What Effect Has The Madden Community Had On Substantially Changing Next-Gen Madden?

[Big FN Deal]

Quote: Originally Posted by Shaun Mason

There are plenty of Game Changers who are openly critical of EA's products, they just tend to just be critical in the situations where it matters, when we are working on ideas to present at EA or while we are at Tiburon working on the current cycle. There are literally sections of the game I wish EA would rip out and start over (line interaction, penalties, etc.) but I understand the reason that isn't feasible today. I could easily come on OS, create detailed threads that show every poorly implemented animation, illogical outcome or items that simply don't mirror reality in any way, but I personally don't feel getting people angry on message boards is a constructive or even therapeutic exercise. I felt that way before I was a Game Changer. I'm far more interested in trying to get to the root of issues so they can be improved. That is how I got involved with EA in the first place. Long before anyone from Tradition Sports Online was a Game Changer we went out of our way to categorize bugs, simply because we could then try to standardize workarounds for our own leagues. We started sharing that information with EA and developed a relationship. I said in my previous post, if you desire a closer relationship with the development team (individually or collectively) you need to cultivate one. The opportunity existed for OS at one point. TSO is MUCH smaller in relation, frankly much more EA positive but outside of Justin Dewiel, it is pretty rare for a EA employee to post. Why? There are 6 Game Changers based out of TSO (seven if you include RedZoneD25) and AzureEffect from The Sim Standard (another CD attendee) calls it home base now. Any information that needs to be flow in either direction easily flows through us. That same relationship could exist here if it was allowed to develop. Then the influence OS desires would be there. That said, there is a very large group of guys who are on the extreme end of wanting realism in games in the Game Changers...you are represented. It's why I come here, because I honestly care that other people that have similar expectations from sports games have a voice.

I have no intent to make this thread a referendum specifically on the CD/CE attendees and EAGCs of the community but I want to address the bold. Most people that come on websites like OS into Madden forums are passionate about NFL gaming and want to know what's going on with it. I don't want to sparse words or take anything you stated to twist it but for me, I like to hear the unedited version of what happened, NDA protected content aside of course.

I think you mentioned before that the members of TSO know you and that makes sense but OS isn't really like that. I "get to know" posters mainly from what they post and that's it. Bezo, LBz, RGiles and PGaither have all been to CD/CE before and through their post history I have found open discussion about that experience. I understand different people have different ways of doing things but some people, including me, disagree with the premise that sharing everything that happened pertaining to Madden while at Tiburon, personally good, bad or indifferent, is somehow unconstructive or just incites pointless anger. I stated "pointless" anger because I believe sometimes consumers need to get reasonably angry to facilitate change in their buying decisions and if hearing the details about the making of Madden is going to anger them or whatever reasonable emotion it might incite, than so be it.

I look at the CD/CE attendees and EAGCs as part of the community at large that has more direct contact with EA/Tiburon. As such, I don't understand why whatever is said or discussed with that group, wouldn't be relayed, as unfiltered as possible, to the rest of the community.

[ZFarls]

Be Respectful. When you have the Lead Designer for Madden reading your forums and openly taking suggestions to improve the game, don't make him think the Madden community is comprised of the worst people on the planet.

You can battle with guys and still come out better for it in the end. Criticism isn't a bad thing, but lets remember your talking to a human being. If your grandkids read these forums, would they be proud in 50 years?

Things get heated at Community Events all the time, but nobody gets personal or upset or creates conspiracies as to why things don't happen.

[Icarus2k9]

Quote: Originally Posted by ZFarls

Be Respectful. When you have the Lead Designer for Madden reading your forums and openly taking suggestions to improve the game, don't make him think the Madden community is comprised of the worst people on the planet. You can battle with guys and still come out better for it in the end. Criticism isn't a bad thing, but lets remember your talking to a human being. If your grandkids read these forums, would they be proud in 50 years? Things get heated at Community Events all the time, but nobody gets personal or upset or creates conspiracies as to why things don't happen.

Okay, that's fair. Now what happens if the dialogue stems to one sentence responses for community concerns that are incredibly bland? If the entire dialogue extends to "why isn't x in / why was y removed?" "because we ran out of time / wasn't our highest priority this year" how do you create a dialogue out of that? Might be missing what you're getting at though...

[ZFarls]

Because they have been transparent and you have an idea (not an understanding) but an appreciation of what it takes to develop a feature.

Because the answer is the truth and even if it was extended upon you wouldn't be any happier or would still want more.

Because answering questions full fledged 100's of times when people don't care about the answer anyway or will only use the quote as a way to make a point 3 years down the road seems like time that can be better spent doing something productive.

To help elaborate on some of the reasons "not enough time" is bland for ...

In anticipation of your follow up question: Then why is it that you could affect ____ but not ____?

The answer to that has many facets, some things don't change because:
The development road map dictates the change will occur in the future.
The underlying implementation makes the change either high risk or difficult.
It is too late in the cycle to confirm the effects of the change suggested.
The change is considered lower priority than other items currently being worked on.
Cost vs Reward is low.
The design is functioning as EA intends (i.e. my opinion is vetoed by theirs)
Other Game Changers disagree with my wants.

