Did the patch make a difference for anyone?

[the fridge]

Quote: Originally Posted by fhhs63

I paid $60 for the game. Why do they even pay to have people test it if they do a craptastic job? It's a business, they have to provide for the consumer.

they don't have to do a job on the game at all but they "try" and YOU don't have to buy the game if YOU don't think it is worth the money

[JaymeeAwesome]

You will never achieve a perfect game and for this game nothing was broken from day one. Most things were able to be tweaked with sliders and the things that couldn't you could deal with. It's a priviledge to get patches, back in the day we didn't have them and we didn't complain then, so why bother complain now. You should be thankful technology has evolved that game makers can tweak games after a full release, because honestly you can't find all the bugs when game testing. You have to release it to millions to find out the minor issues that may have been overlooked.

[Gordy748]

Choking on my coffee a little for agreeing with a Patriots fan () but Jaymee is right. It’s not perfect out of the box, and probably never will be. Mad11 seems more sensitive to the sliders than Mad10, and yes, it's a little annoying to have to spend a lot of time tweaking them instead of just playing. But now that I've made a set that works for me and my capabilities, I'm really enjoying the games. Post 1.03 I've no doubt it'll be better overall than Mad10 (though agree things like dirty uniforms, other glitches could have made the game a LOT more gratifying).

I've played 3 games post-patch, a harder-than-it-looks win 37-21 over the Cardinals, a THUMPING 59-17 loss to the Saints, and last night an easy 31-7 win over the Chiefs.fficeffice" />>>
> >
Compared to my earlier pre-patch games, there seems a greater difference between good and poor teams. NO is OVR 88 in my franchise, Chiefs are 81 and I am 83. I feel I’m competitive (maybe a little too much) against similar quality teams but against the Saints I never once felt I’d come close to even being in the same league, let alone competitive. (Here’s hoping Drew Brees goes fishing the weekend the Seahawks roll into NO this year). Games before were a lot tighter (lost to 49ers and Broncos by 10 points, beat Chicago by 14, for example).>>
> >
The pass defense seems about the same post-patch, perhaps a little easier, but only perhaps. Rushing for me and the CPU seems a little easier. I’ve noticed a few new animations. The CPU still chooses man-blitzes against my 4-wide receiver sets (though the Saints were a lot more astute). Overall I’ll probably make my player skills slightly harder, but only slightly. (possibly this is due to me getting better at the game, not the patch).>>

[REDRZA]

Well I don't agree with the Pats fan. Sliders don't work for people who play online because they don't allow us to use them. That said we rely on Tiburon to do a good job of balancing the game at default settings.

While I agree that patches and technolgy are great things, the fact that companies can, and are allowed to patch games also makes them lazy. If they weren't allowed to patch games they would do a better job polishing them for launch.

[PhinsFan86]

Quote: Originally Posted by roadman

Aren't they providing a business by patching the game? Patches have been a part of sports gaming on NG since the inception of NG sports gaming. It is what it is.

Problem with "patches" is that it results in a crappy awful game when it first comes out. I feel like the developers sit in their little office and say "yeah we know our game sucks this year but hey, everyone is gonna buy it anyway. We'll just make some patches for it in a couple months"

********. If I spend $60 on something I want it to be right THEN. Not three monthes from now. SMH...

[roadman]

Quote: Originally Posted by PhinsFan86

Problem with "patches" is that it results in a crappy awful game when it first comes out. I feel like the developers sit in their little office and say "yeah we know our game sucks this year but hey, everyone is gonna buy it anyway. We'll just make some patches for it in a couple months" ********. If I spend $60 on something I want it to be right THEN. Not three monthes from now. SMH...

I agree wholeheartedly with you, but it's the way of the world we live in with one year sports cycled games on NG consoles.

There is not 1 sports game I own on the 360 that doesn't have patches to it.

And at least with Madden, we are getting the next patch at the end of September, which is only 6 weeks away from launch, not 3 months or in December/January like last year.

[JaymeeAwesome]

Quote: Originally Posted by PhinsFan86

Problem with "patches" is that it results in a crappy awful game when it first comes out. I feel like the developers sit in their little office and say "yeah we know our game sucks this year but hey, everyone is gonna buy it anyway. We'll just make some patches for it in a couple months" ********. If I spend $60 on something I want it to be right THEN. Not three monthes from now. SMH...

Not true. Back in the day techmo bowl and such there were plenty of gameplay issues and superhuman running backs and not having the ability to customize the quarter length or your offensive line. We were happy with non perfect games back then, what makes it different now?

[JVM]

Quote: Originally Posted by roadman

I agree wholeheartedly with you, but it's the way of the world we live in with one year sports cycled games on NG consoles. There is not 1 sports game I own on the 360 that doesn't have patches to it. And at least with Madden, we are getting the next patch at the end of September, which is only 6 weeks away from launch, not 3 months or in December/January like last year.

If you had PS3, you could have MLB 10 The Show--an extremely well designed game. No freezes, such as with Madden 11 where you can waste hours. Anyway, sure is nice to spend $60 dollars to be a beta tester.