 |
Quote: |
 |
|
|
 |
Originally Posted by tarheelguy4736 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
After reading every one's view about the game and the way it has turned out this year, I too believe that the developers need to re-develop the coding of the game. If it is as old as a lot of you are saying it is, then it definitely needs to change. Maybe if they took a year off to write better code for NCAA and develop the game fully then they could create an NCAA that would blow every other NCAA out of the water. However, with that being said, EA will not do this because it's all about $$$. For the developers its more about the game and how they want it to turn out, but if they are being pushed by the corporate leaders to just "make" the game and just send it out as is, regardless of flaws and bugs, and use customers as testers, then the game itself will never be the way we want it to be. I honestly feel like that is what is going on here. I feel like if EA would give the guys to make a good, solid NCAA game then it could be done. But the guys making the game might not how to advance it any further, so in that case changes need to be made. I honestly believe the NCAA team needs a need leader that can communicate with the public, bring new ideas to the table, and execute those ideas. The current person in that position isn't doing that (that's apparent from even watching the "Making of NCAA '12" on ESPNU. Just my two cents.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
This is why I don't blame the developers. I blame the upper management that is making executive decisions. Tiburon needs to allocate resources to architect and create a new code base. As a java developer, from personal experience, I can tell you that it is a pain in the arse to "fix" code or implement new features to a code base that is out dated. 10 years ago is a very long time in terms of software development ages. The software development community has created more efficient ways to architect a code base. For starters, compartmentalize your code...in other words, use the object oriented principles and features (I imagine the code is written using C++ ?). When fixing a defect or implementing a new feature, the code change should not break another feature in the code. This happens when the code base in integrated to much.
The main objective of a company is to make money. They are doing that right now with this crap they are putting out there. I just don't see EA putting aside valuable resources to work on a new code base.
11-14-2011, 10:34 AM
