UFC 4 CAF options

[aholbert32]

The team that works on CAF is different that the one that works on Gameplay. There are no resources being taken away of ea works on one or the other. Don’t let people tell you different. Especially ones who have no idea how this works.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Kingslayer04]

Quote: Originally Posted by aholbert32

The team that works on CAF is different that the one that works on Gameplay. There are no resources being taken away of ea works on one or the other. Don’t let people tell you different. Especially ones who have no idea how this works. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Wait, the art team is also different than the team that works on gameplay. If they decide to remodel every single fighter and give them a 2019 look, wouldn't that take away a certain amount of resources from the gameplay team? Just like the music issue we talked about.

I'm not trying to be anybody's advocate here, I just thought that while the teams are different, the budget is one and the same.

[aholbert32]

Quote: Originally Posted by Kingslayer04

Wait, the art team is also different than the team that works on gameplay. If they decide to remodel every single fighter and give them a 2019 look, wouldn't that take away a certain amount of resources from the gameplay team? Just like the music issue we talked about. I'm not trying to be anybody's advocate here, I just thought that while the teams are different, the budget is one and the same.

You are talking about 2 different things. If the argument was adding to CAF would make it so EA doesn’t add a bunch of new fighters, that makes sense because the art team works on both of those.

Gameplay is different. The art team adding extra beards, haircuts or a system to better create CAF looks has nothing to do with the Gameplay team adding a new training mode or grappling positions or changing stamina. Two different groups.

The music thing is completely different because that’s music licensing. That’s a specific cost that comes from the overall budget. The art team is already going to work in assets related to the game. So if it’s CAF or adding 100 new fighters, the cost is still the same.

It’s an idiotic argument to say that new CAF additions would take away from gameplay changes because they are worked on by two different groups.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Kingslayer04]

Quote: Originally Posted by aholbert32

You are talking about 2 different things. If the argument was adding to CAF would make it so EA doesn’t add a bunch of new fighters, that makes sense because the art team works on both of those. Gameplay is different. The art team adding extra beards, haircuts or a system to better create CAF looks has nothing to do with the Gameplay team adding a new training mode or grappling positions or changing stamina. Two different groups. The music thing is completely different because that’s music licensing. That’s a specific cost that comes from the overall budget. The art team is already going to work in assets related to the game. So if it’s CAF or adding 100 new fighters, the cost is still the same. It’s an idiotic argument to say that new CAF additions would take away from gameplay changes because they are worked on by two different groups. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Oh, okay, so what you're saying is that each team has a certain budget to work with, therefore no matter what one team spends their budget on, it would have no impact on the other team's budget. Is that correct?

[Leiqueros]

It is what I suppose, I will have an established budget, with some other variant, and from that budget I will have it designed for the different teams that work in the game, that is why I imagine that it is silly to say not to ask for arrangements in the issue of the edition because they lose money with it and thus harm the gameplay of the game for example

[TheRizzzle]

Quote: Originally Posted by aholbert32

You are talking about 2 different things. If the argument was adding to CAF would make it so EA doesn’t add a bunch of new fighters, that makes sense because the art team works on both of those. Gameplay is different. The art team adding extra beards, haircuts or a system to better create CAF looks has nothing to do with the Gameplay team adding a new training mode or grappling positions or changing stamina. Two different groups. The music thing is completely different because that’s music licensing. That’s a specific cost that comes from the overall budget. The art team is already going to work in assets related to the game. So if it’s CAF or adding 100 new fighters, the cost is still the same. It’s an idiotic argument to say that new CAF additions would take away from gameplay changes because they are worked on by two different groups. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

As much as I want them to add as many real fighters as possible, it always feels like a losing uphill battle with the amount to roster fluidity.

I have no doubt we're going to get a lot of new fighters. I also think it's going to get offset heavily by the departure of several established guys.

If we had a better CAF system, more slots (like 100-200) and the pipe dream of a fighter share program like EA MMA had, I'd almost be in favor of the resources going that direction, speaking as an offline universe guy.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[TheRizzzle]

A really awesome addition to CAF would be a side-by-side view when you're assigning stats, movesets, perks and levels where you could see the fighter you're creating on the left, and toggle through every fighter in that division on the right.

This would allow you to quickly see how you should assign someone's stats based on where the rest of the division is.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[Skynet]

Quote: Originally Posted by Kingslayer04

Oh, okay, so what you're saying is that each team has a certain budget to work with, therefore no matter what one team spends their budget on, it would have no impact on the other team's budget. Is that correct?

I'm not involved in these discussions internally so take this all with a grain of salt, but I still have more insight than speculation. To be reaaallly accurate, there's technically still one budget for the team. However it does get broken up further into the specific areas depending on the goal and vision of the product, and how many resources it would take to accomplish the high-level vision.

For example, gamemodes and UI often share resources, and have a faaar greater headcount than gameplay. For whatever reasons, it takes significantly more people to make screens and gamemodes than it does gameplay. Audio is even smaller, with only a handful of people. This process is not one of cannibalization, though. If one area has bitten off more than they can chew, we don't really give them resources from another area, but either ask for more from up on high or simply cut some of the features we wanted from elsewhere in the area.

This is a bit oversimplified, but if we wanted 5 new game modes and 3 cool new gameplay mechanics but GM only had resources for 4, for instance, we wouldn't sacrifice a GP thing to keep GM afloat. They'd just prioritize their 5 and drop the lowest one.

The central art teams (modeling, characters, environments, lighting, physics rigs, etc) are more like contractors within EA itself, and each game deals with their managers etc to figure out who/what we need, and then we get their time temporarily or split with other projects. UFC's art design team would have a budget allocated towards new art content as well, and would divvy that up between new fighters, venues, updates, etc. If they think that there's something they can't get but would reeeaaally want, then generally they would make their case to the higher ups for more funds based on the return of value.

It's a very complicated process, and I do not envy one bit the people that have to try and figure out how the budget gets used, or how to convince the powers that be to give us more money when we want it. Bless their hard-working little hearts.