EA Forums - Banner

Am I alone here?.....

Replies

  • Sinbin wrote: »

    But just getting rid of something as a "fix" is the norm in these parts.... Heck, they "got rid" of two skaters and marketed it as a hot new game mode. This is largely what IS ignored and ya still stuff money in their pockets.

    You guys act like Threes is just a mode where they removed 2 players and called it good. A lot more went in to it. The whole money puck feature, new commentary, new graphics, designs, a circuit mode, etc. Then there's all the testing and QA. This was also a pretty highly requested feature from casual players ever since it was introduced in the NHL a few years ago.

    You also don't seem to grasp that the game needs to make money. They can't just keep trying to satisfy the hardcore crowd. There needs to be a reason for the much bigger, casual crowd to buy it. That is what makes the game grow. The hardcore crowd here wants to see people stop spending money on the game in the hopes that it magically becomes what they want. If you want it grow it needs to make money. This game is not cheap to make by any means.


    Market summary > Electronic Arts Inc.

    NASDAQ: EA - Jan 12, 4:31 PM EST

    113.13USD Price increase 1.13 (1.01%)


    EA seems to be doin just fine. They have all the cool loot boxes and people throwing money at HUT / MUT. They will be ok.

    Heck, there was a guy over on the Madden forums losing his mind over "fair play" when stating he spent thousands in MUT? I mean.... really?

    yes I understand the game has to make money.

    and if the Threes mode is there to "grow the game" or expand outside the hardcore crowd, what do the sales nummies break out like? meaning, games sold at full price, games sold at reduced price. and for that matter, is the actual number of games being played this year on par to years past?
  • Sinbin
    1331 posts Member
    Sinbin wrote: »

    But just getting rid of something as a "fix" is the norm in these parts.... Heck, they "got rid" of two skaters and marketed it as a hot new game mode. This is largely what IS ignored and ya still stuff money in their pockets.

    You guys act like Threes is just a mode where they removed 2 players and called it good. A lot more went in to it. The whole money puck feature, new commentary, new graphics, designs, a circuit mode, etc. Then there's all the testing and QA. This was also a pretty highly requested feature from casual players ever since it was introduced in the NHL a few years ago.

    You also don't seem to grasp that the game needs to make money. They can't just keep trying to satisfy the hardcore crowd. There needs to be a reason for the much bigger, casual crowd to buy it. That is what makes the game grow. The hardcore crowd here wants to see people stop spending money on the game in the hopes that it magically becomes what they want. If you want it grow it needs to make money. This game is not cheap to make by any means.


    Market summary > Electronic Arts Inc.

    NASDAQ: EA - Jan 12, 4:31 PM EST

    113.13USD Price increase 1.13 (1.01%)


    EA seems to be doin just fine. They have all the cool loot boxes and people throwing money at HUT / MUT. They will be ok.

    Heck, there was a guy over on the Madden forums losing his mind over "fair play" when stating he spent thousands in MUT? I mean.... really?

    yes I understand the game has to make money.

    and if the Threes mode is there to "grow the game" or expand outside the hardcore crowd, what do the sales nummies break out like? meaning, games sold at full price, games sold at reduced price. and for that matter, is the actual number of games being played this year on par to years past?

    Loot boxes were removed from BF2.If you're talking about Ultimate Team, I imagine that brings in a lot for this game, but the fact is that if the game made more it would reflect in the product. Also, each game is going to have its own budget. Just because the company as a whole is doing well, it doesn't mean they keep dumping money in to franchises that don't make money.

    There's also the yearly dev cycle. Only so much can be done in that time frame. A bigger budget would hopefully mean a bigger team that can get more done in that same year.

    As far as sales go, I don't know. That's not something they really break down publicly.
  • rdizz81 wrote: »
    Maybe it's time for another company or even an "indie" to give it a go.

    Maybe that's why the devs behind old time hockey started with that game. Maybe they were trying to build funds to make a modern hockey game. Although it wouldn't be licensed.

