The current state of sport simulation games
-
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@shuker23 said in The current state of sport simulation games:
This is content wise - The stubs situation has been a big W for me this year. I refuse to put money into stubs and there have been plenty of stubs to go around, without playing the market, which is another thing I find too boring to do. Compare that to 2k or even The Show 17 and it's something that's kept me in the game this year. I hope that doesn't change when it goes cross platform and potentially to a more mass audience that can be fleeced for stubs.
I am happy with that part as well - the content and the stub situation. But at the end of the day the gameplay mechanics will always be most important and it has been seriously lacking/not making progress and that hurts the franchise more than any content can ever make up for.
The stub situation I do agree with if your ok with grinding forever, but to me they haven't added content. A different version of the same card isn't content to me - adding on to what was there in a game mode is new content. But instead they remove numerous things that they already had, so your removing content and all you added was a card to generate stub purchases. 5 different Smoltz cards isn't content - that's slightly upgrading a players stats to entice someone to spend more cash to get the slightly better card that will be replaced in a month to repeat the cycle. Adding a stadium creator, bringing back and upgrading online franchise, franchise contracts and the ability to set prices on concessions,etc were all removed. What actual content besides cards have they added in years?
-
@baboonishace said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@shuker23 said in The current state of sport simulation games:
This is content wise - The stubs situation has been a big W for me this year. I refuse to put money into stubs and there have been plenty of stubs to go around, without playing the market, which is another thing I find too boring to do. Compare that to 2k or even The Show 17 and it's something that's kept me in the game this year. I hope that doesn't change when it goes cross platform and potentially to a more mass audience that can be fleeced for stubs.
I am happy with that part as well - the content and the stub situation. But at the end of the day the gameplay mechanics will always be most important and it has been seriously lacking/not making progress and that hurts the franchise more than any content can ever make up for.
The stub situation I do agree with if your ok with grinding forever, but to me they haven't added content. A different version of the same card isn't content to me - adding on to what was there in a game mode is new content. But instead they remove numerous things that they already had, so your removing content and all you added was a card to generate stub purchases. 5 different Smoltz cards isn't content - that's slightly upgrading a players stats to entice someone to spend more cash to get the slightly better card that will be replaced in a month to repeat the cycle. Adding a stadium creator, bringing back and upgrading online franchise, franchise contracts and the ability to set prices on concessions,etc were all removed. What actual content besides cards have they added in years?
You know what, you're actually 100% correct. When I referred to content I meant player cards which obviously don't mean Jack in comparison to what you refer to.
-
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@baboonishace said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@shuker23 said in The current state of sport simulation games:
This is content wise - The stubs situation has been a big W for me this year. I refuse to put money into stubs and there have been plenty of stubs to go around, without playing the market, which is another thing I find too boring to do. Compare that to 2k or even The Show 17 and it's something that's kept me in the game this year. I hope that doesn't change when it goes cross platform and potentially to a more mass audience that can be fleeced for stubs.
I am happy with that part as well - the content and the stub situation. But at the end of the day the gameplay mechanics will always be most important and it has been seriously lacking/not making progress and that hurts the franchise more than any content can ever make up for.
The stub situation I do agree with if your ok with grinding forever, but to me they haven't added content. A different version of the same card isn't content to me - adding on to what was there in a game mode is new content. But instead they remove numerous things that they already had, so your removing content and all you added was a card to generate stub purchases. 5 different Smoltz cards isn't content - that's slightly upgrading a players stats to entice someone to spend more cash to get the slightly better card that will be replaced in a month to repeat the cycle. Adding a stadium creator, bringing back and upgrading online franchise, franchise contracts and the ability to set prices on concessions,etc were all removed. What actual content besides cards have they added in years?
