John White 1 Hour CFM Interview (T4Verts)

[bad_philanthropy]

Quote: Originally Posted by T4VERTS

Don't look at NBA Live, look to another new thing that has gotten a lot of press this year.

Are you saying Frostbite or Longshot?

Damn you Longshot! *shakes fist in air*

[T4VERTS]

Quote: Originally Posted by bad_philanthropy

Are you saying Frostbite or Longshot? Damn you Longshot! *shakes fist in air*

Maybe one or maybe both, but something within Madden used a lot of resources this year that limited what CFM could do.

[howboutdat]

im not surprised about the question asking if they would want to put micros into the mode. He said reach out to him and let him know your thoughts. So if your against that idea, please, make sure you reach out to him and let him know that is not a good idea nor one you support.

I know a small few think its a good idea, but in reality , they already have more than enough money in profit each year to make CFM better without giving them more. I am sure a portion of MUT money is already going into CFM , they just do not say it. I see no reason for us to open that door, because the issue will be , it may start off small price points, but in time it will grow , and i do not believe that will = that much more added to CFM because they will just hide behind the "limited time" reason.

Why do i say this, simple, i understand business, expecially the greed at the very top of large corporations. They always want MORE profits every year. So currently they are lets say making 20 million profit per year with Sales and MUT money. Then they add micros and get 3 million extra year 1, year two they will want 5 million extra . They will continue to push for more profits each year. That will cut into how much of that micro goes back into CFM. Eventually they will just have to raise the price of the dlc.If this was a small company , trying to make their way, ok i could maybe say they could use it. But no one at the top of this company is hurting in any sort of way and they currently are making a ton of money already. I refuse to agree we should have to give them more just to get more in CFM. To me that is actually counter productive in the long run.

Its also never a good idea when a game locks out any features or parts of a game behind paywalls , especially when talking online gaming. It breaks up player bases, and it also does not offer people the full experience without cashing out 80-100$ for the full game, but its marketed at 60$ for the game.There are free to play games out there that makes money thru micros, i understand that, but it also lets alot of people play them for free.So , i dont buy the whole, they need more money to make CFM better. sorry tverts.

[T4VERTS]

Quote: Originally Posted by howboutdat

im not surprised about the question asking if they would want to put micros into the mode. He said reach out to him and let him know your thoughts. So if your against that idea, please, make sure you reach out to him and let him know that is not a good idea nor one you support. I know a small few think its a good idea, but in reality , they already have more than enough money in profit each year to make CFM better without giving them more. I am sure a portion of MUT money is already going into CFM , they just do not say it. I see no reason for us to open that door, because the issue will be , it may start off small price points, but in time it will grow , and i do not believe that will = that much more added to CFM because they will just hide behind the "limited time" reason. Why do i say this, simple, i understand business, expecially the greed at the very top of large corporations. They always want MORE profits every year. So currently they are lets say making 20 million profit per year with Sales and MUT money. Then they add micros and get 3 million extra year 1, year two they will want 5 million extra . They will continue to push for more profits each year. That will cut into how much of that micro goes back into CFM. Eventually they will just have to raise the price of the dlc.If this was a small company , trying to make their way, ok i could maybe say they could use it. But no one at the top of this company is hurting in any sort of way and they currently are making a ton of money already. I refuse to agree we should have to give them more just to get more in CFM. To me that is actually counter productive in the long run. Its also never a good idea when a game locks out any features or parts of a game behind paywalls , especially when talking online gaming. It breaks up player bases, and it also does not offer people the full experience without cashing out 80-100$ for the full game, but its marketed at 60$ for the game.There are free to play games out there that makes money thru micros, i understand that, but it also lets alot of people play them for free.So , i dont buy the whole, they need more money to make CFM better. sorry tverts.

I figured you'd be interested in that question. I tried to work a couple of the relevant current hot topics into the interview. At least it lets you know where they stand. It doesn't seem like that is something on their radar necessarily, and it also doesn't seem like it would necessarily generate more development resources.

You don't have to say sorry to me, I am pretty neutral on the DLC thing. I think people can make their own purchasing decisions. If they went DLC I'd say it should be cosmetic over feature related. Throwback jerseys, old school coaches, historical stadiums etc.

