Just 4 months ago...I think we're turning a corner...

[RGiles36]

Quote: Originally Posted by FadeEmAll

It's funny how the EA and Ian supporters come and complain about the "haters" telling them how happy they can be, but 9 times out of 10 when I see someone getting attacked on these boards it's because they didn't agree with what the supporters were saying and not the other way around. You make a simple statement like "Man that screenshot doesn't mean that gameplay has improved. We get a great screenshot early every year." Without fail two posts later one of these "internet thugs" comes with that age old post "man get a life loser, you can't tell us how happy to be be. You fricking ***" That $#!t is comical to me.

I disagree with this Fade. I'm certainly not accusing you of lying, but can you show me a post on this board where an "EA/Ian Supporter & Optimist" called you or any other pessimist a name or was attacking in their tone?

See, I actually see this the other way around. When the pessimists are confronted with a debate, they're QUICK to start name-calling. Us optimists are called everything from sheep, to dummies, to being compared to battered wives, etc. And that's just the clean stuff that's said.

The pessimists in my opinion turn this into a black & white board: you either have your doubts about the game, or you're "creaming your pants" for it. The pessimists pretty much eliminate the middle ground. So anything positive that's said about the game is defined as being gullible, having low expectations, or setting yourself up for disappointment etc instead of those comments simply being taken for the compliments that they are.

[aholbert32]

Quote: Originally Posted by Netherscourge

Yea - this too is a major problem (if not the THE biggest problem). I put the NFL itself in the "investors" department. The NFL itself are only concerned with making money. They're not "gamers", they're sellers. But these contracts are drawn up by people from both the NFL and EA. Someone on either end needs to speak up when negotiations are going on and speak on behalf of the gamers for once. I know money takes precedence over quality during these business meeting , but damn it would be nice for once if the customer could get some more respect instead of being treated like livestock.

LOL...speak up for gamers? That person would get laughed out of the board room. I can see it now....an exec is talking about how much revenue Madden brought in and someone interrupts and says:

"Excuse me. There are a small amount of gamers who are upset about the running animations and the lack of presentation in Madden. I think we should delay Madden for a year so that we can add those features"

Exec: "How much is a small amount?"

"Less than 1%"

Exec: "Do the majority of them still buy the game anyway?"

"Yes"

Exec: "You're fired"

[Netherscourge]

Quote: Originally Posted by aholbert32

Bingo. Its never fails to amaze me the lack of business know how on this board. So people are suggesting that EA take two years between versions of Madden so that the game can be "complete"? A couple of problems with that. 1) That insane to ask a company to take its biggest money making product off the shelves. 2) The NFL would never allow that. EA gets a ton of press when Madden is release but so does the NFL. Also on top of a license fee, the NFL receives royalties from each game sold and would take a big revenue hit if EA didnt release the game every year. 3) This board represents less than 1% of Madden purchasers each year. Even if every person on this board hated Madden, thought it wasnt "complete" and refused to buy it....it wouldnt change EA's bottom line.

If getting the exclusive license from the NFL was based partly on contract language that mandated yearly releases, then yes, EA's lawyers are partly to blame. They wanted the money so they accepted the stipulation.

[Derrville]

Quote: Originally Posted by aholbert32

LOL...speak up for gamers? That person would get laughed out of the board room. I can see it now....an exec is talking about how much revenue Madden brought in and someone interrupts and says: "Excuse me. There are a small amount of gamers who are upset about the running animations and the lack of presentation in Madden. I think we should delay Madden for a year so that we can add those features" Exec: "How much is a small amount?" "Less than 1%" Exec: "Do the majority of them still buy the game anyway?" "Yes" Exec: "You're fired"

Not just the community on OS. Go on other forums, go on youtube, go on myspace, facebook, go ask gamestop how many trade ins they had with Madden 09.

Its not less than 1% at all.

[aholbert32]

Quote: Originally Posted by Netherscourge

If getting the exclusive license from the NFL was based partly on contract language that mandated yearly releases, then yes, EA's lawyers are partly to blame. They wanted the money so they accepted the stipulation.

That stipulation is in EVERY major sports video game licensing agreement. The NBA wouldnt allow 2k to take a year off from making the NBA 2k series. Same with Live. The NBA even stipulates when a product comes out and made it so that NBA Ballers and Street came out in alternate years.

EA wants the stipulation. They want Madden out each year. EA likes money. Their employees like money. Their stockholders like money. Same with every company in America.

[S1ARk5]

Quote: Originally Posted by aholbert32

LOL...speak up for gamers? That person would get laughed out of the board room. I can see it now....an exec is talking about how much revenue Madden brought in and someone interrupts and says: "Excuse me. There are a small amount of gamers who are upset about the running animations and the lack of presentation in Madden. I think we should delay Madden for a year so that we can add those features" Exec: "How much is a small amount?" "Less than 1%" Exec: "Do the majority of them still buy the game anyway?" "Yes" Exec: "You're fired"

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA dude this just made me laugh.

Thank you for that.

[TheWatcher]

Quote: Originally Posted by aholbert32

LOL...speak up for gamers? That person would get laughed out of the board room. I can see it now....an exec is talking about how much revenue Madden brought in and someone interrupts and says: "Excuse me. There are a small amount of gamers who are upset about the running animations and the lack of presentation in Madden. I think we should delay Madden for a year so that we can add those features" Exec: "How much is a small amount?" "Less than 1%" Exec: "Do the majority of them still buy the game anyway?" "Yes" Exec: "You're fired"

LOL. I try to remember as much as I can who these details matter to most. It's hard sometimes though when you're so passionate about a detail. I'd love to think the whole Madden base does this, but I know in reality we make up a very small group.

One thing I do know is, even though the casuals may not ask for these things, when they come and they look great they'll enjoy it, too. It's one of those deals where they'll come in and get more and better than they were expecting, so I think it works out for us all in the end and I think it's great. Plus, if you're working on the product (Madden Team) you'll feel more satisfied knowing that you were able to deliver greater value.

[Netherscourge]

Quote: Originally Posted by aholbert32

That stipulation is in EVERY major sports video game licensing agreement. The NBA wouldnt allow 2k to take a year off from making the NBA 2k series. Same with Live. The NBA even stipulates when a product comes out and made it so that NBA Ballers and Street came out in alternate years. EA wants the stipulation. They want Madden out each year. EA likes money. Their employees like money. Their stockholders like money. Same with every company in America.

Look, we've already covered the business aspect of this. It's neither in EA's interest OR the NFL's interest to allow more time for a fully developed NFL video game.

It's IS however in the CUSTOMER'S interest, hence the whole reason for this conversation!