New Twitter account sharing all info from interviews or various sources

[Yaari]

Re: New Twitter account sharing all info from interviews or various sources




Saw this on Discord. Kind of funny, so that's where they are going with the Alter Ego stuff I guess. Volk in his Rugby days. Not against it, just think its interesting.

[AggelosP]

Re: New Twitter account sharing all info from interviews or various sources

Saw this on Discord. Kind of funny, so that's where they are going with the Alter Ego stuff I guess. Volk in his Rugby days. Not against it, just think its interesting.

I bet that's the stuff aholbert doesn't like. It could be an opportunity to bring back old ufc models that were awesome (for example the Conor model against Cerrone).
I'm fine with them, as long as gameplay isn't downgraded once again.

[aholbert32]

Re: New Twitter account sharing all info from interviews or various sources

I bet that's the stuff aholbert doesn't like. It could be an opportunity to bring back old ufc models that were awesome (for example the Conor model against Cerrone).
I'm fine with them, as long as gameplay isn't downgraded once again.

Nah. I dont care about this stuff other than I think it would be better to use the art resources on more new fighters. With that said, I think the majority of people care more about this than say adding the 14th ranked women's bantamweight fighter.

[True1y blessed]

Re: New Twitter account sharing all info from interviews or various sources

Nah. I dont care about this stuff other than I think it would be better to use the art resources on more new fighters. With that said, I think the majority of people care more about this than say adding the 14th ranked women's bantamweight fighter.

As the one of the few people who play the women's divisions I disagree lol

[aholbert32]

Re: New Twitter account sharing all info from interviews or various sources

As the one of the few people who play the women's divisions I disagree lol

I agree with you but EA's internal stats dont lie. People barely play the women's divisions.

[TheRizzzle]

Re: New Twitter account sharing all info from interviews or various sources

I agree with you but EA's internal stats dont lie. People barely play the women's divisions.

But if they had the 14th ranked Bantamweight tho...

Sent from my SM-F926U using Tapatalk

[TGOne]

Re: New Twitter account sharing all info from interviews or various sources

I agree with you but EA's internal stats dont lie. People barely play the women's divisions.

There internal stats are flawed and under false impressions, the same kind of stats and impression they used (Brian Hayes if i remember correctly) about the ground game being less prioritized because people barely played it compared to striking without realizing the reason people avoided being that it didn't have enough depth, was unbalanced and stale. Same goes for women divisions in the game, it's not as stacked as the male divisions. There are few sports i watch Women participate in, well actually none of them except Women's mma which i fully support. Seen many great fights.

[DeadHunter1911]

Re: New Twitter account sharing all info from interviews or various sources

Saw this on Discord. Kind of funny, so that's where they are going with the Alter Ego stuff I guess. Volk in his Rugby days. Not against it, just think its interesting.

I wonder if he'll be a HW lol.

[aholbert32]

Re: New Twitter account sharing all info from interviews or various sources

There internal stats are flawed and under false impressions, the same kind of stats and impression they used (Brian Hayes if i remember correctly) about the ground game being less prioritized because people barely played it compared to striking without realizing the reason people avoided being that it didn't have enough depth, was unbalanced and stale. Same goes for women divisions in the game, it's not as stacked as the male divisions. There are few sports i watch Women participate in, well actually none of them except Women's mma which i fully support. Seen many great fights.

Huh? Your comparison doesnt make any sense.

You cant fudge those numbers. The past 3 games include the best female fighters of all time (Rousey/Holm/Nunes/Cyborg) among others and the numbers showed that a great number of people dont use them. EA tracks the fighters that are used online. They track the fighters that are used offline. They track the type of career fighters people use. People just dont use them.

Ive been very vocal about wanting more female fighters (**** more current fighters in general too) but its kinda hard to motivate the dev team to go in that direction when stats show no one plays them and even people at OS (the supposed home of the sim player) are more interested in getting alt versions of popular fighters than a lower ranked women's flyweight.

[TGOne]

Re: New Twitter account sharing all info from interviews or various sources

Huh? Your comparison doesnt make any sense.

You cant fudge those numbers. The past 3 games include the best female fighters of all time (Rousey/Holm/Nunes/Cyborg) among others and the numbers showed that a great number of people dont use them. EA tracks the fighters that are used online. They track the fighters that are used offline. They track the type of career fighters people use. People just dont use them.

