Next time I post to EA's Fight Night forums, somebody from OS shoot me.

[ajns]

This has to be the equivalent of picking up a brick and bashing one's self in the skull repeatedly. Can we sticky this?

[kingsofthevalley]

Re: Next time I post to EA's Fight Night forums, somebody from OS shoot me.

What exactly is the problem over there?

[SHAKYR]

Re: Next time I post to EA's Fight Night forums, somebody from OS shoot me.

This has to be the equivalent of picking up a brick and bashing one's self in the skull repeatedly. Can we sticky this?

I know how you feel. I was a Senior Moderator and I'm a huge fan of boxing. It seems like being a huge fan of the sport isn't a good thing with some of the posters over there. It's 3 posters who can make posting there hard for a hundred...lol!

[ajns]

Re: Next time I post to EA's Fight Night forums, somebody from OS shoot me.

What exactly is the problem over there?

How much are you willing to read?

Essentially it boils down to this:

1) Every thread pretty much degenerates into a "Brizzo is douchebag" thread.
2) Most of the prolific posters (I wish to believe in a silent majority) are posers who claim they are boxing fans, but are really just online stat guys who believe the game should reflect the fact that they are 2nd in kills in Modern Warfare by rewarding their version of spam by making them 2nd in wins in online boxing.
3) Anyone who doesn't jump on the irrational rip Brizzo wagon (not that there are legitimate criticisms) is vilified.
4) If you dare defend the devs in any way, see #3 times 1000 and with the white hot intensity of 1000 suns. It's almost like invading a bee hive. It's not one sting, its 300.
5) They only take a break from the rip Brizzo and the devs threads long enough to post every hour on the hour some version of "Is this game fixed yet," or "Has the update dropped yet." As the answer has been "no" thus far see #3.
6) They seem to be under the impression that online "makes" Fight Night and without it the game would be totally useless (Which by the way is the easiest way to spot #2 and proof of my point in #2). Perhaps I am naive, but I believe the way to promote Fight Night's longevity is to cater to the people that will buy this game year in year out with or without online IF it is sim. It's EA's straddling the fence on this that causes the issues. In fact, I suggested that it was trying to fix the problems with online that broke the game for everyone and was almost set ablaze.

There's probably more, but whatever I might write would end with the phrase "refer to #3."

[SHAKYR]

Re: Next time I post to EA's Fight Night forums, somebody from OS shoot me.

How much are you willing to read?

Essentially it boils down to this:

1) Every thread pretty much degenerates into a "Brizzo is douchebag" thread.
2) Most of the prolific posters (I wish to believe in a silent majority) are posers who claim they are boxing fans, but are really just online stat guys who believe the game should reflect the fact that they are 2nd in kills in Modern Warfare by rewarding their version of spam by making them 2nd in wins in online boxing.
3) Anyone who doesn't jump on the irrational rip Brizzo wagon (not that there are legitimate criticisms) is vilified.
4) If you dare defend the devs in any way, see #3 times 1000 and with the white hot intensity of 1000 suns. It's almost like invading a bee hive. It's not one sting, its 300.
5) They only take a break from the rip Brizzo and the devs threads long enough to post every hour on the hour some version of "Is this game fixed yet," or "Has the update dropped yet." As the answer has been "no" thus far see #3.
6) They seem to be under the impression that online "makes" Fight Night and without it the game would be totally useless (Which by the way is the easiest way to spot #2 and proof of my point in #2). Perhaps I am naive, but I believe the way to promote Fight Night's longevity is to cater to the people that will buy this game year in year out with or without online IF it is sim. It's EA's straddling the fence on this that causes the issues. In fact, I suggested that it was trying to fix the problems with online that broke the game for everyone and was almost set ablaze.

There's probably more, but whatever I might write would end with the phrase "refer to #3."

The producers straddling the fence with what kind of game they wanted to make is what's causing the problems. They need to go the NBA 2K11 route by having sim as a default and an arcade option.