[XtremeDunkz]

Quote: Originally Posted by T4VERTS

A couple personal views after giving the interview. I think that the community here wants whole sale changes, but EA as a company has a product that their metrics are telling them is wildly successful. I think the issue is OS attracts like minded people so we get a lot of the same thoughts around here, but the reality is we are only a small portion of their daily user base. It is tough to blow something up that all of their data is saying is the most used mode. This is the reason I don't think we are going to see a complete tear down anytime soon, but I do think we could see some large changes over the next couple editions. I think what is cool about play now live is the tech more so than the mode itself. When you see things like this it's important to remember that once certain pieces of tech are in place you can start stretching what can be done. I do think this will be a feature that is used more than we think right now. His thoughts on being cognizant of the users time I thought was interesting. He later mentions how an app that allowed you to control the CFM away from your Xbox. I think the app we want is coming because it satisfies multiple groups in his breakdown of users. I asked about the new commentary being the next step towards the highlight show for a reason. When I interviewed Christian McCleod last year ( he oversees commentary and presentation) and he mentioned the tech wasn't quite there yet to do the highlight show in a self aware environment. They have a scoring system in the background that already suggests highlights post game but having a system in place for other games to pull it and recognize it wasn't there.What we now see is commentary that is aware of other games happening outside of it. I think John kind of hinted that this idea of in game highlights from other games or an end of the week show aren't that far away now that the tech is there. John is open to more global admin settings in CFM but he isn't sure what they should be. As a community a list of all things you want sliders/switches for need to be compiled and provided. He is open to the idea of a large amount of customization for the owners of the league, but I don't think he wants to add something very few will use. Which leads me to my next point.. I think more things will get changed when multiple large CFMs and community members sign off on specific things. Pointing to the Deuce Douglas blog is nice, but it's not going to magically appear in totality. If we can agree on the top 3 things from it we want, we can start down a road towards it (probably not all of it). Certain systems aren't getting scrapped like XP, but if we can agree that player contracts is a top 3 desire, or assistant coaches, we could probably see them end up in Madden 19. Shops selectable list is mentioned as a good option for feedback gathering, if there are others throw them out. From my conversations before and after the interview with John, and this is me reading between the lines, I think John was frustrated that CFM's development team carried a large portion of the Longshot load. I think he feels like CFM is owed more resources next year for being the good soldier this year. We will see if that happens, but John seems to be in a similar place with a majority of people on CFM's lack of features this year. (again this was all me gauging the totality of his comments in side conversations) Those are just a couple of the things I picked up while doing it. I'll probably go back and listen to it again later as it's tough to soak everything in while giving the interview. If you got any questions outside of specific features that weren't answered let me know and I'll try and get you an answer. By the way I know I tend to be an optimist. It isn't just with Madden or CFM, it's the way I like to approach most things haha.

I can tell you, as a commissioner of a 32 man league since 2010, what you touched on in the interview is my number 1. Commissioner override settings for user assists like ball hawk, heat seeker, ball carrier auto moves. Currently no way to regulate that stuff.

Sent from my SM-G925T using Tapatalk

[Rebel10]

Quote: Originally Posted by khaliib

Snip re: broadcast cam ...

As a 'simulation' player, I don't think that a broadcast cam is a good way to play the game. It can be disorienting and really difficult to judge stick movement relative to the camera. If you distill Madden down to a 3rd person game (which it is), very few third person games have fixed cameras anymore. A handful of noteworthy action games do have fixed cameras like Resident Evil 1 and 2, but that game came out 20+ years ago and the cameras were fixed because it allowed them to render the visible area at a higher fidelity, ignoring aspects of the play environment that the player would never see. They weren't actual 3D areas, they were essentially paintings on a screen that your character walked on top of.

Improving the broadcast cam would be great for people who want to simulate a game tween two teams, and not really interfere outside of choosing the plays. Likewise, a coaches cam could work here. But, the overwhelming majority of Madden players -- not just the 1v1 online thumb jockeys, but even your typical franchise player -- usually takes control of the characters on the field.

ANd, also, broadcast cams are a great sideshow, but lets not forget that television has been trying to replicate the angles that videogames can give you since forever. Those wire-cams that are now part of almost every major football broadcast are fever dreams inspired by videogame angles. The 360-degree rotating camera affect that you get at the Super Bowl because of all of the cameras available is likewise something that has always been in a videogame (well, at least since the late 1990s), but was never available in the broadcast booth.

