EA Forums - Banner

Nomore yearly releases?

Replies

  • MarxQc wrote: »
    MarxQc wrote: »
    A healthy model is one time payment and supported by micro transactions. There's no reason for a subscription unless it's a game like eve or wow with an always live always changing world they have to maintain constantly.

    Supported by M.transaction ???
    Micros is the MAIN reason( with yearly release) why this game and all sports game are rotten now...
    They tweak game play, player develppment in relation with MTs.
    Games can support themself just by the single price off the sale if the game is decent enough. If they'D stop spending more than half the budget on marketing.

    How About: you make a good game and ill buy it so you can make money. Just like in everyother consummers market...

    Why are you all trying to find ways on how they could suck more cash out of you for a **** product. ??? They make money... you all get that, right ? They already make money. And i'm reading that you'd accept MT and subscrition... This is blowing me off my chair.
    Not only that but they already make money with a **** product, copypasta from last year... just imagine if they'd put a decent thing outhere... This is a nonsense.

    Simple. Make a good game.

    Rocket league and counter strike are great games yet they still have micro transactions. Yes in those games they are 100% cosmetic but they are there to support continued development. Also I'm sure sanctioned esports tournaments help too.

    How can you compare those ? i paid 20$ for RL and 80 $ for nhl. X4 the price !!!
    One is a completely new original game and design and one is a cheaply tweaked copypasta from last year and the year before. guess the one who should cost 20 and the one 80 ... ?
    one has a game(mode) built around MT and one you can buy new hats and rims with MT...
    Support continued developpement. lol At 80$ a piece... support developpement... seriously ? lol At 80$ i EXPECT some kind of effort. How much they need 100 ? 150 ? lol... C'mon...
    support share holders that only cares about next semester profit you mean.

    Edit: My point is: stop trying to find ways to/supporting the subscription/ microtransactions scam for a muultinational company thats sells below par products at a huge price. They make a fortune and we already give them more money than justified for the product they offer. MT is just an insult added to the already over inflated price.

    You must not have read all of my posts. I was talking about either free to play or a one time fee for the game as opposed to a subscription or annual release.
  • Workin_OT wrote: »
    MarxQc wrote: »
    STOP IT WITH SUBSCRITPTION. !!! Its called yearly release. We already have that at 80$ / year !!! Lol Seriously. What the heiall is it different form now ?!?!?!
    You want to stop having to buy the game every year. in replacement ( in order to have better developpement) you want to pay every year for the game ? i dont get it...
    I bought the last 3 nhl at 80$ a piece plus taxes and you'Re trying to convince me that with only 50$ a year we'll have better product... ????

    THere is no rush to make the game. Nothing changes !!! not even bug fixes... seriously...
    more money doesnt = higher quality.

    Try being less angry, eh bud?

    Yearly releases means there is a set window of development time for each iteration. Say it's 8 months, Dec-July. They have to try and fix bugs, upgrade existing mechanics, develop new mechanics, and worst of all come up with some new features/modes to sell the game around.

    If they get away from the yearly release there is all of a sudden no exact time window for development. They don't have to work on big shiny things to market the game around either. They'd get to work on new features and new mechanics as long as they need and release them when they are truly ready rather than pushing them out for the new game and just saying, 'eh they're good enough for now we'll try and patch it sometime after release.

    That is how the quality of the game could increase.

    Yearly released sports games are an ancient business model that hinder the developers. Hopefully they are serious about this change and make it sooner than later.

    Sorry about that. I just don't get that ppl act like this is the governement we're talking about. More money doesnt = better service. The extra money isnt for developpement but for shareholders. Giving them more money for a broken game will not make the game better.. it will stop the progression of the game instead.

    And im sorry but in the years we live in, there's no real windows, All games have day 1 patches. And have "fixes" all year long.

    I agree with you that yearly release is ****. We paid 80$ for a game and we expect customer service, wich include bugs fixes. Wich could include yearly rooster updates for a couple of years considering the amount of investements they put in this game.
    But you do get that majority of games (exept AAA company) comes out one time at lower price. that are quality products. Games that require much more developpment than NHl (that's just always the same). and yet still make profit.

