PDA

View Full Version : NCAA Football 12 Blog: Web Improvements



cdj
05-25-2011, 04:26 PM
EA SPORTS has posted a blog detailing the web improvements coming to NCAA Football 12 (http://www.ea.com/ncaa-football/blog/web-improvements). Designer Ben Haumiller breaks down Super Sim (play your games online!), the ability to advance Online Dynasty Weeks on the web and more.

After reading Ben's blog, weigh in with your thoughts with The Gaming Tailgate community. Will you utilize either feature?

Hey Everyone, Ben Haumiller back to talk more in depth about what you can expect when you take your Online Dynasty to the web in NCAA Football 12.

As we’ve already announced, the two biggest additions to the Dynasty web experience this year are the ability to advance the week from the web and the ability to use the new Super Sim app to play your games vs. CPU opponents. However, before we get into those I wanted to take a moment and clear up a couple of misconceptions that have surfaced since Monday’s blog. First is that you do not have to pay to access the Online Dynasty website. The site itself, and everything you could do last year continues to be free to use. Recruiting online, writing your Dynasty Wire stories, email alerts, stats/standings, etc. are all there for you to use simply by being a member of an Online Dynasty. Also, while access to Advance Week and Super Sim from the web do each come at a price of $2.99 it’s important to note that this is a onetime fee for the life NCAA Football 12. If you purchase access to Super Sim and participate in 20 different Online Dynasties over the course of your time playing NCAA Football 12, you will be able to Super Sim games in every one of those Dynasties. There is also a free 7 day trial for you to check out the Super Sim app for yourself and see what it’s all about before making the decision on purchasing access for the life of the game.

If you are the commish of a bunch of different Dynasties you will be able to advance the week in every one of them. Also, you are not required to purchase a commissioner bundle to be the commissioner of an Online Dynasty. You can still be the commissioner of one Online Dynasty without purchasing any PDLC.

Now that all of that is out of the way, let’s get on to the new stuff.

Goal for this year’s web updates

As I mentioned in Monday’s blog, the goal of the Online Dynasty website is to allow you the ability to access and participate in your Online Dynasties “anywhere, anytime”. Last year was a first step towards that goal with the ability to recruit online, create stories for the Dynasty Wire, sign up for Dynasty email alerts, view stats/standings/polls, etc. This year was another big step towards the goal by allowing you to participate in dynasty games as well as run the simulations that need to happen each week in order to move on to the next week of the dynasty.

With the addition of Super Sim and Advance Week we have reached the point where if you are scheduled to play a CPU team in the current week, you can complete your tasks for that week without ever having to boot up your console. Let’s flash forward to launch day. You and your friends get the game, join the same Online Dynasty, and get through week 1 on the first day. Now its day two and you and your friends are going to spend all day at work/class. Now you can fly through the weeks of your Dynasty (while on break or in between class of course) to get to those human vs. human battles when you get home at the end of the day. You will be cruising through seasons faster than ever.

Super Sim

Now it’s time to play your game. Let’s run through the experience:

http://ll-100.ea.com/cem/u/f/GPO/easports.com/vignette/NCAABlogImages/WebImprovements5-25-2011/img1.jpg

Here we see a Super Sim game already in progress. Starting from the top you will see your basic scoreboard information (i.e. teams, rank, score by quarter, possession indication, etc.). You will notice that there’s no play clock. That’s because you have all the time you need in between plays to get your personnel just how you want them for the next play, your CPU opponent has all the time in the world, so there’s no rush. You will also see on the right side an Options button and a Skip Ahead button.

Options allows you to turn on/off the background music that plays during the game as well as the SFX that play during specific events in the game.
Skip Ahead gives you the option to advance to a later point in the game (next possession, next quarter, end of game).
You do also have the ability to pause the current game and pick it up later. Simply close the app and your game will be saved off in its current state and can be picked up and finished later. You might be wondering if you can start the game on the web and then finish it on the console (or go from console to web). The answer is, not this year, so if you try this you will find yourself starting the game over from scratch and having to explain your restart warning to the rest of your Dynasty.

Moving on, we next come to the “action window” of the app. Here you will see the events of the game unfold. You can sim the currently selected play and view the results, access your playbook to call your own play, or ask the coach for a new play to run. Let’s take a look at the Playbook option first:

http://ll-100.ea.com/cem/u/f/GPO/easports.com/vignette/NCAABlogImages/WebImprovements5-25-2011/img2.jpg

Here we see LSU’s entire offensive playbook (Note: Custom playbooks are not available from web Super Sim), I can move through the formations, find the play I want and either select to sim the current play from here, or select the play to then make personnel changes. I’m not ready to sim yet, so let’s select a play:

http://ll-100.ea.com/cem/u/f/GPO/easports.com/vignette/NCAABlogImages/WebImprovements5-25-2011/img3.jpg

Here we see the play I selected, and the current personnel on the field for that play. I can highlight any player on the field to get a stat breakdown of their performance in the game. Here I’m highlighting the QB and can see key stats as well as his current fatigue level. If I want to make a sub for the current play all I need to do is click the highlighted player to get a look at that position’s depth chart:

http://ll-100.ea.com/cem/u/f/GPO/easports.com/vignette/NCAABlogImages/WebImprovements5-25-2011/img4.jpg

All I need to do here is click on the player I want to sub in, and I can make the change right there without having to mess with my depth chart. This is a one play sub only, so if you are looking to make more long term changes you will want to head down to the depth chart (which we will do in a minute).

Once I have my players set, it’s time to run the play. Hit that Simulate Play Now button and get your result:

http://ll-100.ea.com/cem/u/f/GPO/easports.com/vignette/NCAABlogImages/WebImprovements5-25-2011/img5.jpg

This window will not only show the basic result of the play, but on events like sacks, interceptions, touchdowns , etc. you will get a special animation and VO from Brad Nessler

http://ll-100.ea.com/cem/u/f/GPO/easports.com/vignette/NCAABlogImages/WebImprovements5-25-2011/img6.jpg

The next set of features are where you can edit your depth chart, follow the current drive, view the scoring summery, and check out player and team stats. Let’s start with the depth chart:

http://ll-100.ea.com/cem/u/f/GPO/easports.com/vignette/NCAABlogImages/WebImprovements5-25-2011/img7.jpg

Pretty straight forward; using a simple drag and drop interface, you can shift around your depth chart for each position. Auto-sub Settings allows you to set your sub in/out frequency, and you can also utilize mass subs to get your 2nd string some work in a blow out.

Next we have the Drive Summary, which gives you a nice graphical representation of what’s happened during the drive and where you currently are on the field.

http://ll-100.ea.com/cem/u/f/GPO/easports.com/vignette/NCAABlogImages/WebImprovements5-25-2011/img8.jpg

Player Stats and Team stats are just what you think, so rather than bore you with details like letting you know that the number of 1st downs are tracked I’ll just show you a few shots of the web stats and then the console stats for that same game so that you can see the results are exactly the same:

http://ll-100.ea.com/cem/u/f/GPO/easports.com/vignette/NCAABlogImages/WebImprovements5-25-2011/img9.jpg

http://ll-100.ea.com/cem/u/f/GPO/easports.com/vignette/NCAABlogImages/WebImprovements5-25-2011/img10.jpg

http://ll-100.ea.com/cem/u/f/GPO/easports.com/vignette/NCAABlogImages/WebImprovements5-25-2011/img11.jpg

http://ll-100.ea.com/cem/u/f/GPO/easports.com/vignette/NCAABlogImages/WebImprovements5-25-2011/img12.jpg

http://ll-100.ea.com/cem/u/f/GPO/easports.com/vignette/NCAABlogImages/WebImprovements5-25-2011/img13.jpg


Advance Week

The Advance Week option does exactly what it says, it advances you to the next week in your Dynasty. While that might seem trivial at first, this was actually a tremendous technical undertaking. Each time the week is advanced all of the CPU vs. CPU games need to be simmed, the Top 25 needs to be updated, the Heisman and other awards need to have their favorites updated, stories need to be generated for the ESPN headlines, recruiting results for every team and every prospect need to be processed and updated, Players of the Week named, Conference Standings updated, coach contracts updated, stats and records updated…, the list goes on and on. One click of a button for you launches many different events that need to get moved to the server in order for this to happen.

