Game Informer - EA Sports Opens Up About The Challenges Of Developing During COVID

[CujoMatty]

Quote: Originally Posted by RogerDodger

The Metacritic Critic Review IS actual reviewers. Down to 63 from the upper 70's last year.

I'm not arguing that. Did you read those? Almost all of them say gameplay is better and not the issue. It being down to 63 is based mostly on the game being buggy and stale, not gameplay.

For the record I have said numerous times that I agree with it being a 6 out of 10. I'm enjoying it for what it is but I have also been vocal about the problems I see.

What this game isnt, is a 1 out of 10 or a .04 out of 10. Can I see someone thinking that? Sure but you'll never convince me of it. Professional reviewers dont believe so either.

I'll go back to my original point. Professional reviewers believe that the gameplay is better but its buggy and stale. I don't believe that warrants a comment that the game should be cheaper. Theres a ton of content in the game and they added a new mode, that while it's not for most of us, is being well received.

You are so interested in proving me wrong by providing a metacritic final score but it doesn't seem like you even read those reviews. So what you are implying is either a lower score this year automatically means the gameplay is worse or a lower score means the game should be cheaper. Neither of those are true necessarily.

[AUChase]

Quote: Originally Posted by ChaseB

It's not really an "excuses" or "sympathy" article, it's more just detailing work-life balance changes, how development changed etc. I understand peeps wanna get in their dunks, and I don't disagree that the priorities probably would have been the same either way (so the backlash would still be there regardless), but it's not really an article asking for forgiveness. It's more just details about how development changed, which I thought was interesting to read. Perhaps it's a PR thing sure, but I don't think it's overly sinister. Also, this wouldn't have been in the works right after the launch of the game as a counter/reaction piece, this is something that clearly GI would have been working on even before the launch of Madden.

I know for me I'm not looking to dunk on anyone. I've been trying to be more active again in here and discuss the game. I like a lot of EA devs and I can see the design work of some they brought over from Live with The Yard. I played a lot of Live Run in NBA Live 18 and 19 and The Yard is definitely something along those sames lines from a design standpoint.

I just think the timing of this particular article leads people to draw the conclusion that it was published to soften the blow. Franchise update, GI article, and EA reporting sales numbers all happened within a relatively short time from each other this week.

I think you make a good point about it being worked on pre-launch, but someone somewhere had to know that publishing this article would be interpreted the way it has been due to all that's going on. Oh well.. the article won't even matter in a few days,but It's a good piece and I enjoyed reading it.

[RogerDodger]

Quote: Originally Posted by CujoMatty

I'm not arguing that. Did you read those? Almost all of them say gameplay is better and not the issue. It being down to 63 is based mostly on the game being buggy and stale, not gameplay. For the record I have said numerous times that I agree with it being a 6 out of 10. I'm enjoying it for what it is but I have also been vocal about the problems I see. What this game isnt, is a 1 out of 10 or a .04 out of 10. Can I see someone thinking that? Sure but you'll never convince me of it. Professional reviewers dont believe so either. I'll go back to my original point. Professional reviewers believe that the gameplay is better but its buggy and stale. I don't believe that warrants a comment that the game should be cheaper. Theres a ton of content in the game and they added a new mode, that while it's not for most of us, is being well received. You are so interested in proving me wrong by providing a metacritic final score but it doesn't seem like you even read those reviews. So what you are implying is either a lower score this year automatically means the gameplay is worse or a lower score means the game should be cheaper. Neither of those are true necessarily.

For the record I've given you two replies, three very short sentences in total. Not sure that qualifies as me being "so interested in proving [you] wrong".

Here's something though. On Seann Graddy's Linked.in profile for his work on NCAA, he cites returning the Metacritic score to the mid-80's as a significant accomplishment. That's EA's Executive Producer of Madden 21 saying that, not me. So it's a metric they take seriously. He didn't quote the content of the reviews themselves, just the score. Although the content of the reviews obviously matter its the baseline score that carries weight.

I once chatted to ex CEO Peter Moore at the Maddenpalooza event at the Pasadena Rose Bowl back in the day and the one thing I remember most is our conversation about the Metacritic review scores. So again, it matters amongst those who make the decisions.

Of course, that's not to say that success is measured against that criteria today and that it hasn't shifted to raw profit instead. Maybe that's why some members of the EA board thought they deserved a more than double pay rise of $10m that the shareholders thankfully knocked down dead.

But i can tell you this, if the Madden 21 ultimately score settles on a 63 this year, Seann won't be quoting it on Linked.in. Whether gameplay has improved, or not.

