08:30 PM - October 27, 2010 by uponablackstar
According to some 1up sources, Tiburon will now be handling the NBA franchise. Nothing has been confirmed, as of yet.
|
|||||||||
|
NBA Elite 11 News Post
08:30 PM - October 27, 2010 by uponablackstarAccording to some 1up sources, Tiburon will now be handling the NBA franchise. Nothing has been confirmed, as of yet.
NBA Elite 11 Videos
Member Comments
nba live 11 prolly would have been the best basketball game out, if they kept wang his vision, and built off of the live 10 code.. smh
So, I don't really play basketball games, but I was extremely interested in Elite, especially after the demo (because I didn't play it enough to see the glitches I guess).
Knowing now that Elite is being moved from EACanada to Tiburon simply means I won't be purchasing Elite, or any EA Basketball game, for as long as the franchise remains in Tiburon's hands.
I like football too much to not play the NCAA games, but when it comes to sports gaming, with FIFA and the limited amount of NHL I've played, EACanada is definitely doing a lot of things right.
I'm very disappointed.
Knowing now that Elite is being moved from EACanada to Tiburon simply means I won't be purchasing Elite, or any EA Basketball game, for as long as the franchise remains in Tiburon's hands.
I like football too much to not play the NCAA games, but when it comes to sports gaming, with FIFA and the limited amount of NHL I've played, EACanada is definitely doing a lot of things right.
I'm very disappointed.
I get it.....EA is the big bad company, who is not necessarily known for great management...lol
But why when the big series change was announced, there wasn't a big outcry from us, the consumer? The management isn't the only ones that put faith in Littman and his new direction. So we should blame ourselves as well.
However, we expected the execution to be better. Can we blame management for the graphics, horrible animations, and glitches? Or does the developers take at least a little blame? I never said the management shouldn't have responsibility, but come on guys.....
But why when the big series change was announced, there wasn't a big outcry from us, the consumer? The management isn't the only ones that put faith in Littman and his new direction. So we should blame ourselves as well.
However, we expected the execution to be better. Can we blame management for the graphics, horrible animations, and glitches? Or does the developers take at least a little blame? I never said the management shouldn't have responsibility, but come on guys.....
|
|||||||||||||
|
And by the time the big change was announced, what can we as consumers do other than what we did, which was collectively say "why didn't they just build on Live 10? Oh well, I'm cautiously optimistic this will work". We as consumers could have protested in front of EA's offices and nothing would have changed, it was April/May by the time we knew the full scope of the new direction the game was headed in. Nothing we did would have changed anything at that point in the cycle.
As far as putting the blame on the devs, like I mentioned above about the whole normal circumstances angle, devs would share in the blame under normal circumstances. These were anything but normal circumstances. This was terrible decision making by people paid very well to make good decisions. I can't reasonably put much, if any, blame at the feet of the dev team when they proved the year before they were more than capable of making a solid game. Maybe they didn't have the right personnel in some places to pull this type of game engine off, but even then, someone else is paid to make sure the right people are in place. Even that's a stretch though, as now we're making assumptions based on zero inside knowledge that this team was lacking in any areas.
I'm sorry, but in my eyes, this whole turn of events after Live 10's release right up until and shortly after the cancellation of Elite 11, falls entirely on the higher ups who seemed to have made one grossly miscalculated mistake after another. And continue to do so with this latest rumour of the mass layoff.
# 45
JerzeyReign @ 10/29/10 02:19 AM
You dudes are comical.... who cares who makes the basketball game, its about the quality of the game... some of you take time out of your "busy" schedule to bash EA and its really pathetic... moving the franchise out of CANADA and into the UNITED STATES may HELP the franchise rather than hurt it... but then again none of this has been confirmed... I'm glad I'm not a gaming nerd yet where news like this bothers me
|
|||||||||||||
|
. Well some of you guys act like moving the game to USA wont actually benefit the franchise. Yeah EA Canada is doing alot of things right. Basketball is just not one of them.
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
I guess, the team switch confirms cancellation? lol. How can a team that's never worked on a game before finish by march?
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
I don't think EA is panicking like the way people on the boards do.
Its a loss, they probably accepted it and able to move on. You win some you lose some. They are trying to tap casual games
With peripherals like kinect, wii, and move, they can do that now!
So yeah, I don't think they're freaking out at all.
I think it was just cut throat business
If you told me, I was to lose 60 million dollars one year, and gain an steady 70 million, possibly MORE over the next few years, I would take it. Who wouldn't? Its one loss vs the opportunity for more
Madden is dumbed down on purpose so people can hail mary all game, because as you know, not many people understand the true fundamentals of football. I don't
but then again, I don't play football games, but I have a few gal pals that do(and don't understand football quite exactly)
that's what they want
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
Not saying this was the case for EA Canada, but I don't believe it to be a 100% tried and true formula.