What this means for you commissioners is that once you get that email alert letting you know the week is ready to advance you can hop on the site, click that button, and keep everyone in the Dynasty moving without having to wait to get home to fire up the console, which will hopefully increase the peace between hostile Dynasty members and their globetrotting commissioners.

That wraps up the web improvements for this year. Check back tomorrow as I’ll go in depth on the new Custom Conference feature.

ArkHogs
05-25-2011, 04:55 PM
Nice! This makes me want to play in an OD..

ram29jackson
05-25-2011, 05:03 PM
this is odd, although i pretty much understand they are trying to tap another market with this feature. trying to hook the fantasy crowd. but doubt the game has enough logic in it to really be that good a solid sim exclusive type.

beartide06
05-25-2011, 05:14 PM
While I may not use this much if at all, I will still most likely purchase the package just in case and also to commish more than one OD. The main reason I would use this is for the advance the week option online. During school in the fall, there is a chance I may be bored in between classes and might want to sim a game as well. Nice little feature, but nothing amazing for me.

CLW
05-25-2011, 05:38 PM
The no custom playbooks thing is kinda a downer but I understand that could get VERY complicated. I doubt I would EVER use the super sim game feature. However, I will DEFINITELY use the advance OD from the web tool. That will save 1/2 day blocks several times a week with my OD which could add season(s) to our pace.

Pig Bomb
05-25-2011, 06:38 PM
I may play one solo dyanasty in coach mode just for this feature...focus on the fun of recruiting and basically play everying at work on my PC.... it's like bonus gaming time the wife never has to know about!!

DariusLock
05-25-2011, 06:58 PM
I may play one solo dyanasty in coach mode just for this feature...focus on the fun of recruiting and basically play everying at work on my PC.... it's like bonus gaming time the wife never has to know about!!

Nice idea.

hillbill
05-25-2011, 07:58 PM
I may play one solo dyanasty in coach mode just for this feature...focus on the fun of recruiting and basically play everying at work on my PC.... it's like bonus gaming time the wife never has to know about!!

Ha ha. True.

SmoothPancakes
05-25-2011, 10:07 PM
Alright, now that I'm no longer dealing with tornado warned storm after tornado warned storm passing through for over three or four hours straight, I can finally say I am really looking forward to this. The ability to play and get in games that I may not have anytime to do so playing on the console, and then advance each week with the simple click of a button and have the next week ready and waiting for me when I get home, etc. These two new features are very obviously not for everyone, but for those who will or wish to take advantage of them, they are some great additions that will help get through dynasty seasons faster.

I OU a Beatn
05-25-2011, 11:27 PM
$6 to use features that are already included in the game? Good thing I don't play online dynasty, that wouldn't sit well with me at all.

souljahbill
05-26-2011, 07:55 AM
$6 to use features that are already included in the game? Good thing I don't play online dynasty, that wouldn't sit well with me at all.

It's not included, per se. Everything is going to be hosted on their servers as opposed to your PS3. That's essentially what you're paying for.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

JBHuskers
05-26-2011, 09:20 AM
Yeah basically this is expensive to maintain, so $6 isn't all that out of the ordinary.

I OU a Beatn
05-26-2011, 09:29 AM
Portal 2 allows for very similar PC/PS3 access and they don't charge a fee. Like I said, it's not going to bother me a bit because I don't play online dynasty, but if I did and wanted those features, it would be annoying that I would have to pay an additional fee for something that should be included in the game's price.

gschwendt
05-26-2011, 09:31 AM
Portal 2 allows for very similar PC/PS3 access and they don't charge a fee. Like I said, it's not going to bother me a bit because I don't play online dynasty, but if I did and wanted those features, it would be annoying that I would have to pay an additional fee for something that should be included in the game's price.
Quite a different situation here... once we're given the green light to discuss these features, I'll explain further but did want to interject with that thought.

I OU a Beatn
05-26-2011, 09:42 AM
It was just an example. Besides, that will just lead me into another subject, one that I do care a lot about and don't like. If they're hosting that information on their servers, then how come our online games are played via P2P?

There's other games that provide dedicated servers and other features that are very heavy in development cost, but they don't require users to pay for them. I couldn't care less about this particular situation as I'll never use it anyway, but it's a troubling trend to see developers nickle and diming their customers.

morsdraconis
05-26-2011, 11:07 AM
If the cost of this stuff makes it where they actually have a decent server for their Dynasty Wire stuff, then awesome. All the web improvements stuff is great, but if the website is as slow as last year, it's pointless.

CLW
05-26-2011, 11:49 AM
Wait is it $6 or $2.99 or both? If both what are the differences?

Paakaa10
05-26-2011, 11:52 AM
Wait is it $6 or $2.99 or both? If both what are the differences?

$2.99 for SuperSim on Web
$2.99 for Advance Week on Web
====
$6.00 (roughly) for both

gschwendt
05-26-2011, 11:53 AM
Wait is it $6 or $2.99 or both? If both what are the differences?

$2.99 each or $6.99 for both plus ability to commish five dynasties.

souljahbill
05-26-2011, 12:00 PM
$2.99 each or $6.99 for both plus ability to commish five dynasties.

Glad you added that bit at the end. I was thinking it would be cheaper to just buy them separately ($5.98 vs. $6.99) but the 4 extra ODs justifies the extra dollar.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

gschwendt
05-26-2011, 12:01 PM
Glad you added that bit at the end. I was thinking it would be cheaper to just buy them separately ($5.98 vs. $6.99) but the 4 extra ODs justifies the extra dollar.
Especially considering that alone was $10 last year I believe.

CLW
05-26-2011, 12:17 PM
$2.99 each or $6.99 for both plus ability to commish five dynasties.

Gotcha. I hate this nickel and dime stuff though. I'd rather EA/gaming companies just raise the price to $70 and give me everything over this garbage.

coogrfan
05-26-2011, 12:23 PM
Especially considering that alone was $10 last year I believe.

IIRC at launch it was 3 for $10 or 5 for $15.

Edit: confirmed.

http://forums.allgames.com/showthread.php?t=28727

Paakaa10
05-26-2011, 12:31 PM
Gotcha. I hate this nickel and dime stuff though. I'd rather EA/gaming companies just raise the price to $70 and give me everything over this garbage.

Except then you'd get the opposite side complaining where people are pissed at spending $10 more for things they don't ever plan on using.

That'd be an interesting poll for video gaming in general; would you rather pay more up-front and have everything in a game or pay less and then add on extra features à la carte?