[ajns]

Re: Next time I post to EA's Fight Night forums, somebody from OS shoot me.

The producers straddling the fence with what kind of game they wanted to make is what's causing the problems. They need to go the NBA 2K11 route by having sim as a default and an arcade option.

Honestly, I have no idea why this idea doesn't gain more traction. Why can't there just be two modes as you suggest with online matches made by comparing settings for arcade or sim? Seems to solve everything neatly. If this is possible, and EA chooses not to do it, then there is a real question as to the selection of the development team.

[Lakers 24 7]

Re: Next time I post to EA's Fight Night forums, somebody from OS shoot me.

Good question - might be a popularity issue. In other words if they separate the two would the crowd be big enough on both sides?

Also, if I remember correctly, on NBA 2k11 there is no mode selection for online ranked games.

But, about the online thing in general. This has been discussed at length before, but I don't understand why you're trying to create a rift between the two sides. As if the true sim gamers are offline players, and the online gamers shouldn't be catered to. The reality is that FNC would fail miserably if there was not an online mode. So, that reason alone is enough to justify why time should be spent developing that aspect.
Secondly, there are a lot of simmers who are strictly online gamers. So, who's to say that we should get the shaft just because you don't play online? I'm sure if you did, then your sentiments would be different.

At the end of the day they need to please both online and offline gamers. It's not hard to do, it's not like no one else was ever able to accomplish such.

[ajns]

Re: Next time I post to EA's Fight Night forums, somebody from OS shoot me.

Good question - might be a popularity issue. In other words if they separate the two would the crowd be big enough on both sides?

Also, if I remember correctly, on NBA 2k11 there is no mode selection for online ranked games.

But, about the online thing in general. This has been discussed at length before, but I don't understand why you're trying to create a rift between the two sides. As if the true sim gamers are offline players, and the online gamers shouldn't be catered to. The reality is that FNC would fail miserably if there was not an online mode. So, that reason alone is enough to justify why time should be spent developing that aspect.
Secondly, there are a lot of simmers who are strictly online gamers. So, who's to say that we should get the shaft just because you don't play online? I'm sure if you did, then your sentiments would be different.

At the end of the day they need to please both online and offline gamers. It's not hard to do, it's not like no one else was ever able to accomplish such.

I'm not trying to create a rift, it already exists. And you are correct in saying that there are sim players that play online. My point was that sim players will buy this game with or without online because it is sim. The folks that want this game ONLY for online play are the impediment and generally fall into the poser category for whom heaven and earth was moved (not to mention offline broken) to patch and tune this thing.

But why surmise? Anyone following this thread that considers themselves a seeker of sim boxing answer the following:

If you could have a version of Fight Night that was true sim, but had no online, would you buy it? Yes or No?

[ajns]

Re: Next time I post to EA's Fight Night forums, somebody from OS shoot me.

Good question - might be a popularity issue. In other words if they separate the two would the crowd be big enough on both sides?

Also, if I remember correctly, on NBA 2k11 there is no mode selection for online ranked games.

But, about the online thing in general. This has been discussed at length before, but I don't understand why you're trying to create a rift between the two sides. As if the true sim gamers are offline players, and the online gamers shouldn't be catered to. The reality is that FNC would fail miserably if there was not an online mode. So, that reason alone is enough to justify why time should be spent developing that aspect.
Secondly, there are a lot of simmers who are strictly online gamers. So, who's to say that we should get the shaft just because you don't play online? I'm sure if you did, then your sentiments would be different.

At the end of the day they need to please both online and offline gamers. It's not hard to do, it's not like no one else was ever able to accomplish such.

Oh, and show me the proof that Fight Night "would fail miserably" without online. No guessing, no opinion, no "most", no "in general." Proof.

[SHAKYR]

Re: Next time I post to EA's Fight Night forums, somebody from OS shoot me.

I'm not trying to create a rift, it already exists. And you are correct in saying that there are sim players that play online. My point was that sim players will buy this game with or without online because it is sim. The folks that want this game ONLY for online play are the impediment and generally fall into the poser category for whom heaven and earth was moved (not to mention offline broken) to patch and tune this thing.

