Why Limit Gamers?

[threes_co]

Re: Why Limit Gamers?

I do not mean to bash but this idea may just be a front to keep people buying their accelerators.

[moneal2001]

Re: Why Limit Gamers?

Arent there rules set forth by the NFLPA on this type of thing? I honestly dont know. Even if not, while the premise of this article is good, I think it is flawed.

Someone mentioned earlier in the thread about devs protecting their work. That person was right IMO. To me, I wouldnt allow full blown customization simply to protect the integrety of the game.

I think Ian Cummings used an interesting word in "cheesing". That isnt an industry term I am sure but gamers have come to accept "cheesing" and associate it with "cheating" or more concerning to devs "cheap". Nobody wants their product to be branded that way and the fact is that if you allow the consumer to do as they please, that is what you are going to be looking at.

As mentioned, 2k games have done a great job of allowing customers to customize thier experience and IMO that does cheapen the game because it potentially allows for workarounds that would kill off the intergrity of the AI.

Most game companies limit gamers and I dont think there is anything wrong with that. Think of it this way, an author writes a book and they copyright it because they dont want you taking it, changing a plotline here or there and altering the outcome. I would like someone to explain how this is different.

The flaw there is that most people that do customization do not "cheese" the game. They try to make the game more sim like. If you look on the 2k boards or online downloads, you see realistic slider sets or rosters that produce more realistic results.

The devs do an amazing job with the time that they have but, it is a very limited time. There are always flaws that get missed or overlooked due to time constraints. Allowing the players to correct those with sliders or roster editing or what have you, seems like the best fix for the problems that we have.

The 2k basketball games offer a huge amount of customization and connectivity to that customization. You say that it produces workarounds that kill the integrity of the AI, but most will say the opposite is happening. It allows the player to get past the flaws in the AI. Like trade and draft AI, two very hard things to program.

In madden you can trade draft picks for Peyton Manning. Do you ever think the colts would do that in real life. No, but it is in the game. Or how about running the same play all game long because the defense never adjusts to it. Those are the real representations of "cheese". How is that not killing the integrity of the AI, its the AI allows cheese like that.

Also most cheesers are lazy finding the easiest way to produce there wants or cheat to the game. Customization takes far too long to get through for most cheesers to go through to produce the effect they want.

Allowing greater customization has never hurt any game that I have ever played. If you can show me one that it has hurt or destroyed please provide it.

[jestep123]

Fair enough and maybe a book was a bad example based on that kind of reach but the fact is that there is all kinds of copyrighted material out there that you can not alter (legally). If what we are talking about is editing uniforms or creating a stadium or team names I am fine with that. That does not make the game cheap. As a matter of fact, those things are features and they add value. Sliders are the same way, they allow you to customize how the game plays to your playing style.

Editing attibutes is a whole different beast and would make the game cheaper perception wise if nothing else.

My general feeling is that OSer's sometimes need to remember that we arent the only gamers in the world.

Imagine a world where the majority gets what they want and we just let the community take over. EA says fine, forget attributes we are setting everyone to zero and you figure it out. The problem there is twofold, your still putting attributes in the hands of a select few (which I guess is better than one person) but I am pretty sure that person has statistics and research to back up what they put into the game. The depth of those stats and that research would not be something the community would want to engage in every year. The effort required would lead to a minnamal change in result anyway. Besides that could you imagine the chaos involved in trying to get folks to agree on ratings?

Second, if folks got on the boards and were constantly changing ratings around, the perception would be that EA has no real idea of what is doing. You would still have people complaining that EA didnt do right by the ratings and its ashame that the community had to step up and take care of it.

When you give people the ability to basically rewrite the game, you take away from its artistic integrety and its value. Perception wise, by giving consumers this much control you have taken a $60.00 game and turned it into a $30 game.

APF 2k8 and CH2k8 are good examples of this to me. These games have stood up for a long time because of the customization involved. We all still play them and that is great for us since we dont have to spend money on a new game.

My question is, how do the dev companies benefit by giving customers all this customization?

[ac-greasy]

Re: Why Limit Gamers?

This post brings to mind, for me anyway, the problem with the Madden game in general. And that is EA seems obsessed with manipulating and controlling how the game is played (or not played) to attain a certain outcome which they think is more realistic. It's gotten to the point where I don't feel like I'm even controlling the action on the field. Yes I can play a game, get relatively normal stats and a realistic outcome, but I had no fun playing it. In this pursuit they constantly take one step forward and and two steps back. For example, if they had a passing cone in the game, doesn't it take more effort to remove it for the next game than it does to just leave it in the game and continue to build in a different direction? Even if only 10% use the cone, it behooves them to leave it in the game rather than to remove it and anger that 10% (myself in included). The 3 click kicking meter is another example...why remove analog stick kicking? Why not have both? It makes no sense at all. I would agrue that this sort of behaviour from EA is ultimately the root cause of everyone's disappointment. We're stuck with the decisions THEY make...good or bad.

[GlennN]

Re: Why Limit Gamers?