Koach Vonner
05-26-2011, 02:23 PM
Except then you'd get the opposite side complaining where people are pissed at spending $10 more for things they don't ever plan on using.

That'd be an interesting poll for video gaming in general; would you rather pay more up-front and have everything in a game or pay less and then add on extra features à la carte?

That would be a great poll!! I'd rather do the add ons. Simply because I don't care about all the paying stuff. I just want to play in a Dynasty. I don't have to advance it. I'm not a commish. Plus in all honestly. My boys and I play most of our games at each others house str8 up head to head. We play in the coaches office and with our athletes too in the locker room. It's also great as a recruiting tool. So for me, I don't get upset at all the paying money stuff.

Paakaa10
05-26-2011, 02:30 PM
I knew I'd seen this somewhere; gaming studio THQ decided to offer the à la carte option for MX vs. ATV alive which released on May 10th, 2011. Here's a write-up on it from PastaPadre:


Just about four months ago THQ revealed plans to try a new pricing model that would begin with the next iteration of the MX off-road racing series. The idea is to release new games at a lower entry point ($30 or $40) and then push downloadable content to expand the experience. The base game may not be fully featured therefore leaving it to individual consumers to choose what is important to them if more is desired.

MX vs ATV: Alive is slated to release on May 10th for $39.99. The breakdown of what will be provided in the retail package and what will be offered as downloadable content is yet to be revealed but will be critical in assessing value. Additional tracks would seem like an obvious one for DLC but don’t be surprised if even online play requires additional payment.

THQ believes that a lower price will make the game more appealing. In turn more consumers purchasing the game means there will be more who are subjected to the availability of downloadable content. The question is whether the relatively small percentage of those who do purchase DLC will make up for or exceed the revenue lost by dropping the price of the game.

Whether this pricing model would be applied to licensed titles such as UFC or WWE remains unlikely even if successful. Companies have a strong desire to protect their brand image and releasing at a reduced price is commonly seen as damaging the value of the brand as a whole. Still the potential for this model to be adopted with less popular or fringe sports titles certainly makes the returns worth monitoring.

Link: http://www.pastapadre.com/2011/01/29/thq-pricing-experiment-begins-in-may

And a follow-up article also from Pasta about how the PSN outage ended up hurting the THQ pricing experiment: http://www.pastapadre.com/2011/05/09/thq-will-take-huge-hit-due-to-psn-outage

I don't think any results have been posted about whether or not this initiative was successful on the Xbox 360 and how many people decided to add-on to the base game through DLC.

I OU a Beatn
05-26-2011, 02:30 PM
Gotcha. I hate this nickel and dime stuff though. I'd rather EA/gaming companies just raise the price to $70 and give me everything over this garbage.

Exactly. It's a snake in the bush way of getting people to pay extra for features that shouldn't require an extra cost.

For the record, I don't mean EA...I mean EVERYONE who does it, which is becoming more and more developers all the time.

CLW
05-26-2011, 02:37 PM
Except then you'd get the opposite side complaining where people are pissed at spending $10 more for things they don't ever plan on using.

That'd be an interesting poll for video gaming in general; would you rather pay more up-front and have everything in a game or pay less and then add on extra features à la carte?


I knew I'd seen this somewhere; gaming studio THQ decided to offer the à la carte option for MX vs. ATV alive which released on May 10th, 2011. Here's a write-up on it from PastaPadre:


Link: http://www.pastapadre.com/2011/01/29/thq-pricing-experiment-begins-in-may

And a follow-up article also from Pasta about how the PSN outage ended up hurting the THQ pricing experiment: http://www.pastapadre.com/2011/05/09/thq-will-take-huge-hit-due-to-psn-outage

I don't think any results have been posted about whether or not this initiative was successful on the Xbox 360 and how many people decided to add-on to the base game through DLC.


Exactly. It's a snake in the bush way of getting people to pay extra for features that shouldn't require an extra cost.

For the record, I don't mean EA...I mean EVERYONE who does it, which is becoming more and more developers all the time.

I'm sure some people would complain. Perhaps the solution is to sell a "cheaper"/"watered down" version of the game and a "more expensive"/"EVERYTHING included" game and let the consumer decide what he/she wants.

It just ticks me off that I have to go to every site to see what the exact pre-order special is and then decide whether I want to miss out on addition X or addition Y and then have to pay $2 for Z $5 for A etc....

I'm actually surprised this DLC thing has worked I would have expected the VAST majority of people to NEVER buy DLC and in fact get pissed and just not buy the product at all.

Paakaa10
05-26-2011, 02:40 PM
Exactly. It's a snake in the bush way of getting people to pay extra for features that shouldn't require an extra cost.

Without going into too much detail, the technology behind SuperSim on the Web and Advance OD on the Web is not inexpensive. In order for the SuperSim to work, an entire web interface needed to be created to allow that. It's not as though SuperSim that we have in the console game could simply be ported over to a web interface.

In order for Advance OD on the Web to work, servers had to be set up which would allow the simulation to play out all of the games remaining in that week; even if you have 12 user games in a given Online Dynasy week, that still leaves around 48 games to simulate and simulate in a logical manner so that the results aren't all screwed up. Doing this from the console is something that is built in; creating the interface and connectivity to access the simulation from a computer is a different beast.

I'm no more of a fan of adding cost to games than anybody else, don't get me wrong; I probably won't be buying any of these DLC add-ons personally because they don't fit into my user profile of how I engage the game. But $6 total to have access to these two features is a pretty small price to pay if you want that convenience. And that's what they are: a convenience. You can still SuperSim games on console and advance the OD on your console.

gschwendt
05-26-2011, 02:46 PM
To expand further on what Brian said, the simulation all takes place on EA's servers... none of it happens on your PC or cell phone. You hit the "advance OD" button and then can walk away. What it essentially comes down to is that the servers that will run these simulations will have to have the specs to meet multiple consoles (ie run multiple sims) at the same time.

I equate it to an added feature on a car... for example the ability to start your car with keyless entry. It's far from necessary, you can still start your car without it, but you pay for the convenience of the add-on.

Kwizzy
05-26-2011, 02:46 PM
Without going into too much detail, the technology behind SuperSim on the Web and Advance OD on the Web is not inexpensive. In order for the SuperSim to work, an entire web interface needed to be created to allow that. It's not as though SuperSim that we have in the console game could simply be ported over to a web interface.

In order for Advance OD on the Web to work, servers had to be set up which would allow the simulation to play out all of the games remaining in that week; even if you have 12 user games in a given Online Dynasy week, that still leaves around 48 games to simulate and simulate in a logical manner so that the results aren't all screwed up. Doing this from the console is something that is built in; creating the interface and connectivity to access the simulation from a computer is a different beast.

I'm no more of a fan of adding cost to games than anybody else, don't get me wrong; I probably won't be buying any of these DLC add-ons personally because they don't fit into my user profile of how I engage the game. But $6 total to have access to these two features is a pretty small price to pay if you want that convenience. And that's what they are: a convenience. You can still SuperSim games on console and advance the OD on your console.

Well said and makes sense to me. I am actually on the opposite end of the spectrum from Paakaa as far as my use of the game goes. I will most definitely buy the bundle that allows me to commish multiple dynasties and advance/super sim online.

Paakaa10
05-26-2011, 03:10 PM
I equate it to an added feature on a car... for example the ability to start your car with keyless entry. It's far from necessary, you can still start your car without it, but you pay for the convenience of the add-on.

Nice analogy; would've been much easier to say than all that I typed out haha.

