Are the forums indicative of the popularity of UFC 4?

[TheRizzzle]

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

While I think developer interaction is pretty neat, and for UFC 3 it was really great, I'm not sure what the point of that interaction would be for UFC 4, barring QnAs.

This is a rather hardcore-based forum. And unless you suggest new colour patterns for the new jackets or something to simplify things even more for the casuals, what could you possibly hope to contribute? They don't care about you and your ideas. All that we fought to accomplish for UFC 3 by interacting with the devs has practically been erased in one fell swoop. Advice on realism to an arcade-driven dev team just doesn't make any sense to me. Game depth suggestions in terms of modes and creation have fallen on deaf ears as well.

I don't mean to push the devs away, some people probably find the whole thing useful after all. I'm just thinking out loud here.

Honestly? I do it because I enjoy it. Thats it.

I like thinking through these things. Would it be awesome to see it come to life? Absolutely.

But I take enjoyment in the discussion. That's just me though.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

[aholbert32]

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

I feel this series has taken several steps back since UFC 2. People can act like the devs don’t come here because of “trolls” or “rhetoric”, but the truth be told I really feel like they could care less. They truly believe they made a great game and all of us that don’t think it’s a great game are crazy.

They have chosen to go a direction that caters to casuals and be a fortnite like experience. They have no interest in replicating the sport realistically and that’s their prerogative. They feel they can make more money this way, and hey more power to them.

But if anyone thinks that providing positive and coherent feedback is changing the direction of this series well.... I am afraid that ship has sailed

I dont completely agree with this. One of the things that OSers lack at times is nuance in their opinions.

Is this game 100% catered to casual fans? No. There are way to many gameplay aspects that are in place for sim fans to make that argument.

Is the gameplay 100% sim? Hell no. No one can make that argument when they remove things like OU from the clinch and add aspects to the game to prevent realistic strategies like cage control.

One of the things that caused me to spend significantly less time here was the extreme opinions many people have here. I know thats a sign of the times were everyone makes the most extreme argument as loud as they can whether its true or not but that isnt enjoyable for me or for alot of the people who left.

OSers have every right to reject this game. They have every right to complain about the game not being as much as a simulation as they require for EA to get their 60 bucks. But lets not act like there are no elements of this game that are realistic or that when intelligent feedback is given that the devs dont have a history of at least considering it.

The decision everyone has to make is how much they are demand from EA for a purchase. You arent going to get everything you want. As a sim focused player, you arent going to get most of what you want. As you said, thats because they are trying to appeal to casual fans too.

[Therebelyell626]

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

Quite simply, you can't make an ultra realistic sports title video game for a niche sport (here come the pitch forks) and expect it to become popular right away.

Now can you gradually ease the player base into more realistic features as the game moves along? That's kind of our best hope but that depends on the goal of the UFC and EA Sports.

You've got to realize this isn't the same UFC from the Undisputed era. They are much more in the "create streams of revenue" phase of the company's development than the "stewards of the sport" phase now.

This means that above almost anything else, the UFC is looking for the dev team to hit certain sales numbers. Beyond completely bastardizing their brand, they will allow for a lot of catering to casuals if it means more sales.

Believe me, the UFC is the type of organization that will want final approval on most stuff. But they want money above almost all else.

So without probably being able to say it, the devs probably try to carve out as much realism into the game as they can, while not killing sales in the process.

If a feature doesn't create a sale but won't lose it either, it might get added. If it could cost sales, it doesn't matter what it is, it's probabky not making the cut.

It's a tough ask and we have every right to not like it. But you can only truly tell them you don't like it by voting with your dollar and then living with the consequences.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

While I think you have some valid points, I have to disagree with one thing. The UFC being a “niche” sport is exactly why it is not a game casuals are going to pick up. Your either a fan of MMA or not. I would venture to say a kid who is into fortnite or say call of duty are not going to be interested in picking up a UFC or MMA game.

Plus the age group they are targeting most likely do not watch nor follow MMA. A casual may get this game used or on sale for $10-$20. They’ll probably play it couple times and move on. This is not a game that has long term playability outside of hard cores. If EA considers that nickel and dime approach a success then yes. They can consider UFC 4 a success.

I think UFC 4’s ultimate failings is that it is trying to be too many things at once without a coherent direction. I feel like the suits at EA look at the sales charts and want every game to be a fortnite. The problem is fortnite does fortnite very well. That doesn’t mean that the fortnite model is one size fits all. I understand the simplified controls. Makes sense. I understand the simplified and streamlined gameplay. I really do. But what I don’t understand is how EA felt they would sell more units with gorilla masks and funky pre fight dances then they would have if the included (inset fighter name here).

