Are the forums indicative of the popularity of UFC 4?

[Phillyboi207]

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

While I can't speak for this person, I do think it's very obvious why someone would post like this, and what their intent is.

Their goal is to express their overt disappointment with UFC 4. With an example that shows just part of why they are disappointed, and how far the disappointment goes, and just how mind boggling it really is.

The reason for making this post is both an expression of ones opinions, as well as a showcase of how the fans of the game are feelings. It is just 1 opinion, but an equally valid opinion as any other. If the devs see enough posts expressing these sentiments, they will understand how the people are feeling about their game.

This goes for more positive posts as well obviously, but just because he has a negative opinion, doesn't make it any less valid.

Does a game from 8 ago really have a better KO system? That would be subjective I'd suppose, but a feeling a lot of people seem to share, and maybe looking into KOs isn't such a terrible idea.

Will posts like this improve the game? Absolutely, 100% they will. As long as the devs see them, they will make a difference. Positive or negative opinions - all lead to a deeper understand of how your game is being received.

So here’s the thing. Negative feedback is welcome especially if it is accompanied with constructive feedback. Believe me I’ve expressed mainly negative opinions of UFC4 to this point. My profile is still level 3 because I find it difficult to enjoy this game on any level. The game is a huge disappointment for me. That said I know that Skynet has put in a ton of work and in his main areas (Offline AI / Sliders) the game is way better than it’s ever been.

As others have mentioned the issue is the toxic / entitled manner in which that user responded. Skynet was literally telling us that’s why Devs don’t respond and he jumps in trying to shame the Devs. How does that help? When people act childish the Devs are more likely to not take your feedback seriously.

[TapOrSnap]

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

Well this was a rather heated thread for me to spend the last couple hours of my life on.

There was a lot of "feedback" provided. One bit of which was my inactivity on this forum, which is completely justified. I apologize for that. My work life in the last several months has been dominated by working on the patches for our game and I have not had the time to come here while I was on the clock nor the inclination to put myself through the wringer in my off hours. However as my penance I have taken the time to read through the entirety of this thread, every word of it, in the hopes that you folks will realize that you are heard.

I applaud Skynet for the time he has put into this forum. Make no mistake "spend hours of your life on OS" is not a task on any of our schedules and Skynet has suffered a great deal of abuse and responded to your concerns while also collecting and collating actionable feedback entirely during his off hours. I appreciate his dedication as should anyone who feels strongly about our game.

I want to say thank you for those of you who provide constructive feedback to us as well as those who try to steer the conversation back towards constructive feedback.

I find it difficult to come here myself as when I do find constructive criticism it is often buried under page after page of vitriol.

Don't get me wrong. I enjoy reading messages where people say they love our game and I understand when people want to tell us if they hate our game but please add a because or an if.

"I love this game because it has such a wide roster"
"I hate this game because it doesn't have fighter X"

"I love this game because I can wear a silly mask"
"I hate this game because my opponents are always wearing silly masks"

"I like the grappling, if it had slightly faster timings in crucifix it would make that position much more strategically viable."
"I dislike the striking because I can't get the input timings down if there was a way I could train those it would be much easier"

When you tell us we don't know how to do our jobs (which we are pretty sure we do) you lose credibility.

When you tell us that "UFC sucks because EA sucks" you are not providing us anything actionable and as Skynet said EA is actually a pretty incredible place where we have chosen to work. Skynet is EA, I am EA, we're part of a large company and sure we've made mistakes but I can tell you from experience we have worked hard to learn from them. There are some folks out there who have decided outright that anything with the EA logo on it deserves to be maligned. When you align yourself with that kind of mentality you lose credibility.

Please do not mistake my silence for apathy. I am listening, we all are. However engaging of late has proven less productive than in the past. Our time has been spent continuing to work to improve the game in a way that provides the best experience for our entire user base. Sometimes that means adding features which appeal to or help onboard our casuals, sometimes it means updating or adding a fighter or strike to appeal to MMA fans and sometimes it means adding that one strike or grappling transition which will improve the meta for a small percentage of our high level players and never even be noticed by the casuals. I can think of things we have put into recent patches or have in our backlog which fit into all those categories.

Thank you to everyone who has played our game and thank you to those of you who have helped us make it better.

[TheRizzzle]

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

Well this was a rather heated thread for me to spend the last couple hours of my life on.



