NCAA 09 Gameplay Issues (response from EA)

[Anti Honor]

I haven't even gotten a response about the CPU Sliders being fixed in the 2nd patch.. Has anyone else? I can't play the game like this. It's ridiculous.

[The Autumn Wind]

I have been a relatively good boy for 1,244 posts, and have never received word from mods that my opinions were out of line. Perhaps I risk that here, but I'm so quantifiably in the green that I don't care. What's going on with this game, and with the developers' involvement with the community regarding the game, is not cool.

I bought this game as a reciprocal gesture of good will toward EA, which as a company has *seemed* to take a new tack on the issues of game quality and customer relations. To concretize this a bit, Ian was here not long ago collecting the community's feedback on what was not working properly in the game (and I construe that broadly to include not only roster bugs, but defenders turning away from the play, etc.), and he seemed not long ago to acknowledge that there were several legitimate issues worth looking into beyond roster bugs--gameplay issues in short.

The rhetorical framework of that engagement troubled me when it happened--the language was something like "we'll look into these and see if they're bugs"--and I had a strong suspicion that the team had no intention of addressing these issues that the community defined as glaring issues in the game, not the idiosyncratic experience of an unimportant few.

Now, with the "you should give it a second look" and "the reactions are overwhelmingly positive" response from Ian, and the "no comment" from OMT on a second, gameplay related patch, it seems clear to me that this community engagement move was a PR move from the beginning. I'm not calling it a conspiracy, but it does seem that the best efforts of EA's mice and men often come to naught. Actually it's not naught, it's -$60. Multiplied by millions.

To say that a game in which quarterbacks complete 75% of their passes is fine is ludicrous. I could pile on examples, but I won't lest this become a tome. The short of it is that this is unconscionable. The game looks pretty on the outside but on the inside, it's a mess. It's a white-washed sepulcher in the language of the New Testament

I'm pissed and I think I have a right to be, and I think I have a right to say it in a forum like this where people come who care deeply about their sports gaming experience. I hope Ian and Adam read this and take something from it; just don't give me any more spin.

[roadman]

Quote: Originally Posted by Anti Honor

I haven't even gotten a response about the CPU Sliders being fixed in the 2nd patch.. Has anyone else? I can't play the game like this. It's ridiculous.

Adam said in a recent thread that he is not going to list what is being fixed and what not will be fixed until the patch comes out.

I'll try to link you to it.

It's official, I'm over it.

[Anti Honor]

Quote: Originally Posted by roadman

Adam said in a recent thread that he is not going to list what is being fixed and what not will be fixed until the patch comes out. I'll try to link you to it. It's official, I'm over it.

Thanks.

So, basically, at this point, I paid 60 dollars to use ''backwards sliders'' that don't even help. Also, great post, Trojan. Couldn't agree more.

[callmetaternuts]

Quote: Originally Posted by roadman

Adam said in a recent thread that he is not going to list what is being fixed and what not will be fixed until the patch comes out. I'll try to link you to it. It's official, I'm over it.

I think thats a little unfair to make a blanket statement as if Adam is being a douche by not telling us. He has valid points, why tell us they are looking at something when he doesnt know if it can be or will be fixed? As soon as he says "we are looking at issue A" it spreads like wildfire that issue A is being fixed, its broek, then that turns into it will be fixed and when he or EA comes back and says it wont be fixed or isnt broken, they get killed.

I dont blame him for not listing what will be fixed, or mentioning it until its done. He's at least being candid with us, we dont need to take hsi statements and begin twisting them also.