This is all to say that I think if it were feasible, then the NFL would love to have a "videogame cam," but it just isn't feasible (those endzone cams and wire cams lose depth because they can't follow the action fast enough, so the broadcast camera is the easiest to maintain depth and perspective, and show most of the field). The 3rd person perspective with cameras that pan and zoom with the action has always been a luxury of videogames that real life can't replicate, so I'm not sure if the motivation is there to really invest in broadcast style cams for playing the game.

Quote: Originally Posted by Armor and Sword

3. Injuries - I saw they have done some tuning to severity. What I want to see is a dynamic injury system with body parts, progressive injuries that can worsen if trying to play through them (Think Head Coach 09) also absolutely we need lingering injuries where they have a true injury list of questionable and doubtful and tie this into the league news each week. If you play a guy questionable his injury can linger longer and may lead to worsen. I know they added the “Big Decision” aspect to binging back a player early from injury on Madden 17 But let’s expand upon this more. Injuries are a huge part of the NFL.

Good post, and expanding on this...

In Madden '17 the "Big Decision" was a welcome addition but it was always a pretty binary, easy decision: Don't start the injured guy, play the uninjured guy. There are a couple reasons why this didn't make a very big impact on the game:

Scenario: James White (82ovr), your #1 RB gets injured, and you have a 'Big Decision' to make starting James White (Injured, 71 ovr) or Dion Lewis (Healthy, 81ovr).

• For one, injured James White's overall would drop dramatically in Madden (perhaps appropriately so), so starting him in the game would make no sense. If White (injured) becomes a 71 ovr, and Lewis (healthy) is an 81, you start Dion Lewis, and sit White. You don't lose anything there by starting White over Lewis. While it's realistic to have an injured guy not be as effective, there's a reason why teams start banged up Shady McCoy over whoever is #2 in Buffalo, because he's much, much better than #2. In Madden, that difference usually isn't that apparent.
• Stamina doesn't matter enough in Madden. In real NFL, if a player gets injured it's not so much that "Dion Lewis has to take over for James White," it's that crummy RB #3 has to take over for Dion Lewis because Lewis can't play 100% of offensive snaps in a game. In Madden, stamina hasn't ever really mattered. First, most players don't lose enough stamina, but second, even when they do, it typically doesn't affect play as much as it could. There's a reason why a RB who gets s 25 yard run is usually taken off the field, because they're ineffective on the next play. In Madden, unless your'e breaking a super long run, you can have runs of 10, 15, 8, 4, and 35 -- in a row -- and still be at 78 stamina or something. In the NFL injuries matter because depth matters. In Madden, depth doesn't matter so injuries don't matter.
• Nagging injuries should be a thing and if you want a real 'Big Decision' it should be 'Do you want a player to get surgery, or stay active, but risk a big injury?' This sort of decision happens every year for teams and big players. It's happened to Gronk like.. 3 out of the last 5 years he's been in the NFL. It's happened with Ryan Tannehill last season. Almost every team has had a tleast one injured player who has a nagging injury, and the question has always come up in those cities, is this guy going to miss the whole season because he'll get surgery, but it'll "fix him" for the future, or is he going to miss 4-6 games and come back but with a bigger risk of re-injury? In Madden, this could play out where it has a lasting impact on the players Injury rating. Guys who opt for surgery may miss a whole season, but their injury rating bumps up to an 85 or 90. Guys who sit our 4-6 weeks but don't get surgey should have a reduced injury rating, 65-70 or something, making a high risk of re-injury. That's a big decision.

Ratings really don't matter enough in Madden for injuries to matter. You can take a look at two teams last season to see how much injuries matter, the Oakland Raiders and Miami Dolphins. Oakland was the top seeded team in the AFC for nearly all of 2016, and then in a horrible injury, their star QB who had led them to that record got injured, and their super bowl hopes crashed. They went from one of the best, most efficient passing offenses in the NFL, to a terrible offense that had it's worst offensive game of the season... They're second lowest number of first downs all season, lowest yards, and their second worst scoring game. In Madden, this wouldn't happen because while Derrick Carr is really good in Madden, Connor Cook isn't that bad, at least, you can win with Connor Cook. In real life, Houston (a pretty crappy playoff team) took away any strength that Cook could have, shut down all of the underneath stuff, forced him into passes he couldn't make and Cook threw 3 terrible INTs that lost Oakland the game. In Madden, Cook would have come out, Houston would have played their normal defense, and Cook would have been probably about as effective as Carr, with maybe a few routes not being available.