    You do get that they make a lot of money right ? And that they invest little to nothing.
  • MarxQc wrote: »
    Workin_OT wrote: »
    MarxQc wrote: »
    STOP IT WITH SUBSCRITPTION. !!! Its called yearly release. We already have that at 80$ / year !!! Lol Seriously. What the heiall is it different form now ?!?!?!
    You want to stop having to buy the game every year. in replacement ( in order to have better developpement) you want to pay every year for the game ? i dont get it...
    I bought the last 3 nhl at 80$ a piece plus taxes and you'Re trying to convince me that with only 50$ a year we'll have better product... ????

    THere is no rush to make the game. Nothing changes !!! not even bug fixes... seriously...
    more money doesnt = higher quality.

    Try being less angry, eh bud?

    Yearly releases means there is a set window of development time for each iteration. Say it's 8 months, Dec-July. They have to try and fix bugs, upgrade existing mechanics, develop new mechanics, and worst of all come up with some new features/modes to sell the game around.

    If they get away from the yearly release there is all of a sudden no exact time window for development. They don't have to work on big shiny things to market the game around either. They'd get to work on new features and new mechanics as long as they need and release them when they are truly ready rather than pushing them out for the new game and just saying, 'eh they're good enough for now we'll try and patch it sometime after release.

    That is how the quality of the game could increase.

    Yearly released sports games are an ancient business model that hinder the developers. Hopefully they are serious about this change and make it sooner than later.

    Sorry about that. I just don't get that ppl act like this is the governement we're talking about. More money doesnt = better service. The extra money isnt for developpement but for shareholders. Giving them more money for a broken game will not make the game better.. it will stop the progression of the game instead.

    And im sorry but in the years we live in, there's no real windows, All games have day 1 patches. And have "fixes" all year long.

    I agree with you that yearly release is ****. We paid 80$ for a game and we expect customer service, wich include bugs fixes. Wich could include yearly rooster updates for a couple of years considering the amount of investements they put in this game.
    But you do get that majority of games (exept AAA company) comes out one time at lower price. that are quality products. Games that require much more developpment than NHl (that's just always the same). and yet still make profit.

    You do get that they make a lot of money right ? And that they invest little to nothing.

    Where are you getting we would be giving them more money from?

    If you buy the game every year you are already paying a subscription fee of $80 a year in canada.

    With a subscription fee based business model it wouldn't cost the consumer more money. At worst it would cost you the same $80 per year, but since they aren't publishing a 'new game' every year that requires new discs and packaging, you could potentially pay even less, maybe $50 per year.

  • Workin_OT wrote: »
    MarxQc wrote: »
    Workin_OT wrote: »
    MarxQc wrote: »
    STOP IT WITH SUBSCRITPTION. !!! Its called yearly release. We already have that at 80$ / year !!! Lol Seriously. What the heiall is it different form now ?!?!?!
    You want to stop having to buy the game every year. in replacement ( in order to have better developpement) you want to pay every year for the game ? i dont get it...
    I bought the last 3 nhl at 80$ a piece plus taxes and you'Re trying to convince me that with only 50$ a year we'll have better product... ????

    THere is no rush to make the game. Nothing changes !!! not even bug fixes... seriously...
    more money doesnt = higher quality.

    Try being less angry, eh bud?

    Yearly releases means there is a set window of development time for each iteration. Say it's 8 months, Dec-July. They have to try and fix bugs, upgrade existing mechanics, develop new mechanics, and worst of all come up with some new features/modes to sell the game around.

    If they get away from the yearly release there is all of a sudden no exact time window for development. They don't have to work on big shiny things to market the game around either. They'd get to work on new features and new mechanics as long as they need and release them when they are truly ready rather than pushing them out for the new game and just saying, 'eh they're good enough for now we'll try and patch it sometime after release.

    That is how the quality of the game could increase.

    Yearly released sports games are an ancient business model that hinder the developers. Hopefully they are serious about this change and make it sooner than later.

    Sorry about that. I just don't get that ppl act like this is the governement we're talking about. More money doesnt = better service. The extra money isnt for developpement but for shareholders. Giving them more money for a broken game will not make the game better.. it will stop the progression of the game instead.

