|
Quote: |
|
|
|
|
Originally Posted by SilverBullet19 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It depends on what they consider successful, which is purely financial. It depends on the developer, but a generic game may be slow to take off. For every person like you and I that would be fine with a generic game, there's someone who won't buy because they want the real deal. Does the developer demand a return on investment in year 1, or are they willing to give it at least a few iterations before pulling the plug if there's no profit?
You say Madden is failing...but it's not at all. Their numbers dropped in 2017, and 2018, but they're still selling millions upon millions. On top of that, they're actually making more than ever from MUT, which reportedly generated something like $800 million from M18. I'm sure IMV would/will look at what the current complaints about it are, I think that's more of what you mean.
For a developer, you're right, they need to "hang with the big boys." It needs to be a complete product, for sure. The problem is, if it's going to try to compete, it needs to be done at a very high level right off the bat. We have patience with Axis and Maximum because they're just a few guys doing their best, and coming along well. It's teams of literally like 3 dudes, building a game from scratch, and it's only $20. I'm cool with that.
If you produce IMV's game, through a high level developer, with a $60 price tag, people want it to be ready to go. A patch here or there, but complete overall with deep enough features. In short, it needs to have more than NCAA 14, better graphics, and better physics. It needs to be better than NCAA 14. If not, people will be like "well...why buy the new one where I have to customize everything when NCAA 14 already has 127 of the FBS teams?"
As I said, if it ever makes production, I will buy it. That being said, at $60, it will need to be exactly what you said, a "full product," for me, and anyone else, to really be happy with it. I'd rather them delay it to get it right if that's the case, because the first one is going to be make or break. If it's got glaring issues with their plan of fixing it the next time, there may not be a next time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
They had an update yesterday. Met with Spencer Dinwiddie in New York to discuss plans. He pledged $100,000 last year so I guess he's pledging more now? The guy is expected to make 1.65m this year.
What I mean by "hang with" I don't at all expect it to be as well produced and play as well as Madden. I don't think anybody should expect that, even with a $60 price-tag. It's going to be a different game. Different engine. different style, different mechanics, it just won't play like Madden. I don't think the developers intend for it to play like Madden.
The biggest thing Gridiron Champions has going for it is that it's an underdog in the Sports Gaming world, and one thing Americans love is an underdog.
The deal with Madden, in my opinion, is that it's a ticking time bomb. Let's be real, Madden is EA's biggest cash-cow, maybe slightly behind FIFA, but it is one of their primary cash-cows. The deal with that is, even ole reliable Betsy dies at some point. Gamers are gonna get fed up eventually. Battlefield V is struggling right now because EA pissed off Gamers. At what point does EA piss off gamers with Madden? We don't know. But EA is certainly playing with fire and ole Betsy is getting a little old. User reviews....aren't good.
Metacritic
(PS4)
Critics = 8.2 Users = 3.5
(PC)
Critics = 8.0 Users = 2.9
(XB1)
Critics = 8.3 Users= 4.1
It's really only a matter of time before sales tank. Because either people are getting fed up with the game or EA says or does something stupid.