Question about the alternate uniforms

[nine0bison]

Quote: Originally Posted by coogrfan

Fixed.

What also bothers me about this whole thing is that we still haven't heard anything from EA!!! They have a very bad habit of leaving it's consumers in the dark about everything. I bet next year's version will "feature" alternate uniforms and "feature" a bunch of other stuff that was left out of the game.

[coogrfan]

Quote: Originally Posted by nine0bison

What also bothers me about this whole thing is that we still haven't heard anything from EA!!! They have a very bad habit of leaving it's consumers in the dark about everything. I bet next year's version will "feature" alternate uniforms and "feature" a bunch of other stuff that was left out of the game.

Agreed, the lack of details on how this will work is frustrating.

[DIESEL]

Quote: Originally Posted by TJdaSportsGuy

The things you are mentioning were probably used by less than 10 % of the people who played this game. I didn't even know those things were missing until you just told me. Bare bones? Hah, hardly.

Well I haven't done a poll to to find out how many people use these features so you or I have no idea what % of people use them. But I do know I used them. I also know EA has felt the need to put them in the game for the last 3-4 years. So I'm guessing they think people want these features also.

Yes the game plays a good game of football and yes there is a dynasty mode. I know those are the basic elements of a college football game. But EA has been giving me an increasing number of "other" features throughout the years that have made the game deeper until the 360 version. I'm as happy as anyone that they made gameplay their 1st priority. But when the game costs more and then you start charging for something that has always been free, I think that stinks. Maybe it will bother you when they charge $20 for dynasty mode or $5 to buy the damn football.

[ODogg]

Quote: Originally Posted by DIESEL

Well I haven't done a poll to to find out how many people use these features so you or I have no idea what % of people use them. But I do know I used them. I also know EA has felt the need to put them in the game for the last 3-4 years. So I'm guessing they think people want these features also. Yes the game plays a good game of football and yes there is a dynasty mode. I know those are the basic elements of a college football game. But EA has been giving me an increasing number of "other" features throughout the years that have made the game deeper until the 360 version. I'm as happy as anyone that they made gameplay their 1st priority. But when the game costs more and then you start charging for something that has always been free, I think that stinks. Maybe it will bother you when they charge $20 for dynasty mode or $5 to buy the damn football.

Games now are so realistic they cost multi-millions to develop. Game prices haven't changed hardly at all since I started gaming in 1980. Back then I paid $50 for pac-man on the atari 2600. Some games for the Nintendo cost $70 and $80 (tecmo, zelda). Todays games cost probably 100x more to develop. That money has to be made somewhere. I read somewhere that if inflation were applied to videogames we'd be paying about $120 for each game right now so we're actually quite fortunate. The bottom line is the game prices are the same but the development costs are way, way up.

Features like alternate uniforms and other small enhancements are used by some, but not all of the community, so this is an area where you can expect to pay a small fee if you want the feature. It is either they start going to this type of model or start jacking up the game prices to $80-$90 a game. I'll take this model any day rather than being forced to pay $80-$90 a game. At least in this respect if you want the game you pay $60 but if you want all the little extras you pay a small fee, if you don't want the little extras or only want part then you are not required to pay for them. It's just the reality of the gaming world. The prices go up here just like any other real world item.

The truth is gamers are just spoiled by prices remaining the same for the last 30 years or so but although the prices are remaining the same the games are light years improved and simply cost more to make.

[Dauminator]

Not quite. Initial develpment cost of a new-gen sports game for EA may be high, but is much, much less in subsequent years because the basic framework of the game is already in place, and they are just updating rosters, tightening code, etc.

You can't compare the cost of today's games to those in the past, because you are not taking into account the fact that the "hardware" (microchips, etc.) costs have significantly decreased. Look at the price of computers now vs. 15 years ago.....computers today are infinitely more advanced and powerful, and cost less. Same goes with TV's, radios, etc. As technology advances, these costs go down, not up.

I don't like the direction gaming is taking. When you buy a game, it should be complete. You should never have to pay for extras.

Pay extra for dynasty as someone already mentioned? Could (and probably will) happen within 5 years. Let's see how tolerant you people are then.

[ODogg]

Quote: Originally Posted by Dauminator

Not quite. Initial develpment cost of a new-gen sports game for EA may be high, but is much, much less in subsequent years because the basic framework of the game is already in place, and they are just updating rosters, tightening code, etc.

Every year the programmers, animators, etc all need paid, they don't get paid less because the framework is "already there". If anything their salaries increase year to year.

Quote: Originally Posted by Dauminator

You can't compare the cost of today's games to those in the past, because you are not taking into account the fact that the "hardware" (microchips, etc.) costs have significantly decreased. Look at the price of computers now vs. 15 years ago.....computers today are infinitely more advanced and powerful, and cost less. Same goes with TV's, radios, etc. As technology advances, these costs go down, not up.

Hardware costs going down have nothing to do with software development.

Quote: Originally Posted by Dauminator

I don't like the direction gaming is taking. When you buy a game, it should be complete. You should never have to pay for extras. Pay extra for dynasty as someone already mentioned? Could (and probably will) happen within 5 years. Let's see how tolerant you people are then.

No one likes paying more. And you can complain if you like but when you see the reality of the situation we actually have it quite good as consumers in this area.

[DIESEL]

Quote: Originally Posted by ODogg

The truth is gamers are just spoiled by prices remaining the same for the last 30 years or so but although the prices are remaining the same the games are light years improved and simply cost more to make.

I an not going to claim I know how much it costs to make games. But I do know the basis of any business model is to make more revenue than you spend in creating your product. You almost make it sound like EA (or any game company) is taking a loss when they sell a game at today's prices. I think you're kidding yourself if you think these "low" prices are spoiling us.

Charging for downloadable content is just going to be gravy on top of a nice pay day. I truly believe it's a slippery slope that will end up screwing the gaming community. In particular any sports game with an exclusive license is a cash cow waiting to be milked.

[Dauminator]

Quote: Originally Posted by ODogg

Every year the programmers, animators, etc all need paid, they don't get paid less because the framework is "already there". If anything their salaries increase year to year. Hardware costs going down have nothing to do with software development. No one likes paying more. And you can complain if you like but when you see the reality of the situation we actually have it quite good as consumers in this area.

Yes, programmers need to be paid, but once the framework is there there isn't as much for them to do in subsequent years other than tighten things up and "add" more features. The costs are not as great as the initial programming. You should know that.

Hardware costs don't figure in software programming, I'll give you that...but they do in the game system itself.

Consumers have it quite good? In some ways (in advanced graphics and enhanced content), yes! In other ways, no. Gameplay? There are those that would argue the overall gameplay of Sierra's Front Page Sports (except for the last one) series was better. Charging for "features" that were formerly included as part of the game is most definitely NOT "good" for the consumer. The only way I will EVER pay extra for something not included with the game, is if EA offered historical uniforms and teams for the University of Iowa. And I don't mean one jersey, or an "all time Iowa" team. I mean jerseys and teams that were never offered before.