There was a lot of "feedback" provided. One bit of which was my inactivity on this forum, which is completely justified. I apologize for that. My work life in the last several months has been dominated by working on the patches for our game and I have not had the time to come here while I was on the clock nor the inclination to put myself through the wringer in my off hours. However as my penance I have taken the time to read through the entirety of this thread, every word of it, in the hopes that you folks will realize that you are heard.



I applaud Skynet for the time he has put into this forum. Make no mistake "spend hours of your life on OS" is not a task on any of our schedules and Skynet has suffered a great deal of abuse and responded to your concerns while also collecting and collating actionable feedback entirely during his off hours. I appreciate his dedication as should anyone who feels strongly about our game.



I want to say thank you for those of you who provide constructive feedback to us as well as those who try to steer the conversation back towards constructive feedback.



I find it difficult to come here myself as when I do find constructive criticism it is often buried under page after page of vitriol.



Don't get me wrong. I enjoy reading messages where people say they love our game and I understand when people want to tell us if they hate our game but please add a because or an if.



"I love this game because it has such a wide roster"

"I hate this game because it doesn't have fighter X"



"I love this game because I can wear a silly mask"

"I hate this game because my opponents are always wearing silly masks"



"I like the grappling, if it had slightly faster timings in crucifix it would make that position much more strategically viable."

"I dislike the striking because I can't get the input timings down if there was a way I could train those it would be much easier"



When you tell us we don't know how to do our jobs (which we are pretty sure we do) you lose credibility.



When you tell us that "UFC sucks because EA sucks" you are not providing us anything actionable and as Skynet said EA is actually a pretty incredible place where we have chosen to work. Skynet is EA, I am EA, we're part of a large company and sure we've made mistakes but I can tell you from experience we have worked hard to learn from them. There are some folks out there who have decided outright that anything with the EA logo on it deserves to be maligned. When you align yourself with that kind of mentality you lose credibility.



Please do not mistake my silence for apathy. I am listening, we all are. However engaging of late has proven less productive than in the past. Our time has been spent continuing to work to improve the game in a way that provides the best experience for our entire user base. Sometimes that means adding features which appeal to or help onboard our casuals, sometimes it means updating or adding a fighter or strike to appeal to MMA fans and sometimes it means adding that one strike or grappling transition which will improve the meta for a small percentage of our high level players and never even be noticed by the casuals. I can think of things we have put into recent patches or have in our backlog which fit into all those categories.



Thank you to everyone who has played our game and thank you to those of you who have helped us make it better.

Well adding Brock Lesnar got me to buy the game.

Adding Michael Chandler might get me to buy it twice.

And if we could finally edit CAF stats again that would be wonderful but if you were able to bump the slots up to say...100 you might damn well please a good majority of the offline universe players.

I generally like most aspects of the game having finally bought it.

The grappling feels a little limited on the ground compared to 3. Would love more clinch positions.

The striking feels better for sure IMO. Also, the AI is vastly more challenging than in year's past, at least for me. It feels like I have to work through things on the feet because not everyone fights the same anymore.

My biggest criticism of the game would be that a lot of the things I'm accustomed to seeing upgraded YOY from traditional sports titles doesn't happen with this franchise.

The roster is robust...but not entirely current. The fun for hardcore MMA fans is the depth of those second and third tier fighters, not just the superstars.

Also the game's presentation feels exactly the same. I play Event Mode. It hasn't changed. The walkout are the same. Too repetitive and would love some variation from what prelim looks like versus a co-main/main event or title fight.

Also...more (real) arenas/stadiums would nice...preferably ones that create unique atmospheres. Think that new venue in Abu Dhabi. Or AT&T Stadium, Marvel Stadium in Australia.

It's certainly not a bad game. Not to me anyway. But you asked for specifics and it felt good to get those off my chest.

Now back to throwing fools around with Lesnar.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

[giro160]

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

I love the game and now even more.
my only question is i play on a standard ps4, do you think if i buy a ps5 my game on the ground will improve, because now if i play against ps pro users, it is very difficult to block their transitions, while with standard ps4 users is it very easy?
sorry for my bad english i use translator

[Evil97]

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

I love the game and now even more.
my only question is i play on a standard ps4, do you think if i buy a ps5 my game on the ground will improve, because now if i play against ps pro users, it is very difficult to block their transitions, while with standard ps4 users is it very easy?
sorry for my bad english i use translator

From what I've gathered so far is that the PS 5 and Xbox Series X feel pretty much the same as PS4 Pro and Xbox One X. Both of those however do play better than regular PS4 and Xbox One regarding a slightly better response time. So to answer your question directly, if you currently have the regular PS4, then getting a PS5 will be slightly better. But if you already have a Pro, it's not worth it for just this game (most would argue it wouldn't be worth it for just this game regardless lol).