    And im sorry but in the years we live in, there's no real windows, All games have day 1 patches. And have "fixes" all year long.

    I agree with you that yearly release is ****. We paid 80$ for a game and we expect customer service, wich include bugs fixes. Wich could include yearly rooster updates for a couple of years considering the amount of investements they put in this game.
    But you do get that majority of games (exept AAA company) comes out one time at lower price. that are quality products. Games that require much more developpment than NHl (that's just always the same). and yet still make profit.

    You do get that they make a lot of money right ? And that they invest little to nothing.

    Where are you getting we would be giving them more money from?

    If you buy the game every year you are already paying a subscription fee of $80 a year in canada.

    With a subscription fee based business model it wouldn't cost the consumer more money. At worst it would cost you the same $80 per year, but since they aren't publishing a 'new game' every year that requires new discs and packaging, you could potentially pay even less, maybe $50 per year.

    I didnt express myself proprely there.
    Micro transactions and subs/ yearly release is giving them more money, from the point of view that you pay for the game and that's it... wouldnt that be fantastic ! lol You know, almost the way it was before nhl went to crap. lol
    From the point of view that a lot of posts includes either Micro, yearly release and subs.

    I'm trying to put up a voice against that. For quality product. How about that ?: I pay 80$ for a game that has no Micro transaction ( expect cosmetics maybe), no subs and no yearly release. and that offer me consumer service by fixing the bugs.
  • MarxQc wrote: »
    Workin_OT wrote: »
    MarxQc wrote: »
    Workin_OT wrote: »
    MarxQc wrote: »
    STOP IT WITH SUBSCRITPTION. !!! Its called yearly release. We already have that at 80$ / year !!! Lol Seriously. What the heiall is it different form now ?!?!?!
    You want to stop having to buy the game every year. in replacement ( in order to have better developpement) you want to pay every year for the game ? i dont get it...
    I bought the last 3 nhl at 80$ a piece plus taxes and you'Re trying to convince me that with only 50$ a year we'll have better product... ????

    THere is no rush to make the game. Nothing changes !!! not even bug fixes... seriously...
    more money doesnt = higher quality.

    Try being less angry, eh bud?

    Yearly releases means there is a set window of development time for each iteration. Say it's 8 months, Dec-July. They have to try and fix bugs, upgrade existing mechanics, develop new mechanics, and worst of all come up with some new features/modes to sell the game around.

    If they get away from the yearly release there is all of a sudden no exact time window for development. They don't have to work on big shiny things to market the game around either. They'd get to work on new features and new mechanics as long as they need and release them when they are truly ready rather than pushing them out for the new game and just saying, 'eh they're good enough for now we'll try and patch it sometime after release.

    That is how the quality of the game could increase.

    Yearly released sports games are an ancient business model that hinder the developers. Hopefully they are serious about this change and make it sooner than later.

    Sorry about that. I just don't get that ppl act like this is the governement we're talking about. More money doesnt = better service. The extra money isnt for developpement but for shareholders. Giving them more money for a broken game will not make the game better.. it will stop the progression of the game instead.

    And im sorry but in the years we live in, there's no real windows, All games have day 1 patches. And have "fixes" all year long.

    I agree with you that yearly release is ****. We paid 80$ for a game and we expect customer service, wich include bugs fixes. Wich could include yearly rooster updates for a couple of years considering the amount of investements they put in this game.
    But you do get that majority of games (exept AAA company) comes out one time at lower price. that are quality products. Games that require much more developpment than NHl (that's just always the same). and yet still make profit.

    You do get that they make a lot of money right ? And that they invest little to nothing.

    Where are you getting we would be giving them more money from?

    If you buy the game every year you are already paying a subscription fee of $80 a year in canada.

    With a subscription fee based business model it wouldn't cost the consumer more money. At worst it would cost you the same $80 per year, but since they aren't publishing a 'new game' every year that requires new discs and packaging, you could potentially pay even less, maybe $50 per year.

    I didnt express myself proprely there.
    Micro transactions and subs/ yearly release is giving them more money, from the point of view that you pay for the game and that's it... wouldnt that be fantastic ! lol You know, almost the way it was before nhl went to crap. lol
    From the point of view that a lot of posts includes either Micro, yearly release and subs.