You know what, you're actually 100% correct. When I referred to content I meant player cards which obviously don't mean Jack in comparison to what you refer to.
yeah most people when they refer to content are talking about cards, to me I just don't see that as content for the game. I like the new cards and everything but it can't replace actually upgrading the modes that you have in your game. It just seems like that is what every sports game does now is removed features to focus on cards and cards alone
-
@baboonishace said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@baboonishace said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@shuker23 said in The current state of sport simulation games:
This is content wise - The stubs situation has been a big W for me this year. I refuse to put money into stubs and there have been plenty of stubs to go around, without playing the market, which is another thing I find too boring to do. Compare that to 2k or even The Show 17 and it's something that's kept me in the game this year. I hope that doesn't change when it goes cross platform and potentially to a more mass audience that can be fleeced for stubs.
I am happy with that part as well - the content and the stub situation. But at the end of the day the gameplay mechanics will always be most important and it has been seriously lacking/not making progress and that hurts the franchise more than any content can ever make up for.
The stub situation I do agree with if your ok with grinding forever, but to me they haven't added content. A different version of the same card isn't content to me - adding on to what was there in a game mode is new content. But instead they remove numerous things that they already had, so your removing content and all you added was a card to generate stub purchases. 5 different Smoltz cards isn't content - that's slightly upgrading a players stats to entice someone to spend more cash to get the slightly better card that will be replaced in a month to repeat the cycle. Adding a stadium creator, bringing back and upgrading online franchise, franchise contracts and the ability to set prices on concessions,etc were all removed. What actual content besides cards have they added in years?
You know what, you're actually 100% correct. When I referred to content I meant player cards which obviously don't mean Jack in comparison to what you refer to.
yeah most people when they refer to content are talking about cards, to me I just don't see that as content for the game. I like the new cards and everything but it can't replace actually upgrading the modes that you have in your game. It just seems like that is what every sports game does now is removed features to focus on cards and cards alone
Absolutely, I agree 100%.
-
Ive been saying cards aren't content since last year. Everyone goes on about how great the content is, but putting cards or packs in the store isn't content. Giving you something to do with those cards once you have them is content, giving you a gameplay related path to earning them is content. Simply selling you a new card isn't content.
Getting rid of features is pretty bad here too, even in DD. In 17 and 18 they had stat grinds, collections, and game missions all working together. In 19 they added moments, which would have been fine, but the scuttled almost everything from the previous games. Is that really adding content? Or is it replacing what they already had instead of improving upon it?
-
@maskedgrappler said in The current state of sport simulation games:
Ive been saying cards aren't content since last year. Everyone goes on about how great the content is, but putting cards or packs in the store isn't content. Giving you something to do with those cards once you have them is content, giving you a gameplay related path to earning them is content. Simply selling you a new card isn't content.
Getting rid of features is pretty bad here too, even in DD. In 17 and 18 they had stat grinds, collections, and game missions all working together. In 19 they added moments, which would have been fine, but the scuttled almost everything from the previous games. Is that really adding content? Or is it replacing what they already had instead of improving upon it?
I would even be okay if they decided to give us less playable content, if that would be a result of them putting extra time and effort into polishing the engine and the mechanics of the game. But like I said earlier, barely anything has changed over the years other than minor tweaks, the adjustment of sliders and some added animations.
-
I'm glad that people are starting to realize it. I remember 5 years ago people thought I was making this all up because I lost a game. These flaws aren't new, people are just finally fed up.
I caved and bought Madden 21 after skipping 20. I knew it was going to be bad going in, but it's even worse than I thought. The Show is heading down the same path, but it's still a much better video game.
I thought my Madden 20 boycott would make a difference. It didnt, so I figured a Madden 21 boycott would make no difference, because theres always going to be somebody to drop 5k on the game.
Hopefully the #nfldropea movement actually sticks, and there is an organized boycott for Madden 22. We have to stop buying these terrible games together.
-
@MFundercover said in The current state of sport simulation games:
I'm glad that people are starting to realize it. I remember 5 years ago people thought I was making this all up because I lost a game. These flaws aren't new, people are just finally fed up.
