Boxing videogame campaign, do you want another boxing game?

[SPRINGS03]

Quote: Originally Posted by SHAKYR

I'm glad there fans who still want the sweet science instead of the same back and forth rock 'em sock 'em robot gameplay. It's no major variety to boxers skills & capabilities in Fight Night.

Yeah i definitely want a realistic sim game, but that means that EA CANADA shouldn't have any part in making the next boxing game, that development team was a joke and clearly didn't know much about boxing. Fight night champion had potential but was such an abomination of a game. Just awful.

It's been a great past few years with boxing with some great matches, the demand for a boxing game shouldn't be overlooked by video game developers.

[SHAKYR]

Quote: Originally Posted by SPRINGS03

Yeah i definitely want a realistic sim game, but that means that EA CANADA shouldn't have any part in making the next boxing game, that development team was a joke and clearly didn't know much about boxing. Fight night champion had potential but was such an abomination of a game. Just awful. It's been a great past few years with boxing with some great matches, the demand for a boxing game shouldn't be overlooked by video game developers.

I definitely agree!

[Artman22]

At this point I'd be extremely happy if we were told that a new boxing game is being developed for the NG systems, but no more arcade boxing games. Boxing is my favorite sport.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RACZILLA]

Quote: Originally Posted by Money99

Can I ask what training equipment boxers have today that they didn't back 100 years ago that makes them stronger fighters? Enough to make it dangerous not to have catchweights?

So I'm way late on this discussion but I was reading through the thread and thinking about this today.

I always have a tough time comparing fighters from different eras. To SHAKYR's point, there have been some advancements over the last 100 years in terms of what fighters have at their disposal. I do agree with you that much of the training has been consistent, which is actually a credit to the sport IMO that some of these techniques have lasted the test of time.

That being said, if you literally go back 100 years, one of the most significant differences is the overall health and life expectancy of people. In 1914 the average American male only lived to be 52. Today we've got a guy nearly that age who is still relevant at light-heavy.

Then of course you look at size where Jack Johnson was called the Galveston Giant at 6'2, which would put him at a considerable disadvantage today against the biggest guys in that division.

If you gave some of the past fighters the same nutrition, training, and equipment that fighters have today, would some of them be able to compete? Absolutely. And I do think fighters at that time maybe in general were a little tougher, but you also have to consider that the life of the average person was really difficult, so the average person was a bit tougher as well.

The further into the 20th century you go, the easier the argument is to make IMO that some of the greats could compete with today's fighters. I think guys like Robinson and Ali would still have made an impact today. When you start talking about guys like Ketchel it's a lot tougher to know for sure.

Lastly, I'll say that one thing you mentioned did strike me as a little odd. You mentioned having less divisions but that you'd want fighters to weigh in on the same day. I think you can make an argument for both of these things separately, but together I don't know if they make sense. Because people today are better nourished than they were 100 years ago, you've got a larger spectrum in terms of heights and weights. The idea of having fighters weigh in on the same day as the fight makes a lot of sense IMO. You'd have more people fighting closer to their natural weights and take some of the danger out of the cuts.Still, if you're going to do that I think you've got to have enough classes that someone can realistically make a weigh that's somewhere close to what they'd be naturally.

On the other side of that coin I can understand the interest of combining classes. You'll have a better talent pool at each weight and can likely make better fights and draw more interest to the sport. But if you're going to do that you'll force fighters who naturally way well above or below the limit to be at a disadvantage. So in that case I think it makes sense to give someone more time before a fight to recover.

Historically you'd see guys like the aforementioned Ketchel or Joe Gans move up in weight to fight Heavys like Sam Langford. Was it probably entertaining? I think so. Did the smaller guys typically win? Not too often. So while it could be interesting, I'm a bigger fan of the second idea of same day weigh-ins. I don't know if that and the other idea are compatible.

[SHAKYR]

Quote: Originally Posted by RACZILLA

So I'm way late on this discussion but I was reading through the thread and thinking about this today. I always have a tough time comparing fighters from different eras. To SHAKYR's point, there have been some advancements over the last 100 years in terms of what fighters have at their disposal. I do agree with you that much of the training has been consistent, which is actually a credit to the sport IMO that some of these techniques have lasted the test of time. That being said, if you literally go back 100 years, one of the most significant differences is the overall health and life expectancy of people. In 1914 the average American male only lived to be 52. Today we've got a guy nearly that age who is still relevant at light-heavy. Then of course you look at size where Jack Johnson was called the Galveston Giant at 6'2, which would put him at a considerable disadvantage today against the biggest guys in that division. If you gave some of the past fighters the same nutrition, training, and equipment that fighters have today, would some of them be able to compete? Absolutely. And I do think fighters at that time maybe in general were a little tougher, but you also have to consider that the life of the average person was really difficult, so the average person was a bit tougher as well. The further into the 20th century you go, the easier the argument is to make IMO that some of the greats could compete with today's fighters. I think guys like Robinson and Ali would still have made an impact today. When you start talking about guys like Ketchel it's a lot tougher to know for sure. Lastly, I'll say that one thing you mentioned did strike me as a little odd. You mentioned having less divisions but that you'd want fighters to weigh in on the same day. I think you can make an argument for both of these things separately, but together I don't know if they make sense. Because people today are better nourished than they were 100 years ago, you've got a larger spectrum in terms of heights and weights. The idea of having fighters weigh in on the same day as the fight makes a lot of sense IMO. You'd have more people fighting closer to their natural weights and take some of the danger out of the cuts.Still, if you're going to do that I think you've got to have enough classes that someone can realistically make a weigh that's somewhere close to what they'd be naturally. On the other side of that coin I can understand the interest of combining classes. You'll have a better talent pool at each weight and can likely make better fights and draw more interest to the sport. But if you're going to do that you'll force fighters who naturally way well above or below the limit to be at a disadvantage. So in that case I think it makes sense to give someone more time before a fight to recover. Historically you'd see guys like the aforementioned Ketchel or Joe Gans move up in weight to fight Heavys like Sam Langford. Was it probably entertaining? I think so. Did the smaller guys typically win? Not too often. So while it could be interesting, I'm a bigger fan of the second idea of same day weigh-ins. I don't know if that and the other idea are compatible.

Dang! You hit it right on the head. You made my point clearly! This is exactly what I'm talking about. Know can you pick Brizzo or Jazz brain to see if they hint at another Fight Night game. I was trying to get Peter Moore to spill the beans on Twitter.

[RACZILLA]

Quote: Originally Posted by SHAKYR

Dang! You hit it right on the head. You made my point clearly! This is exactly what I'm talking about. Know can you pick Brizzo or Jazz brain to see if they hint at another Fight Night game. I was trying to get Peter Moore to spill the beans on Twitter.

I don't know either of them all that well, really. I'm sure they are focused on the task at hand though. Hopefully their UFC game does well as it could create some confidence in the combat sports category.

[SHAKYR]

Quote: Originally Posted by RACZILLA

I don't know either of them all that well, really. I'm sure they are focused on the task at hand though. Hopefully their UFC game does well as it could create some confidence in the combat sports category.

Oh ok, I agree the success of the UFC game can be a good thing I hope.