Are the forums indicative of the popularity of UFC 4?

[aholbert32]

Re: Are the forums indicative of the popularity of UFC 4?

Point 3 says EA was planning to do something, what was it? Some kind of micro transaction scheme? Probably having to buy fighters or ranked being only Create a fighter lol

It wasnt anything like that. It was gameplay related but there is no need to get into the specifics because they listened to feedback and took steps to fix the issue before release.

I honestly would not give a **** about microtransactions or buying fighters. I would spend a crazy amount of money if they were willing to sell packs of fighters that arent in the game. I've done it for other games.

[TheRizzzle]

Re: Are the forums indicative of the popularity of UFC 4?

It wasnt anything like that. It was gameplay related but there is no need to get into the specifics because they listened to feedback and took steps to fix the issue before release.



I honestly would not give a **** about microtransactions or buying fighters. I would spend a crazy amount of money if they were willing to sell packs of fighters that arent in the game. I've done it for other games.

1000000%.

If this is the difference between getting what...15-20 free DLC fighters during the patch cycle and let's say...100...

Take my money. Gladly. You wanna throw ads in my already purchased game to fund it, then explain "the why" behind it and I'm probably good with it too.

Pay the art team and give me what I want lol!

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

[Kingslayer04]

Re: Are the forums indicative of the popularity of UFC 4?

Lets clarify something since posts are being attributed to me:

Point 1 is my opinion. Its based on the fact that EA has confirmed it was targeting a more casual audience with UFC 4 and the fact that the hardcore community still buys the game even though the many aspects of the new game were not targeting them. In my opinion, EA considers hardcores a lock because HARDCORES have shown them they are a lock.

I will say this and this is also solely my opinion: To say EA doesnt care about "you or your ideas" (like you did in the response that Skynet replied to) isnt true imo. Even though I'm dissapointed about a lot in UFC 4, there are many things that they have added that have been things that this community has asked for specifically.

Now OSers may not like how they executed those ideas but to say they dont care is false. In my opinion, they care about ideas that are going to appeal to the entire community first, ideas that will bring in new buyers second and the hardcore fans third.

I appreciate your clarification on your own stance. I don't mean to quote people incorrectly. However, I do remember you saying they were on the verge of completely ignoring the hardcores and would do it in a heartbeat if it hadn't been for the... GCs, was it? I clearly remember you saying that.

Either way, my opinion remains the same. But as disappointing as the direction the series has taken is, I'm not exactly mad that a corporation is acting like a corporation. It's a business, it's money first, I get that. What irritates me is Skynet's persistent claims that they care about everyone equally when there's ample evidence to the contrary, and that my opinion is invalid because I don't work with them and don't know them. And that EA isn't in it for the money and they're all beautiful fairy people. No, the product speaks louder when it pertains to the corporation's intentions and priorities. And as much as the game sucks in my eyes, that's fine. Just own up to it.

As for the features he listed that he says he wants added - okay, I guess? But the way I see it, it's been 6 years and 4 games and they're running out of excuses on the "foundations first" front. The game's still about as barren as a wasteland. Anyway, I hope they get around to eventually adding all that, they have until 2030 to do it. I also hope these features are actually on top of an existing foundation, seeing as they may have removed more features than added for this game.

But again, I'm long past trying to help "steer the ship in the right direction". It's their business and their game, I'm just a player who has certain issues with the whole thing. They don't have to abide by me, obviously.

[Morgan Monkman]

Re: Are the forums indicative of the popularity of UFC 4?

1000000%.

If this is the difference between getting what...15-20 free DLC fighters during the patch cycle and let's say...100...

Take my money. Gladly. You wanna throw ads in my already purchased game to fund it, then explain "the why" behind it and I'm probably good with it too.

Pay the art team and give me what I want lol!

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

I’m not a fan of having to pay for fighters, especially if they want this to be a competitive online game, everyone has to have access to the same content. Otherwise just do away with everything and market the game to casuals, that’s the direction it’s headed currently.

[TheRizzzle]

Re: Are the forums indicative of the popularity of UFC 4?

I’m not a fan of having to pay for fighters, especially if they want this to be a competitive online game, everyone has to have access to the same content. Otherwise just do away with everything and market the game to casuals, that’s the direction it’s headed currently.

I get that, but I think of it differently.

I'm funding the resource with an expectation that my ROI is the volume of fighters. Not simply paying for fighters. I'm paying for MORE fighters than would be available for free.

As for the second half of your argument about online, I'm sorry I'm an offline only guy and I'm tired of my experience being constantly influenced by online users. I'm literally stating I'd pay for a service. At that point I win if the online users aren't willing to do the same.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

[aholbert32]

Re: Are the forums indicative of the popularity of UFC 4?