    Since I play EASHL only I don't care for licenses. A pure online game with your own player would be great. Having said that I know not every NHL sale is to a player that plays EASHL but it would be great for a company to purely concentrate on online play. You would probably get the leagues as well and some e-gaming. Heck I would volunteer my time to help code and test where I can. Any 3-d graphics guys on here?? lol
  • kezz123 wrote: »
    trw1987 wrote: »
    Careful, you’re gonna stir up the 12 guys who didn’t like the progressive build. It had its pros and cons like anything, but the pros far outweighed the negatives, as opposed to the class system with equal speeds...takes the realism right out of it

    i think a progression system online where the ultimate goal is to have a fair even ground experience was dumb as heck. You want points back? Id be ok with it as long as attributes are reworked from the ground up and make sense / work properly so that everyone doesn't end up making the same 2 builds to abuse of speed while neglecting attributes like accuracy that was useless with curve shots. But they arent really needed, there has never been so much diversity in playstyles as there is now.

    The problem isnt progression. Progression is still here in upgrading arenas and team jerseys and so on. The problem was abusing the progression system to gain an unfair advantage over others. I know, I did it too. I would play the crap out of the game at release and even take a day off to ensure I have an advantage over others and it REALLY showed. I would outskate everyone and play like a god among shrimps for a few weeks before people caught up.

    honestly, anyone that want such an abusive system back should be ignored not because their opinion doesnt matter but because they support an abusive system for their own benefit.

    There are others of us that loved to tinker with their player (that sounds bad :)). Try different builds, try other peoples builds. Yes the end goal is to have a better player but not to get the upper hand or the 'super build' (which didn't exist btw, some attributes were broken, but not 1 SUPER BUILD), just to try things. I spent way too much talking builds to content creators and guys I played with either in LG, drop-in or club. Personally it kept me interested and added more to do.

    Having said that I would prefer a fixed system where attributes ALL mattered and you had choices to make that would drastically effect your player.

  • Sinbin wrote: »
    Sinbin wrote: »

    But just getting rid of something as a "fix" is the norm in these parts.... Heck, they "got rid" of two skaters and marketed it as a hot new game mode. This is largely what IS ignored and ya still stuff money in their pockets.

    You guys act like Threes is just a mode where they removed 2 players and called it good. A lot more went in to it. The whole money puck feature, new commentary, new graphics, designs, a circuit mode, etc. Then there's all the testing and QA. This was also a pretty highly requested feature from casual players ever since it was introduced in the NHL a few years ago.

    You also don't seem to grasp that the game needs to make money. They can't just keep trying to satisfy the hardcore crowd. There needs to be a reason for the much bigger, casual crowd to buy it. That is what makes the game grow. The hardcore crowd here wants to see people stop spending money on the game in the hopes that it magically becomes what they want. If you want it grow it needs to make money. This game is not cheap to make by any means.


    Market summary > Electronic Arts Inc.

    NASDAQ: EA - Jan 12, 4:31 PM EST

    113.13USD Price increase 1.13 (1.01%)


    EA seems to be doin just fine. They have all the cool loot boxes and people throwing money at HUT / MUT. They will be ok.

    Heck, there was a guy over on the Madden forums losing his mind over "fair play" when stating he spent thousands in MUT? I mean.... really?

    yes I understand the game has to make money.

    and if the Threes mode is there to "grow the game" or expand outside the hardcore crowd, what do the sales nummies break out like? meaning, games sold at full price, games sold at reduced price. and for that matter, is the actual number of games being played this year on par to years past?

    Loot boxes were removed from BF2.If you're talking about Ultimate Team, I imagine that brings in a lot for this game, but the fact is that if the game made more it would reflect in the product. Also, each game is going to have its own budget. Just because the company as a whole is doing well, it doesn't mean they keep dumping money in to franchises that don't make money.

    There's also the yearly dev cycle. Only so much can be done in that time frame. A bigger budget would hopefully mean a bigger team that can get more done in that same year.

    As far as sales go, I don't know. That's not something they really break down publicly.

    post keeps disappearing when I went to edit it.... trying again....

    well, yes. you're just proving my point and making sense of why I didn't NHL 18 - at any price - no matter the reduced amount / total cost. doing so means you support exactly what I have bolded above.

    :|
  • @Sinbin they may not have solid sales data but they do have budget data as they are a publicly traded company. Last time I looked ea paid more for marketing than r&d across the entire company. To me that is totally inexcusable.

