Circling Out --- Sprint Option For UFC 4

[Lauriedr1ver]

Quote: Originally Posted by aholbert32

The issue I have with that statement is that you appear to be discounting the fact that ea is using the same data that you are. They come to OS. They go to Reddit. YouTube. Discord. They see the same threads you do. They just have other ways to collect data. Let’s put this in a different way. Let’s take an election. Let’s say there are 6 counties in a state. You have data of from one county that says candidate A will win. Someone else has data from all 6 that says Candidate B will win. Sure based on your data, you think A will win but you have to accept that your data is incomplete. So the fact that your data says something different doesn’t really matter. I also wonder why people always ignore the questions I presented earlier. Like if you even take a second to think about it, it doesn’t make sense why EA would go in the opposite the direction of sim if sim was the most profitable approach. If that’s what the majority wants, it’s a no brainer to go in that direction. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

That's a flawed analogy as we dont know how much data EA have so we don't know how big the countries would be. With the size of the community and active online player base we can assume that what we have access to is <10% of the online player base.

[Haz____]

I'll just say EA has done an incredible job alienating fans of existing franchises by trying to appeal to a mass audience. See; Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Deadspace, Star Wars Battlefront, etc.

Whatever reads they are getting off their data, they have historically had a track record of being off base.




Also just a note. This says nothing about the skill, dedication, and passion of the dev team. Only a criticism of the big wig decision makers heading EA.

[aholbert32]

Quote: Originally Posted by Lauriedr1ver

That's a flawed analogy as we dont know how much data EA have so we don't know how big the countries would be. With the size of the community and active online player base we can assume that what we have access to is <10% of the online player base.

I dont see how its flawed when they have data on EVERY person who has played the game. If you have ever logged in and played the game (whether its online or offline), EA has data on the way each gamertag played and what modes they played. Its how they know that a significantly bigger portion of the community plays offline modes than plays online.

That information isnt the end all and be all and I feel the specific comments from the hardcore community should be held in higher consideration but to say we dont have an idea how much data EA has is false.

The reality is they have more info than you do. So its strange that you admittedly say you have less than 10% of the info (all of it doesnt even support the argument that people want a realistic sim) and use that small amount to doubt the rest of the data.

You have to admit that only the hardest of the hardcore constantly post about a video game, right?

[aholbert32]

Quote: Originally Posted by Haz____

I'll just say EA has done an incredible job alienating fans of existing franchises by trying to apeal to a mass audience. See; Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Deadspace, Star Wars Battlefront, etc. Whatever reads they are getting off their data, they have historically had a track record of being off base. Also just a note. This says nothing about the skill, dedication, and passion of the dev team. Only a criticism of the big wig decision makers heading EA.

This is correct but there is a difference. I cant speak to Dragon Age or Deadspace but if I recall the majority of issues that people had with SWB was an attempt by EA to generate more revenue (which is in line with what EA does). Mass Effect Andromeda was more of an issue with poor development not changes to the game meant to focus on a certain part of the community, right?

We are the customers and I get that we are going to demand what we want no matter the consequence but this always confuses me a little. Like I work in the television business and when we are developing a show, we have the some of the same info as EA (focus groups, data on what the demo watches, surveys). So we take that into consideration when creating a show.

If we dont and the show flops....we get fired. Because the corporation pays for this data for a reason. To determine the best way to sell this show to the audience. Ignoring that data is problematic because its the best way to determine if a show will be successful and ignoring it and getting it wrong can lead to people losing their jobs.

So I'm never surprised or upset when a game company goes in a direction that it thinks will lead to the most sales because thats what corporations do. What I do is I speak with my wallet. When EA and 2k removed features I liked from Madden and NBA 2k, I didnt buy those games until they added them back. When Live went towards an arcadey path. I stopped buying the game.

That why I asked 1212 why should EA cater to him when the data says more sales will come from catering the game to others and he has openly admitted that even if they go down that path...he will still buy the game? His response was they shouldnt take advantage of the hardcore which is hard to understand given that he (and others) are asking a corporation to do that.

[Lauriedr1ver]

Quote: Originally Posted by aholbert32

I dont see how its flawed when they have data on EVERY person who has played the game. If you have ever logged in and played the game (whether its online or offline), EA has data on the way each gamertag played and what modes they played. Its how they know that a significantly bigger portion of the community plays offline modes than plays online. That information isnt the end all and be all and I feel the specific comments from the hardcore community should be held in higher consideration but to say we dont have an idea how much data EA has is false. The reality is they have more info than you do. So its strange that you admittedly say you have less than 10% of the info (all of it doesnt even support the argument that people want a realistic sim) and use that small amount to doubt the rest of the data. You have to admit that only the hardest of the hardcore constantly post about a video game, right?

1. So the data is what we play? I'm assuming there is more than just that as that's not a method of feedback thats a method of knowing what we engage with.