But why surmise? Anyone following this thread that considers themselves a seeker of sim boxing answer the following:

If you could have a version of Fight Night that was true sim, but had no online, would you buy it? Yes or No?

Yes, I would buy it in a heart beat, I would actually buy more than one copy.

Oh, and show me the proof that Fight Night "would fail miserably" without online. No guessing, no opinion, no "most", no "in general." Proof.

This sounds like my question to the producers and fans that they can't prove sim doesn't sell if a sim boxing game was never made.

[Lakers 24 7]

Re: Next time I post to EA's Fight Night forums, somebody from OS shoot me.

I'm not trying to create a rift, it already exists. And you are correct in saying that there are sim players that play online. My point was that sim players will buy this game with or without online because it is sim. The folks that want this game ONLY for online play are the impediment and generally fall into the poser category for whom heaven and earth was moved (not to mention offline broken) to patch and tune this thing.

But why surmise? Anyone following this thread that considers themselves a seeker of sim boxing answer the following:

If you could have a version of Fight Night that was true sim, but had no online, would you buy it? Yes or No?

IMO that's like releasing a 360 or PS3 without any games. If you buy one, you'll have a great console but nothing to do with it. So what would be the point. Releasing a sim boxing game without any means to play online would be a cruel, cruel tease.

With that said the answer for me would be no. As much as I want a sim boxing game, I just can't play against the AI. For a list of reasons. Even games that are sim both online and off, like NBA 2k11 I get bored playing the AI, there's no enjoyment in it for me. Doesn't mean I'm any less sim than anyone else, I've always had feedback in the 90%+ range over football and basketball. Like I've said, I know many others who fall in the same boat, and none of us are posers. So stop attacking online gamers.

As far as the importance of online play. Just look at the industry, it really should go without saying how crucial multilayer is. You're not going to find a single developer who will say that online isn't an important aspect to their game. It's a pretty obvious trend.

[BoomerSooner420]

Re: Next time I post to EA's Fight Night forums, somebody from OS shoot me.

IMO that's like releasing a 360 or PS3 without any games. If you buy one, you'll have a great console but nothing to do with it. So what would be the point. Releasing a sim boxing game without any means to play online would be a cruel, cruel tease.

With that said the answer for me would be no. As much as I want a sim boxing game, I just can't play against the AI. For a list of reasons. Even games that are sim both online and off, like NBA 2k11 I get bored playing the AI, there's no enjoyment in it for me. Doesn't mean I'm any less sim than anyone else, I've always had feedback in the 90%+ range over football and basketball. Like I've said, I know many others who fall in the same boat, and none of us are posers. So stop attacking online gamers.

As far as the importance of online play. Just look at the industry, it really should go without saying how crucial multilayer is. You're not going to find a single developer who will say that online isn't an important aspect to their game. It's a pretty obvious trend.

Plenty of games do great without online play. Too many to name in fact. But I think the point was to say that a bad game with online play is still a bad game, and a good game without online play is still a good game. At least that's what I took from it. I would definetly prefer to play a great game against the AI over playing a f'd up game against other people.

[ajns]

Re: Next time I post to EA's Fight Night forums, somebody from OS shoot me.

IMO that's like releasing a 360 or PS3 without any games. If you buy one, you'll have a great console but nothing to do with it. So what would be the point. Releasing a sim boxing game without any means to play online would be a cruel, cruel tease.

Really? How does this analogy work? You are just re-stating that online is the only thing that makes a console useful. I use my computer to post to OS, but I use it for other stuff OFFLINE way more. Given what hackers and exploiters do to online play, I think one could argue quite the opposite. If a game's online never works as intended because it is exploited or hacked, what good is it?