Ive been very vocal about wanting more female fighters (**** more current fighters in general too) but its kinda hard to motivate the dev team to go in that direction when stats show no one plays them and even people at OS (the supposed home of the sim player) are more interested in getting alt versions of popular fighters than a lower ranked women's flyweight.

Since when did i even fudge those numbers? That's your strawman, not mine. Obviously you didn't understand my point.

I'm talking the analytics of those numbers. For your information i'm an Business intelligence consultant, there's literally hundreds of ways to interpret/analyze data for decision making. My point is there interpretation of data at EA is flawed, in other words the people at EA is out of touch with it's community. The genius Brian Hayes as i previously stated is a perfect example which i figured out years ago when he clearly stated that they where prioritizing the ground game less than the striking due to the fact that ground game is less used than the striking according to their "factual data" without realizing the simple fact that the reason people aren't using the grappling as much are not due to lack of inherited interest but the fact that the ground game lacks any depth in the game.

Same goes for the female divisions in the game which are completely underwhelming in numbers compared to the mens divisions. I'm not saying the female division would reach the same usage and popularity as the mens divisions, but they surely would vastly improve. You had like over 50 fighters in most men divisions. Irl the females flyweight division along with the strawweight is the most stacked one. In the game, there where like only 10 fighters at launch (flyweight) most of them included fighters from other divisions. Now where's the incentive to use that division (female flyweight) in the career mode for example which is the most used mode in the game according to their data when it's so underwhelming rather than lack of inherited interest?

Do you honestly believe having the 4 best female fighters is enough to invoke gameplay interest, especially in the career mode? If the mens flyweight division only included Connor and Khabib (the most popular fighters by far) and 4 other fighters would generate the same interest to use that division in career mode? If that's the case, then why do so many in the community keep clamouring for a bigger roster or criticizing it being "outdated"?

And how do you know the interest of this forum, do have the complete data? I'm not one of them as the other before me as you can clearly tell, i would prefer adding at the very least the top 15 in every division (women's included) which actually adds immersion before trivial "alt egos". What's their new slogan? "As real as it gets" right? I mean, If they are going to go in "half-assed" with those particular approaches, the might as well just remove the whole female divisions to save time and money, and while there at it just remove the ground game to given the fact that they haven't put enough effort in that regard as well.

Yes you where very vocal about the addition of more female fighters. Just as the vast community was very vocal about improvement towards the ground game (the most requested improvement by far according to data). I mean how many years have i and many others asked for something simple as a seated cage position which is fundamentally immersive from an mma perspective and ground grappling towards the cage which happens in vast majority of mma fights? Tell me have they budged yet at EA?

Nah as i stated, this is not about pinpointing data accurately, this is about EA being completely out of touch with it's community.

[aholbert32]

Re: New Twitter account sharing all info from interviews or various sources

Since when did i even fudge those numbers? That's your strawman, not mine. Obviously you didn't understand my point.

I'm talking the analytics of those numbers. For your information i'm an Business intelligence consultant, there's literally hundreds of ways to interpret/analyze data for decision making. My point is there interpretation of data at EA is flawed, in other words the people at EA is out of touch with it's community. The genius Brian Hayes as i previously stated is a perfect example which i figured out years ago when he clearly stated that they where prioritizing the ground game less than the striking due to the fact that ground game is less used than the striking according to their "factual data" without realizing the simple fact that the reason people aren't using the grappling as much are not due to lack of inherited interest but the fact that the ground game lacks any depth in the game.

Same goes for the female divisions in the game which are completely underwhelming in numbers compared to the mens divisions. I'm not saying the female division would reach the same usage and popularity as the mens divisions, but they surely would vastly improve. You had like over 50 fighters in most men divisions. Irl the females flyweight division along with the strawweight is the most stacked one. In the game, there where like only 10 fighters at launch (flyweight) most of them included fighters from other divisions. Now where's the incentive to use that division (female flyweight) in the career mode for example which is the most used mode in the game according to their data when it's so underwhelming rather than lack of inherited interest?

Do you honestly believe having the 4 best female fighters is enough to invoke gameplay interest, especially in the career mode? If the mens flyweight division only included Connor and Khabib (the most popular fighters by far) and 4 other fighters would generate the same interest to use that division in career mode? If that's the case, then why do so many in the community keep clamouring for a bigger roster or criticizing it being "outdated"?