    I'm trying to put up a voice against that. For quality product. How about that ?: I pay 80$ for a game that has no Micro transaction ( expect cosmetics maybe), no subs and no yearly release. and that offer me consumer service by fixing the bugs.

    Still don't quite follow you.

    You wouldn't pay for a yearly release and a subscription. It would be one or the other.

    Subscription model could potentially raise the quality of the product. I don't understand why you are trying to be a voice against that.
  • deadman9999
    877 posts Member
    edited November 2017
    They havent even patched the looping/resetting in this game yet and you think they will keep the patches coming in this format? lol nope

    Do you ever have anything nice or positive to say? Why even bother coming here if you are only here to troll? What benefit does that have to anyone?

    You need to realize what trolling is. Speaking an honest, albeit negative opinion of something isn't trolling. He's right. Why would EA impress us with a different model, when they barely have the talent to maintain their current iteration? Cut the crap misusing hackneyed words.

    I was a bit positive when the game launched, I enjoyed how EA handled the nets coming off from the beta it was a good mix, but EA has taken all the cool things away and is back to NHL 17.5
  • Workin_OT wrote: »
    MarxQc wrote: »
    Workin_OT wrote: »
    MarxQc wrote: »
    Workin_OT wrote: »
    MarxQc wrote: »
    STOP IT WITH SUBSCRITPTION. !!! Its called yearly release. We already have that at 80$ / year !!! Lol Seriously. What the heiall is it different form now ?!?!?!
    You want to stop having to buy the game every year. in replacement ( in order to have better developpement) you want to pay every year for the game ? i dont get it...
    I bought the last 3 nhl at 80$ a piece plus taxes and you'Re trying to convince me that with only 50$ a year we'll have better product... ????

    THere is no rush to make the game. Nothing changes !!! not even bug fixes... seriously...
    more money doesnt = higher quality.

    Try being less angry, eh bud?

    Yearly releases means there is a set window of development time for each iteration. Say it's 8 months, Dec-July. They have to try and fix bugs, upgrade existing mechanics, develop new mechanics, and worst of all come up with some new features/modes to sell the game around.

    If they get away from the yearly release there is all of a sudden no exact time window for development. They don't have to work on big shiny things to market the game around either. They'd get to work on new features and new mechanics as long as they need and release them when they are truly ready rather than pushing them out for the new game and just saying, 'eh they're good enough for now we'll try and patch it sometime after release.

    That is how the quality of the game could increase.

    Yearly released sports games are an ancient business model that hinder the developers. Hopefully they are serious about this change and make it sooner than later.

    Sorry about that. I just don't get that ppl act like this is the governement we're talking about. More money doesnt = better service. The extra money isnt for developpement but for shareholders. Giving them more money for a broken game will not make the game better.. it will stop the progression of the game instead.

    And im sorry but in the years we live in, there's no real windows, All games have day 1 patches. And have "fixes" all year long.

    I agree with you that yearly release is ****. We paid 80$ for a game and we expect customer service, wich include bugs fixes. Wich could include yearly rooster updates for a couple of years considering the amount of investements they put in this game.
    But you do get that majority of games (exept AAA company) comes out one time at lower price. that are quality products. Games that require much more developpment than NHl (that's just always the same). and yet still make profit.

    You do get that they make a lot of money right ? And that they invest little to nothing.

    Where are you getting we would be giving them more money from?

    If you buy the game every year you are already paying a subscription fee of $80 a year in canada.

    With a subscription fee based business model it wouldn't cost the consumer more money. At worst it would cost you the same $80 per year, but since they aren't publishing a 'new game' every year that requires new discs and packaging, you could potentially pay even less, maybe $50 per year.

    I didnt express myself proprely there.
    Micro transactions and subs/ yearly release is giving them more money, from the point of view that you pay for the game and that's it... wouldnt that be fantastic ! lol You know, almost the way it was before nhl went to crap. lol
    From the point of view that a lot of posts includes either Micro, yearly release and subs.