I caved and bought Madden 21 after skipping 20. I knew it was going to be bad going in, but it's even worse than I thought. The Show is heading down the same path, but it's still a much better video game.
I thought my Madden 20 boycott would make a difference. It didnt, so I figured a Madden 21 boycott would make no difference, because theres always going to be somebody to drop 5k on the game.
Hopefully the #nfldropea movement actually sticks, and there is an organized boycott for Madden 22. We have to stop buying these terrible games together.
Yup there needs to be an Elon Musk type of person/organization (not afraid to take on the status quo and the money to make it happen) to realize how much potential there is and knock all these lazy and comfortable developer studios of their pedestals.
-
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
With the recent release of Madden 21 I once again came to the sad realization of how the sports gaming industry developed over the last 10 years or so. I haven't touched Madden (or any other EA Sports game) in years, nor will I ever again and it blows my mind that their business model is still sustainable because people just keep handing over their money like zombies.
MLB The Show is not as bad, for one reason and one reason only; you can earn the virtual currency by playing the game or working the market and therefore much of the content is not stacked behind a giant pay wall. Although it is for some people, like most of the casual players who have no time to grind the market. That isn't even my biggest gripe about these developments, it's the fact that developers have gotten lazy and the quality degrades every single year.
Make no mistake; MLB The Show has already cut online franchise because it wants to focus on Diamond Dynasty exclusively since that's where the money is made. And the quality of the game suffers because of it. Just look back at the last 5 editions of the game and ask yourself honestly how much of a (positive) change have been made. Almost everything is still the same, with minor tweaks and visual upgrades. Those are not significant improvements, even though they want you to believe they are. You could even make the argument it has gotten worse. And that goes against nature in a way; shouldn't a new game build on the good things of its predecessors and learn from the mistakes? The game looks and feels exactly the same since MLBTS 18. It plays different, due to minor tweaks and adjusted sliders, but are you telling me this is the best they could do in 3 years when 18 is generally regarded as the worst MLBTS game ever made?
Hell no. But as long as you keep playing DD/Ultimate Team and give them your money. This game could have been so much better by now, with all the technology and resources that are available. It's mind blowing and yet we keep accepting mediocrity and even pay a premium for a lazy unfinished product every single year.
I wish I had resources like Elon Musk and take the industry head on. I would outbid EA Sports, 2K Sports and Sony for the licenses and create a whole new line of sports simulation games where game quality and realism would be the top and only priorities with content available to all, instead of milking its player base for every hard earned dollar they have. Developed and funded (!) by people who are passionate about sports and the gaming industry, not by suits who only care about quarterly sales and their fat bonuses at the end of the year.
These companies can make tons of money by just selling the base games. The exclusive single player story games have proven that, like God of War and The Last of Us. I wish the sport games industry did a 180 and went back to that formula where passion and quality overshadow greed, not the other way around.
If you have some extra time on your hands (it's a lengthy video), I highly recommend you watch our brother Angry Joe in his Madden rant and reconsider your own perspective on the industry as it is right now and actively keep in mind that every dollar you spend in this industry is a dollar spent towards keeping things as they are.
https://youtu.be/UX5_6M5LLwAGreat post and very true. IMO, the peak of the sports games gameplay was in the early-mid 2010's. It has been a steady fast decline ever since.
I'm still happy that the only sports game I now play is produced by SDS and not EA sports.
-
My biggest issue with game is knowing if you give up a early or late hit your giving up runs during that inning. It’s shouldn’t be that way, if I throw a good pitch to let a opponent who is just flailing at pitches be rewarded. This game is becoming rng based to the point it’s almost unplayable
-
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@maskedgrappler said in The current state of sport simulation games:
Ive been saying cards aren't content since last year. Everyone goes on about how great the content is, but putting cards or packs in the store isn't content. Giving you something to do with those cards once you have them is content, giving you a gameplay related path to earning them is content. Simply selling you a new card isn't content.