And how do you know the interest of this forum, do have the complete data? I'm not one of them as the other before me as you can clearly tell, i would prefer adding at the very least the top 15 in every division (women's included) which actually adds immersion before trivial "alt egos". What's their new slogan? "As real as it gets" right? I mean, If they are going to go in "half-assed" with those particular approaches, the might as well just remove the whole female divisions to save time and money, and while there at it just remove the ground game to given the fact that they haven't put enough effort in that regard as well.

Yes you where very vocal about the addition of more female fighters. Just as the vast community was very vocal about improvement towards the ground game (the most requested improvement by far according to data). I mean how many years have i and many others asked for something simple as a seated cage position which is fundamentally immersive from an mma perspective and ground grappling towards the cage which happens in vast majority of mma fights? Tell me have they budged yet at EA?

Nah as i stated, this is not about pinpointing data accurately, this is about EA being completely out of touch with it's community.

- The community is showing who EA want to use. If you think that adding Tabitha Ricci or Karine Silva or any other 10-15 ranked female division fighter is going to drastically change the amount of people who use female fighters, you are wrong. EA's data shows that most players dont even use stacked divisions like Featherweight other than the top fighters.

- Most of the "community" doesnt know who those fighters are and have never seen them fight. People like me and The Rizzle are MMA nerds who want every fighter but most of the "community" (even the sim community) only care about the top fighters.

- I'm not going to argue this more. You can believe what you want to believe. I want every single UFC fighter in the game but even this community isnt that vocal about it. Most of yall are focused on other things (which is your right).

[TheRizzzle]

Re: New Twitter account sharing all info from interviews or various sources

Huh? Your comparison doesnt make any sense.

You cant fudge those numbers. The past 3 games include the best female fighters of all time (Rousey/Holm/Nunes/Cyborg) among others and the numbers showed that a great number of people dont use them. EA tracks the fighters that are used online. They track the fighters that are used offline. They track the type of career fighters people use. People just dont use them.

Ive been very vocal about wanting more female fighters (**** more current fighters in general too) but its kinda hard to motivate the dev team to go in that direction when stats show no one plays them and even people at OS (the supposed home of the sim player) are more interested in getting alt versions of popular fighters than a lower ranked women's flyweight.

How do they track offline usage?

FWIW, I strategically use the female divisions and men's flyweight sparingly in my offline universe, because I don't want to burn through all the match-up possibilities too fast.

Combined with limited CAF slots and not being able to properly supplement the divisions...

It does kinda become a self fulfilling prophecy of "well yeah I guess I don't use them as often as men's lightweight. But give me the fighters and watch the ratio go up."

Sent from my SM-F926U using Tapatalk

[TGOne]

Re: New Twitter account sharing all info from interviews or various sources

- The community is showing who EA want to use. If you think that adding Tabitha Ricci or Karine Silva or any other 10-15 ranked female division fighter is going to drastically change the amount of people who use female fighters, you are wrong. EA's data shows that most players dont even use stacked divisions like Featherweight other than the top fighters.

- Most of the "community" doesnt know who those fighters are and have never seen them fight. People like me and The Rizzle are MMA nerds who want every fighter but most of the "community" (even the sim community) only care about the top fighters.

- I'm not going to argue this more. You can believe what you want to believe. I want every single UFC fighter in the game but even this community isnt that vocal about it. Most of yall are focused on other things (which is your right).

Nice strawman yet again, it seems like you're having a a difficult time addressing the actual points in my argument. Therefore your right, arguing further is actually pointless.

- Yes i believe most fans in the community with common sense would actually prefer having all the top 15 fighters in every division, Womens included before trivial alter egos.

"EA's data shows that most players don't even use stacked divisions like Featherweight other than the top fighters". And what has specific favorite fighter usage got to do with my argument of usage of divisions in career mode (the most used mode) for the sake of immersion? Guess what? I use specific fighters more often to, nor have i used every fighter in the roster, that's not the point. And yes having enough depth in a roster, particular in specific divisions would enhance the usage of that division in career mode, at the very least for me, go figure.

- And most of the community doesn't even know most of the male fighters in other divisions to, so what's your point? Is having the top 15-20 fighters in every division at the very least for the sake of immersion to much of an ask, even for EAs reputation? And yes the community has asked for that for years, i don't know where you draw your conclusions?