[Icarus2k9]

Quote: Originally Posted by ZFarls

Because they have been transparent and you have an idea (not an understanding) but an appreciation of what it takes to develop a feature. Because the answer is the truth and even if it was extended upon you wouldn't be any happier or would still want more. Because answering questions full fledged 100's of times when people don't care about the answer anyway or will only use the quote as a way to make a point 3 years down the road seems like time that can be better spent doing something productive. To help elaborate on some of the reasons "not enough time" is bland for ... In anticipation of your follow up question: Then why is it that you could affect ____ but not ____? The answer to that has many facets, some things don't change because: The development road map dictates the change will occur in the future. The underlying implementation makes the change either high risk or difficult. It is too late in the cycle to confirm the effects of the change suggested. The change is considered lower priority than other items currently being worked on. Cost vs Reward is low. The design is functioning as EA intends (i.e. my opinion is vetoed by theirs) Other Game Changers disagree with my wants.

Okay, that's cool. I think on a personal level, I'd love to know which of those is being invoked each time the dreaded "sorry this didn't make it" comes up, but that's just because I'd know which battles would still be worth having that debate with and which of those have no chance of being changed. Even if a quote did provide ammunition e.g. something functioning as EA intends, I'd at least prefer to know. Again, can see why they don't though.

I think in regards to the Game Changers, I can certainly cope with them defending the product because they see the inner workings more than I do by a country mile, and I can cope with them being "pro-EA" at a basic level - they wouldn't devote so much time to the thing if they weren't at least optimistic a better game can be made by the current team - but the moment that dialogue begins to smell like a PR line rather than healthy disagreement, my hackles go up slightly.

For example, when the function to edit wasn't available in the CC mode (keep saying CCM mode, which is idiotic), someone was saying in defence that the function wasn't removed, it was just never added. I know that's technically correct - the best kind of correct if Futurama serves me well - but that still felt like spin from someone who is in no way employed by EA.

Right, I've swept this way off track now. Thanks for your time anyway, going to bow out before this eats into the day waaay too much for my place of work's liking

[Big FN Deal]

In an attempt to narrow what I want to know concerning community affect, I will ask this What is the segment of the Madden community or outside of it, that has asked or is asking EA/Tiburon to make "boring" real life NFL football more enjoyable, ie "fun" in Madden?

I don't have a problem understanding video games are not made overnight, that companies are out to make money, that EA/Tiburon is not personally out to get me, etc. However, I don't understand even after overcoming all the realities of game creation, whatever actually is able to be added into this NFL simulation game, then has to be subjected to some "fun" standard. There is a disconnect there, imo because the standard for "fun" in a simulation should be realism and the only limitations to that standard should be the existing realities of video game creation, not ginned a up "fun" standard after the fact.

So if, as it seems, most substantial changes in Madden are affected by a "fun" standard that is NOT based on the direct input of the interactive community at large or even CD/CE attendees and EAGCs, then what affect does the community really have on substantial change in Madden?

I really want to know who decides the "fun" standard in Madden because like Icarus2k9 alluded to, that's where the community needs to focus their attention and attempt to gain influence to affect change, imo.

[shaunlmason]

Quote: Originally Posted by Big FN Deal

I have no intent to make this thread a referendum specifically on the CD/CE attendees and EAGCs of the community but I want to address the bold. Most people that come on websites like OS into Madden forums are passionate about NFL gaming and want to know what's going on with it. I don't want to sparse words or take anything you stated to twist it but for me, I like to hear the unedited version of what happened, NDA protected content aside of course. I think you mentioned before that the members of TSO know you and that makes sense but OS isn't really like that. I "get to know" posters mainly from what they post and that's it. Bezo, LBz, RGiles and PGaither have all been to CD/CE before and through their post history I have found open discussion about that experience. I understand different people have different ways of doing things but some people, including me, disagree with the premise that sharing everything that happened pertaining to Madden while at Tiburon, personally good, bad or indifferent, is somehow unconstructive or just incites pointless anger. I stated "pointless" anger because I believe sometimes consumers need to get reasonably angry to facilitate change in their buying decisions and if hearing the details about the making of Madden is going to anger them or whatever reasonable emotion it might incite, than so be it. I look at the CD/CE attendees and EAGCs as part of the community at large that has more direct contact with EA/Tiburon. As such, I don't understand why whatever is said or discussed with that group, wouldn't be relayed, as unfiltered as possible, to the rest of the community.

My interactions at EA are essentially open book at TSO. I don't always post information in places that are publicly accessible, often information is shared in our chat and via Xbox Live or Skype (I talk to our membership in person as much as I humanly am able). The reason TSO gets so much more personal interaction with me is because I trust that community because we have personal relationships. I know they are going to take my word and not try to paint me in a negative light.

If you want more open dialog with me all you have to do is ask and I will provide as much information as I reasonably can. The second people start spinning and twisting my words I'll stop interacting. I'm not a PR person, my thoughts are my own and they shouldn't be construed as more than that, nor should I have to spend my time defending my words.

[shaunlmason]

Quote: Originally Posted by Icarus2k9

Quick question for you then Shaun Mason (if that is your real name)...what would OS have to do to allow this relationship to develop? I agree an overwhelming "EA suxxors" attitude isn't going to win favour, but what would be the key? May be an obvious answer, but still curious to hear it.

It's my real name, I don't believe in pseudonyms. =)

The answer is obvious, and it is to reduce the noise to signal ratio. No one (not even the posters at OS) wants to read through 6 pages of repeated ideas or just plain bashing to get to one nugget of information.

If you aren't providing something to the discussion, stay out of it, that is my general rule. You can read threads on OS and see the same person repeat the same negative comment multiple times. The initial comment (i.e. I think EA is lazy so they just give us what they want) is unnecessary enough, but repeating it shameful, in my opinion.

That's why the Game Changers are useful, we are mostly signal with minimal noise.