NHL 15 Thread

[Flash Walken]

Break even? At Best?

YOu think EA isn't making hand over fist with board advertisements, HUT and EASHL dlc?

Yeah, the overhead to implement those systems is costly, but I think it is absolutely foolish to believe the NHL franchise doesn't turn a tiny profit. It is likely smaller than Fifa and Madden, but that doesn't mean it isn't very profitable in its own right.

EA isn't doing this out of the goodness of their hearts. The game makes money.

[TjRhythmic]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Break even? At Best?

YOu think EA isn't making hand over fist with board advertisements, HUT and EASHL dlc?

Yeah, the overhead to implement those systems is costly, but I think it is absolutely foolish to believe the NHL franchise doesn't turn a tiny profit. It is likely smaller than Fifa and Madden, but that doesn't mean it isn't very profitable in its own right.

EA isn't doing this out of the goodness of their hearts. The game makes money.

Where in my post did I say anything about EA's profit, or how much they make?

I was trying to say is if ANOTHER company comes in and, after the first few years of being in the red, can grab a share of the market. At best they could be breaking even. Could turn a small profit, but it could also flop. If I was an investor/publisher, and a developer came to me. The risk wouldn't be worth the reward... and I'd back out. EA has the market.

[Chill Cosby]

Originally Posted by AcGold

The NFL games by 2k were better 10 years ago than Madden games are now. Having a choice allowed us to choose between two brands competing for customers. You argument is clouded by emotion and optimism, the 2k games were also sold at a lower price so the customers both had a choice and had to pay less. Haven't bought a football game since EA took over and am not buying the new NHL game so EA being the lone producer is pushing me out of the market.

I don't want 2k back to push EA, I always found 2k games had drastically better animations and just want a 2k game. EA games always have a weird jittery look to it that don't look natural. It was the competition that pushed 2k to release such good games

My argument is clouded by emotion and optimism?
No need to be patronising. I'll be more receptive to your point if you avoid it in the future.

Again, I was arguing against this:

Originally Posted by AcGold

It would be great if 2k came back and forced EA to make better games.

Which (unfortunately) negates the truth of this statement:

Originally Posted by AcGold

I don't want 2k back to push EA, I always found 2k games had drastically better animations and just want a 2k game.

If you're sticking by your first statement, then we disagree. However, if you're sticking by your second statement, then we agree, so don't respond in a way which suggests I said anything different.

2k coming back would give consumers choice, which is naturally a good thing. I don't think it would drastically improve EA's product in any real way, it would simply give us consumers an option as to where to spend our money. Would EA change some things? Probably, but whether those changes would make the game better or worse is entirely subjective.

Was NFL 2k5 a more enjoyable game than Madden 14? You know what, maybe it was.

In an objective sense, simulation games now are simply better than they were on the Xbox/PS2. There is more power and more realism than ever before. Are some of the features stale? Yeah, but that's the subjective stuff. Could 2k blow EA out of the water given the amount of subjective stuff they had right in the past, combined with the objectively better engines and hardware at their fingertips? Absolutely.

I guess my point is that statements that refer to EA improving because of the presence of 2k aren't based on any evidence or reality, but 2k would absolutely improve the market for consumers and allow us choice. If 2k comes back with an NHL game that is as bad as 2k10 was, EA won't need to improve a thing. If 2k comes back with an amazing game? Then who cares what EA does? I'm playing 2k.

[AcGold]

oh my god... not this again. You were denying basic principles of economics and now you're being pedantic. Just let's stop this argument now, please.

My only point is that I like choice and the 2 having to compete against each other in NFL made a high quality cheaper alternative with a fleshed out online component with rankings and leaderboards a possibility. 2k did the online component better 10 years ago in NFL than EA does with their hockey now so I think it's understandable to want 2k back in the game. You can nitpick and try to find an argument with anything, just please, just one more comment and let's stop because it's a waste of both of our time and everyone elses.

[TjRhythmic]

Sorry if I came across a little douchy with my "where in my post..." comment Flash. I re read it and it came across harsh.

Like I said, for such a small market, it's tough for another company to grab any share and turn a profit. As a company the time and money that is needed to get to that point is just not worth it. Not saying that it couldn't happen. There very well might be a company out there with deep enough pockets that is willing to go after the market aggressively, and I hope it happens, just not holding my breath on it.

