EA UFC 3 is worth getting into, but it's not worth the minimum asking price of 70$

[manliest_Man]

Quote: Originally Posted by Yaari

I am counting down the days until I can finally play again and now you are telling me to wait another month? Honestly I dont think their budget is going to get any better if the game bombs at launch. (Not to say it will get any better if you do get it at launch, I just dont think that "statement" is going to have any of your intended effect). I just don't believe that will result into what you are hoping for.

I believe what I am saying, can work, but just not with a post from a closed-off forum like this one.

If the sport wasn't as important or as big or as successful or had the potential to be even greater than it currently is, then i doubt EA would be holding the exclusive rights to the UFC license.

I've considered what you and a lot of people are saying, about the game not doing good and not even getting a 4th one, but I doubt that'll be the case If we prove(already proven) that the market for it exists, by buying it later (instead of buying used or completely skipping,
Then next time around the publishers might push more resources into it, to create a better game and make sure people pay them a full price for it.

__________________________________________________ _________________

I simply refuse to believe that the game is struggling with development costs. I believe it's mostly related to what the publishers think they can get away with.

So the fact that we are worthy of getting milked and have EA give a damn about us, doesn't lead me to believe that it would lead to the end of the series, if one of the games bombed, after being released 3 times, with loads of reused assets that the people got tired of putting up with.

[smokeface]

Quote: Originally Posted by manliest_Man

Do i think the 70$ were worth it for EA UFC 1, absolutely. Do i think the 140$ were worth it for the then final product EA UFC 2? No. Do i think the 210$ are worth it for the now final product EA UFC 3? No.

How many hours have you have played in the series so far? How many hours do you anticipate playing the 3rd installment, and what will that bring your total hours invested into the series to?

[Kingslayer04]

What rubbed me the wrong way about the whole thing was not that much the "is it an entirely new game" discussion, but rather the response I got when I pointed out, in this case, the character model flaws.

I was really hyped about the game, I just used this platform to raise awareness on the model topic. Admittedly, I may have underestimated the cost of such an endeavour - judging by GPD's enquiry on which 2 of the 3 options we would prefer, I infer that it's quite a big chunk of the budget, and other key areas would not be able to be addressed if this one was. And this is okay, they have a certain budget - they have to be mindful of it. The developers don't make their own budget, they are given some money and they have to make do, naturally, I understand. This is the point where I have to say I was very pleased when I initially saw the models that were updated - Eddie Alvarez got a much, much needed facelift, most of the Lightweight division in the BETA seemed revamped, and I can also think of Bisping who really looks much better, much more up-to-date, and there's others too, I'm sure. Great job on this!

But, all I got for basically bringing up the presentation topic was some very passionate, defensive responses from people who weren't even GPD himself, trying to put things in a positive light, attacking me for "not understanding", trying to play some semantic games and calling feedback "just noise, because people will buy it anyway". There's nothing wrong with admitting not everything is perfect. It would be sufficient to just say something along the lines of - "Sorry man, but they/we simply do not have the resources to address everything. We know that the models are not all up to date and we can't fix them without really sacrificing gameplay improvements." Instead I saw replies like "We offer it, if you don't like it - don't buy it." from GPD. This wasn't intended for me, but is this the way to approach things, surely not? Afterwards, GPD responded (to me, personally) in what I thought was a much better manner, after which he issued the aforementioned enquiry as to what would we want most.

It's things like that that can also put a customer off, even if they were already hyped about the game.

[aholbert32]

Quote: Originally Posted by manliest_Man

Take Battlefront 2 for example. After all the blowback, the game is out 2 months now and you can find it on PC for 30 Euros, compared to the 70 Euros of launch price. As far as EA UFC 3 goes, i know i am gonna be spending a lot of time with it and will get my money's worth as far as time played/ammount payed goes, no matter how much i personally pay for it, because i don't play any other games that intrest me at this point. But i do want it to be even more improved and there is no other way for me to convince the publishers, to get it to improve other than waiting longer, to drop less money on it and convincing other people to do the same. At this point, this series seem to be focused only on MMA fans, who have nowhere else to go to, because this is the only MMA game series for the current gen. If however, the series was focused on expanding it's playerbase, instead of milking the MMA junkies. we would still be paying 70$ but getting a higher quality product.

This is funny because its counter to EVERYTHING people say here. Now EA is only focused on MMA fans? I thought the issue was that the game was too focused on arcade/casual fans and that the dev team needed to focus on realism and things hardcore MMA fans want?

I dont think you are going to convince alot of people though. The fact is its far from a consensus that the dev team didnt do enough to convince people this game is worth $70. I think UFC 3 is missing a much needed mode (universe mode) but its enough of an upgrade from 2 to buy it full price. I think many people here feel similarly.

With that said, credit to you if you actually hold off and dont buy the game until April.