    I'm trying to put up a voice against that. For quality product. How about that ?: I pay 80$ for a game that has no Micro transaction ( expect cosmetics maybe), no subs and no yearly release. and that offer me consumer service by fixing the bugs.

    Still don't quite follow you.

    You wouldn't pay for a yearly release and a subscription. It would be one or the other.

    Subscription model could potentially raise the quality of the product. I don't understand why you are trying to be a voice against that.

    Why would it have to be one or another. Why not none and offer a good service after sale ?
    Why does one sale a game at 20$ and offer updates for years and make profit ?
  • deadman9999
    877 posts Member
    edited November 2017
    has anyone yet stop to think what the leagues themselves are saying about this? You think the NFL,NHL, FIFA want a game that only comes out every couple years? I dunno about that these games gets people excited about the upcoming seasons ahead, and what about ESPORTS you think people wanna watch the same game over and over? How often would EA fix the same glitch moves, all questions that have to be asked before doing something like this.. especially with the exclusive deal with NFL would NFL sign the contract after its up again? I kinda feel that EA wants to get away from sports games altogether... I could see NFL 2K be reborn again in the next 10 years
  • has anyone yet stop to think what the leagues themselves are saying about this? You think the NFL,NHL, FIFA want a game that only comes out every couple years? I dunno about that these games gets people excited about the upcoming seasons ahead

    A new release model for video game NHL would have zero effect on the real sports leagues lol.
    and what about ESPORTS you think people wanna watch the same game over and over?

    Yes, people watch counter strike, league of legends, and rocket league over and over because they are well designed and maintained games. If NHL was appealing from a spectator point of view, it could do well in an esports market too.
    How often would EA fix the same glitch moves, all questions that have to be asked before doing something like this..
    If they released one game, they could work on glitches and bugs on an ongoing basis with no pressure from deadlines. That's how all of the big games operate currently. They release new patch updates as needed to improve the game and they bring in revenue through micro transactions.
    especially with the exclusive deal with NFL would NFL sign the contract after its up again? I kinda feel that EA wants to get away from sports games altogether... I could see NFL 2K be reborn again in the next 10 years

    Not sure what you're getting at here.



    The winning formula for game design in 2017 includes:

    - release one game
    - build up a huge community because everyone is playing the SAME game.
    - provide stable online experience
    - have great replay sharing tools so people can share via social media to try and create viral videos (free advertisement)
    - provide updates and maintenance on an ongoing basis.
    - keep bringing in revenue through microtransactions that do not break or influence the outcome of games.
  • MarxQc wrote: »
    Workin_OT wrote: »
    MarxQc wrote: »
    Workin_OT wrote: »
    MarxQc wrote: »
    Workin_OT wrote: »
    MarxQc wrote: »
    STOP IT WITH SUBSCRITPTION. !!! Its called yearly release. We already have that at 80$ / year !!! Lol Seriously. What the heiall is it different form now ?!?!?!
    You want to stop having to buy the game every year. in replacement ( in order to have better developpement) you want to pay every year for the game ? i dont get it...
    I bought the last 3 nhl at 80$ a piece plus taxes and you'Re trying to convince me that with only 50$ a year we'll have better product... ????

    THere is no rush to make the game. Nothing changes !!! not even bug fixes... seriously...
    more money doesnt = higher quality.

    Try being less angry, eh bud?

    Yearly releases means there is a set window of development time for each iteration. Say it's 8 months, Dec-July. They have to try and fix bugs, upgrade existing mechanics, develop new mechanics, and worst of all come up with some new features/modes to sell the game around.

    If they get away from the yearly release there is all of a sudden no exact time window for development. They don't have to work on big shiny things to market the game around either. They'd get to work on new features and new mechanics as long as they need and release them when they are truly ready rather than pushing them out for the new game and just saying, 'eh they're good enough for now we'll try and patch it sometime after release.

    That is how the quality of the game could increase.

    Yearly released sports games are an ancient business model that hinder the developers. Hopefully they are serious about this change and make it sooner than later.

    Sorry about that. I just don't get that ppl act like this is the governement we're talking about. More money doesnt = better service. The extra money isnt for developpement but for shareholders. Giving them more money for a broken game will not make the game better.. it will stop the progression of the game instead.