    I'm of the school that, if you make a great product it will sell itself. In my opinion any company who spends more on marketing than research and development doesn't deserve my money.

    Then you talk about the games personal budget and staff. Well I've seen games that have one iteration being sold continually instead of a new one every year (meaning they are raking in less than this series) do far more innovative and unique things in one years time than we see from these guys. Is that because they have to make a "whole new game" in one year? If so why continue to handcuff yourself with an outdated release cycle?
  • rcompton78 wrote: »
    kezz123 wrote: »
    trw1987 wrote: »
    Careful, you’re gonna stir up the 12 guys who didn’t like the progressive build. It had its pros and cons like anything, but the pros far outweighed the negatives, as opposed to the class system with equal speeds...takes the realism right out of it

    i think a progression system online where the ultimate goal is to have a fair even ground experience was dumb as heck. You want points back? Id be ok with it as long as attributes are reworked from the ground up and make sense / work properly so that everyone doesn't end up making the same 2 builds to abuse of speed while neglecting attributes like accuracy that was useless with curve shots. But they arent really needed, there has never been so much diversity in playstyles as there is now.

    The problem isnt progression. Progression is still here in upgrading arenas and team jerseys and so on. The problem was abusing the progression system to gain an unfair advantage over others. I know, I did it too. I would play the crap out of the game at release and even take a day off to ensure I have an advantage over others and it REALLY showed. I would outskate everyone and play like a god among shrimps for a few weeks before people caught up.

    honestly, anyone that want such an abusive system back should be ignored not because their opinion doesnt matter but because they support an abusive system for their own benefit.

    There are others of us that loved to tinker with their player (that sounds bad :)). Try different builds, try other peoples builds. Yes the end goal is to have a better player but not to get the upper hand or the 'super build' (which didn't exist btw, some attributes were broken, but not 1 SUPER BUILD), just to try things. I spent way too much talking builds to content creators and guys I played with either in LG, drop-in or club. Personally it kept me interested and added more to do.

    Having said that I would prefer a fixed system where attributes ALL mattered and you had choices to make that would drastically effect your player.

    What I am saying is that the points themselves werent the core issue.
    The fact that you could unlock points via playtime created an unfair environment for a few months while people adapted and were unfriendly to new player. That was issue #1.
    Issue #2 was that the attributes were a mess. (probably still are). So those who knew which attributes didnt matter or how to glitch around an attribute (low accuracy + curve shot for instance) were advantaged over those who didnt.

    If all attributes had a proper working system behind them and ongoing balance change by EA, and if the progression part of the system was removed, probably nobody would be against customization of attributes.
  • I would pay double the price if a solid development team produced a hockey game that was strictly OTP with clubs and dropins.
    Probably not a HUGE market for it...but if it was well done it could be great. Just concentrating on physics, good connections (servers) and just good hockey.
    I personally don't care if it's licensed.
    I'd play as the Chicago Deep Dish Hockey club all day.
  • rdizz81
    18 posts Member
    edited January 2018
    It's not the price it's the principle. $60 roster update is not going to cut it.

    I would gladly pay for a solid EASHL experience. Especially if they added an rpg element to it. (Like there used to be) I guess I'm just a disgruntled customer and for the past 3 years now have been disappointed over and over. Same stuff no innovation, and disappearing features. Fool me once and all...

    All in all the core game is still great, don't get me wrong not here to bash NHL 18 I'm just frustrated that there has been no major leap forward. It almost seems to take 1 step forward and 2 steps back.

    But I've learned my lesson, I just cannot support this title anymore.
  • kezz123 wrote: »
    trw1987 wrote: »
    Careful, you’re gonna stir up the 12 guys who didn’t like the progressive build. It had its pros and cons like anything, but the pros far outweighed the negatives, as opposed to the class system with equal speeds...takes the realism right out of it

    i think a progression system online where the ultimate goal is to have a fair even ground experience was dumb as heck. You want points back? Id be ok with it as long as attributes are reworked from the ground up and make sense / work properly so that everyone doesn't end up making the same 2 builds to abuse of speed while neglecting attributes like accuracy that was useless with curve shots. But they arent really needed, there has never been so much diversity in playstyles as there is now.