JBHuskers
05-26-2011, 03:28 PM
To expand further on what Brian said, the simulation all takes place on EA's servers... none of it happens on your PC or cell phone. You hit the "advance OD" button and then can walk away. What it essentially comes down to is that the servers that will run these simulations will have to have the specs to meet multiple consoles (ie run multiple sims) at the same time.

I equate it to an added feature on a car... for example the ability to start your car with keyless entry. It's far from necessary, you can still start your car without it, but you pay for the convenience of the add-on.

It is just an easy target for those who love to jump on EA to use.

I OU a Beatn
05-26-2011, 03:48 PM
Still not buying it. Epic Games issued dedicated servers for MILLIONS of people, and they're a much smaller publisher than EA is. If EA expects me to believe that web interfaces for a fraction of that number cost more than dedicated servers, then I'm going to need a lot more convincing.

In the same logic, do I get to pay less for the game because I don't want to play Road to Glory? Mascot Games? You can't argue that. If EA expects me to pay for additional features, wouldn't it be correct of me to expect to pay less for features I don't want?

It also has nothing to do with jumping on EA. EA is just one of a number of publishers that is doing this and I don't appreciate it from any of the other publishers, either. Why should I have to pay for DLC that is already included on the disc, like a very large number of games are doing nowadays? I think it's stupid.

CLW
05-26-2011, 04:00 PM
To expand further on what Brian said, the simulation all takes place on EA's servers... none of it happens on your PC or cell phone. You hit the "advance OD" button and then can walk away. What it essentially comes down to is that the servers that will run these simulations will have to have the specs to meet multiple consoles (ie run multiple sims) at the same time.

I equate it to an added feature on a car... for example the ability to start your car with keyless entry. It's far from necessary, you can still start your car without it, but you pay for the convenience of the add-on.


Nice analogy; would've been much easier to say than all that I typed out haha.

Except MOST people don't pay X for the car and then pay Y for the add on later. Rather you pick the car you want and drive away with all the features you wanted for Z price or at least have the option of buying the car with all the bells and whistles up front for Z price.

To me its an annoyance more than anything. Just give me the OPTION of buying the damn game with EVERYTHING pre-loaded on it ready to go. Call it a "Collector's Edition" or some other nonsense and make the price fair (i.e. $60 + Cost of DLC - some discount to make it a small "deal" versus buying all of the DLC seperately)

I will say this EA better be 100% sure that these online advances work and work properly. People will be livid if they pay more $ for this feature as DLC and then there is some weird bug where the sims are all screwy (think tons of upsets; stats completely out of whack; etc....) or it does something else crazy like count the game twice or gives teams Ls that should have Ws or even worse cause ODs to lock up/crash.

cdj
05-26-2011, 04:26 PM
The difference between these items and typical DLC is that the cost goes towards the game being played, processed, simmed, etc. on a server - not the console. I know this is being called DLC or PDLC, but it's not downloadable content in the typical sense of attaining or unlocking maps, skins, etc. on the console.

The point that has not been brought to light enough is that should someone loan a copy of the game to a friend (or someone gets a copy from Redbox), said friend could start a one-man Online Dynasty, then pay for the DLC to allow them to advance weeks online and 'SuperSim' games online (recruiting online is free)....letting them have a PC version of NCAA Football 12 for $6.

Kwizzy
05-26-2011, 04:29 PM
Still not buying it. Epic Games issued dedicated servers for MILLIONS of people, and they're a much smaller publisher than EA is. If EA expects me to believe that web interfaces for a fraction of that number cost more than dedicated servers, then I'm going to need a lot more convincing.

In the same logic, do I get to pay less for the game because I don't want to play Road to Glory? Mascot Games? You can't argue that. If EA expects me to pay for additional features, wouldn't it be correct of me to expect to pay less for features I don't want?

It also has nothing to do with jumping on EA. EA is just one of a number of publishers that is doing this and I don't appreciate it from any of the other publishers, either. Why should I have to pay for DLC that is already included on the disc, like a very large number of games are doing nowadays? I think it's stupid.

No, try to buy a car without seatbelts or airbags sometime because you don't want them & let us know how that goes. The bottom line is EA has set a price for their base product. Anything else you can choose to pay for or not. Now, on things such as uniforms and such I completely agree with you, those things can and should be in the game at no added cost. Something that requires server space on the other hand, I understand.

Kwizzy
05-26-2011, 04:30 PM
The difference between these items and typical DLC is that the cost goes towards the game being played, processed, simmed, etc. on a server - not the console. I know this is being called DLC or PDLC, but it's not downloadable content in the typical sense of attaining or unlocking maps, skins, etc. on the console.

The point that has not been brought to light enough is that should someone loan a copy of the game to a friend (or someone gets a copy from Redbox), said friend could start a one-man Online Dynasty, then pay for the DLC to allow them to advance weeks online and 'SuperSim' games online (recruiting online is free)....letting them have a PC version of NCAA Football 12 for $6.

They'd need an online code too cdj to even start the online dynasty, so technically $26

I OU a Beatn
05-26-2011, 04:39 PM
No, try to buy a car without seatbelts or airbags sometime because you don't want them & let us know how that goes. The bottom line is EA has set a price for their base product. Anything else you can choose to pay for or not. Now, on things such as uniforms and such I completely agree with you, those things can and should be in the game at no added cost. Something that requires server space on the other hand, I understand.

Unless the ability to simulate your dynasty online has the potential to save your life(and is in fact required to be installed by the law), then that comparison is completely moot. Comparing a car to a video game is laughable to say the least.

Your last sentence is something I would understand if other developers didn't do the same thing for no extra cost. Look at Epic Games. They're implementing dedicated servers that have the ability to hold hundreds of thousands of players at once - that isn't cheap. But, you don't see them making you pay an additional fee for that feature.

Then you have other publishers like EA, that require you to pay extra for features that should be included in the price. If they're going to go to the model of paying for features, then they should have a bare bone game that everyone has access to for a certain price, and then you can upgrade from there with the features you want. It makes sense. How it is now, it's basically set up so you either pay for features on top of the price of the game(that includes things that I don't want) or you just don't get access to them. It's a lame practice and one that does absolutely nothing beneficial for the customers.

Kwizzy
05-26-2011, 04:51 PM
Unless the ability to simulate your dynasty online has the potential to save your life(and is in fact required to be installed by the law), then that comparison is completely moot. Comparing a car to a video game is laughable to say the least.

Your last sentence is something I would understand if other developers didn't do the same thing for no extra cost. Look at Epic Games. They're implementing dedicated servers that have the ability to hold hundreds of thousands of players at once - that isn't cheap. But, you don't see them making you pay an additional fee for that feature.

Then you have other publishers like EA, that require you to pay extra for features that should be included in the price. If they're going to go to the model of paying for features, then they should have a bare bone game that everyone has access to for a certain price, and then you can upgrade from there with the features you want. It makes sense. How it is now, it's basically set up so you either pay for features on top of the price of the game(that includes things that I don't want) or you just don't get access to them. It's a lame practice and one that does absolutely nothing beneficial for the customers.

ok, if you really wanna pick things apart lets go with... Air conditioning, reclining seats, power windows, etc.... The point is that these things arent necessary but it's impossible to find a new car without them anymore because manufacturers have decided that the majority of their consumers want these things in their base package. There is no getting around the fact that you will have to pay the price of the base car even if you don't want these things. EA has ensured that if you want to play a football video game, you must buy it from them, and you have to pay $60 for the base game (and they get to decide what goes into that base) and they can decide what they will consider options. It's just smart business and I personally am glad that they have decided that additional options can be had for a fee rather than including them in the base cost and charging everyone for it.