    And im sorry but in the years we live in, there's no real windows, All games have day 1 patches. And have "fixes" all year long.

    I agree with you that yearly release is ****. We paid 80$ for a game and we expect customer service, wich include bugs fixes. Wich could include yearly rooster updates for a couple of years considering the amount of investements they put in this game.
    But you do get that majority of games (exept AAA company) comes out one time at lower price. that are quality products. Games that require much more developpment than NHl (that's just always the same). and yet still make profit.

    You do get that they make a lot of money right ? And that they invest little to nothing.

    Where are you getting we would be giving them more money from?

    If you buy the game every year you are already paying a subscription fee of $80 a year in canada.

    With a subscription fee based business model it wouldn't cost the consumer more money. At worst it would cost you the same $80 per year, but since they aren't publishing a 'new game' every year that requires new discs and packaging, you could potentially pay even less, maybe $50 per year.

    I didnt express myself proprely there.
    Micro transactions and subs/ yearly release is giving them more money, from the point of view that you pay for the game and that's it... wouldnt that be fantastic ! lol You know, almost the way it was before nhl went to crap. lol
    From the point of view that a lot of posts includes either Micro, yearly release and subs.

    I'm trying to put up a voice against that. For quality product. How about that ?: I pay 80$ for a game that has no Micro transaction ( expect cosmetics maybe), no subs and no yearly release. and that offer me consumer service by fixing the bugs.

    Still don't quite follow you.

    You wouldn't pay for a yearly release and a subscription. It would be one or the other.

    Subscription model could potentially raise the quality of the product. I don't understand why you are trying to be a voice against that.

    Why would it have to be one or another. Why not none and offer a good service after sale ?
    Why does one sale a game at 20$ and offer updates for years and make profit ?

    It would be great if it were non but we all know that isn't going to happen, eh bud?
  • Workin_OT wrote: »
    MarxQc wrote: »
    Workin_OT wrote: »
    MarxQc wrote: »
    Workin_OT wrote: »
    MarxQc wrote: »
    Workin_OT wrote: »
    MarxQc wrote: »
    STOP IT WITH SUBSCRITPTION. !!! Its called yearly release. We already have that at 80$ / year !!! Lol Seriously. What the heiall is it different form now ?!?!?!
    You want to stop having to buy the game every year. in replacement ( in order to have better developpement) you want to pay every year for the game ? i dont get it...
    I bought the last 3 nhl at 80$ a piece plus taxes and you'Re trying to convince me that with only 50$ a year we'll have better product... ????

    THere is no rush to make the game. Nothing changes !!! not even bug fixes... seriously...
    more money doesnt = higher quality.

    Try being less angry, eh bud?

    Yearly releases means there is a set window of development time for each iteration. Say it's 8 months, Dec-July. They have to try and fix bugs, upgrade existing mechanics, develop new mechanics, and worst of all come up with some new features/modes to sell the game around.

    If they get away from the yearly release there is all of a sudden no exact time window for development. They don't have to work on big shiny things to market the game around either. They'd get to work on new features and new mechanics as long as they need and release them when they are truly ready rather than pushing them out for the new game and just saying, 'eh they're good enough for now we'll try and patch it sometime after release.

    That is how the quality of the game could increase.

    Yearly released sports games are an ancient business model that hinder the developers. Hopefully they are serious about this change and make it sooner than later.

    Sorry about that. I just don't get that ppl act like this is the governement we're talking about. More money doesnt = better service. The extra money isnt for developpement but for shareholders. Giving them more money for a broken game will not make the game better.. it will stop the progression of the game instead.

    And im sorry but in the years we live in, there's no real windows, All games have day 1 patches. And have "fixes" all year long.

    I agree with you that yearly release is ****. We paid 80$ for a game and we expect customer service, wich include bugs fixes. Wich could include yearly rooster updates for a couple of years considering the amount of investements they put in this game.
    But you do get that majority of games (exept AAA company) comes out one time at lower price. that are quality products. Games that require much more developpment than NHl (that's just always the same). and yet still make profit.