2. I agree with you here. Actual feedback is what is important.

3. I doubt the rest of the data as its the only data we have access to, let's say you can see 16 glasses on a bar and they are only filled with Coke. A member of staff says that there is another 84 glasses of Lemondade in the back but you aren't allowed to see it, can't see it or anything with it, all you know is it might exist and it might be the opposite of what you can see. Would you take it as face value from a person of authority or would you question it as it's not what

Last part I disagree that only hard core fans post if that's what you meant. Most fans nowadays post or look for feedback. If you mean post constantly then sure I agree.

[aholbert32]

Quote: Originally Posted by Lauriedr1ver

1. So the data is what we play? I'm assuming there is more than just that as that's not a method of feedback thats a method of knowing what we engage with. 2. I agree with you here. Actual feedback is what is important. 3. I doubt the rest of the data as its the only data we have access to, let's say you can see 16 glasses on a bar and they are only filled with Coke. A member of staff says that there is another 84 glasses of Lemondade in the back but you aren't allowed to see it, can't see it or anything with it, all you know is it might exist and it might be the opposite of what you can see. Would you take it as face value from a person of authority or would you question it as it's not what Last part I disagree that only hard core fans post if that's what you meant. Most fans nowadays post or look for feedback. If you mean post constantly then sure I agree.

The data shows what you play and how you play.

The analogy doesnt really work but lets work with it. So you only see Coke on the bar. You want Lemonade. You ask 10% of the people currently in the bar and they say "we want lemonade". The bartender says "We have lemonade in the back but the majority of our customers say they want Coke based on my experience and we are only allowed to serve one kind of drink. So thats why we only serve Coke."

Your response is "Well I've talked to 10% of the people here and they want Lemonade!"

I know its tough to take people at face value when your experience is different. When I'm faced with that I tend to ask "what reason would they have to lie?"

EA's motivation is money/revenue. Their goal is never to make the most realistic game. They goal is to make games that will result in the most people buying them. Period. So if someone at EA tells me "our data shows that people want this kind of game and we are creating that game so that we can appeal to the most potential buyers"....I tend to believe them because that falls in line with what the company they work for wants.

[Lauriedr1ver]

Quote: Originally Posted by aholbert32

The data shows what you play and how you play. The analogy doesnt really work but lets work with it. So you only see Coke on the bar. You want Lemonade. You ask 10% of the people currently in the bar and they say "we want lemonade". The bartender says "We have lemonade in the back but the majority of our customers say they want Coke based on my experience and we are only allowed to serve one kind of drink. So thats why we only serve Coke." Your response is "Well I've talked to 10% of the people here and they want Lemonade!" I know its tough to take people at face value when your experience is different. When I'm faced with that I tend to ask "what reason would they have to lie?" EA's motivation is money/revenue. Their goal is never to make the most realistic game. They goal is to make games that will result in the most people buying them. Period. So if someone at EA tells me "our data shows that people want this kind of game and we are creating that game so that we can appeal to the most potential buyers"....I tend to believe them because that falls in line with what the company they work for wants.

1. What and how doesnt mean anything, we play how the game dictates us to play, of course there is a differences in style but the majority play on the same fashion due to the game.

2. That analogy only works if you then say the bartender has data and it shows 90% of the bar wants coke so that's why we serve it. We can even add now that the data we have shows people will have coke so that's why you only sell it. That's quite the game even more as now it incompases how some of the data doesnt really match up with what people want.

What reason would they have to lie, you answer it in your very next line.

[aholbert32]

Quote: Originally Posted by Lauriedr1ver

1. What and how doesnt mean anything, we play how the game dictates us to play, of course there is a differences in style but the majority play on the same fashion due to the game. 2. That analogy only works if you then say the bartender has data and it shows 90% of the bar wants coke so that's why we serve it. We can even add now that the data we have shows people will have coke so that's why you only sell it. That's quite the game even more as now it incompases how some of the data doesnt really match up with what people want. What reason would they have to lie, you answer it in your very next line.

You couldnt be more wrong about that and that is purely is a hardcore perspective. The game forces you to play a certain way to be successful at the highest level. The game meta doesnt force me to play a certain way to win offline. I've been successful in the lower levels online using a distance management style.

Now thats difficult in the higher levels and thats where the whole comp/sim debate really comes into play.

To the second point, I have no idea what you are trying to say. I'm telling you that EA claims to have data that shows that the majority of players who play the game prefer a faster paced, less sim version of the game. They have data that shows that majority of people play that way because they like playing that way (not because the game forces them too).

You are saying that simply because you have seen alot of posts on forums and social media saying that people want a sim/realistic game, you doubt EA's data. I'm telling you that EA takes the social media into account but has more data that counters those posts.

Your 3rd point doesnt make sense either. If EA's goal is to generate the most revenue....they will do what generates the most revenue. If they had data that showed that a sim/realistic game would sell the most....they would make the game a sim/realistic game. Their data says the opposite of that so thats the main reason why the game isnt hyper realistic.