A cont. of the previous thread which has now been locked: https://answers.ea.com/t5/General-Discussion-News/presentation-doesn-t-Work-For-Nhl-23/m-p/12089563#M6443
We have to keep this constructive or this one will be too.
@EA_Aljo wrote:
@kyl_35 wrote:I can see where you’re coming from, but consider what it looks like…
Every time we’re transparent about the reason for something people get really mad at the reason and poke holes in the logic. So we’re just not going to provide reasons anymore.
Deleted posts aside, it looks crazy sketchy to make game impacting moves and then not provide any clarity. It makes people even more skeptical about things we’re not told about; and it’s a big reason EA has lost the benefit of the doubt with most people on this board.
This is what I mean when I say people twist our words. This isn't about having holes poked in the logic. It's comments like this that add to our reasoning for limiting what we say here. We try to be more open and transparent, but that gets twisted into something that isn't at all what we were talking about. That and it invites a lot of toxic responses where people just rage at us. That's not constructive at all.
I agree we could be more clear though. I'd like to see our patch notes improve and explain the changes better.
It isn't twisting your words there in any meaningful sense. kyl_35 was expressing his impression of what was said and it was clearly understood as such. In this case you should be less concerned about your words being twisted and more concerned that you did not clearly express yourself originally - which is what was being asked for. The lack of communication led to an understanding different than intended. While twisting words is an act of manipulation, this appears to be an act of interpretation.
Stating the same thing more than once is what you want to be doing here. If customers are interpreting your words in that way you want to iterate and clarify your meaning. Disengagement makes people less constructive; it is not engaging with them that makes them less constructive. If they misinterpreted what you say, clarify. That is dialogue. If you disengage you are both letting their interpretation dominate and you are essentially stating a power differential and that prompts acting out. They feel unheard; others feel unheard because you don't engage with them either; and things get less constructive as a result.
@wsoulia wrote:4) adding or subtracting teams is great in theory but give us the option to change/create multiple AHL Teams to go with them. Along with that, editing the jerseys, the logos, arenas, etc would make it a true franchise mode. Also let us set the budget as the owner of the franchise. If I want to spend 10x more on coaching and scouting than another teams, I should be able to. And please get rid of Owner goals, some are nearly unattainable.
That is one thing that is definitely needed, but the bigger issue is that you need a way to create shell teams - no players on them - and then create players you add directly to that team. That greatly simplifies the ability to staff all those custom teams. They really ought to allow periodic expansions with shell teams you never fill as well.
@EA_Aljo wrote:
@kyl_35 wrote:
@EA_Aljo wrote:As far as being more transparent goes, I tried that with the True Broadcast camera thread. It wasn't as well received as I hoped. Normally, our transparency just results in more toxic responses. Which doesn't give us motivation to be more transparent.
I firmly disagree with you saying the responses you received in that thread were “toxic”. You received a lot of appreciation from people for the clarity while they were also expressing the frustration behind the decision.
Any of the posts you don’t like in that thread would have been as bad or worse had you said nothing.
The appreciation was great. That doesn't go unnoticed, but you're also not seeing the posts that had to be removed. While we know some people appreciate the transparency, it tends to invite a lot of rude responses. We expect to get them, but hoped for better in this case. Especially with the requests to be more transparent, which we did, but it didn't go over as well as we hoped. I'm not saying we'll never do that again, but as far as an experiment goes, it was met with mixed results.
@Beauts90 I believe you had a post that was part of a thread that was removed.
Transparency should not be about the results though imo. It should be something a company prides itself in because it values its customer’s concerns and the overall experience and connection they have with the company .
It is something to aspire for because it will set you apart from other companies that refuse to engage with their customers in an informative and honest manner. The negative replies that have to be removed would be perceived as a necessary evil to tolerate for that greater good.
i think we could have avoid all this issues if EA was honest to us, all we wanted its more clarification about true broadcast and full presentation just tell us the truth (EA) we know we won't have them this year just admit it so we could move on, the majority are mad because we've purchased that game and it feels so incomplete i know i'm repeating myself but what else can i say ? personally if somebody stole me a 100$ by giving me false advertising for a product that i'd like to buy and find out all he said was a lie i would have done everything to get my money back (but i can't anymore) or even report & file a police report about that person.... so i wish one day you will understand how we feel .
ps: its not about being negative we are just frustrated by how things went since the released of the game .
@kyl_35 wrote:And just to get the thread back on track…
I still haven’t bought the game and likely
won’t until a couple of things are fixed. One of those being Full Presentation coming back. Even then, one thing is certain…
Update: I bought the game today because I found it on Facebook marketplace for $30
@kyl_35But really, that’s all it’s worth now lol. I see it’s been dropped at Walmart, for 48 bucks Canadian. That’s insanely low for a brand new release. It’s not even a deal price. That’s just it’s normal price instead of 79.99
even then, I honestly wouldn’t even drop 20 bucks for it. It’s not worth it at all, in my opinion anyways
@EA_Aljo here is little tip for the future NHL games... You don't need and shouldn't remove ANYTHING that players has an choise to choose wich one to use... Full presentation or condensed... And also what comes to true broadcast camera... Why did that have to replace with something that really isn't TRUE broadcast? Why just not make new camera angle and keep that TRUE broadcast and name that new camera angle to something else...
People like when they have choises wich one to use... And because you did remove stuff what we had choises last year... Some of these wanted refund and some of those hasn't even bought the game and these people aren't coming back before you give these choises back... And like me and many others are really hoping these two things are both coming back... I know that i would buy the game IF these two things are coming back. So what i want for Christmas is FULL PRESENTATION and the ORIGINAL TRUE BROADCAST CAMERA.
We know exactly why you closed the biggest thread on the forum. Start a new one.... what difference does it make except keeping the thread less active and keeping out of view for new visitors to see it. Bring replays back. In NHL 23. Not in 24 because many of us are fed up with you.