I appreciate your clarification on your own stance. I don't mean to quote people incorrectly. However, I do remember you saying they were on the verge of completely ignoring the hardcores and would do it in a heartbeat if it hadn't been for the... GCs, was it? I clearly remember you saying that.

Either way, my opinion remains the same. But as disappointing as the direction the series has taken is, I'm not exactly mad that a corporation is acting like a corporation. It's a business, it's money first, I get that. What irritates me is Skynet's persistent claims that they care about everyone equally when there's ample evidence to the contrary, and that my opinion is invalid because I don't work with them and don't know them. And that EA isn't in it for the money and they're all beautiful fairy people. No, the product speaks louder when it pertains to the corporation's intentions and priorities. And as much as the game sucks in my eyes, that's fine. Just own up to it.

As for the features he listed that he says he wants added - okay, I guess? But the way I see it, it's been 6 years and 4 games and they're running out of excuses on the "foundations first" front. The game's still about as barren as a wasteland. Anyway, I hope they get around to eventually adding all that, they have until 2030 to do it. I also hope these features are actually on top of an existing foundation, seeing as they may have removed more features than added for this game.

But again, I'm long past trying to help "steer the ship in the right direction". It's their business and their game, I'm just a player who has certain issues with the whole thing. They don't have to abide by me, obviously.

If you can find that quote, I would appreciate it. Context is important too. I could see myself saying that about certain aspects of the game or that specific feature that the GCs spoke out about but not the entire game. If I did, I was wrong because the GCs dont have that much pull. We cant force the devs to listen to any community. All we can is give them feedback and hopefully push them in the right direction.

Related to your views, I'll say this. You didnt buy the game which is the right thing to do when you hate the direction of the series. You've spent the last few months off and on posting about your issues with the game and the direction of the series. You've done it clearly and respectfully for the most part.

With that said, the next game isnt likely to come out until 2022 unless they change the release schedule so at this point you posting.....isnt really helpful.

I dont mean that in a disrespectful way. I mean they arent likely to add anything in a patch that is going to make you buy UFC 4, right? You have reason to believe that they dont listen to you or this community so in your opinion posting here isnt going to improve the game, right?

We are at least a few months before they completely lock in on things for UFC 5 so my suggestion is to do what I'm doing. I'm not providing much feedback for 4 anymore and havent for months. The things that I've asked for havent gotten much movement and I dont expect the will. So I'm chilling. In a few months, I'll offer some ideas for UFC 5 and hope EA listens. Its the best I can do but I'm not overly optimistic.

I'm letting the people who enjoy UFC 4 continue to enjoy it and provide feedback on a game that they play.

[aholbert32]

Re: Are the forums indicative of the popularity of UFC 4?

I’m not a fan of having to pay for fighters, especially if they want this to be a competitive online game, everyone has to have access to the same content. Otherwise just do away with everything and market the game to casuals, that’s the direction it’s headed currently.

The problem with applying that to UFC is the comp scene plays with like 10% of the fighters. They arent going to play with Francisco Trinaldo or Geoff Neal or Kevin Holland (fighters likely to be grouped in packs).

Its always the top 5 in each division.

Also, if there is a top fighter in there that you want to use as a comp player....you may have to drop 5 bucks to use him if you want. Thats the price of staying competitive.

I dont think the rest of the players should be prevented from having a full roster simply because of a comp scene that is 10% of the entire community

[Morgan Monkman]

Re: Are the forums indicative of the popularity of UFC 4?

The problem with applying that to UFC is the comp scene plays with like 10% of the fighters. They arent going to play with Francisco Trinaldo or Geoff Neal or Kevin Holland (fighters likely to be grouped in packs).

Its always the top 5 in each division.

Also, if there is a top fighter in there that you want to use as a comp player....you may have to drop 5 bucks to use him if you want. Thats the price of staying competitive.

I dont think the rest of the players should be prevented from having a full roster simply because of a comp scene that is 10% of the entire community

I shouldn’t have to pay to stay competitive. That’s the antithesis of what people want. Pay2win. I’m not saying that’s what will happen but it’s why I hate micro transactions and the gaming community at large does as well.

[aholbert32]

Re: Are the forums indicative of the popularity of UFC 4?

I shouldn’t have to pay to stay competitive. That’s the antithesis of what people want. Pay2win. I’m not saying that’s what will happen but it’s why I hate micro transactions and the gaming community at large does as well.

