What do you all think
I think using AI to formulate ideas is fine, but when someone posts something that was clearly generated entirely by A.I. it devalues your feedback.
if EA made an NHL game that was so exceptional that it kept those fans and pulled in new players who don’t even normally play sports games, it could become one of the most respected sports titles in the industry.
Isn't it obvious that the goal of every single game developer that ever existed is to create a game that is so "exceptional that it kept those (old) fans and pulled in new players who don’t even normally play" ?
EA should and could capitalize. With today’s technology — especially openAI — there’s no reason this series couldn’t be the most authentic and immersive hockey game ever made.
Personally, I find it hilarious that OpenAI injected itself into this generated idea.
build the best version possible now and update it all season.
Again - literally the goal of every development team that ever existed.
Move to a subscription-based model so the game keeps evolving without needing to buy a new copy every September.
The sub would be $9 a month easy. $108 a year. What does a new game cost right now?
Weekly roster updates, evolving new animations, improved AI, and presentation tweaks rolled out year-round.
Again - I understand this entire post is Ai-generated slop, but you really should've proof-read this. None of these ideas take into consideration the actual manpower required to accomplish this stuff. It's just generating ideas with no credence to development.
The rest of your Ai-Generated post includes things that exist in the game already.
World Juniors, World Cup of Hockey, and Olympic hockey for national teams.
integration of leagues like the PWHL alongside NHL, AHL, CHL, and international tournaments.
Pre-game cinematic intros, reactive crowds,
KidShowtime1867 yes, I used ChatGPT to help organize my thoughts, but everything in that post came from me. It just made it easier to get it all written out, plus it reminded me of a couple features fans have been asking for that I might’ve missed.
The point I was making is that “making the best game possible” might be every developer’s goal, but it’s not EA’s business model. The devs could add all the stuff we want if they had the time and budget, but EA purposely holds features back and rolls them out slowly so we keep buying every year. That’s why nothing really changes, even when fans threaten boycotts.
The best sports games ever made happened because of dedicated human devs with the freedom to go all-in. That’s never going to happen here unless EA has a reason to change. The only way I see that happening is if the business model changes so EA actually makes more money giving us everything at once—otherwise, why would they? If they made the perfect NHL game today, half the player base could skip buying next year.
That’s where the yearly subscription idea comes in, it guarantees them the same (or more) revenue while letting the dev team keep improving the same game all year instead of drip-feeding us just enough to sell the next one.
Community ManagerThe point I was making is that “making the best game possible” might be every developer’s goal, but it’s not EA’s business model. The devs could add all the stuff we want if they had the time and budget, but EA purposely holds features back and rolls them out slowly so we keep buying every year. That’s why nothing really changes, even when fans threaten boycotts.
This really isn't true. We don't purposely hold back features. Everything has to be built, tested and balanced. This takes a tremendous amount of time. We don't have a bunch of stuff done already that we're just waiting to add. Even with a yearly subscription model, you'd probably see the same rate at which new features are added.
EA_Aljo it's not just a feeling; it’s a fact that many simple, in-depth features this franchise had over a decade ago are completely missing now, despite years of fans asking for them back. If the team truly has passionate developers (which I believe you do), then why haven’t these features returned? Even with next gen processors, this isn’t only about time; it’s about where the time is being allocated, and that’s why so many fans are upset. Across the EA community, there’s a strong belief that most focus goes to HUT because it brings in more money, and I can understand that. But omitting very important features feels either lazy or by design. What’s harder to understand is why so much depth has been taken out of modes like Be a Pro, Franchise, and Presentation that were done realistically a decade ago. From the outside, it looks like a strategic business decision or the result of priorities being shifted elsewhere. I understand that if you gave us everything we wanted at once, there’s a risk people wouldn’t feel the need to buy the game every single year, but that’s exactly why I keep coming back to the idea of a new business model that works for both EA and the fans.
Community ManagerOld features don't always work as the game moves to new platforms and technology. Only so much can be done in a year. Nobody is being lazy here. This is an unfortunate accusation considering how hard they work. You also have to consider not everyone has the same priorities. So, calling our developers lazy because they aren't handling someone's favorite part of the game, but are working on something they aren't interested in, really isn't fair. For example, presentation is a big deal to many of you, but not to others. Just like the people most interested in gameplay probably aren't going to care as much about players walking out the tunnel and such. We just have to be careful about what gets worked on year to year. Unfortunately, it means some are going to be disappointed because what they wanted got little or no attention.