# 53
Boilerbuzz @ 10/29/10 10:36 AM
|
|||||||||||||
|
1. Even if you played the demo one time, the problems should have been quite apparent. Since you admittedly stated you didn't play it often, how can you make the assessment that it would have been good enough to try? Because NHL and FIFA was good? It was that line of thinking that started them on the path that lead ultimately to their failure.
2. Ever consider that putting development of the game in a culture more in tuned with basketball COULD help it. Not saying it will, mind you, as Florida is a football crazy state, yet Madden still doesn't know a front from a coverage... But the chances are good.
3. Finally, EAC has had the Live series from the get go. In MY opinion, there were elements of the game that were great representation of the game. But there were many that were FAR from it. In all that time, the dev team, it seems, never even attempted to address these elements. So in MY opinion, while Live 10 was the biggest step forward I'd seen in a long time, EAC's version of basketball was a failure. When competition came along, the numbers showed as much. In short, they had years to get it right, and they didn't. It was time to move on.
So why should you be disappointed at all? There is no basis for it.
# 54
Boilerbuzz @ 10/29/10 10:41 AM
|
|||||||||||||
|
From what I experienced, there were guys there with "enough" exposure to the NBA to advance the title past the point where it was. Of course, this is in my opinion.
Why that didn't happen is not something I can answer. But there was enough feedback from this community alone to give them the idea that they weren't doing "enough" to get past the point of no return with the consumer. This tells me someone "pulling the strings" just could not grasp why their was such failure from a sales standpoint.
Then again, I also think Live 10 was given more credit than it deserved. IMO it simply incorporated 2k-style elements into Live '09's core gameplay.
There was not enough NBA authenticity, and this is where EA lost all touch with its consumer base, something I see that has been a problem with Tiburon for a while now and their football franchise.
Why that didn't happen is not something I can answer. But there was enough feedback from this community alone to give them the idea that they weren't doing "enough" to get past the point of no return with the consumer. This tells me someone "pulling the strings" just could not grasp why their was such failure from a sales standpoint.
Then again, I also think Live 10 was given more credit than it deserved. IMO it simply incorporated 2k-style elements into Live '09's core gameplay.
There was not enough NBA authenticity, and this is where EA lost all touch with its consumer base, something I see that has been a problem with Tiburon for a while now and their football franchise.
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
I am going to get in trouble for what I'm about to say, but I really don't care because I'm bothered enough to say it anyways. The ignorance from some of you on here is incredible. That whole stereotype about Americans not being able to see past their own borders, is unfortunately in full effect in this thread. Hate to break it to you guys, but in cities like Toronto and Vancouver, basketball is HUGE. Is it as big as in Florida or California? No, obviously. But in Canada, with the diversity in our population which is especially true when it comes to the cities I mentioned above, having guys "exposed" to the game of basketball is not the issue. Anyone suggesting that is flat out ignorant.
I don't know the makeup of the dev team working on the Live series, as far as where they're all from and whatnot, but I seriously doubt that what they're lacking is knowledge of the game. Further to that, what dev team has former high level athletes working on it that are making a significant contribution to the game they're working on? I know Littman is a former professional goalie in hockey and I'm sure there's other teams that have some semblance of staff members that played at relatively high levels, but this mean anything in the grand scheme of things? If you're honest with yourself, you'll realize that's not the case. I will point again to the FIFA example, which is developed by EA Canada, in a country that routinely trails countries a fraction of it's size in the world rankings. It obviously doesn't hamper that team very much but even if they felt they were lacking in any area, they have the power to go out and hire whomever they feel necessary to improve the knowledge of whatever sports game they're working on.
At the end of the day, these dev teams are largely made up of fans of the sport they're working on. Some are bigger fans then others but I guarantee that the type of staff that 2K have and EA Canada had working on their respective basketball titles are very similar. So why does one game consistently out-perform the other? It all comes down to the direction these teams get from the higher ups. 2K has a different corporate direction than EA does, obviously. 2K has been more sim than arcade (though it's not to say it's totally sim) for as long as I can remember where EA in the past has tailored their game more to the common fan, though it still had many sim elements. Remember the last gen of sports games, especially near the end of that generation of consoles? How sim were EA's hockey and soccer titles? Everyone would agree that they couldn't be described as games for hardcore fans of the sport. 2K's hockey title and Konami's soccer title were chosen by the hardcore as far as last-gen goes. Yet, a year or so after these consoles came out, EA changed their corporate M.O. with these titles and over time, both the NHL series and FIFA series incorporated more sim elements every year and became the industry leading games they are today.
The Live series was slower to fall under this new corporate direction but the moment it did, in one and a half year's time, Wang and Co. turned the game into a very respectable and solid playing sim, culminating in Live 10 being preferred by quite a few people over 2K10. The game, with this new direction from above, became something it struggled to be since the jump to the new consoles. Yet, sales lagged behind (major trust issues from consumers, obviously) the suits panicked and went in yet another new direction. They jumped the gun. We will never know but I feel very confident that if Live 11 ever saw the light of day, with Wang and Co. allowed to continue down the path they started at the end of Live 09, it would be close to if not on par with 2K11, strictly from a gameplay perspective.