You arent paying to stay competitive though. Again, most of not all the fighters that are DLC are mid-level fighters that comp fighters dont use. Even if they made someone like Michael Chandler (a top LW) a paid DLC, a comp player would have Khabib, Tony, Dustin, Conor and Justin G. to choose from if they didnt want to pay.

[TheRizzzle]

Re: Are the forums indicative of the popularity of UFC 4?

I shouldn’t have to pay to stay competitive. That’s the antithesis of what people want. Pay2win. I’m not saying that’s what will happen but it’s why I hate micro transactions and the gaming community at large does as well.

You thinking allowing people to buy Francisco "F******" Trinaldo is upsetting the competitive balance of online gaming?

Thats the argument you're going with?

They aren't putting cheat code fighters into the game. Just pick one of the over 200 free fighters.

Or don't allow DLC into online comp? I really don't care either way.

Let's put this a different way. At this point, some people don't have access to Lesnar, Joshua or Fury in the heavyweight division because they weren't free.

Is the competitive balance of HW every seriously brought up amongst the competitive online crowd here?

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

[Kingslayer04]

Re: Are the forums indicative of the popularity of UFC 4?

If you can find that quote, I would appreciate it. Context is important too. I could see myself saying that about certain aspects of the game or that specific feature that the GCs spoke out about but not the entire game. If I did, I was wrong because the GCs dont have that much pull. We cant force the devs to listen to any community. All we can is give them feedback and hopefully push them in the right direction.

Related to your views, I'll say this. You didnt buy the game which is the right thing to do when you hate the direction of the series. You've spent the last few months off and on posting about your issues with the game and the direction of the series. You've done it clearly and respectfully for the most part.

With that said, the next game isnt likely to come out until 2022 unless they change the release schedule so at this point you posting.....isnt really helpful.

I dont mean that in a disrespectful way. I mean they arent likely to add anything in a patch that is going to make you buy UFC 4, right? You have reason to believe that they dont listen to you or this community so in your opinion posting here isnt going to improve the game, right?

We are at least a few months before they completely lock in on things for UFC 5 so my suggestion is to do what I'm doing. I'm not providing much feedback for 4 anymore and havent for months. The things that I've asked for havent gotten much movement and I dont expect the will. So I'm chilling. In a few months, I'll offer some ideas for UFC 5 and hope EA listens. Its the best I can do but I'm not overly optimistic.

I'm letting the people who enjoy UFC 4 continue to enjoy it and provide feedback on a game that they play.

To be fair, I don't plan on dedicating time on digging it up. Could have been a DM, but it also could have been in one of the million threads ages ago. I really don't remember where it was posted, nor when exactly. You addressed it anyway. If I do happen to find it, I'll post it here.

As for the feedback part - I hadn't posted here in a long time, I don't have much reason to. I guess I just wanted to address Skynet's behaviour on here, while also questioning what ideas from this predominantly hardcore-based forum could possibly gain any traction, seeing as the developers have headed into a casual direction yet again. I didn't really try to influence the game again. I'm kind of past giving feedback, if anyone on that dev team ever found any of my suggestions to be good, those can still be found in my post history. And yeah, that's pretty much it.

[Haz____]

Re: Are the forums indicative of the popularity of UFC 4?

They arent going to play with Francisco Trinaldo or Geoff Neal or Kevin Holland (fighters likely to be grouped in packs).

I'd pay for that pack.

[Skynet]

Re: Are the forums indicative of the popularity of UFC 4?

Let me start by saying thank you for continuing a civil discussion without any 'passionate' language. While this is a difficult topic, there's no reason we can't honestly look at it and be frank with the facts. All the facts. Opinions are certainly valid, and you've plenty of reason to have the opinions you do, but I don't agree with them because I am taking into account other sides that point elsewhere. That simple.

Again, my post blurred the lines between yourself and the corporation that you, the developers, work for. I have no desire to nitpick and separate one from the other again, like it had to be done the last time we had this discussion.

I had no intention of doing a me/us/them comparison. I don't feel personally attacked by what you said and I don't think it targeted anyone else, it was simply an assumption based on poor evidence and I know that it's wrong. You spoke of process and big bad EA breathing down our necks, and your thoughts simply don't reflect the reality. I can give plenty of evidence to prove that if you're open to seeing it. I get riled up on this because I know how many people want to jump on the EA hate bandwagon, and inaccurate opinions like this add fuel to a fire that hurts everyone and is not needed.

You're quite allowed to keep your opinion and share it, but I won't stop deny it is the truth

1. aholbert has stated multiple times that EA consider the hardcores to be a lock so most effort went into the casuals and that they do.not.care.