Sent from my SM-N960U using Operation Sports mobile app

[Skynet]

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

To be quite clear, there is no difference in gameplay on any of those console versions. PS4, PS4 Pro, and PS5 all have identical timing and gameplay. The only difference on the Pro and 5 is that they are prettier.

[Evil97]

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

To be quite clear, there is no difference in gameplay on any of those console versions. PS4, PS4 Pro, and PS5 all have identical timing and gameplay. The only difference on the Pro and 5 is that they are prettier.

For me, and for strictly online play, the response time for denials is easier on an Xbox one X compared to a regular Xbox one. I have no idea on the technology of why this is, but it definitely plays better on Xbox one x. I have both xbox's and am just basing this on first hand side by side comparison, as well as some friends that are high level players online and ESFL that experienced the same when switching. All this is only in regards to playing online.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Operation Sports mobile app

[MeowingForVengeance]

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

To be quite clear, there is no difference in gameplay on any of those console versions. PS4, PS4 Pro, and PS5 all have identical timing and gameplay. The only difference on the Pro and 5 is that they are prettier.

How can it not be an advantage to be at 60 fps when your opponent is only seeing 30 fps? Not trying to be confrontational or anything, I just genuinely never understood this, even going back to UFC 3.

[Skynet]

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

So the answer here is that rendering is the only thing at 60, not gameplay. That means the screen updates twice as often, but not with any information that's actually new. It's just smoother. If a hand has to travel 4 inches in one frame on PS4, it instead would have 2 frames of 2 inches in the same time on a Pro or PS5.

Gameplay still updates at 30, which means your inputs are still consumed at the same speed. The simulation engine still updates at the same speed. Outcomes and impacts are still at the same speed. Denial windows are the same, etc.

The rendering is interpolated, which mean it takes the 30fps frames, and calculates a middle ground between them, and shows that. So the rendering engine doesn't even get a new update from the game engine for this extra frames, it makes them up.

[TapOrSnap]

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

To build on what Skynet said above we run our game sim at exactly the same rate on both machines and we only process the inputs for any given frame when we have received those inputs from both consoles. In the case of grappling where we can't have every animation in memory all the time we only play the next animation when both clients have reported them as loaded. So if one player's console is slower at loading than the other for whatever reason they will both wait for the slower console to be finished. Our game depends on both machines doing the exact same thing on the exact same sim frame.

What is happening on the hardware itself ie latency between controller and when that input is reported by the console to the game is another issue. We have little control over that and while apples to apples comparisons between the different platforms and their versions are pretty scarce it looks like input latency is typically slightly lower on the newer platforms. Even a small delta could result in inputs occasionally being picked up one frame later on the older hardware, which in a binary success/fail situation such as grapple denials could make the difference. This however is conjecture on my part I have done nothing to verify it personally. Here is one source I found https://displaylag.com/video-game-input-lag-database/. It combines both monitor lag and input lag but that's really what matters in this case. If the older hardware updates the screen slower and/or reports your response to what is on the screen slower all of this in aggregate will lead to it feeling slightly more sluggish. If anyone finds a more complete source I would love to see it.

[TheRizzzle]

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

Since ya'll are in here at the moment...whats happening with Sean O'Malley hair since the patch went live? He looks like a burn victim.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

[aholbert32]

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

Since ya'll are in here at the moment...whats happening with Sean O'Malley hair since the patch went live? He looks like a burn victim.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

Its a bug. They are looking into it.

[the_rainman]

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

These games have been getting worse each iteration since UFC 2. My god, UFC 4 is inexcusably bad.

[TheShizNo1]

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

I understand when people want to tell us if they hate our game but please add a because or an if

"I love this game because it has such a wide roster"
"I hate this game because it doesn't have fighter X"

"I love this game because I can wear a silly mask"
"I hate this game because my opponents are always wearing silly masks"

"I like the grappling, if it had slightly faster timings in crucifix it would make that position much more strategically viable."
"I dislike the striking because I can't get the input timings down if there was a way I could train those it would be much easier"

These games have been getting worse each iteration since UFC 2. My god, UFC 4 is inexcusably bad.

[emoji2377]


Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[johnmangala]

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

One interesting thing I noticed is that on discord they say we have better feedback on OS than on discord. But here they say OS is a wasteland of trolls and discord is better.