Getting rid of features is pretty bad here too, even in DD. In 17 and 18 they had stat grinds, collections, and game missions all working together. In 19 they added moments, which would have been fine, but the scuttled almost everything from the previous games. Is that really adding content? Or is it replacing what they already had instead of improving upon it?
I would even be okay if they decided to give us less playable content, if that would be a result of them putting extra time and effort into polishing the engine and the mechanics of the game. But like I said earlier, barely anything has changed over the years other than minor tweaks, the adjustment of sliders and some added animations.
I agree. But I'm not sure what the answer is. I have a feeling that this is how they want the game to play. It's a fine line between making a game that rewards good players without excluding mediocre players.
-
@maskedgrappler said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@maskedgrappler said in The current state of sport simulation games:
Ive been saying cards aren't content since last year. Everyone goes on about how great the content is, but putting cards or packs in the store isn't content. Giving you something to do with those cards once you have them is content, giving you a gameplay related path to earning them is content. Simply selling you a new card isn't content.
Getting rid of features is pretty bad here too, even in DD. In 17 and 18 they had stat grinds, collections, and game missions all working together. In 19 they added moments, which would have been fine, but the scuttled almost everything from the previous games. Is that really adding content? Or is it replacing what they already had instead of improving upon it?
I would even be okay if they decided to give us less playable content, if that would be a result of them putting extra time and effort into polishing the engine and the mechanics of the game. But like I said earlier, barely anything has changed over the years other than minor tweaks, the adjustment of sliders and some added animations.
I agree. But I'm not sure what the answer is. I have a feeling that this is how they want the game to play. It's a fine line between making a game that rewards good players without excluding mediocre players.
You can still implement that ideology while upgrading your game engine and mechanics overall. And this game is very due for a complete overhaul in my opinion.
-
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@maskedgrappler said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@maskedgrappler said in The current state of sport simulation games:
Ive been saying cards aren't content since last year. Everyone goes on about how great the content is, but putting cards or packs in the store isn't content. Giving you something to do with those cards once you have them is content, giving you a gameplay related path to earning them is content. Simply selling you a new card isn't content.
Getting rid of features is pretty bad here too, even in DD. In 17 and 18 they had stat grinds, collections, and game missions all working together. In 19 they added moments, which would have been fine, but the scuttled almost everything from the previous games. Is that really adding content? Or is it replacing what they already had instead of improving upon it?
I would even be okay if they decided to give us less playable content, if that would be a result of them putting extra time and effort into polishing the engine and the mechanics of the game. But like I said earlier, barely anything has changed over the years other than minor tweaks, the adjustment of sliders and some added animations.
I agree. But I'm not sure what the answer is. I have a feeling that this is how they want the game to play. It's a fine line between making a game that rewards good players without excluding mediocre players.
You can still implement that ideology while upgrading your game engine and mechanics overall. And this game is very due for a complete overhaul in my opinion.
For sure. I just think a lot if people want them to put out a heavily skill based game and I just can't see that happening.
-
@maskedgrappler said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@maskedgrappler said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@maskedgrappler said in The current state of sport simulation games:
Ive been saying cards aren't content since last year. Everyone goes on about how great the content is, but putting cards or packs in the store isn't content. Giving you something to do with those cards once you have them is content, giving you a gameplay related path to earning them is content. Simply selling you a new card isn't content.
Getting rid of features is pretty bad here too, even in DD. In 17 and 18 they had stat grinds, collections, and game missions all working together. In 19 they added moments, which would have been fine, but the scuttled almost everything from the previous games. Is that really adding content? Or is it replacing what they already had instead of improving upon it?
I would even be okay if they decided to give us less playable content, if that would be a result of them putting extra time and effort into polishing the engine and the mechanics of the game. But like I said earlier, barely anything has changed over the years other than minor tweaks, the adjustment of sliders and some added animations.