I OU a Beatn
05-26-2011, 04:56 PM
So...you're glad that you're paying $60 base price for a game that includes features that you wont use but are only given the option to pay an ADDITIONAL cost for features that you will use on top of the base price? I bet EA and the other developers that pull this really love you. :D

Kwizzy
05-26-2011, 05:01 PM
So...you're glad that you're paying $60 base price for a game that includes features that you wont use but are only given the option to pay an ADDITIONAL cost for features that you will use on top of the base price? I bet EA and the other developers that pull this really love you. :D

I'm not saying I'm happy about it, I'm saying that that's the way the world works. I don't run around feeling entitled to everything I want. If I was able to make my own game to have exactly what I want in it I would but I don't know how so I'm forced to buy a product that someone else offers & to do so, their asking price is $60 and inludes features A, B, & C. That's all I'm saying. My original response was to your argument that you should be able to take features out & pay less if they want to charge for added features.

I OU a Beatn
05-26-2011, 05:05 PM
I'm not saying I'm happy about it, I'm saying that that's the way the world works. I don't run around feeling entitled to everything I want. If I was able to make my own game to have exactly what I want in it I would but I don't know how so I'm forced to buy a product that someone else offers & to do so, their asking price is $60 and inludes features A, B, & C. That's all I'm saying. My original response was to your argument that you should be able to take features out & pay less if they want to charge for added features.

Like I said, there's no argument to that. If I'm given the option to pay for additional features, then in theory, I should be able to decide to forgo certain features and pay less. I'm well aware that it doesn't work that way, which is why it's ridiculous for them to charge extra for features that should be included in that base price. This trend only recently started, and it's not one that I'm too fond of. The only people it benefits are the publishers who thought up the stupid idea in the first place.

xGRIDIRONxGURUx
05-26-2011, 05:16 PM
well its a good thing you dont play dynasty right?

"E"

Kwizzy
05-26-2011, 05:43 PM
Like I said, there's no argument to that. If I'm given the option to pay for additional features, then in theory, I should be able to decide to forgo certain features and pay less. I'm well aware that it doesn't work that way, which is why it's ridiculous for them to charge extra for features that should be included in that base price. This trend only recently started, and it's not one that I'm too fond of. The only people it benefits are the publishers who thought up the stupid idea in the first place.

That's the wonderful thing about theories, they're perfect in reality but IRL you realize they' don't hold up. Reality is that if they didn't charge extra for these features then they wouldn't exist this year because somewhere along the line, someone justified the time they spent on this feature being paid for through the extra fee.

smace767
05-26-2011, 07:07 PM
My take on this.

Anything that is for sale is something that is available for consumers who want to get what that product/service provides. Its open to whoever wants it, whoever dont want or need it, dont get it.

Most people dont order and completely personalize a car purchase from the dealer. They pick the closest to what they want, out of whats on the lot. And most people do purchase addons(tint, rims, stereos, body kits ect..).

Sometimes the price point is meant as much to keep people out. If EA gave this service for free they would no doubt have to expand on the structure to support it. Everybody would try it. Even people that will play the game for a month and move on to something else. From a Business stand point EA has already determined that at 2.99, people who really want or need and use it will pay the 2.99.
Those who won't use it will pass and not use resources. Ea will know daily how many potential user those servers will cost.

No company, Epic, EA whoever is providing you anything for free. epics server costs are already rolled up in the development cost. Some answered their own questions. Epic and other companies development costs are fractions of EAs.

The flip side of EA not putting everything on the disc that cost 59.99 and charging for DLC. Is a company, EPIC or whoever. making a 49.99 game and not adding content but still charging 59.99. The same assumption that EA could add more, could be apply to another company leaving things out to maximize profit.

A companies number one goal is to make a profit. If charging for extra content expands the development and feature list so be it. Id rather have them offer DLC because maybe there is something i would like vs nothing. Then have them stop development once they hit there cost limits for whats on the disc.



Last point-Compare how much it cost to be entertain by other things you pay for. Movies, skating, alcohol, getting in a nightclub ect..

20 dynasty seasons is about 300 hours(15 hours per season) of entertainment at a cost of 59.99 plus tax. Spend 59.99 on entertainment on movies and that 59.99 gets you 15 hours worth of movies. The sports gaming market is already a value when you compare cost to entertain to the length it entertains you. In that sense, the disk is already a bargain. And 2.99 for a web based game is still.

Bottom line is EA has a product for sale. If you cant afford it, or dont want it, dont buy it. It wasnt marketed for you anyway.

morsdraconis
05-26-2011, 08:04 PM
And, yet another thread derailed by EA hate over DLC that one person arguing about won't even use or need because all they do is play retarded people online.

xGRIDIRONxGURUx
05-26-2011, 09:35 PM
refer to my above comment...

"well its a good thing you dont play dynasty right?" SMH

"E"

CLW
05-26-2011, 09:38 PM
And, yet another thread derailed by EA hate over DLC that one person arguing about won't even use or need because all they do is play retarded people online.

Considering the biggest/most of these "web improvements" are DLC/not free I don't think a discussion about the merits of DLC is exactly derailing the thread. Moreover, I think all of those who aren't DLC friendly haven't said we only dislike EA's DLC. Rather, I think its just a general dislike for the concept regardless of the company making the game.

I OU a Beatn
05-26-2011, 09:38 PM
And, yet another thread derailed by EA hate over DLC that one person arguing about won't even use or need because all they do is play retarded people online.

EA hate? How many times do I have to say "ANY publisher that does this is lame" before I get the point across? I couldn't care less who does it, it's lame. If Epic Games charged a fee to access dedicated servers, I'd bitch about that until I was blue in the face. I'm not someone who's going to complain about a company just because of their past games, nor am I someone who's going to praise a company for their past games.

The whole "he's just bitching to bitch about EA" thing is getting really old considering I've probably logged more games in the NCAA series than 90%+ of the people who even buy the game. If anyone has earned the right to bitch about EA, it's certainly me, and I'm not even doing that. I'm very simply saying that it's a ridiculous model to require customers to pay for certain features that should be included in the retail price. That goes for EA. That goes for Activision. That goes for Bethesda. That goes for Take Two. That goes for everyone.

There is no way I should be gimped features because I don't want to fork over extra money after I've already purchased my game. I should have ALL the features. It's one thing to release maps later and charge for them. Those maps took extra development costs and were more than likely developed after the game had already been released, so that's fine with me. What's not fine with me is the current trend of charging for stuff that's already on the disc. Several games have done this. You'll pay for an add on a couple weeks after release and download a like 4MB file. It's pretty obvious it was already on the disc in that case, so that's absolutely retarded.

I consider the web features to be the same. I realize it costs money for EA to do that, but that should've been figured into their development costs. Since we're all using car references, it's pretty much the same as buying a car for the same price as all the other cars, and then finding out you have to pay more to have brakes installed, or the engine put in, etc..

It's stupid.

Personally, I'd be happy if I could say one critical thing of EA(which is deserved in certain cases) without hearing a chorus of the inevitable "he just wants to bitch about EA" or similar statements. Every single critical statement I've made about EA/NCAA Football/any other developer is 100% legitimate and without bias. Contrary to popular belief, not everyone is going to agree with everything. You don't see me calling everyone who disagrees with me EA fanboys.