You can’t sit here and tell me that UFC 4 is a huge leap from UFC 3 because it just isn’t. Event mode still the same. Most of the core nodes are still the same. Training and tutorials still the same. It’s a game that claims to want to be more simple to play but does not explain itself or it’s mechanics in any coherent fashion. They can use the “corona virus” excuse all they want. But this game has been in development longer than any other UFC title and still feels like a game that was marginally worked on. The leap from undisputed 2 to 3 felt huge. Heck, even the leap from EA UFC 1 to UFC 2 felt significant. This game is not a huge improvement over its predecessor and may even be less fun.

[aholbert32]

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

While I think you have some valid points, I have to disagree with one thing. The UFC being a “niche” sport is exactly why it is not a game casuals are going to pick up. Your either a fan of MMA or not. I would venture to say a kid who is into fortnite or say call of duty are not going to be interested in picking up a UFC or MMA game.

I dont agree with that at all. Video games are a way that casual fans learn to love and appreciate a sport. I'm a soccer and NHL fan primarily because I bought (actually rented....im old as hell) those games when I was young. I played them, thought the games were cool and then became a fan of both sports.

I also have an advantage in that I've seen some of the data that EA based their approach on. One thing that stood out to me was that there arent a ton of people who bought UFC 3 who consider MMA their favorite part. ****, according to their data, there arent a ton of people who bought UFC 3 who consider MMA their 2nd or 3rd favorite sports.

So from a financial perspective, it makes no sense for them to cater a game to people who are hardcore fans of the sport because according to their data....there arent enough of them.

When I saw that and other information, it instantly woke me up. It changed the way I viewed the game and the amount of effort I use in pushing for hardcore sim changes. I'm always going to encourage them to go the sim route but its hard to argue against going the financial route when we are talking about a corporation.

[johnmangala]

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

How popular was the sim mode from UD3? Is the data available to EA?

I think the GCs are pushing for online sliders for quick fight and invite. Skynet seems open to it on discord.

I think a playerbase split can be fixed too.

Online sliders would be like a hub for different rules and sliders sets. It would replace the current 4-5 options - all, mma etc with a hub.

You add different tags and that narrows your search, so like now but with few more options. Like presets for sim/arcade and rules like MMA, boxing, Ko etc.

[aholbert32]

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

How popular was the sim mode from UD3? Is the data available to EA?

.

No because that is THQ data. Its possible the UFC may have access to it but I cant see EA asking for it. Its a 10 yr old game and video games (and players) have changed alot during that time.

[TheRizzzle]

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

While I think you have some valid points, I have to disagree with one thing. The UFC being a “niche” sport is exactly why it is not a game casuals are going to pick up. Your either a fan of MMA or not. I would venture to say a kid who is into fortnite or say call of duty are not going to be interested in picking up a UFC or MMA game.

Plus the age group they are targeting most likely do not watch nor follow MMA. A casual may get this game used or on sale for $10-$20. They’ll probably play it couple times and move on. This is not a game that has long term playability outside of hard cores. If EA considers that nickel and dime approach a success then yes. They can consider UFC 4 a success.

I think UFC 4’s ultimate failings is that it is trying to be too many things at once without a coherent direction. I feel like the suits at EA look at the sales charts and want every game to be a fortnite. The problem is fortnite does fortnite very well. That doesn’t mean that the fortnite model is one size fits all. I understand the simplified controls. Makes sense. I understand the simplified and streamlined gameplay. I really do. But what I don’t understand is how EA felt they would sell more units with gorilla masks and funky pre fight dances then they would have if the included (inset fighter name here).

You can’t sit here and tell me that UFC 4 is a huge leap from UFC 3 because it just isn’t. Event mode still the same. Most of the core nodes are still the same. Training and tutorials still the same. It’s a game that claims to want to be more simple to play but does not explain itself or it’s mechanics in any coherent fashion. They can use the “corona virus” excuse all they want. But this game has been in development longer than any other UFC title and still feels like a game that was marginally worked on. The leap from undisputed 2 to 3 felt huge. Heck, even the leap from EA UFC 1 to UFC 2 felt significant. This game is not a huge improvement over its predecessor and may even be less fun.

I'm literally a fan of the sport because I picked up a copy of Undisputed 2009. That and Brock Lesnar.

I was exactly the target demo in 2009 that they are targeting now. So it can be done.

But at the end of the day, someone picking up the game and becoming a fan of the sport is irrelevant. Once the game has been purchased EA Sports has essentially won. The only other victory is if they enjoy it enough to purchase it again.

Us hardcores are suckered and most will buy it no matter what. The casuals will if it's fun. Thats why the majority of resources are being spent there. Because that's where the work has to get done to make the sale.

