How to make a difference

[threeandhalfstars]

I think if we want to make a difference and actually see some positive changes to the NCAA Football franchise, we need to expand our forum and take our voice elsewhere's. By getting other consumers to learn about the issues of this game and EA Sports' approach to the NCAA Franchise in general, we can affect future sales of NCAA 12 and possibly 13. I suggest two things:

(1) Go http://www.amazon.com/NCAA-Football-...=operasport-20and review the game.

(2) Contact the IGN staff or another game-review cite and ask them to write an article addressing how the console-game industry has changed with the increased use of patches and cite this game and lack of beta testing as an area of concern for the consumer.

[threeandhalfstars]

Found some other websites people can contact to see if we can get more publicity on the issue and hopefully change EA's approach to the NCAA Football Franchise:

Gametrailers - [email protected]

Kotaku - [email protected]

1Up - [email protected]

Gamepro - http://www.gamepromedia.com/contact/edit/

Xbox Magazine - [email protected]

I will be reaching out to these guys (and have already written to IGN and reviewed the game on Amazon). What about you?

[z4ckdabeast]

You forgot the most effective method:

Don't buy the game.

Do you really think EA cares about your complaints concerning the game when you continue to purchase it every single year?

[threeandhalfstars]

Quote: Originally Posted by z4ckdabeast

You forgot the most effective method: Don't buy the game. Do you really think EA cares about your complaints concerning the game when you continue to purchase it every single year?

(a) While I'm sure the "you" was meant to be universal, I personally have bought only two NCAA games on the next-gen consoles, this one and 08.

(b) I am no dummy about how sales and money are the only thing that matters. I bought NCAA 12 because of the stellar reviews on IGN, Gamespot, and Amazon. If just one of the big game review sites writes an article about the issues of this game and EA Sports' approach the franchise in general, that will put the consumer on notice and will affect sales for NCAA 13. Lowering the average review on Amazon from where it is currently (3 and 1/2 stars) to 2 1/2 or 2 stars will affect the sales of the game in its last hurray, the Thanksgiving to Holiday season.

[Kingfish]

Quote: Originally Posted by threeandhalfstars

If just one of the big game review sites writes an article about the issues of this game and EA Sports' approach the franchise in general, that will put the consumer on notice and will affect sales for NCAA 13. Lowering the average review on Amazon from where it is currently (3 and 1/2 stars) to 2 1/2 or 2 stars will affect the sales of the game in its last hurray, the Thanksgiving to Holiday season.

I am not dog piling the rabbit here, just offering another view. The big review sites are not going to 'tank' a review of EA cause that will do two things, a) stir up the hate of the masses that call themselves EA fanboys and b) keep them from getting access to any previews and special offers.

I knew a guy that put a site together back in the day, kinda like tomshardware.com He intended to make it honest and a consumers watchdog type site. He wrote a few positive reviews and had a couple of good articles but when he wrote his first less than stellar review of an AMD chipset or a Radeon vid-card...they shut him down one and all.

Now that was one "little guy" vs. "the man" but you don't get to be a reviewer at Gamespot or IGN and not realize who is paying for the advertising...at those sites, a review that slammed ANYTHING EA wouldn't get past the editors.

Just my opinion...

[threeandhalfstars]

Quote: Originally Posted by Kingfish

I am not dog piling the rabbit here, just offering another view. The big review sites are not going to 'tank' a review of EA cause that will do two things, a) stir up the hate of the masses that call themselves EA fanboys and b) keep them from getting access to any previews and special offers.

I am sure this is the case, but I don't feel like we shouldn't try. I am not asking much; just go to one of the sites I posted and write a quick email requesting an article on some of the issues of the current approach to many games, including EA Sports. Maybe with enough people asking, a review site will write said article, even if they write it with more subtlety and toned-down language than what we would like.

[psychicDB]

Your efforts are laudable, but I don't think y'all realize just how much money is involved in this game.

I'm not a brilliant mathematician or anything, but I can do some basic number crunching with a little bit of googling: according to vgchartz.com, NCAA 11 sold 1.77 million copies. Now if you assume that not everybody paid $60 due to some price drops, etc, I'll drop the average price down to $57 to be generous. That equals out to a gross income of $100,890,000.