    You do get that they make a lot of money right ? And that they invest little to nothing.

    Where are you getting we would be giving them more money from?

    If you buy the game every year you are already paying a subscription fee of $80 a year in canada.

    With a subscription fee based business model it wouldn't cost the consumer more money. At worst it would cost you the same $80 per year, but since they aren't publishing a 'new game' every year that requires new discs and packaging, you could potentially pay even less, maybe $50 per year.

    I didnt express myself proprely there.
    Micro transactions and subs/ yearly release is giving them more money, from the point of view that you pay for the game and that's it... wouldnt that be fantastic ! lol You know, almost the way it was before nhl went to crap. lol
    From the point of view that a lot of posts includes either Micro, yearly release and subs.

    I'm trying to put up a voice against that. For quality product. How about that ?: I pay 80$ for a game that has no Micro transaction ( expect cosmetics maybe), no subs and no yearly release. and that offer me consumer service by fixing the bugs.

    Still don't quite follow you.

    You wouldn't pay for a yearly release and a subscription. It would be one or the other.

    Subscription model could potentially raise the quality of the product. I don't understand why you are trying to be a voice against that.

    Why would it have to be one or another. Why not none and offer a good service after sale ?
    Why does one sale a game at 20$ and offer updates for years and make profit ?

    It would be great if it were non but we all know that isn't going to happen, eh bud?

    Looping, crashes, glitches and bugs fixes aren't going to happen either. Doesnt mean its acceptable. Eh bud

    Just read the post right above your last post. Thats what i'm talking about. Thats gaming.
  • at some point you gotta consider concessions. $80 a year currently to play the "new" game which is a glorified patch. That cost includes printing on cds cover athlete, marketing and all sort of other costs.

    you get 0 after sale service and support other than the one half baked patch or two.

    Instead you can pay similar or EVEN if it was say $120 a year instead of $80 BUT now you get full focus on game development, regular updates, support for the game after sale, events etc. Its totally worth it. But thats a big if. They can probably cut the marketing and shipping and crap cost and hire more arts developers for mtx and do a $60-$80 a year pricing model and have much better product. They COULD go free to play + mtx but I dont see their execs going that route now because of all the suckers who buy the game each year still. I dunno I could be surprised.

    if I was them id include them with EA access so you still have to pay for EA access but you get access to all sports game and then these games have MTX.



  • CrushNHL
    460 posts Member
    edited November 2017
    If they made NHL (And all their sports games, really) Free-To-Play + Microtransactions I’d be willing to bet they would attract at least 10x as many new players to the game which would result in an exponential hike in HUT earnings.

    It’s a no-brainer business move.
  • symmer1983 wrote: »
    has anyone yet stop to think what the leagues themselves are saying about this? You think the NFL,NHL, FIFA want a game that only comes out every couple years? I dunno about that these games gets people excited about the upcoming seasons ahead

    A new release model for video game NHL would have zero effect on the real sports leagues lol.
    and what about ESPORTS you think people wanna watch the same game over and over?

    Yes, people watch counter strike, league of legends, and rocket league over and over because they are well designed and maintained games. If NHL was appealing from a spectator point of view, it could do well in an esports market too.
    How often would EA fix the same glitch moves, all questions that have to be asked before doing something like this..
    If they released one game, they could work on glitches and bugs on an ongoing basis with no pressure from deadlines. That's how all of the big games operate currently. They release new patch updates as needed to improve the game and they bring in revenue through micro transactions.
    especially with the exclusive deal with NFL would NFL sign the contract after its up again? I kinda feel that EA wants to get away from sports games altogether... I could see NFL 2K be reborn again in the next 10 years

    Not sure what you're getting at here.



    The winning formula for game design in 2017 includes:

    - release one game
    - build up a huge community because everyone is playing the SAME game.
    - provide stable online experience
    - have great replay sharing tools so people can share via social media to try and create viral videos (free advertisement)
    - provide updates and maintenance on an ongoing basis.
    - keep bringing in revenue through microtransactions that do not break or influence the outcome of games.

    This guy gets it. This is how video games should be designed.
  • Sgt_Kelso
    1325 posts Member
    edited November 2017

    I've never seen him brag about being a game changer. I didn't even know he was one until someone (maybe you in another thread) mentioned that he was one.

