NFL, winning the big one means almost nothing in game. I already covered what I think will fix it earlier when I suggested more dynamic camera work combined with random and numerous celebration styles.

I grew up loving EA games but I only buy Madden once every 2 years as do I buy NHL. NCAA has become an annual purchase because I haven't yet learned better. EA it's time to start respecting your customers and put out a better product.

[CJ2KSnowww]

I haven't been big into video games for several years up until NHL '11 this year and FIFA '10 last year, but I can totally agree with you in terms of the camera angle stuff. What's funny is that it seems to me that so much of what you pointed out can be improved upon with just the addition of a bunch of camera's placed around the stadium in animations.

Granted, in the grand scheme of things the intro and other videos are tiny blips on the radar, however it would be a nice addition as you state.

In NHL '11, every time I've won an overtime game with any team, the celebration is the same. One guy falls on top of another followed by a pig-pile. Yeah, it's a cool video, but like you say, it's only one video and I don't even watch it anymore.

This isn't by any stretch a game-breaker for me nor do I really care whether they add more aesthetically pleasing stuff, but yeah, it would be nice.

[Matt_350z]

White Out, I couldn't agree with you more. I enjoy NHL 11, a lot. Its just there is so much more that could be done in terms of "little things" to make the game more authentic, and really tighten up the entire product.

I obviously have little to no idea what goes into a development cycle for a game. I have to think that its not much time, and September rolls around very quickly(using NHL for example).

However, you can't tell me that the devs haven't played the sports games of the past, and the games of their competitors. If they havn't then they shouldn't be working for EA, to be honest. Those games offer a lot of great ideas, and insight to small things that really put a sports game over the top.

I'm talking ridiculously small things like anthem snippets at the beginning of the game(past EA hockey games), to larger things like more realistic/diverse/true to life arena's(2k hockey).

I'll never forget a year or two back when I was playing NHL2kwhatever, and I was playing against Montreal at the Molsen Centre and the PA announcer announced things in French. I geek out over little things like that. I know a lot of others would too. Things like diverse team intro's, pre game goalie matchups, diverse goal horns, inbetween period show/breakdown/highlight. A REAL franchise mode(in the likes of Madden or SCEA's MLB franchise). The play by play being far more player specific(see MLB 10, and MLB2k10).

I too started gaming in the Genesis age. I think I was about 12 or 13 when NHL Hockey came out, and I was hooked ever since then. At 33 now, I still look forward to the yearly EA hockey expierience(and used to look forward to 2k as well).

It seems like EA is trying to stuff the game with features(HUT/ BAGM) and not rleally address minor things that would really clean up the game. It seems like they are more concerned with what will bring them in extra money(HUT card packs, and EASHL boost slots, and boosts), as opposed to putting out a truly great hockey expierience.

I do like what EA has done with the NHL franchise from 07, until now. However, it is most definately the time for them to really step it up with 12' and wow us again.

[voodoo_magic]

I agree White Out.
EA sports games on the current gen are very disappointing. Every year they add fluff or cash grab features and fix some bugs while new bugs pop up and it's like nothing amazing happens anymore.
With all the years of games to look at and see what features/presentation really worked they continue to take very small steps forward if any.

The first year or two on a new system I suppose it can be acceptable for it to be harder for them to get everything in the game, but at this point what is their excuse.
To put it in a sports analogy they are a franchise that keeps overpaying for aging vets(fluff/re introducing old features taken out) but never winning championships, while what they should be doing is building with solid draft choices(gameplay) and when they are stars adding a few veterans(solid presentation/depth) that will complement them.

The sad thing is you see other games like mlb the show and nba 2k putting out some solid games so it can be done. The management at EA doesn't really care if we like the game or it's a great representation of the sport as long as it's the only choice they know they don't have to invest much in development because the average ****** gamer will buy it anyways.

[mkharsh33]

Nice article to the OP! Enjoyed it... Too bad you're preaching to the choir here at OS. EA should see this (with a zillion signatures on it). Appreciated your thoughts...

[canucksss]

great read... hopefully EA will gonna read this because many if not majority of players playing NHL 11 will have the same sentinments as you.

[GlennN]

Interesting. I guess we all view things in different ways. I understand the points you raise, but few are very high on my list. Games seem as deep as ever, generally speaking.

I don't care much about presentation, as (with no in-game saves), I want to spend my limited play time actually playing the games. Camera angles seem fine for me.

Your progression idea would make things worse in my mind. I love offline franchise, mostly so I can watch players grow and develop. Having all players develop at a regular, predictable, rate would ruin things for me. I want the quick rising late-round gem and I want the never developing high round bust. Not every player should develop at the "average" rate.

For me, the number one Madden problem is the players do not play to their ratings, and the number one NHL problem is that stats/records/awards for players are either not available at all or limited. I cannot attribute either deficiency to the state of gaming in general, since Madden does a pretty nice job of making rosters/stats/awards/records viewable and players in NHL (other than, perhaps, goalies) really do seem to play to their ratings.

I just can't complain about EA Sports' products over the past couple years. I loved NHL 10 more than any hockey game I ever played (more than 11, sadly), and I am playing Madden 11 this year a ton (every other year, since NFL2k5 came out) Madden was quickly back to the shelf.

Again, I guess it all just depends what is important to each gamer.

[White Out]

Quote: Originally Posted by GlennN

Your progression idea would make things worse in my mind. I love offline franchise, mostly so I can watch players grow and develop. Having all players develop at a regular, predictable, rate would ruin things for me. I want the quick rising late-round gem and I want the never developing high round bust. Not every player should develop at the "average" rate.

I dont think you quite got what I wrote about progression. My progression would allow players to develop and become busts or studs... it would just have to be evened out somewhere else. Each year the total number of overall points would remain within a 5~ range to allow some years higher quality and just overall variance.

So if one year Jarome Iginla was 95, then dropped to 91 as he aged, that would free up ~4 points to be given to a youth somewhere else or osmeone who had a great year.