The devs could add all the stuff we want if they had the time and budget
This statement is not based in reality. I understand that it's somewhat unreasonable to expect everyone on this forum to grasp the complexity of developing a videogame - especially the younger crowd who thinks adding a feature to a game is just a matter of pressing a button that says, 'add this feature'.
The truth of the matter is, adding a new game feature can trigger changes across physics, AI, animation, networking, UI, and sound, often requiring new assets that must be created, tested, optimized, and seamlessly integrated. Designers must balance the feature through multiple test cycles, and if it impacts multiplayer, ensure smooth network synchronization without lag or exploits. In large studios, the process also demands careful coordination across multiple teams to avoid disrupting production schedules.
That’s why nothing really changes, even when fans threaten boycotts.
I've been around this game and its community for longer than I want to admit. Every single year there's a subset of the community who feel personally attacked by EA because their very specific needs aren't being met. Sometimes it's a bug that's plagued the series for a while, sometimes it's a mechanic they haven't taken the time to fully understand. These people insist on creating threads, tweets - anything they can to generate some kind of 'viral' campaign to 'boycott this year's game'. It never works because aside from our typical gripes year after year, EA continues to put out a hockey game that the majority gravitate to.
The best sports games ever made happened because of dedicated human devs with the freedom to go all-in
Again with the AI generated replies. You need to prompt the AI to include what you would consider one of the "best sports games ever made" in order for it to formulate a coherent point. Without providing an example as a standard to hold EA to, you're just saying things with no substance.
The only way I see that happening is if the business model changes so EA actually makes more money giving us everything at once
Again - this statement holds no water. "If the business model changes, EA makes more money and we get everything we want".
Yes and if NASA just figured out zero point energy, humanity would no longer be held captive to burning fossil fuels. Like what's NASA even waiting for? Do they even want to make money? I think we should boycott NASA until they just change their business model to invent zero point energy. It's so weird they just dont' do it already.
If they made the perfect NHL game today, half the player base could skip buying next year.
I know right? Why don't they just make the perfect NHL game? What are they thinking?
That’s where the yearly subscription idea comes in, it guarantees them the same (or more) revenue while letting the dev team keep improving the same game all year instead of drip-feeding us just enough to sell the next one.
As EA_Aljo mentioned, even in a subscription based model, you'll still see similar development timelines with full feature releases still likely being 12-18 months apart.
You’re overcomplicating what I’m talking about. I’m not asking for “press a button, add a feature” — I’m pointing out that basic depth and realism that used to be in the game has been stripped out of Franchise, Be a Pro, and Presentation for years, and despite fans asking, it’s never been brought back. We’re not talking brand-new, physics-breaking innovations here. We’re talking about basic features that were already in NHL over a decade ago, ran fine, and made the experience better.
You also can’t ignore the fact EA has a monopoly on licensed hockey games. There’s no competition breathing down their neck, and they’ve shifted focus to HUT because it’s the cash cow. I get why they do it — it makes money — but pretending that doesn’t affect where time and resources go is just being willfully blind.
That’s the point of bringing up the business model. I’m not even saying necessarily“give us everything at once,” just bring back the core features that made past games great. Right now, there’s no financial reason to do that. But if a model like a subscription guaranteed long-term revenue while letting devs work on one evolving game instead of chopping it into yearly releases, they could bring those features back and still keep the lights on.
We’re talking about basic features that were already in NHL over a decade ago, ran fine, and made the experience better.
What features? My dude - you need to understand that in order for ChatGPT to provide a response that has some substance, you need to prompt it properly. You're just saying platitudes like "realism needs to be brought back" and "they just need to change their entire business model". These statements mean nothing without actual examples of exactly what you mean.
just bring back the core features that made past games great
like what? provide some actual examples instead of word salad from ChatGPT.
But if it’s really good and you want to keep playing, most people would keep their subscription going year after year
Again with this "If the game was good, people would buy it". Like.. my guy... please understand the vagueness of these statements makes them drip with insincerity.
it is just a fail safe for EA to roll out a better, higher quality game with many more feature missing and for players to continue subscribing if it is worth it.
How?! Please provide an actual specific example of how a 12-month development cycle would differ under a subscription model. You haven't laid out any specifics other than "if they made the game great, people would subscribe"
KidShowtime1867 I'm 39 and have been playing this game since NHL94 every single year. I've likely been around this game just as long as you have...