I'm proof it can be sold that way. I can hate it 11 years later but I can't fault the logic since I've lived it.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

[Zyaf]

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

I dont agree with that at all. Video games are a way that casual fans learn to love and appreciate a sport. I'm a soccer and NHL fan primarily because I bought (actually rented....im old as hell) those games when I was young. I played them, thought the games were cool and then became a fan of both sports.

I can exactly agree with this.
I bought UFC 3 before I ever really knew what MMA was.. before I knew really anything about combat sports. I fell in love with the sport, and the fighters, and the diversity and complexity of the combat. I learned so many basic ideas from the game. I feel the same way about UFC 4, except it's taught me more about the clinch and takedowns than UFC 3 ever did. Is it perfect? Far from it. But MMA holds a special place in my psyche specifically because of the EA UFC video games.. as corny as that sounds.

[Skynet]

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

While I think developer interaction is pretty neat, and for UFC 3 it was really great, I'm not sure what the point of that interaction would be for UFC 4, barring QnAs.

This is a rather hardcore-based forum. And unless you suggest new colour patterns for the new jackets or something to simplify things even more for the casuals, what could you possibly hope to contribute? They don't care about you and your ideas. All that we fought to accomplish for UFC 3 by interacting with the devs has practically been erased in one fell swoop. Advice on realism to an arcade-driven dev team just doesn't make any sense to me. Game depth suggestions in terms of modes and creation have fallen on deaf ears as well.

I don't mean to push the devs away, some people probably find the whole thing useful after all. I'm just thinking out loud here.

Man, this is so ridiculous. Do you honestly think you have the insight and knowledge to know what happens on a AAA sized dev team, working 40+ hour weeks, for years... when you've never stepped foot in the building? You're spreading misinformation and making woefully inaccurate assumptions and stating them as fact, then not listening to someone who actually knows the real answer. This is the exact kind of entitelment and toxicity that I hate the most, and personally drives me away. That is willful ignorance and malicious to the community. Stop doing it or leave.

We absolutely listen and cater to multiple fan bases, care about their ideas and opinions, and listed to their feedback, hardcore and sim included. Along with the feedback of many other people and fan bases and forms of data collection. There are no def ears here. I am here because that feedback continues to be of great value to myself and the larger team. Especially during patching. I'm not here to create some giant charade of tricking people into thinking we care when we don't...

The dev team, particularly the gameplay devs, are incredibly sim focused. Way more so than arcade. GPD and myself included in that. 90% of all gameplay changes are directed towards a more sim and realism experience, even when that looks like 2 steps forward and 1 step back, like upgrading the engine that drives clinch and takedowns at the cost of some of the breadth and depth of the content inside it. Content can expand later once the foundation is in place. Other areas of the overall game team do lean in other directions in varying degrees, but that doesn't mean we don't listen, discuss, and an evaluate the different opinions. All of them. If we went full sim, does that mean we'd be completely ignoring the casual fans? NO. It has nothing to do with ignoring anyone.

We gather feedback from many sources, external and internal, and evaluate it. Eventually we have to decide on a direction for a given choice, thousands of them. Thousands a day even, across the whole team. What you don't see, and refuse to acknowledge, is that just because we didn't act in favor of an opinion here, or elsewhere, doesn't mean we ignored it. It doesn't even mean we didn't agree with it. We are faced with the reality of deadlines, resources constraints, and conflicting opinions; and sometimes an idea, no matter how good, just isn't feasible in the larger scope of doing our jobs.

And just because we were unable to act on something now, doesn't mean we've forgotten it and won't do it later. Transition based subs, CAF editing and sharing, more sliders, better training and tutorial content, better offline modes, different stamina and damage tuning, ref interactions, better ground TKOs, draws, more CAF slots, more clinch and ground positions. All of these things and more are on our minds and we want to add them. It's just not as simple as wanting them. We've acted on tons of fan feedback since launch and during production, please for the love of god stop saying we're not listening simply because some things didn't get added even though they've been asked for.

[johnmangala]

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

I love the new TDs and clinch. Clinch could be better like more transitions and scrambles but it's better than before at its base.

Subs and stamina are what's causing balance issues imo. Subs should be dangerous by sub specialists and during low stamina. It was close to this in ufc 3, ftf subs were strong, low stamina was dangerous, and specialists like Rousey had fewer sub gates.

Stamina doesnt have to be sim but 31 kds in that
Pryosis video is not as rare as it seems. I've experienced that too and it's mainly because leg and body damage. You can finish quick with 1 rock to the head and GNP but with body and leg damage you can't attack the body during FTF so it creates loops of FTF. This adds to the KD count.