[aholbert32]

Re: New Twitter account sharing all info from interviews or various sources

Nice strawman yet again, it seems like you're having a a difficult time addressing the actual points in my argument. Therefore your right, arguing further is actually pointless.

- Yes i believe most hardcore fans in the community with common sense would actually prefer having all the top 15 fighters in every division, Womens included before trivial alter egos.

"EA's data shows that most players don't even use stacked divisions like Featherweight other than the top fighters". And what has specific favorite fighter usage got to do with my argument of usage of divisions in career mode (the most used mode) for the sake of immersion? Guess what? I use specific fighters more often to, nor have i used every fighter in the roster, that's not the point. And yes having enough depth in a roster, particular in specific divisions would enhance the usage of that division in career mode, at the very least for me, go figure.

- And most of the community doesn't even know most of the male fighters in other divisions to, so what's your point? Is having the top 15-20 fighters in every division at the very least for the sake of immersion to much of an ask, even for EAs reputation? And yes the community has asked for that for years, i don't know where you draw your conclusions?

- You need to look up the definition of a "strawman argument". You said "I'm not saying the female division would reach the same usage and popularity as the mens divisions, but they surely would vastly improve.". I said ". If you think that adding Tabitha Ricci or Karine Silva or any other 10-15 ranked female division fighter is going to drastically change the amount of people who use female fighters, you are wrong. EA's data shows that most players dont even use stacked divisions like Featherweight other than the top fighters."


You made an argument. I responded to that argument. Simple as that.

- I'll make this simple for you. If you think immersion is a big factor for most players of this game.....I'll respectfully disagree. Online players dont care about immersion or full rosters. That can be determined from play data, online surveys and social media information. The majority of online players dont care about Tabitha Ricci and her addition isnt likely to make them use the women;s division more.

Many offline players do care about immersion but not in the way you think. A full roster matters if EA was willing to provide modes like a franchise/universe mode but they havent been up to this point.

Look, I'm not saying I know everything. I'm not saying that it isnt possible that EA is misinterpreting the data in some way. But I do know more than you. You have nothing to support your opinions other than post or feedback youve seen from an undefined "community". I have seen actual data from EA and had tons of long convos with the devs about this information (over 8 yrs). You can choose to doubt it or ignore it and stand with your theory. I really dont give a ****. But it doesnt make your theory more true.

Anyway, feel free to respond or not. I dont spend much time here anymore and the main reason is people who refuse to accept the reality of what the game is and why it is designed the way it is.

[aholbert32]

Re: New Twitter account sharing all info from interviews or various sources

How do they track offline usage?

FWIW, I strategically use the female divisions and men's flyweight sparingly in my offline universe, because I don't want to burn through all the match-up possibilities too fast.

Combined with limited CAF slots and not being able to properly supplement the divisions...

It does kinda become a self fulfilling prophecy of "well yeah I guess I don't use them as often as men's lightweight. But give me the fighters and watch the ratio go up."

Sent from my SM-F926U using Tapatalk

If you are playing an offline mode but still logged in to EA's servers, EA can track who you are using and what modes you play.

Here is how EA approaches choosing fighters to add (based on my experience and knowledge):

- First, is the fighter a fight a way from fighting for the title or currently a #1 contender? This is the reason why fighters like Taila Santos and Erin Blanchfield were added. Santos had a title fight coming up and Blanchfield was working her way up. EA doesnt want to be caught out there with a UFC champion who isnt in the game.

- Second, has the fighter been in multiple main events. That is what guys like Sean Strickland over the top.

- Third, is the fighter a popular fighter who was outside of the UFC? See....Michael Chandler.

- Four, is the fighter an action fighter that consumers would be excited about adding? What plays into this is how vocal communities are about adding him/her.

I remember a conversation I had with a dev after UFC 3 came out because I was disappointed in the number of new fighters they added in 3 compared to 2. The response I got was basically "We used a ton of resources in 2 to add fighters. We were shooting to ensure that everyone in the top 10 of each division was recoginized and then we noticed that people werent regulalrly using the majority of new lower ranked fighters"

Now, I responded that part of that was because of the lack of offline modes but that a little insight into why EA isnt very focused on filling out the roster at launch. They prefer to use DLC to fill the roster and use that to constantly promote the game.