[ComfortablyLomb]

Quote: Originally Posted by GatorBait06NC

I see where your post is coming from, BUT... The game came out in August. Let me repeat. August. Bottom line is that these patches should only include add ons such as visual upgrade, correct bugs and glitches, and alternate unis and stuff like that.

I disagree. If gameplay can be upgraded with a patch and the company is willing to put the time and effort into upgrading it I don't see why the improvement should be withheld from the buying public. It's obvious you would rather have nothing than something for some reason.

Quote:

Gameplay should have been left alone regardless of how good or bad it was. Because when they alter gameplay it makes the diehard gamers want to start over with the better gameplay additions.

You're basically saying that gameplay shouldn't be addressed by a patch because diehard gamers are an obsessive-compulsive group. Maybe they are and maybe they aren't but refusing to improve the product because of some group's neurosis is it's own insanity.

Quote:

Releasing patch after patch to improve gameplay is atrocious. The game comes out in August and we have to wait until Thanksgiving for the gameplay to be as good as it should have been on release day.

As has been said many, many times on the many forums of this website: sports games really require a development cycle longer than one year. Unfortunately, that isn't how the sports game industry works and I don't foresee a change on the horizon. A lot of bugged out console games of the past could have been fixed by patches but the ability wasn't there and now we have this incredible technology that allows for problems to be corrected on the consoles and you don't want to use it. What you want is what I want, games that ship in perfect working order, but it's not necessarily realistic and if you're going to forgo repairs after shipment because you're angry the video game world isn't the utopia you envision I think you've lost sight of reality.