Hopefully the new lights out ragdoll KOs make it so that there are less KDs.

[Skynet]

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

The new lights out KOs won't change the KD/KO rates, just the visuals of them. However, there are changes in this patch that do effect KDs. The change to the upkick among those, which was incorrectly awarding KDs to the kick, and to the wrong fighter at that...

There are also changes to stamina and leg health event thresholds coming in future patches or tuners. Likely submission tuning as well. Thanks for continuing to give accurate and actionable feedback.

[Kingslayer04]

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

Man, this is so ridiculous. Do you honestly think you have the insight and knowledge to know what happens on a AAA sized dev team, working 40+ hour weeks, for years... when you've never stepped foot in the building? You're spreading misinformation and making woefully inaccurate assumptions and stating them as fact, then not listening to someone who actually knows the real answer. This is the exact kind of entitelment and toxicity that I hate the most, and personally drives me away. That is willful ignorance and malicious to the community. Stop doing it or leave.

We absolutely listen and cater to multiple fan bases, care about their ideas and opinions, and listed to their feedback, hardcore and sim included. Along with the feedback of many other people and fan bases and forms of data collection. There are no def ears here. I am here because that feedback continues to be of great value to myself and the larger team. Especially during patching. I'm not here to create some giant charade of tricking people into thinking we care when we don't...

The dev team, particularly the gameplay devs, are incredibly sim focused. Way more so than arcade. GPD and myself included in that. 90% of all gameplay changes are directed towards a more sim and realism experience, even when that looks like 2 steps forward and 1 step back, like upgrading the engine that drives clinch and takedowns at the cost of some of the breadth and depth of the content inside it. Content can expand later once the foundation is in place. Other areas of the overall game team do lean in other directions in varying degrees, but that doesn't mean we don't listen, discuss, and an evaluate the different opinions. All of them. If we went full sim, does that mean we'd be completely ignoring the casual fans? NO. It has nothing to do with ignoring anyone.

We gather feedback from many sources, external and internal, and evaluate it. Eventually we have to decide on a direction for a given choice, thousands of them. Thousands a day even, across the whole team. What you don't see, and refuse to acknowledge, is that just because we didn't act in favor of an opinion here, or elsewhere, doesn't mean we ignored it. It doesn't even mean we didn't agree with it. We are faced with the reality of deadlines, resources constraints, and conflicting opinions; and sometimes an idea, no matter how good, just isn't feasible in the larger scope of doing our jobs.

And just because we were unable to act on something now, doesn't mean we've forgotten it and won't do it later. Transition based subs, CAF editing and sharing, more sliders, better training and tutorial content, better offline modes, different stamina and damage tuning, ref interactions, better ground TKOs, draws, more CAF slots, more clinch and ground positions. All of these things and more are on our minds and we want to add them. It's just not as simple as wanting them. We've acted on tons of fan feedback since launch and during production, please for the love of god stop saying we're not listening simply because some things didn't get added even though they've been asked for.

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.

My point is, EA does not care. Regardless of how passionate you, or GPD, or anyone on that team may be about truly adding everything possible, my opinion is this - EA does not care about everyone. See, I bolded it just in case someone can't differentiate between an opinion and a fact. Now, this opinion is based on evidence -

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"

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.

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.

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. Let your product show me what you're so passionately trying to convince me. Unfortunately, everything I see and have seen points to the exact opposite.

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'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.

[Morgan Monkman]

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

[johnmangala]

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

And just because we were unable to act on something now, doesn't mean we've forgotten it and won't do it later. Transition based subs, CAF editing and sharing, more sliders, better training and tutorial content, better offline modes, different stamina and damage tuning, ref interactions, better ground TKOs, draws, more CAF slots, more clinch and ground positions. All of these things and more are on our minds and we want to add them. It's just not as simple as wanting them. We've acted on tons of fan feedback since launch and during production, please for the love of god stop saying we're not listening simply because some things didn't get added even though they've been asked for.

WHAT! How did I miss this the first time I read it. This has to be the best news I've read regarding these games.

Thank you so much especially on TBS, I know it doesnt mean confirmed but the fact it's on your minds is so pleasing.

[aholbert32]

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

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.

My point is, EA does not care. Regardless of how passionate you, or GPD, or anyone on that team may be about truly adding everything possible, my opinion is this - EA does not care about everyone. See, I bolded it just in case someone can't differentiate between an opinion and a fact. Now, this opinion is based on evidence -

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"

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.

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.

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. Let your product show me what you're so passionately trying to convince me. Unfortunately, everything I see and have seen points to the exact opposite.

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'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.

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.