Excellent article, Chris. I agree completely. I'm at the point where I could accept the inability to edit players (though idealy I would like that ability), if they would remove the artificial limitations in other areas. Stop saying I cannot have more than 10 draft picks. If I want to rebuild my team, why should I be limited? Stop saying I do not have a minimum number of tackles, or safeties, or whatever. Let me build my roster, my way. If ratings truly mean something, then I should be using players realistically. Maybe in my scheme (like in many NFL teams), I don't use a full back. Maybe I like CBs playing S. Maybe, like the Eagles, I draft mostly tackes and then use them as guards. Those are the kind of limits that bother me most, even above the inability to edit players.

[moneal2001]

Re: Why Limit Gamers?

My question is, how do the dev companies benefit by giving customers all this customization?

Improve on the game engine. If you wanted to play NBA 2k10 with updated rosters and new draft classes you could. The reason to buy 2k11 comes from the improvements to the game play and AI not the updated rosters.

Yea if devs just popped out a new game with updated rosters and now game or ai improvements. They would not get sales, but as long as they were working on improving the gameplay and AI they would still sell games.

[stlstudios189]

I understand some limitations to keep online cheeting etc.. but in an EA game I have to play a full 82 game NBA and NHL season why can't I have a 29 or 58 game season?

[rooney8]

Re: Why Limit Gamers?

A good example of not limiting gamers is in 2K11 with the option to overide trades. I would never touch it, I won't even do monthly training or send my players to off-season camps because I feel it's cheese but I am sure some love being able to overide trades and that's great for them.

[Exonerated]

Re: Why Limit Gamers?

In my dynasty, I get two free agents from another club to join my superstar.

I force them to sign with me for less than max.

And then, I proceed to start the season 8-6.

[michapop9]

Re: Why Limit Gamers?

The first reason wasn't listed as making the game unstable -- just it was 'cheesing'. That's not cool.

The other problems are there because the design of the game has determined that there are limits which you cannot cross. It's a design flaw, not a software limitation.

You cant argue with this, MLB the show and MLB 2k allow you to do this as well as other games without crashing problems, The people that even try to argue that these abilities/options shouldnt be in there have no bearing whatsoever BECAUSE THEY WOULD NOT BE FORCED TO USE IT!!!! But they would prevent others from doing so if they had it there way.

[rooney8]

Re: Why Limit Gamers?

You cant argue with this, MLB the show and MLB 2k allow you to do this as well as other games without crashing problems, The people that even try to argue that these abilities/options shouldnt be in there have no bearing whatsoever BECAUSE THEY WOULD NOT BE FORCED TO USE IT!!!! But they would prevent others from doing so if they had it there way.

I am just worried that instead of fixing many things like progression/regression we will be given the ability to edit thousands of players so we can just do that ourselves. It just seems it would be an easy way to not fix things that need to be fixed.

[roadman]

Re: Why Limit Gamers?

You cant argue with this, MLB the show and MLB 2k allow you to do this as well as other games without crashing problems, The people that even try to argue that these abilities/options shouldnt be in there have no bearing whatsoever BECAUSE THEY WOULD NOT BE FORCED TO USE IT!!!! But they would prevent others from doing so if they had it there way.

Eh, no need to shoot others opinions down.

I don't use editing at all in sports games on NG. I did on the PC years ago with HH Baseball and on Madden on the PC. I just don't have the time anymore.

That doesn't mean others can't enjoy it by allowing more editing. I'm all for more options, but not at the expense of hearing others opinions, for or against.

[GlennN]

Re: Why Limit Gamers?

In my dynasty, I get two free agents from another club to join my superstar.

I force them to sign with me for less than max.

And then, I proceed to start the season 8-6.

That's great! But, of course that could never happen in real life . . . well, north of the Mason Dixon line anyway.

[michapop9]

Re: Why Limit Gamers?

I am just worried that instead of fixing many things like progression/regression we will be given the ability to edit thousands of players so we can just do that ourselves. It just seems it would be an easy way to not fix things that need to be fixed.

Well if you look back how often has this line of thought been used and things still dont get fixed?? As if putting something good in the game that gives people opportunities to customize things how they want will take away something else that needs to be fixed, for the past few years things have been getting put in the game that arent neccessarily good and others have been getting completely ignored, if this train of thought is used than we might as well not put anything into the game, what needs to be "fixed" is truly getting smaller while what needs to be "added" is still a pretty large list.

[michapop9]

Re: Why Limit Gamers?

Eh, no need to shoot others opinions down.

I don't use editing at all in sports games on NG. I did on the PC years ago with HH Baseball and on Madden on the PC. I just don't have the time anymore.

That doesn't mean others can't enjoy it by allowing more editing. I'm all for more options, but not at the expense of hearing others opinions, for or against.

Ok, Im sorry if I came off a bit harsh, but can you see the point? Putting this feature in and fixing the instabilities with it would benefit many people while harming no one, because no one would be forced to use it, I think you agree because it sounded like you did, again sorry for being harsh I just have a hard time listening to people who cant see that it would not hurt anyone and would add to the game for alot of people.