Jayrah
05-27-2011, 05:17 AM
Regardless, I'm willing to pay a little bit extra if they want to offer me "a little bit extra ability" to access my game from anywhere at any time, IF it's something I would use. Gotta be honest here, the game has a lot of "extra features" through the web that are completely free to us, and while we've come to "expect" these features, they aren't necessarily features we "deserve" for free. I mean, come on, not a whole lotta console games can be accessed via your cpu on web, and vice-versa. They could sell the game without this access to us and it would still be $59.99, so what's the incentive for them to put out that extra ability? $3 more for full access to pure game functionality basically on my phone through web is WELL worth it to me.

If it's not worth it to you... Ya know what? You're in the clear and don't have to pay it!

Otherwise here's the option: They'll jack up the price anywhere from $3-$6 and make it available to EVERYONE. Then those of us that don't need it would go CRAZY :mad:. The argument would be "I didn't ask for and don't need this option, why don't they take the price back to normal and make it DLC for those that WANT and NEED it and save me some $$$! This is ridiculous....blah blah!"

:D

And I know you'll say "well that's not true it should come with the game at that price because it's my right as a consumer to get the full product at the industry standard retail value just like everybody else (which is too high in my opinion anyway)."

But man that's like walking into McDonald's and asking for a Double Cheeseburger at the single Cheeseburger price, and saying "I know you have the ability to give me that extra patty because it's already made, so why should I have to pay for it? It's on the same sandwich..."

You donated a couple extra dollars to TGT for a couple extra features and to support the hard work that some ppl have put into the site setup and functionality.... but you didn't have to. Same concept. The option is yours to take advantage of....or not. Since you don't use the features that are being paid for, it seems as if the market value of their decision was geared towards you, so that you can get everything you would otherwise use out of the game, and not be charged extra for something that quite honestly, does you jack crap in how you experience the game. I would think you'd be totally on board with the decision to proceed the way they did for your benefit.

Jayrah
05-27-2011, 06:21 AM
By the way IOU, you may be interested to note that I do (as I think everyone here does) agree with your argument as it pertains to "in game" items and functionality. For example with Uniforms (the couple that at least for now have been deemed to be dlc), that's something that directly affects gameplay experience in game for only certain players, not to mention a major marketing/campaign point with enhanced presentation and specific team traditions that actually those that never play as those teams won't care about, but those that do are being screwed over by not getting the very same items for their team as are available for every other team in the game via the campaign. Therefore, it's absolute BS in my humble opinion that something like that is going to have to be paid for (if indeed it is). If improved zone d and/or custom pb's was dlc, that would be wrong as well, of course, and your argument would fly to the Heavens with everyone in the community behind you.

But I think the difference in what we're discussing here is that this particular dlc is something that won't affect any particular players in game, nor will it enhance or demote many's enjoyment or usage of the game. In other words once you fire up your PS3 or Xbox, there really isn't a single player that will notice this particular addition one way or the other, cause it's not made to affect the game itself. It's made to enhance the out of game experience of a general crowd, with a specific request or need. Also it's nothing that is a "one on one" enhancement, but rather it is as much as a 12-1 enhancement of said experience, because for example whenever a commissioner of an OD has purchased this and wants to take advantage and move the dynasty forward away from their console, up to 11 other players are also positively affected by being able to get to their game faster, therefore speeding up the overall dynasty progress, which is in itself an "off the disc" feature set. Therefore imo it's definitely fair to have an asking price for it, and it's absolutely no big deal to pay it if it enhances your overall enjoyment and usage of the game.

oweb26
05-27-2011, 06:39 AM
In IOU's defense he equally bitches across all developers/companies. NOw if you would have said he just likes to bitch then............:nod::D

Paakaa10
05-27-2011, 10:17 AM
@I OU a Beatn: I'll never get on your case for criticizing any company when it's justified. And it's clear that you believe it to be justified in this case, so I fully support your right to have that opinion. Keep on fighting the good fight, because we need multiple opinions to engage in tough discussion and shape the future of this gaming genre.

I guess I just look at it differently, particularly as it applies to SuperSim on the Web. People have gone crazy for a mobile text-sim-ish game in iOOTP (iOut of the Park Baseball) which can only be played on a mobile device and costs $4.99 by itself. By comparison, SuperSim on the Web would appear to offer a similar level of control over the game as it is played--and gets a "bonus" through being directly connected to the console version of NCAA Football 12--and costs $2 less. As I understand it from the blog, you could potentially purchase SuperSim on the Web and Advance OD on the Web and play a single-player Dynasty mode in NCAA Football 12 as though it were a mobile simulation game and never have to turn on your console again!

It's not a cut-and-dry discussion by any means; different things will have different value for everybody, and some people will be willing to pay extra for certain things while others view it differently. Hopefully the discussion never has to analyze a situation where basic aspects of a game that we expect to have out of the box require an extra cost above-and-beyond the price on the front of the box. It's up to those of us in the community--both here at TGT and at all other sites--to help make the statement that will guide the game towards delivering what the majority of us want at the price point nearly all can agree with.

Pig Bomb
05-27-2011, 10:57 AM
I like the web improvements

Jayrah
05-27-2011, 06:37 PM
good stuff paakaa

steelerfan
05-27-2011, 11:17 PM
And, yet another thread derailed by EA hate over DLC that one person arguing about won't even use or need because all they do is play retarded people online.

I think it's appropriate for me to speak up and say that, despite recent appearances of mors' thoughts resembling steelerfan's thoughts, I DID NOT hack morsdraconis' account. I HAVE NOT been signing in as morsdraconis and posting.

:D :D :D

morsdraconis
05-28-2011, 07:22 AM
:D :D :D

I would agree with that statement.

I OU a Beatn
05-28-2011, 09:52 AM
@I OU a Beatn: I'll never get on your case for criticizing any company when it's justified. And it's clear that you believe it to be justified in this case, so I fully support your right to have that opinion. Keep on fighting the good fight, because we need multiple opinions to engage in tough discussion and shape the future of this gaming genre.

I guess I just look at it differently, particularly as it applies to SuperSim on the Web. People have gone crazy for a mobile text-sim-ish game in iOOTP (iOut of the Park Baseball) which can only be played on a mobile device and costs $4.99 by itself. By comparison, SuperSim on the Web would appear to offer a similar level of control over the game as it is played--and gets a "bonus" through being directly connected to the console version of NCAA Football 12--and costs $2 less. As I understand it from the blog, you could potentially purchase SuperSim on the Web and Advance OD on the Web and play a single-player Dynasty mode in NCAA Football 12 as though it were a mobile simulation game and never have to turn on your console again!

It's not a cut-and-dry discussion by any means; different things will have different value for everybody, and some people will be willing to pay extra for certain things while others view it differently. Hopefully the discussion never has to analyze a situation where basic aspects of a game that we expect to have out of the box require an extra cost above-and-beyond the price on the front of the box. It's up to those of us in the community--both here at TGT and at all other sites--to help make the statement that will guide the game towards delivering what the majority of us want at the price point nearly all can agree with.

Exactly. Some people are going to be fine with the fact they need to pay extra if they want certain features, and others are not. In my case, I'm one of the people that doesn't like having to pay extra when the extra features launch the same time the game does. In my opinion, if they're launching at the same time, then it should all be included for the price that the publisher has decided for their game. If they launch a couple weeks or months later, then yes, feel free to charge. If they're launching later, that means they needed to put in additional development time after the game released, so yes, I would fully support them in charging at that point.