And for the record, I've read this years reviews so far. They say gameplay is better. They also say gameplay is a polished up version of Madden 20 which is why it's weighting in their overall judgement isn't keeping the score higher.

Given that this is a discussion about the Game Informer article about EA's difficulty about making Madden this year, it'll be interesting to see if there's similar articles about the FIFA and NHL teams experiencing similar difficulties.

[Culture Rot]

Very, very interesting timing.

[CujoMatty]

Quote: Originally Posted by RogerDodger

For the record I've given you two replies, three very short sentences in total. Not sure that qualifies as me being "so interested in proving [you] wrong". Here's something though. On Seann Graddy's Linked.in profile for his work on NCAA, he cites returning the Metacritic score to the mid-80's as a significant accomplishment. That's EA's Executive Producer of Madden 21 saying that, not me. So it's a metric they take seriously. He didn't quote the content of the reviews themselves, just the score. Although the content of the reviews obviously matter its the baseline score that carries weight. I once chatted to ex CEO Peter Moore at the Maddenpalooza event at the Pasadena Rose Bowl back in the day and the one thing I remember most is our conversation about the Metacritic review scores. So again, it matters amongst those who make the decisions. Of course, that's not to say that success is measured against that criteria today and that it hasn't shifted to raw profit instead. Maybe that's why some members of the EA board thought they deserved a more than double pay rise of $10m that the shareholders thankfully knocked down dead. But i can tell you this, if the Madden 21 ultimately score settles on a 63 this year, Seann won't be quoting it on Linked.in. Whether gameplay has improved, or not. And for the record, I've read this years reviews so far. They say gameplay is better. They also say gameplay is a polished up version of Madden 20 which is why it's weighting in their overall judgement isn't keeping the score higher. Given that this is a discussion about the Game Informer article about EA's difficulty about making Madden this year, it'll be interesting to see if there's similar articles about the FIFA and NHL teams experiencing similar difficulties.

Dude that had nothing to do with my point. Not once did I say the reviews dont matter. In fact I've said on other posts that I think the review scores of 63 is bad news for EA.

This allllllll came about because I said in reply to a guy that I dont think the reviews warrant the game to be cheaper. That's all. Thats it. You then replied by quoting one sentence of my reply that metacritic reviews would dispute that claim.

You now keep arguing about it like I'm saying reviews dont matter or hurt EA in anyway or that I'm saying the scores represent a success. In no way am I saying that. In fact it sounds like I feel the exact same as you in that regard. Lol

I will repeat it again. All I said is that professional reviewers have mostly said the gameplay is better and that I dont see why someone would think a lower price would be justified.

What am I suppose to think when you keep arguing about a separate matter that in fact I agree with but was never said. Its pushing an agenda on me and my opinion by putting words in my mouth.

[RogerDodger]

Quote: Originally Posted by CujoMatty

Dude that had nothing to do with my point. Not once did I say the reviews dont matter. In fact I've said on other posts that I think the review scores of 63 is bad news for EA. This allllllll came about because I said in reply to a guy that I dont think the reviews warrant the game to be cheaper. That's all. Thats it. You then replied by quoting one sentence of my reply that metacritic reviews would dispute that claim. You now keep arguing about it like I'm saying reviews dont matter or hurt EA in anyway or that I'm saying the scores represent a success. In no way am I saying that. In fact it sounds like I feel the exact same as you in that regard. Lol I will repeat it again. All I said is that professional reviewers have mostly said the gameplay is better and that I dont see why someone would think a lower price would be justified. What am I suppose to think when you keep arguing about a separate matter that in fact I agree with but was never said. Its pushing an agenda on me and my opinion by putting words in my mouth.

Really, not arguing with you at all. Apart from the first paragraph that was a direct response to yours, the rest of my post was a generic reply to everyone. Have a great day!

[baconbits11]

All I have to say is there was no pandemic in 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016 and so on...so for them to bring it up now as an excuse does not get my sympathy. We got about the same level of improvement in the years without a pandemic.

[SolidSquid]

Quote: Originally Posted by baconbits11

All I have to say is there was no pandemic in 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016 and so on...so for them to bring it up now as an excuse does not get my sympathy. We got about the same level of improvement in the years without a pandemic.

Agreed, I don’t think they did for sympathy but I also didn’t see game informer interviewing any other companies/devs about COVID when they had to produce and release games in the same landscape.

This clearly wasn’t a move to garner any goodwill but the optics of it are just off. Same things with releasing all the game codes the day after DropEA was trending.