Injuries matter in real life because ratings and depth matters in real life, and neither of these things really matter in Madden.

[howboutdat]

Quote: Originally Posted by T4VERTS

I figured you'd be interested in that question. I tried to work a couple of the relevant current hot topics into the interview. At least it lets you know where they stand. It doesn't seem like that is something on their radar necessarily, and it also doesn't seem like it would necessarily generate more development resources.

and i do thank you for doing the interview, and john for taking the time. I personally like john, he has been very responsive when i contacted him. Just an example. Last year they put out an update for the MCA App. It broke he ability to put people on auto. I contacted him on twitter, and he responded fairly quickly, they were not aware the update had caused the issue. He told me they would look into it. They did, and he asked me a few times to try it again, still didnt work, they continued to look into it, until they put out another update that fixed it.He continued to keep in contact with me to make sure it was working. Which i ensured him it was fixed. So for people to think he does not try , is simply not true and i know this first hand.Ive talked to him about numerous other issues, this just a small example.

Also i get what your saying , it was prob longshot that took alot of resources. I just want them to be able to focus on CFM better. They have the funds , they can make longshot and cfm and still make more than pleanty of money with current system.

The thing i brought up earlier about MUT money and CFM, i personally think if EA would let people know that money from MUT cycles into CFM ( if it does ,which i believe it does ) it could help change some of the more hardcore peoples mindsets from hating MUT so much. Why do i say this? Because alot of people refuse to even click on MUT because they feel it takes from CFM.But if EA would let people know, that some of the money made from actually is spent back in CFM , it could have a double domino effect.

1- those who want them to add micros to CFM currently, would already have a way they could give EA more money, that in turn increases the profit ,that may go back into CFM .Basically i already think this happens( though no proof it does) and thus basically there already is a micro to give money into cfm.Which is another reason i dont believe we should add a separate one for CFM.

2- It might change some peoples mindsets on MUT and finally see it as something that is not taking from CFM, but can help add to it, thus more may end up playing it that already buys the game every year( which we know EA wants us to do, and is why i felt they added salary cap mut to try to help with that) . Thus more may be willing to not only play it for a change but may end up enjoying it and spending money, and thus maybe cycling alittle more back into CFM.

Now if they did that, and within a year or two , people saw bigger increases in what they do with CFM, all that combined would show people, look more spent in MUT is helping make CFM better. and thus continue to bring people over , to play both modes, maybe spend more and thus help everyone out in the end, EA and the consumers.


I say this because this is basically what gta v (i know not a yearly title but just think about this) does now. They have shark cards, Its just an option, does not lock any part of the game out if you dont buy them. I see MUT coins as a kind of same type thing, its an option, you can still play MUT without buying them, you can earn them. GTA V uses the money made from shark cards, to produce over 30 FREE to all who own the game DLC's. And still make a ton of profit. Now one can say well they sell alot more copies , but in 5 year span Madden sells alot too. Its a smart gaming business model i believe for any online game really. Let those who want to spend the extra spend it, but dont limit those who dont. Give everyone the same game. It can be done. It is being done and it is still able to generate very high profits. I personally believe MUT could do this for Madden overall in a bigger way, if they found a way to show CFM heads, it actually benefits the whole game , the money made on MUT. Just my two cents.

[howboutdat]

Quote: Originally Posted by XtremeDunkz

I can tell you, as a commissioner of a 32 man league since 2010, what you touched on in the interview is my number 1. Commissioner override settings for user assists like ball hawk, heat seeker, ball carrier auto moves. Currently no way to regulate that stuff. Sent from my SM-G925T using Tapatalk

yes ive talked to many online commish's . in dif chats with them, everyone ive talked to wants this option. XtremeDunkz if your not in these groupme all admin chats or discord, please dm me ,ill get you in them .We working on trying to get commishes together to give a detailed response after game is launched on cfm going forward from our perspectives.