According to the same site, NCAA 12 has sold 1.14 million copies thus far, and let's say everyone paid $58 since the prices haven't been low for as long. That's $66,120,000 gross income. EA reported this summer that sales for 12 were up 17% from sales of 11. If you factor that 17% increase into NCAA 11 sales, you can estimate that by this time next year they will have made $118,041,300 off of NCAA 12.

Let that sink in for a second. The psychic dbs, the super lbs, the warping defenders, the transfer faileds, the no huddles, the freezes, the glitches, the god-awful AI....has made $66,120,000 gross income at this point in time, and will probably make another $50 million by this time next year.

You don't get to rake in that kind of dough by simply making great video games year after year. EA is very smart and has played the capitalist game to extreme success. The exclusivity deals, the advertising, the review magazines in their back pocket -- it's capitalism at its finest. Why would they alter their business model in the slightest when it's not only working, but getting better? There's a reason that Revo facemask everybody complains about is positioned improperly on the players' helmets -- that stupid looking helmet is gonna rake in a hundred million bucks whether it's sideways, upside down, or backwards. When Ben Hamburger is strolling through the cubicles at the EA office, trust me, he ain't giving motivating, empowering speeches to push his employees to give 110% and create the best game they can. He ain't checking over every last detail of the game to make sure it's picture perfect. The broken blocking, the psychic dbs, well....who cares when you're this successful?

EA has a monopoly, and there ain't a damn thing we can about it do short of waiting out their exclusivity deal and (A) hoping a developer who gives a damn will get the deal or, more realistically, (B) hoping that there will be no exclusivity deal.

In the words of George Carlin, "The table is tilted, folks. The game is rigged."

[z4ckdabeast]

Quote: Originally Posted by psychicDB

Your efforts are laudable, but I don't think y'all realize just how much money is involved in this game. I'm not a brilliant mathematician or anything, but I can do some basic number crunching with a little bit of googling: according to vgchartz.com, NCAA 11 sold 1.77 million copies. Now if you assume that not everybody paid $60 due to some price drops, etc, I'll drop the average price down to $57 to be generous. That equals out to a gross income of $100,890,000. According to the same site, NCAA 12 has sold 1.14 million copies thus far, and let's say everyone paid $58 since the prices haven't been low for as long. That's $66,120,000 gross income. EA reported this summer that sales for 12 were up 17% from sales of 11. If you factor that 17% increase into NCAA 11 sales, you can estimate that by this time next year they will have made $118,041,300 off of NCAA 12. Let that sink in for a second. The psychic dbs, the super lbs, the warping defenders, the transfer faileds, the no huddles, the freezes, the glitches, the god-awful AI....has made $66,120,000 gross income at this point in time, and will probably make another $50 million by this time next year. You don't get to rake in that kind of dough by simply making great video games year after year. EA is very smart and has played the capitalist game to extreme success. The exclusivity deals, the advertising, the review magazines in their back pocket -- it's capitalism at its finest. Why would they alter their business model in the slightest when it's not only working, but getting better? There's a reason that Revo facemask everybody complains about is positioned improperly on the players' helmets -- that stupid looking helmet is gonna rake in a hundred million bucks whether it's sideways, upside down, or backwards. When Ben Hamburger is strolling through the cubicles at the EA office, trust me, he ain't giving motivating, empowering speeches to push his employees to give 110% and create the best game they can. He ain't checking over every last detail of the game to make sure it's picture perfect. The broken blocking, the psychic dbs, well....who cares when you're this successful? EA has a monopoly, and there ain't a damn thing we can about it do short of waiting out their exclusivity deal and (A) hoping a developer who gives a damn will get the deal or, more realistically, (B) hoping that there will be no exclusivity deal. In the words of George Carlin, "The table is tilted, folks. The game is rigged."

EA isn't exactly the greatest company, to put it kindly, but you can't honestly believe they aren't making ANY efforts to improve the game. That's just preposterous.