With that said the answer for me would be no. As much as I want a sim boxing game, I just can't play against the AI. For a list of reasons. Even games that are sim both online and off, like NBA 2k11 I get bored playing the AI, there's no enjoyment in it for me. Doesn't mean I'm any less sim than anyone else, I've always had feedback in the 90%+ range over football and basketball. Like I've said, I know many others who fall in the same boat, and none of us are posers. So stop attacking online gamers.

No one is attacking online gamers. You have every right to like online regardless of whether you consider yourself a sim boxer or an arcade fighter. You lose me, and quite a few others, when you suggest that my offline experience should be ruined to save your online experience. You do this by defending tuning and patching to make online better at the expense of offline, and then when called on it, reverting back to the "online is the only thing that matters" argument.

As far as the importance of online play. Just look at the industry, it really should go without saying how crucial multilayer is. You're not going to find a single developer who will say that online isn't an important aspect to their game. It's a pretty obvious trend.

No one is asking anyone to give up or ignore the importance of online or the trend in online play. I would suggest that this country is trending toward higher gas prices. Doesn't make it good, or right, or tolerable. Just because the consoles let us play online doesn't mean that should be the end all be all of the console. Lest we forget that for the majority of the gaming past, consoles were a way of escaping reality and not dealing with the outside world. Some of us still like them for that. And to us, suggesting that the console gaming industry should be thrust solely toward online gaming flies in the face of that sentiment. Forcing someone who wants an escape from reality to play on a platform that forces them to deal with other people, believe it or not, can be viewed as counterproductive to that end.

[Lakers 24 7]

Re: Next time I post to EA's Fight Night forums, somebody from OS shoot me.

Really? How does this analogy work? You are just re-stating that online is the only thing that makes a console useful. I use my computer to post to OS, but I use it for other stuff OFFLINE way more. Given what hackers and exploiters do to online play, I think one could argue quite the opposite. If a game's online never works as intended because it is exploited or hacked, what good is it?

No one is attacking online gamers. You have every right to like online regardless of whether you consider yourself a sim boxer or an arcade fighter. You lose me, and quite a few others, when you suggest that my offline experience should be ruined to save your online experience. You do this by defending tuning and patching to make online better at the expense of offline, and then when called on it, reverting back to the "online is the only thing that matters" argument.

No one is asking anyone to give up or ignore the importance of online or the trend in online play. I would suggest that this country is trending toward higher gas prices. Doesn't make it good, or right, or tolerable. Just because the consoles let us play online doesn't mean that should be the end all be all of the console. Lest we forget that for the majority of the gaming past, consoles were a way of escaping reality and not dealing with the outside world. Some of us still like them for that. And to us, suggesting that the console gaming industry should be thrust solely toward online gaming flies in the face of that sentiment. Forcing someone who wants an escape from reality to play on a platform that forces them to deal with other people, believe it or not, can be viewed as counterproductive to that end.

I don't think we're on the same page, because that wasn't my argument at all. In fact, I specifically said that they need to improve both aspects. There's no excuse for the gameplay to be as busted as it is online or off.

At the end of the day they need to please both online and offline gamers. It's not hard to do, it's not like no one else was ever able to accomplish such.

So, the notion that I think it should be about online and nothing else isn't true.

The analogy about the console is just personal preference in response to your question about buying a boxing sim without an online mode. What I'm trying to say is, while it may be a great game, I wouldn't be able to do anything with it. Being that I don't enjoy playing anything against the computer. On that, I'm simply speaking for myself.

If a game's online never works as intended because it is exploited or hacked, what good is it?

That gets back to my original point in that EA needs to get serious about making good videogames. They sort of did it with EA MMA, so there's no reason why FNC can't be the sim we want it to be both online and off.

No one is attacking online gamers.

You said the people who want the game only for online play, generally are posers.

when you suggest that my offline experience should be ruined to save your online experience.

Again, never suggested anything like that. If EA gets their act together we can definitely have our cake and eat it too. All I'm trying to point out is the importance of online play, and that doesn't mean offline guys be damned. There's no need to rail against online gamers, or marginalize the importance of online play simply because EA failed to patch the game properly.