With how they're doing it now, I have to compare it to the publishers that had the developers put extra content on the disc when it shipped only locked out, and you had to pay extra later down the road just to get the key to unlock it. That's lame and in my mind, is pretty close to EA requiring a fee to access these features when they should've been included in the game price.

I just truly do not understand some of the people on various sites. I've completely stopped going to OS simply because any small criticism towards EA gets you banned(no shit, I got banned for explaining how line interaction and zone defense were broken in a calm controlled manner without a single insult towards EA). I've been called an EA fanboy multiple times over multiple years for buying NCAA every year and saying that it's been improved over on Utopia and because of that, post once in a blue moon about the game. Here, I'm the exact opposite and an EA hater because I don't agree with every single thing EA chooses to do, even though I've complimented what they're doing this year SEVERAL times. I'd personally like a reasonable conversation every once awhile when two people don't agree that doesn't dissolve to a bunch of "he's just an EA hater and that's what EA haters do," but I'm assuming that's asking for too much. :D

xMrHitStickx904
05-28-2011, 10:30 AM
Exactly. Some people are going to be fine with the fact they need to pay extra if they want certain features, and others are not. In my case, I'm one of the people that doesn't like having to pay extra when the extra features launch the same time the game does. In my opinion, if they're launching at the same time, then it should all be included for the price that the publisher has decided for their game. If they launch a couple weeks or months later, then yes, feel free to charge. If they're launching later, that means they needed to put in additional development time after the game released, so yes, I would fully support them in charging at that point.

With how they're doing it now, I have to compare it to the publishers that had the developers put extra content on the disc when it shipped only locked out, and you had to pay extra later down the road just to get the key to unlock it. That's lame and in my mind, is pretty close to EA requiring a fee to access these features when they should've been included in the game price.

I just truly do not understand some of the people on various sites. I've completely stopped going to OS simply because any small criticism towards EA gets you banned(no shit, I got banned for explaining how line interaction and zone defense were broken in a calm controlled manner without a single insult towards EA). I've been called an EA fanboy multiple times over multiple years for buying NCAA every year and saying that it's been improved over on Utopia and because of that, post once in a blue moon about the game. Here, I'm the exact opposite and an EA hater because I don't agree with every single thing EA chooses to do, even though I've complimented what they're doing this year SEVERAL times. I'd personally like a reasonable conversation every once awhile when two people don't agree that doesn't dissolve to a bunch of "he's just an EA hater and that's what EA haters do," but I'm assuming that's asking for too much. :D

I agree with the bolded. I understand why developers are using DLC and extra features, it's money grab, I get it. However, I rather have those DLC already on the retail disc, then give me something extra to pay for about a month or 2 after release to lengthen the longevity of the product.

SmoothPancakes
05-28-2011, 10:47 AM
I just truly do not understand some of the people on various sites. I've completely stopped going to OS simply because any small criticism towards EA gets you banned(no shit, I got banned for explaining how line interaction and zone defense were broken in a calm controlled manner without a single insult towards EA). I've been called an EA fanboy multiple times over multiple years for buying NCAA every year and saying that it's been improved over on Utopia and because of that, post once in a blue moon about the game. Here, I'm the exact opposite and an EA hater because I don't agree with every single thing EA chooses to do, even though I've complimented what they're doing this year SEVERAL times. I'd personally like a reasonable conversation every once awhile when two people don't agree that doesn't dissolve to a bunch of "he's just an EA hater and that's what EA haters do," but I'm assuming that's asking for too much. :D

See, I view that as you just being a realist and not afraid to speak your mind. Same thing with rhombic. Some people might view him as nothing but constantly negative and an EA hater, but a lot of his gripes actually have merit, as do yours, and you both are just willing to say what is on your mind and in the exact wording that it is on your mind, not watering it down to avoid appearing negative. And that's what I respect. We all have opinions. We all have gripes. You bring them up in a respectful, civilized conversational manner, you can complain until you're blue in the face for all I care then. People these days instantly want to label others as either a hater or a fanboy. To them there is no middle ground, which is ridiculous, there is always middle ground and negatives and positives with everything.

Besides, I've seen you at work in the Other Games forum. You're equal opportunity when it comes to complaints or things you don't agree with in regards to developers, not just EA. :D

souljahbill
05-28-2011, 09:46 PM
In NCAA '11, couldn't you export the weekly stats, recruiting updates, depth chart, etc. if your dynasty was online? I assume that's in 12, right? What exactly can you export/print again? I never used it so I don't know.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

JeffHCross
05-28-2011, 10:15 PM
What exactly can you export/print again? I never used it so I don't know.Individual team rosters, schedules for the entire season, the current recruiting class, and statistics from the current season. That's all for '11. I have no idea what is/isn't in '12 in terms of that.

souljahbill
05-28-2011, 10:30 PM
Individual team rosters, schedules for the entire season, the current recruiting class, and statistics from the current season. That's all for '11. I have no idea what is/isn't in '12 in terms of that.

I ended up looking for the blog and found it. Then I read the comments and you pretty much ran it. Are you a database guy? You figured out all sorts of problems.

If online works better this year, I'll try doing my offline dynasty online again. Last year, there were too many problems and it got frustrating so I went back to offline.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

morsdraconis
05-28-2011, 11:09 PM
If online works better this year, I'll try doing my offline dynasty online again. Last year, there were too many problems and it got frustrating so I went back to offline.

Same here. If it works better (aka the site isn't ridiculously slow), I might consider it.

Also, they need to make it WAY easier (or possible at all) to share your highlights/stories. Linking to them didn't work 75% of the time and there was no way to pull the FLVs from the website (without WAY too much work, that is).

JeffHCross
05-28-2011, 11:28 PM
I ended up looking for the blog and found it. Then I read the comments and you pretty much ran it. Are you a database guy? You figured out all sorts of problems.I wouldn't call myself a database guy, though I do spend a healthy amount of time with Excel (especially in the last year), thanks to my job and all of the effort I put into my Historical Players.

I figured out the "problems" because I wanted to know the answer. Nothing more sophisticated than some elbow grease and effort. :)

Also, they need to make it WAY easier (or possible at all) to share your highlights/stories.I found out after the fact that there was a setting in our ODs that controlled whether or not the links would easily work. For example, Powerhouse had whatever the setting was switched in such a way that no one outside Powerhouse could see our stories. So none of my links ever worked.

I don't think this is going to be changed, but it would be nice for it to be easier to fix.

psuexv
05-31-2011, 12:35 PM
Any talk about a mobile version of dynasty wire to make it more accessible on smartphones?

souljahbill
05-31-2011, 01:01 PM
Any talk about a mobile version of dynasty wire to make it more accessible on smartphones?

Yeah, if there was an iPhone/Android app, it would KILL.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

JeffHCross
05-31-2011, 07:49 PM
I think Madden had a smartphone app for Online Franchise, and it did very poorly. I may be remembering wrong though.

Daywalker86
06-01-2011, 08:49 AM
Think there is any chance that "Pro-Combat' Uni styles will be added to Teambuilder?

psuexv
06-01-2011, 09:50 AM
I think Madden had a smartphone app for Online Franchise, and it did very poorly. I may be remembering wrong though.

Was they app poorly developed or people didn't care to have one?