I agree. But I'm not sure what the answer is. I have a feeling that this is how they want the game to play. It's a fine line between making a game that rewards good players without excluding mediocre players.
You can still implement that ideology while upgrading your game engine and mechanics overall. And this game is very due for a complete overhaul in my opinion.
For sure. I just think a lot if people want them to put out a heavily skill based game and I just can't see that happening.
They could easily satisfy both sides by creating separate game modes for the more casual players and the competitive players. Yet another fine example of innovative possibilites and untapped potential in my opinion.
-
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@maskedgrappler said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@maskedgrappler said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@maskedgrappler said in The current state of sport simulation games:
Ive been saying cards aren't content since last year. Everyone goes on about how great the content is, but putting cards or packs in the store isn't content. Giving you something to do with those cards once you have them is content, giving you a gameplay related path to earning them is content. Simply selling you a new card isn't content.
Getting rid of features is pretty bad here too, even in DD. In 17 and 18 they had stat grinds, collections, and game missions all working together. In 19 they added moments, which would have been fine, but the scuttled almost everything from the previous games. Is that really adding content? Or is it replacing what they already had instead of improving upon it?
I would even be okay if they decided to give us less playable content, if that would be a result of them putting extra time and effort into polishing the engine and the mechanics of the game. But like I said earlier, barely anything has changed over the years other than minor tweaks, the adjustment of sliders and some added animations.
I agree. But I'm not sure what the answer is. I have a feeling that this is how they want the game to play. It's a fine line between making a game that rewards good players without excluding mediocre players.
You can still implement that ideology while upgrading your game engine and mechanics overall. And this game is very due for a complete overhaul in my opinion.
For sure. I just think a lot if people want them to put out a heavily skill based game and I just can't see that happening.
They could easily satisfy both sides by creating separate game modes for the more casual players and the competitive players. Yet another fine example of innovative possibilites and untapped potential in my opinion.
Not sure how well that would work. Nobody wants to admit they suck and if the good rewards are in the competitive mode people are going to gravitate to that.
You may be right. I wouldnt personally be against it.
-
At the end of the day, all these games are running on PS2-era engines.
Just from what I've observed over the years, it's not that these companies don't want the game to be infinitely better YoY, it's just that the engine they keep building on is so limited and frankensteined together that even minor additions are gigantic undertakings with branching, potentially game-breaking effects. It's why you're seeing games like Madden and MLBTS seemingly get buggier every year, despite them appearing to be largely interchangeable with the previous year(s?) game.
They need to essentially tear them all down and build them back up from scratch, which isn't going to happen until they're absolutely forced to (ie. people stop buying packs/stubs).
-
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@maskedgrappler said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@maskedgrappler said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@maskedgrappler said in The current state of sport simulation games:
Ive been saying cards aren't content since last year. Everyone goes on about how great the content is, but putting cards or packs in the store isn't content. Giving you something to do with those cards once you have them is content, giving you a gameplay related path to earning them is content. Simply selling you a new card isn't content.
Getting rid of features is pretty bad here too, even in DD. In 17 and 18 they had stat grinds, collections, and game missions all working together. In 19 they added moments, which would have been fine, but the scuttled almost everything from the previous games. Is that really adding content? Or is it replacing what they already had instead of improving upon it?
I would even be okay if they decided to give us less playable content, if that would be a result of them putting extra time and effort into polishing the engine and the mechanics of the game. But like I said earlier, barely anything has changed over the years other than minor tweaks, the adjustment of sliders and some added animations.
I agree. But I'm not sure what the answer is. I have a feeling that this is how they want the game to play. It's a fine line between making a game that rewards good players without excluding mediocre players.
You can still implement that ideology while upgrading your game engine and mechanics overall. And this game is very due for a complete overhaul in my opinion.
For sure. I just think a lot if people want them to put out a heavily skill based game and I just can't see that happening.
They could easily satisfy both sides by creating separate game modes for the more casual players and the competitive players. Yet another fine example of innovative possibilites and untapped potential in my opinion.