    Oh, the title 'game changer' beside his name wasn't a clue?
  • Sgt_Kelso wrote: »

    I've never seen him brag about being a game changer. I didn't even know he was one until someone (maybe you in another thread) mentioned that he was one.

    Oh, the title 'game changer' beside his name wasn't a clue?

    Doesn't show on mobile
  • In general, I'd be fine with a subscription, but when it comes to EA, I have no faith in them to actually be doing this to improve the quality of the game. I imagine this is mostly seen as a way to save costs on the following:
    1. Not needing to have developers working on two code bases (patches for old, improvement for new)
    2. Not needing to keep game servers up for any old versions
    3. Not needing as much marketing every year (don't need to convince people to spend $60 on the new game, just keep their $5/month subscription)
    4. Don't need to have "marketable" features like new dekes every year

    I'm sure there's others too, and while a good developer might take those cost savings and invest it back in the game to make something better, I look at EA and see a company with profits of close to 1 billion per year that doesn't need to cut costs if they want to improve their games, and has a fairly consistent history of doing as little as possible. All I see when I look at that list is:
    1. Now we don't need as many developers
    2. Now we don't need as many servers, and can reset all HUT teams as often as we want!
    3. Now we don't need as many marketers
    4. Now we need even fewer developers

    I realize this is an extremely cynical point of view, but I just don't see how anyone can trust EA to be making this decision for the betterment of the games.
  • In general, I'd be fine with a subscription, but when it comes to EA, I have no faith in them to actually be doing this to improve the quality of the game. I imagine this is mostly seen as a way to save costs on the following:
    1. Not needing to have developers working on two code bases (patches for old, improvement for new)
    2. Not needing to keep game servers up for any old versions
    3. Not needing as much marketing every year (don't need to convince people to spend $60 on the new game, just keep their $5/month subscription)
    4. Don't need to have "marketable" features like new dekes every year

    I'm sure there's others too, and while a good developer might take those cost savings and invest it back in the game to make something better, I look at EA and see a company with profits of close to 1 billion per year that doesn't need to cut costs if they want to improve their games, and has a fairly consistent history of doing as little as possible. All I see when I look at that list is:
    1. Now we don't need as many developers
    2. Now we don't need as many servers, and can reset all HUT teams as often as we want!
    3. Now we don't need as many marketers
    4. Now we need even fewer developers

    I realize this is an extremely cynical point of view, but I just don't see how anyone can trust EA to be making this decision for the betterment of the games.

    That's why I say if the guys working on the game really had passion for what they are doing and wanted to make a really great hockey game they'd quit and go on kickstarter and start a new studio and make a non nhl licensed game focusing on a game mode like eashl and making it perfect.

    Corporate ea is holding them back.
  • jake19ny
    688 posts Member
    edited November 2017
    Hard to imagine but taking a year off for this series would be disaster. People are angry enough year to year with the lack of innovation and improvements so just imagine you waited 2 years and were disappointed. Honestly after playing NHL16 if they didn’t release again until 18 would you be blown away? The improvements from 16 to 18 are minuscule at best in fact next gen has been a disaster for this development crew that clearly doesn’t understand the game of hockey or the consoles they are developing for
  • MarxQc
    85 posts Member
    edited November 2017
    jake19ny wrote: »
    Hard to imagine but taking a year off for this series would be disaster. People are angry enough year to year with the lack of innovation and improvements so just imagine you waited 2 years and were disappointed. Honestly after playing NHL16 if they didn’t release again until 18 would you be blown away? The improvements from 16 to 18 are minuscule at best in fact next gen has been a disaster for this development crew that clearly doesn’t understand the game of hockey or the consoles they are developing for

    In that scenario, what happens if next year is no show, no impovement. ? Same bugs ?
    I,m not buying this game until theres major changes. Im done , And by looking at the forum, im sure im not the only one.
    And im not talking about removing 2 players off the Ice and claiming its all new game impovements. If i Buy à new NHL game. It will be a NEW NHL game.

    But i get what youre saying. Ppl feel cheated.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.