2. GPD has dittoed that sentiment and even added something along the lines of "why should EA cater to you when you're never happy"

This is honestly a really interesting point. What is a hardcore player to you? What about that player makes them hardcore, and what implications does that have? Is it simply someone who is willing to put X hours into the game? Someone who pre-orders? Someone who knows the sport inside and out? Someone who's super competitive and skilled? Someone who runs their own universe mode in spreasheets? Someone who builds 50+ CAFs? Someone who buys the game simply because it's a new MMA experience?

What is it that makes a player hardcore, and what does the game owe those people over the 'casuals' who don't fall into that group but buy the game just the same?

Personally, I think the team's goal is actually to appeal to casuals so they buy the game, but have a game that's deep and engrossing enough that it turns them into hardcores, or returning players. That means the veneer is shiny but the core experience is actually built for various flavor of hardcore. And I very much believe that is the larger philosophy that the team works on. We need to pair accessibility and ease of access with room to grow and depth. That is very, very hard to do and we're trying to do it on a relatively new sports franchise with a relatively small resource budget.

3. information coming from aholbert and other gamechangers about something EA/you were planning to do that proves this sentiment right and didn't come to pass only because of an upheaval on the GC's part. He did not want to disclose what that was.

We were planning to revamp the ground game. This took many ideas and forms, but boiled down to one major concept: most people don't know BJJ. They don't care to know, and they don't want to know. Hardcores and casuals alike. We needed to simplify an incredibly complex and information heavy experience into something players could intuitively understand and ideally learn from. This is where the simplified grapple assist controls eventually spawned from. The scary thing that came far too close to fruition for almost every dev's liking was that for some time, assist controls were planned to be the ONLY form of grappling. A death sentence.... thankfully, our own internal feedback was backed by outrage and shock by the GCs and we were able to convince leadership to not go that route. Keep in mind, this was still entirely within the UFC dev team, not 'big bad EA' above us.

Now, this whole process had a few downsides all the same. We had months of different prototypes and designs of how to simplify things, as well as how to keep the old system alive during those prototypes incase we ever convinced leadership to not gut the old system (and thank RNGesus we did...). However, all the dev work that went into these designs, many of them quite good in their own right, meant the devs involved were effectively working on things that never got into the final game. This is very common in any creative industry, but this was likely one of the larger prototype churns UFC has ever had and it means the final game has less final content given the time spent building it. Diablo III was in production for over 8 years! Still a pretty small game when it came out... that is simply the nature of our jobs.

4. And last but certainly not least - my own eyes. What I'm seeing does not show me any love for the hardcore community, barring the sweet-looking grappling exchanges. In all honesty, I don't think this is a great game as a whole, not just when it comes to the hardcores. UFC 3 showed me what you guys can do over a 2 year cycle, that leap was phenomenal. In comparison, UFC 4 looks like it's been patched together in a month or two, in all of its aspects.

Right. So I don't fault you for not knowing the things you can't see. All the back and forth that happens behind closed doors during development. All the different opinions we do consider, and the different points of view of not just the community but the devs themselves, as well as the corporate agendas. And you're quite right to judge the product by what it contains.

However, I will say that there's plenty of evidence to the contrary of your point that is very much in front of you. Only focusing on the information that backs your opinions is confirmation bias, and one of the most common ways of warping opinions and not having an accurate understanding. So! Here's some widely known bits that help balance against your own:

-We've had a GC program since UFC 1, comprised almost entirely of different flavors of hardcore fans. We've talked to them almost daily, and flown them to the studio a few times for in-depth back and forth and feedback.

-We have community interaction to a level that verrry few games ever do. (Hello!)

-We've overhauled major gameplay systems every single iteration of the game, and always strived to drive them to a more realistic and complex representation of the actual sport.

-We have a level of animation quality and depth for different fighters and styles that no previous MMA game has ever had. Casuals don't see these things, and they certainly don't buy the game because of it. This is 100% hardcore fanfare.

-We patch our games post-launch more frequently and with more content than perhaps any sports game, while also having one of the smallest teams. That is easily more in favor of hardcores than casuals, and most of the changes themselves are in fact based on community feedback or features we wanted in the base game but weren't able to get to in time.

-Most of our modes resources actually go into career and online, and career mode has evolved significantly each iteration. Like it or not, you cannot reasonably deny that it has changed a lot. The amount of work that goes into it is the single greatest expenditure of our development as far as I know. Is it on the level of the story modes in FIFA or Madden? No, but you would blanche at knowing how expensive those were, and how big the teams were to build those experiences alone. Like... educated guess, those cost more than our entire game did.

You just played that card where I have to know all of your staff personally and work with you to have an opinion of your product and EA's thought process.Like you did last time, when I had to consider that EA workers are nice family men and whatnot. This is ridiculous.