[Phobia]

Quote: Originally Posted by Trojan Man

I have been a relatively good boy for 1,244 posts, and have never received word from mods that my opinions were out of line. Perhaps I risk that here, but I'm so quantifiably in the green that I don't care. What's going on with this game, and with the developers' involvement with the community regarding the game, is not cool. I bought this game as a reciprocal gesture of good will toward EA, which as a company has *seemed* to take a new tack on the issues of game quality and customer relations. To concretize this a bit, Ian was here not long ago collecting the community's feedback on what was not working properly in the game (and I construe that broadly to include not only roster bugs, but defenders turning away from the play, etc.), and he seemed not long ago to acknowledge that there were several legitimate issues worth looking into beyond roster bugs--gameplay issues in short. The rhetorical framework of that engagement troubled me when it happened--the langauge was somehting like "we'll look into these and see if they're bugs"--and I had a strong suspicion that the team had no intention of addressing these issues that the community defined as glaring issues in the game, not the idiosyncratic experience of an unimportant few. Now, with the "you should give it a second look" and "the reactions are overwhelmingly positive" response from Ian, and the "no comment" from OMT on a second, gameplay related patch, it seems clear to me that this community engagement move was a PR move from the beginning. I'm not colling it a conspiracy, but it does seem that the best efforts of EA's mice and men often come to naught. Actually it's not naught, it's -$60. Multiplied by millions. To say that a game in which quarterbacks complete 75% of their passes is fine is ludicrous. I could pile on examples, but I won't lest this become a tome. The short of it is that this is unconscionable. The game looks pretty on the outside but on the inside, it's a mess. It's a white-washed sepulchre in the langauge of the New Testament I'm pissed and I think I have a right to be, and I think I have a right to say it in a forum like this where people come who care deeply about their sports gaming experience. I hope Ian and Adam read this and take something from it; just don't give me any more spin.

I feel just like you man. The sad thing is we get pinned as the bad guy because we are not happy with the game. But the fact of it, we paid our money on something that is horribly bugged. We get the run around with answers, basicly had our money taken and told to "deal with it till we choose to tell you when your game will be playable". I am lost for words at how EA has handled all these problems with the game. I am trying my hardest to maintain control and level headed with this. But it is hard when this is a trend year in and year out.

Everyone saying that EA on the boards was a marketing scheme might be right.

[Phobia]

Quote: Originally Posted by callmetaternuts

I think thats a little unfair to make a blanket statement as if Adam is being a douche by not telling us. He has valid points, why tell us they are looking at something when he doesnt know if it can be or will be fixed? As soon as he says "we are looking at issue A" it spreads like wildfire that issue A is being fixed, its broek, then that turns into it will be fixed and when he or EA comes back and says it wont be fixed or isnt broken, they get killed. I dont blame him for not listing what will be fixed, or mentioning it until its done. He's at least being candid with us, we dont need to take hsi statements and begin twisting them also.

So we are supposed to just accept we paid 60$ for a broke game and just support them doing this?

[pjv31]

Quote: Originally Posted by callmetaternuts

I think thats a little unfair to make a blanket statement as if Adam is being a douche by not telling us. He has valid points, why tell us they are looking at something when he doesnt know if it can be or will be fixed? As soon as he says "we are looking at issue A" it spreads like wildfire that issue A is being fixed, its broek, then that turns into it will be fixed and when he or EA comes back and says it wont be fixed or isnt broken, they get killed. I dont blame him for not listing what will be fixed, or mentioning it until its done. He's at least being candid with us, we dont need to take hsi statements and begin twisting them also.

QFT

[therizing02]

Quote: Originally Posted by Phobia

Riz I would make that list my sig if it was not the length of a essay But it was like the above poster said, right on point!

Copy and paste and take out the spaces

[pjv31]

Quote: Originally Posted by Phobia

So we are supposed to just accept we paid 60$ for a broke game and just support them doing this?

Dude, its not that. I am sure they are trying to figure out what will and won't be fixed, time constraints, man hours. Its not just hey fix everything we say is wrong or else. They are like any other job. These guys have families, lives outside of work. They need to identify what they are going to fix, how and when. And to be honest, and I know people don't want to hear this, but they are probably still trying to figure those things out.

Also what most people don't understand about writing code and fixing code is that when something goes wrong and you think "oh well that's an easy fix" it could mess up 10 other things. That right there is the biggest reason he can't say exactly what will be fixed.