[aholbert32]

Quote: Originally Posted by Kingslayer04

What rubbed me the wrong way about the whole thing was not that much the "is it an entirely new game" discussion, but rather the response I got when I pointed out, in this case, the character model flaws. I was really hyped about the game, I just used this platform to raise awareness on the model topic. Admittedly, I may have underestimated the cost of such an endeavour - judging by GPD's enquiry on which 2 of the 3 options we would prefer, I infer that it's quite a big chunk of the budget, and other key areas would not be able to be addressed if this one was. And this is okay, they have a certain budget - they have to be mindful of it. The developers don't make their own budget, they are given some money and they have to make do, naturally, I understand. This is the point where I have to say I was very pleased when I initially saw the models that were updated - Eddie Alvarez got a much, much needed facelift, most of the Lightweight division in the BETA seemed revamped, and I can also think of Bisping who really looks much better, much more up-to-date, and there's others too, I'm sure. Great job on this! But, all I got for basically bringing up the presentation topic was some very passionate, defensive responses from people who weren't even GPD himself, trying to put things in a positive light, attacking me for "not understanding", trying to play some semantic games and calling feedback "just noise, because people will buy it anyway". There's nothing wrong with admitting not everything is perfect. It would be sufficient to just say something along the lines of - "Sorry man, but they/we simply do not have the resources to address everything. We know that the models are not all up to date and we can't fix them without really sacrificing gameplay improvements." Instead I saw replies like "We offer it, if you don't like it - don't buy it." from GPD. This wasn't intended for me, but is this the way to approach things, surely not? Afterwards, GPD responded (to me, personally) in what I thought was a much better manner, after which he issued the aforementioned enquiry as to what would we want most. It's things like that that can also put a customer off, even if they were already hyped about the game.

One correction: My quote was "Its just noise IF people buy it anyway".

I give the OP a ton of credit here if he follows through with what he says he's gonna do. He has issues with the game. He doesnt think enough was done to justify a purchase at full price. He has listed his complaints on this forum and the devs are aware of it. He's not going to buy the game at full price because he doesnt think its worth it.

He isnt complaining non-stop about issues, acting as if these issues are game-killers and then giving EA $60 for a game that's full of "game-killing issues".

[Kingslayer04]

Quote: Originally Posted by aholbert32

One correction: My quote was "Its just noise IF people buy it anyway". I give the OP a ton of credit here if he follows through with what he says he's gonna do. He has issues with the game. He doesnt think enough was done to justify a purchase at full price. He has listed his complaints on this forum and the devs are aware of it. He's not going to buy the game at full price because he doesnt think its worth it. He isnt complaining non-stop about issues, acting as if these issues are game-killers and then giving EA $60 for a game that's full of "game-killing issues".

Even if it's "IF they buy the game", that's the mindset of someone who only thinks about profit. Some people may just want to point out what they think could use an improvement, even if they would still pay the full price, regardless of the flaws they mention. It's not all black and white where if you passionately vouch for certain changes you think the game is total trash. Some people just want to play from Day 1. Obviously, that would cost them the full price. Just pointing that out. That being said, there's people who don't think the game is worth price X and will wait for a price fall, for whatever reasons they might have, of course.

[zeric]

The game isnt 70 dollars? You csn pre-order the standard edition for like 40 right now??

Sent from my LGLS991 using Operation Sports mobile app

[aholbert32]

Quote: Originally Posted by Kingslayer04

Even if it's "IF they buy the game", that's the mindset of someone who only thinks about profit. Some people may just want to point out what they think could use an improvement, even if they would still pay the full price, regardless of the flaws they mention. It's not all black and white where if you passionately vouch for certain changes you think the game is total trash. Just pointing that out. That being said, there's people who don't think the game is worth price X and will wait for a price fall, for whatever reasons they might have, of course.

But thats not what I'm saying.

I said "complaining non-stop about issues". I have issues with UFC 3 and here they are:

No universe mode.
Not enough improvements to CAF.
No improvements to event mode.
Not enough cage grappling and positions.
I dont love the new camera angles.
No instant replay function.
Certain fighter body types are off.
No customization of roster fighters.
Rogan's commentary.

Now, I've posted my issues here and directly to the devs. For many of those issues, I've been informed that there likely wont be a change for UFC 3. So I dont need to post "non-stop" about those issues anymore. I got an answer. I dont love the answer. Now I have a decision to make.

Are these issues going to prevent me from buying the game?

If yes, then I wont buy the game and I'll move on from complaining. Why? Because the devs arent working on UFC 4 yet so posting about things I know wont be added to 3 is useless at this point.

If no, then I buy the game and I move on from complaining. Why? For the same reason above.

All of my constant complaining about the same thing isnt going to cause any immediate change and just will serve as "noise" that gets in the way of feedback of things that can be fixed by patch for UFC 3.

Here is one thing I've learned: Most of the time when things are fixed by patches its not because the devs see people posting for weeks about the same issue. The devs typically see the original post....look into and see if its actually an issue...and if it is see if its something they can fix.

Your post 3 weeks after the issue is identified isnt causing the change. For example, if they change Ngannou or add ref interactions by patch, it will have nothing to do with a post that you make today. It will be because of the person who first identified the issue.