    The problem isnt progression. Progression is still here in upgrading arenas and team jerseys and so on. The problem was abusing the progression system to gain an unfair advantage over others. I know, I did it too. I would play the crap out of the game at release and even take a day off to ensure I have an advantage over others and it REALLY showed. I would outskate everyone and play like a god among shrimps for a few weeks before people caught up.

    honestly, anyone that want such an abusive system back should be ignored not because their opinion doesnt matter but because they support an abusive system for their own benefit.

    This is ****, not everyone abused it some people built a player on what they wanted him to do. Not to mention this isn't the players fault it was clearly done wrong. You should be rewarded for playing if that means Increased stats then good. Just like IRL some players skate faster. Sounds like EA just needed to tweak the balance or their matching program.... So instead of improving it and adjusting the balance so players wouldn't "abuse" it they opted to get rid of it all together. That to me was just the easy way out.
  • VeNOM2099
    3178 posts Member
    edited January 2018
    Sinbin wrote: »

    But just getting rid of something as a "fix" is the norm in these parts.... Heck, they "got rid" of two skaters and marketed it as a hot new game mode. This is largely what IS ignored and ya still stuff money in their pockets.

    You guys act like Threes is just a mode where they removed 2 players and called it good. A lot more went in to it. The whole money puck feature, new commentary, new graphics, designs, a circuit mode, etc. Then there's all the testing and QA. This was also a pretty highly requested feature from casual players ever since it was introduced in the NHL a few years ago.

    You also don't seem to grasp that the game needs to make money. They can't just keep trying to satisfy the hardcore crowd. There needs to be a reason for the much bigger, casual crowd to buy it. That is what makes the game grow. The hardcore crowd here wants to see people stop spending money on the game in the hopes that it magically becomes what they want. If you want it grow it needs to make money. This game is not cheap to make by any means.


    They didn't remove LOOT BOXES, they temporarily disabled the in-game Market that allowed you to use REAL MONEY to purchase LOOT BOXES. Regular loot boxes you get in game by playing the game are still there and they're still ridiculous.

    Read that: T-E-M-P-O-R-A-R-I-L-Y

    EA will at some point enable it again (hopefully not seeing how much terrible publicity BF2 is still garnering).
  • kezz123 wrote: »
    What I am saying is that the points themselves werent the core issue.
    The fact that you could unlock points via playtime created an unfair environment for a few months while people adapted and were unfriendly to new player. That was issue #1.
    Issue #2 was that the attributes were a mess. (probably still are). So those who knew which attributes didnt matter or how to glitch around an attribute (low accuracy + curve shot for instance) were advantaged over those who didnt.

    If all attributes had a proper working system behind them and ongoing balance change by EA, and if the progression part of the system was removed, probably nobody would be against customization of attributes.

    Fully agree. I didn't mind the grind as it gave me something to go for. I am not one for aesthetic changes. In fact I haven't changed my guy besides name and celebration since day 1. (oh ya I added a God awful mouth guard...well because...it bothers my club :) ) But I do see your point on the unfairness. Having said that I found that you used to be able to at least compete with others fairly quickly. Were you the fastest on the ice? No but you could at least compete. The first 4-5 levels you were garbage for sure.

    Either way I would be ok. Level up system or not.

    The attribute system was flawed and would have to be fixed for sure. I think everyone could agree to that.

  • I would pay double the price if a solid development team produced a hockey game that was strictly OTP with clubs and dropins.
    Probably not a HUGE market for it...but if it was well done it could be great. Just concentrating on physics, good connections (servers) and just good hockey.
    I personally don't care if it's licensed.
    I'd play as the Chicago Deep Dish Hockey club all day.

    Let me know whom to send my money to. I too would pay a hefty price.
  • rcompton78 wrote: »
    I would pay double the price if a solid development team produced a hockey game that was strictly OTP with clubs and dropins.
    Probably not a HUGE market for it...but if it was well done it could be great. Just concentrating on physics, good connections (servers) and just good hockey.
    I personally don't care if it's licensed.
    I'd play as the Chicago Deep Dish Hockey club all day.