You don't have to know anything about any of us to have reasonable opinions of the product. But you sure as hell don't know about our processes. Do you know what astronauts go through simply because you've seen a rocket go into space before? You can comment on how cool the ship is, but I'll be damned if I listen to a 'valid opinion' about the engineering of the ship or the piloting from someone who's never touched the stuff... that... that is ridiculous

I'll now address the end of your first paragraph. "Malicious to the community"? How, by expressing my thoughts? I wasn't "malicious" when I was defending and praising you guys in the months leading up to UFC 4's release, when people were giving you **** for the information blackout and "delayed" release. I'm not insulting anyone and I provide the arguments that help form my opinion in an articulate and civil manner. I'm not cheerleading, I'm not spamming, I'm not trolling. And you're asking me to leave? Really?

I had bolded a few very specific parts in your message in which this was directed, and I stand by it. It's toxic and malicious to the continuation of this community. Personally, I don't want it here. What possible purpose is there in a community if the message circulating inside of it is that it's pointless and people should feel like they're wasting their time by being there... it's destructive and simply untrue. Pick your words more wisely if that's not what you mean, because it is what you said.

I'm sorry but all you do is show me you can't handle criticism. Asking me to leave for the sake of the community? Come on, man, that's a weak move. I expected at least the ability to take an internet user's qualms on the chin. And I hope you don't use me as an excuse to stop interacting with those who enjoy your insight on here.

Please don't confuse ****-posting with criticism. I come here specifically for the constructive criticism, and pass almost all of it on and champion in to the team. The ****-posting however, I would happily see gone from the world, and will not tolerate silently. Your post contained both. I can pick them apart, and do so. But I'd very much appreciate not having to.

[aholbert32]

Re: Are the forums indicative of the popularity of UFC 4?

I'd pay for that pack.

I know you would and so would I. I dont think a huge amount of people would but that is a way to cater to hardcore fans. We have 200 plus fighters missing from the game...that is a way to close the gap.

[TapOrSnap]

Re: Are the forums indicative of the popularity of UFC 4?

Wow folks I don't view the forums for one day and things turn into a soap opera again.

For those saying Skynet isn't passionate, just look at the time stamp on most of his posts. Once again he is putting his downtime towards interacting with this wonderful community.

There is little I can add to the discussion at this point above and beyond what Skynet has already said here but again if you doubt our commitment to the hardcore player just look at the patch notes. The new grapple transitions for example will mean nothing to a casual player, they probably won't even see them if they are using assist and if they do they won't know why and probably won't notice. Those changes exist purely to address issues with high level play in those positions.

Skynet already pointed out that we spent a significant portion of our time building the grapple assist. I can expand on that. I spent a significant portion of my time building it, it's my baby and I am a proud father, many people helped me make it a reality but it was my world for the better part of the development cycle. However the job would have been a lot easier if I hadn't tried to maintain the existing systems. I did that because I suspected that with the new system alone we would be alienating a large portion of the high level players. In time and through collecting feedback in playtests my suspicion was proven true and I had to redesign the entire system again to allow both mechanics to work in tandem. This was because we did not want to have the grapple input become another matchmaking criteria to divide the community and we still needed a new system to address the complaints regarding the inaccessibility of the existing grapple system. Instead the new system was built to become something that could tutorialize the grapple game. This is why we included the hybrid grapple, to allow newer players who wanted to transition to the deeper system to use Assist while seeing what was happening under the hood as they made assist selections. We also found that several of our experienced players enjoyed using hybrid as they were fond of playing the grapple meta but would sometimes switch to the assist inputs for positions they were less than familiar with where they might know they have a sub or getup for example but not recall the direction or for unfamiliar fighters to learn the move sets as they played. The assist input would give them what they wanted and show them how to get there in the future. Finally we also wanted it to be a couch play solution for when your friend, whose never played, comes over and you just want to fight. You can just turn on assist for him so you don't have to give him a dissertation on the finer points of grappling to jump in and have a fun experience.

That's probably more insight into our dev process than I typically share but I want you to understand how much thought and effort goes into any given change. Of course we are always looking to cater to new players and casual players, that's the only way to grow our player base. However every decision is weighed against how it will impact our existing player base. You might want to jump on the hate EA bandwagon and paint the company as an abusive overlord whose yoke we poor devs suffer under but that simply isn't the case. EA and the culture they foster gave me the latitude to build the system above even though the benefits of my approach were not initially obvious. Thousands of man hours went into this feature alone, it was no small investment.

This is not a unique story either. Many if not most of our features go through a very similar process.