I'm a middle of the road online player. I'm about .500 in events and I get my 10 wins for my 15 stars and in RS I'm 24-9 but thats between 400-600 area. I know I'm not going to be a WS player heck I'm 65 and don't have the reflexes I did 30 something years agao when I still played but I still like to play video baseball. The last thing I want is to be giving a chance to win through RNG or whatever you want to call it. Make the game work for everyone's level of abilities. If I'm a 500 player in RS and I play better (through my input) against another 500 player swinging at everything, don't throw my opponent a bone with a lucky swing. I have had every game since MLBTS inception and after this year I'm betting on 20 being my last. It should be more enjoyable online versus WTH just happened? Peace out.
-
@maskedgrappler said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@maskedgrappler said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@maskedgrappler said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@maskedgrappler said in The current state of sport simulation games:
Ive been saying cards aren't content since last year. Everyone goes on about how great the content is, but putting cards or packs in the store isn't content. Giving you something to do with those cards once you have them is content, giving you a gameplay related path to earning them is content. Simply selling you a new card isn't content.
Getting rid of features is pretty bad here too, even in DD. In 17 and 18 they had stat grinds, collections, and game missions all working together. In 19 they added moments, which would have been fine, but the scuttled almost everything from the previous games. Is that really adding content? Or is it replacing what they already had instead of improving upon it?
I would even be okay if they decided to give us less playable content, if that would be a result of them putting extra time and effort into polishing the engine and the mechanics of the game. But like I said earlier, barely anything has changed over the years other than minor tweaks, the adjustment of sliders and some added animations.
I agree. But I'm not sure what the answer is. I have a feeling that this is how they want the game to play. It's a fine line between making a game that rewards good players without excluding mediocre players.
You can still implement that ideology while upgrading your game engine and mechanics overall. And this game is very due for a complete overhaul in my opinion.
For sure. I just think a lot if people want them to put out a heavily skill based game and I just can't see that happening.
They could easily satisfy both sides by creating separate game modes for the more casual players and the competitive players. Yet another fine example of innovative possibilites and untapped potential in my opinion.
Not sure how well that would work. Nobody wants to admit they suck and if the good rewards are in the competitive mode people are going to gravitate to that.
You may be right. I wouldnt personally be against it.
But in my vision of how the game should be there are no "rewards". That's typical DD/Ultimate Team ideology, they need to feed you "rewards" to open up your wallet if you miss out on any of them. You're hitting the nail on the head with what I'm arguing against, if there are no rewards in the form of player cards with preset attributes, then it doesn't matter on what level you compete; it's about having fun and having the experience of playing a simulation sports game.
-
we can all complain until we turn blue but the fact is the current model works just look at how SDS has grown as a company in the last 5 years. There will always be people who don't care and will spend money where I think SDS and the other companies can chnage without hurting there current model is creating a comp mode and a casual mode. Make the comp mode more realistic with less rng influence mant will say thats what RS is but its not rng still influences the game just like BR and events.
-
@STI1489 said in The current state of sport simulation games:
we can all complain until we turn blue but the fact is the current model works just look at how SDS has grown as a company in the last 5 years. There will always be people who don't care and will spend money where I think SDS and the other companies can chnage without hurting there current model is creating a comp mode and a casual mode. Make the comp mode more realistic with less rng influence mant will say thats what RS is but its not rng still influences the game just like BR and events.
It works because we accept it. We accept it because there is no alternative. Let's take Madden here for a minute, they only sell games because people want to play a football game and there isn't anything else. So looking at their revenue you could conclude they are "successful" if you just look at that number. That's not a very smart way to look at the success and sustainability/continuity potential for a business.
If a competitor would arise and makes a way more customer oriented game, they will be done for. That's a realistic thing to worry about being EA because people do get fed up and will happily jump ship when the opportunity arises. Same goes for SDS or any other business for that matter.