JeffHCross
06-01-2011, 10:31 PM
Was they app poorly developed or people didn't care to have one?No idea. I'm going off of vague memory at this point. I tried doing a Google search to find evidence of it, but I could only find a ported game -- until tonight (http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/madden-nfl-11-online-franchise/id327499481?mt=8). It looks like it's being rated :3star: out of :5star:. Hard to say why because I can only see the last three comments. Sigh, Apple, you suck.

ram29jackson
06-07-2011, 03:10 AM
EA hate? How many times do I have to say "ANY publisher that does this is lame" before I get the point across? I couldn't care less who does it, it's lame. If Epic Games charged a fee to access dedicated servers, I'd bitch about that until I was blue in the face. I'm not someone who's going to complain about a company just because of their past games, nor am I someone who's going to praise a company for their past games.

The whole "he's just bitching to bitch about EA" thing is getting really old considering I've probably logged more games in the NCAA series than 90%+ of the people who even buy the game. If anyone has earned the right to bitch about EA, it's certainly me, and I'm not even doing that. I'm very simply saying that it's a ridiculous model to require customers to pay for certain features that should be included in the retail price. That goes for EA. That goes for Activision. That goes for Bethesda. That goes for Take Two. That goes for everyone.

There is no way I should be gimped features because I don't want to fork over extra money after I've already purchased my game. I should have ALL the features. It's one thing to release maps later and charge for them. Those maps took extra development costs and were more than likely developed after the game had already been released, so that's fine with me. What's not fine with me is the current trend of charging for stuff that's already on the disc. Several games have done this. You'll pay for an add on a couple weeks after release and download a like 4MB file. It's pretty obvious it was already on the disc in that case, so that's absolutely retarded.

I consider the web features to be the same. I realize it costs money for EA to do that, but that should've been figured into their development costs. Since we're all using car references, it's pretty much the same as buying a car for the same price as all the other cars, and then finding out you have to pay more to have brakes installed, or the engine put in, etc..

It's stupid.

Personally, I'd be happy if I could say one critical thing of EA(which is deserved in certain cases) without hearing a chorus of the inevitable "he just wants to bitch about EA" or similar statements. Every single critical statement I've made about EA/NCAA Football/any other developer is 100% legitimate and without bias. Contrary to popular belief, not everyone is going to agree with everything. You don't see me calling everyone who disagrees with me EA fanboys.

I would think most people who bother with the fanboy term are in high school or around 21 so its really unimportant to worry about ( or even think about- just internet pointlessness)

I'm a fanboy of any football game good or bad haha. I only play sports games for the most part so thats all i'm going to talk about anyway. the only reason I initially got a ps2 was because of madden

steelerfan
06-07-2011, 06:03 AM
I would think most people who bother with the fanboy term are in high school or around 21 so its really unimportant to worry about ( or even think about- just internet pointlessness)

Um, didn't I just see, a week or so ago, that IOU turned 22? :o

Pig Bomb
06-07-2011, 06:35 AM
There is no way I should be gimped features because I don't want to fork over extra money after I've already purchased my game. I should have ALL the features. It's one thing to release maps later and charge for them. Those maps took extra development costs and were more than likely developed after the game had already been released, so that's fine with me. What's not fine with me is the current trend of charging for stuff that's already on the disc. Several games have done this. You'll pay for an add on a couple weeks after release and download a like 4MB file. It's pretty obvious it was already on the disc in that case, so that's absolutely retarded.

I consider the web features to be the same. I realize it costs money for EA to do that, but that should've been figured into their development costs. Since we're all using car references, it's pretty much the same as buying a car for the same price as all the other cars, and then finding out you have to pay more to have brakes installed, or the engine put in, etc..


I would have to disagree with this analogy. The things EA is asking people to pay extra for are just that, extras. They are not essential like brakes or an engine. It's more like getting a roof rack or some upgraded rims.

I'm sure EA would say the are doing many of the purchasers of the game a favor by NOT adding in these costs and charging $65.99 or whatever for the game. Instead they realize lots of people will not use the web stuff at all. Others won't use the extra commish stuff etc....these are not essential to play at all...they are extras.

Also, just because other companies sell DLC later on that isn't "on the disc" doesn't mean that the DLC couldn't have been on there...it's just a marketing ploy so it appears to add greater value... [or it could have been a deadline issue and they could not complete the work in time...so they release it later like it's some special deal.]

As for the fanboy and EA hate..I don't care..I respect everyone's opinon.
I am an EA fanboy because I love their games....but I also hate them at times and will verbally gang rape EA when the fuck up IMO.

Jayrah
06-07-2011, 06:56 PM
I would have to disagree with this analogy. The things EA is asking people to pay extra for are just that, extras. They are not essential like brakes or an engine. It's more like getting a roof rack or some upgraded rims.

I'm sure EA would say the are doing many of the purchasers of the game a favor by NOT adding in these costs and charging $65.99 or whatever for the game. Instead they realize lots of people will not use the web stuff at all. Others won't use the extra commish stuff etc....these are not essential to play at all...they are extras.

Also, just because other companies sell DLC later on that isn't "on the disc" doesn't mean that the DLC couldn't have been on there...it's just a marketing ploy so it appears to add greater value... [or it could have been a deadline issue and they could not complete the work in time...so they release it later like it's some special deal.]


That's what I'm saying. And to be fair this stuff ISN'T on the disk. It's on the WEB! It may be tied to the disk because it's tied to the game but it's a totally separate functionality from the disk. My question is: IOU, would any of these paid features be ones that you would use if they were free to you? If so, which ones? Far as I know, you're a big Online Ranked game guy, and if you do dynasty it's offline.... These extra features don't affect either of those particular modes, so why would you need them or even care if they're on your game? Just because of principle, or because you're hell bent on complaining? Because the fact that they don't affect you (and MANY others that are the same way as you) in the least is the reason that something like this is tagged as extra cost. It's a specific need/request item for a specific crowd, and that particular crowd has said (both past and present) that they'd be willing to pay extra for the abilities that NCAA team is now giving them, mostly because it's not a game related item, it's a mode related item outside of the game.

Besides that if you say that these extras are not worth the money, but you're also telling me that an extra map or items on other games (which are only entirely disk related) is worth the money just because it was released later than the game that is BS. That would mean that all of the NCAA patches that we get to "improve" the game after release would also be labeled (using your logic) as dlc that you would be willing to pay for, which I KNOW FOR A FACT is not the case. And since you don't believe in extra uniforms being payable dlc either, you are really contradicting yourself here.

I don't understand how people can say the last couple years about certain features (BTW I'm not talking about you specifically but it ties in with the idea of all the complaints/complainers here) "We never requested this so why the F is it on my game?", and then turn around and say about another feature "I know I didn't request this and it doesn't affect me to any degree, but why the F ISN'T it in my game? I shouldn't have to pay to get this feature even though I'll never need it!"

I don't mind you have an opinion about whatever, but at least make it consistent. If you agree with payable DLC items/functions, then agree with them and don't bitch and moan when a company takes advantage of them (especially when it hardly even affects you in the least). If you don't agree with them, that's fine as well but complain about ALL of them due to your opinion on the entire subject. Don't single out a company/game because you have a personal vendetta against them. Have a stance and be universal.

ram29jackson
06-08-2011, 01:44 AM
Um, didn't I just see, a week or so ago, that IOU turned 22? :o


well, he should take the compliment that I thought he was older :)