Bottom line, it comes down to the what game does the corporation want made. This dev team proved they're very capable but had the rug pulled out from under it by the decision-makers. Those decision-makers are at fault here, not the dev team. And it certainly has nothing to do with WHERE the dev team is located, otherwise Madden would be amazing (it's not) and the last gen NHL 2K series would be terrible (which it wasn't, despite it being made by Americans, not Canadians). Both Madden and the 2K hockey series are where they are because of what their respective corporations wanted them to be, and EA's basketball game is where it is because of the same reason.
I don't know the makeup of the dev team working on the Live series, as far as where they're all from and whatnot, but I seriously doubt that what they're lacking is knowledge of the game. Further to that, what dev team has former high level athletes working on it that are making a significant contribution to the game they're working on? I know Littman is a former professional goalie in hockey and I'm sure there's other teams that have some semblance of staff members that played at relatively high levels, but this mean anything in the grand scheme of things? If you're honest with yourself, you'll realize that's not the case. I will point again to the FIFA example, which is developed by EA Canada, in a country that routinely trails countries a fraction of it's size in the world rankings. It obviously doesn't hamper that team very much but even if they felt they were lacking in any area, they have the power to go out and hire whomever they feel necessary to improve the knowledge of whatever sports game they're working on.
At the end of the day, these dev teams are largely made up of fans of the sport they're working on. Some are bigger fans then others but I guarantee that the type of staff that 2K have and EA Canada had working on their respective basketball titles are very similar. So why does one game consistently out-perform the other? It all comes down to the direction these teams get from the higher ups. 2K has a different corporate direction than EA does, obviously. 2K has been more sim than arcade (though it's not to say it's totally sim) for as long as I can remember where EA in the past has tailored their game more to the common fan, though it still had many sim elements. Remember the last gen of sports games, especially near the end of that generation of consoles? How sim were EA's hockey and soccer titles? Everyone would agree that they couldn't be described as games for hardcore fans of the sport. 2K's hockey title and Konami's soccer title were chosen by the hardcore as far as last-gen goes. Yet, a year or so after these consoles came out, EA changed their corporate M.O. with these titles and over time, both the NHL series and FIFA series incorporated more sim elements every year and became the industry leading games they are today.
The Live series was slower to fall under this new corporate direction but the moment it did, in one and a half year's time, Wang and Co. turned the game into a very respectable and solid playing sim, culminating in Live 10 being preferred by quite a few people over 2K10. The game, with this new direction from above, became something it struggled to be since the jump to the new consoles. Yet, sales lagged behind (major trust issues from consumers, obviously) the suits panicked and went in yet another new direction. They jumped the gun. We will never know but I feel very confident that if Live 11 ever saw the light of day, with Wang and Co. allowed to continue down the path they started at the end of Live 09, it would be close to if not on par with 2K11, strictly from a gameplay perspective.
Bottom line, it comes down to the what game does the corporation want made. This dev team proved they're very capable but had the rug pulled out from under it by the decision-makers. Those decision-makers are at fault here, not the dev team. And it certainly has nothing to do with WHERE the dev team is located, otherwise Madden would be amazing (it's not) and the last gen NHL 2K series would be terrible (which it wasn't, despite it being made by Americans, not Canadians). Both Madden and the 2K hockey series are where they are because of what their respective corporations wanted them to be, and EA's basketball game is where it is because of the same reason.
I could care less about what you think about a few people's statements in here, but you're essentially using a generalizing conversation to start your diatribe yourself.
That said, I could care less who made it, NBA Live this gen has been nothing short of a full size disappointment from broken promises to broken patches.
Pick any example you want to pick, and regardless of whatever the location is, whatever is going on at EAC wasn't working with basketball fans in general.
Direction or not, the disaster was seen coming 10 miles away by the fans, dont tell me the decision makers couldn't feel which way the wind was blowing as well.
That said, I could care less who made it, NBA Live this gen has been nothing short of a full size disappointment from broken promises to broken patches.
Pick any example you want to pick, and regardless of whatever the location is, whatever is going on at EAC wasn't working with basketball fans in general.
Direction or not, the disaster was seen coming 10 miles away by the fans, dont tell me the decision makers couldn't feel which way the wind was blowing as well.
# 60
LingeringRegime @ 10/29/10 01:36 PM
If this is indeed true, I really feel for the guys that got laid off at EA Canada. First of all, I don't blame them for Elite 11 since they didn't get the proper time to really make it a quality product.
Tiburon??? Seriously?
Peter Moore seems to be incompetent for this job. Perhaps he should step down and bow out before this gets uglier.
Tiburon??? Seriously?
Peter Moore seems to be incompetent for this job. Perhaps he should step down and bow out before this gets uglier.
Post A Comment
This thread has been closed for new comments.
Working...