    Let me know whom to send my money to. I too would pay a hefty price.

    Same here as I know tons of others would too.

    Bring back 12 player private lobbies also.

  • I mean there isn't even a practice mode for EASHL.... cmon man
  • I argued for 2 years about bringing back the attribute system but reworking it so that every category and attribute actually mattered. I used to toy around with my guys all the time. I'd have one as an enforcer, one as a playmaker, and one as a sniper...I'd move stats around every few games if I didn't like the way he played. It was actually fun. The different speeds to me is more realistic then just the same speed for every guy but a computer AI guy can catch you on a breakaway or beat you to every loose puck? The system would definitely need to be worked and no it's not simple but they've had 3 years now to adjust and fix it and they have not even attempted it. Much easier to just say here's a prebuilt class of players.. use them. Like some of you, I wouldn't care about licensing to have an online mode with created characters for online team play and I'd even be ok with playing in outdoor rinks instead of stadiums.

    I wonder if Unreal Engine 4 has the capability to design hockey games.... hmmmmm.
  • booher04 wrote: »
    I argued for 2 years about bringing back the attribute system but reworking it so that every category and attribute actually mattered. I used to toy around with my guys all the time. I'd have one as an enforcer, one as a playmaker, and one as a sniper...I'd move stats around every few games if I didn't like the way he played. It was actually fun. The different speeds to me is more realistic then just the same speed for every guy but a computer AI guy can catch you on a breakaway or beat you to every loose puck? The system would definitely need to be worked and no it's not simple but they've had 3 years now to adjust and fix it and they have not even attempted it. Much easier to just say here's a prebuilt class of players.. use them. Like some of you, I wouldn't care about licensing to have an online mode with created characters for online team play and I'd even be ok with playing in outdoor rinks instead of stadiums.

    I wonder if Unreal Engine 4 has the capability to design hockey games.... hmmmmm.

    A game called supraball runs on unreal 3 as does rocket league. I see no reason UE4 wouldn't be able to do sports. Unity is also another very solid option that I personally prefer as unreal is harder to optimize as evidenced by pubg...
  • Sinbin
    1331 posts Member
    rdizz81 wrote: »
    It's not the price it's the principle. $60 roster update is not going to cut it.

    I would gladly pay for a solid EASHL experience. Especially if they added an rpg element to it. (Like there used to be) I guess I'm just a disgruntled customer and for the past 3 years now have been disappointed over and over. Same stuff no innovation, and disappearing features. Fool me once and all...

    All in all the core game is still great, don't get me wrong not here to bash NHL 18 I'm just frustrated that there has been no major leap forward. It almost seems to take 1 step forward and 2 steps back.

    But I've learned my lesson, I just cannot support this title anymore.

    It's a lot more than a roster update. The mode you like isn't getting as much attention as you want. You don't really hear people complain that 9 - Legacy were a roster update even though there were probably about the same amount of updates to EASHL that there have been with 16 - 18. There are 2 major gripes from this community with that mode. TPS and no progression. The previous generation didn't have TPS and it did have progression. So, what leap forward are you really wanting since there didn't seem to be one in those games.
  • Sinbin
    1331 posts Member
    VeNOM2099 wrote: »

    They didn't remove LOOT BOXES, they temporarily disabled the in-game Market that allowed you to use REAL MONEY to purchase LOOT BOXES. Regular loot boxes you get in game by playing the game are still there and they're still ridiculous.

    Read that: T-E-M-P-O-R-A-R-I-L-Y

    EA will at some point enable it again (hopefully not seeing how much terrible publicity BF2 is still garnering).

    At this point it may as well be permanent. The game has been out for a couple months and the majority of people have leveled up high enough without paying anything extra. Most people will spend money early on to progress faster. I don't see why they would re-enable them, but so what if they do? By now everyone knows you can get everything for free and the grind isn't that bad. No, I don't agree with their loot box system, but with it not costing anything extra, I don't have a problem with it. I would prefer a more grind friendly exp system, but the game is fun so I can overlook it.
  • We live in the time of indies and early access... wish someone would step up. Hard to do it without NHL license but if it focused on hand built teams maybe just maybe
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!