So for now, we have one option. Sucks for us as consumers, but it's just the realities of business.

[Flash Walken]

I think the major component in the cost of the EA NHL product is in licensing.

If that aspect of the game design is making development prohibitively expensive, then I think someone should attempt to make a game without the licensing.

WHere is the sweet Mutant Hockey League for PS4 or Steam?

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

WHere is the sweet Mutant Hockey League for PS4 or Steam?

Mutant League Hockey was an EA game as well.

[Esoteric]

I normally played about 5 games of EASHL, then stopped.

The majority of my NHL play is either offline in Be A GM, or with buddies on the couch.

Still planning to buy this day 1.

[Chill Cosby]

Originally Posted by AcGold

oh my god... not this again. You were denying basic principles of economics and now you're being pedantic. Just let's stop this argument now, please.

My only point is that I like choice and the 2 having to compete against each other in NFL made a high quality cheaper alternative with a fleshed out online component with rankings and leaderboards a possibility. 2k did the online component better 10 years ago in NFL than EA does with their hockey now so I think it's understandable to want 2k back in the game. You can nitpick and try to find an argument with anything, just please, just one more comment and let's stop because it's a waste of both of our time and everyone elses.

Not what again? Pedantic? Denying basic principles of economics? Argument? Nitpicking?

How do two argue when they both agree?
Just relax man, refrain from projecting, and we can continue this conversation (not argument) peacefully and calmly. We're all friends here.

As I said, I disagreed with the statement that the presence of 2k would improve EA. Economic theory may suggest that competition encourages improved product, but it is far from a conclusion, and is never a guarantee. That is economics 101. We MAY see an improvement in quality, but it could just as easily come from 2k, and EA could cease improvement in multiple areas.

For an example of what I mean: You play EASHL almost exclusively. If 2k came out with a similar game that wasn't as fleshed out in their simulation modes (BAP, BAGM, whatever) but had THE premiere online experience, and EA responded with leaving EASHL alone (a feature you currently find frustrating) and instead focused on being the go-to game for those interested in offline modes, then wouldn't you subjectively say EA hadn't improved at all? You're not going to see an overall improvement, you're likely going to see a division of specialty and a lower price point on one of the two.

I get what you're saying, and as I said, I agree that 2k re-entering the market would be good for consumers. I think you might have worded it in a way I didn't quite understand, but you've clarified it, so we're good. I don't think conversations like this waste anyone's time. That's why I posed the question as to what improvements others think EA would make in light of 2k entering the market, I'm actually curious.

I'll repeat myself here, but personally I think the improvements would come in areas that weren't as strong of a focus for whatever 2k would bring to the table. I think EA is confident in it's product, so I would imagine they would put energy into whatever 2k's shortcomings are, and show people how much better their product is in those areas. Instead of saying "We both do this, but we do it a little better" I think they would want to say "They don't do this, we do and do it well."

Honestly, I think 2k coming back would be neat. I thought they were pretty campy games at the time, but a lot has changed since then. I'd love a different take on the NHL series even just to see it.

[Russic]

Originally Posted by TjRhythmic

The thing with hockey is that's it's not that big of a title outside of Canada. A few places in the US, maybe a small market in Europe. What's the incentive for a company like 2k to put money and development hours into a game that will at best - break even. As a company, the risks FAR OUTWEIGH the gains that would come from it.

I admit, I jumped on the emotional bandwagon like everyone else when I heard the news, but I remember when NHL 07, the first one on the new systems, and it looked great, but compared to the ps2/xbox version it just wasn't as refined and as deep. I think all they really had was pretty much a season mode. And as Russic alluded to, this version is no different. They did pretty much build this game from the ground up, regardless of what people think. It's a little more then wavey jerseys and arenas. It's a brand new engine... we got spoiled with game modes and features in the last iterations that now we all feel entitled to have them in the this one, myself included. And after reading Russic's calm posts on the subject I realized that this is not nhl 14, or 13, or 12. This is a brand new game... I'm treating it as such, and, I'm ok with it.

Still, no EASHL sucks, but life goes on...

A little while ago I was cycling through the NHL 14 modes. Because I only play GM mode, I kinda forgot the volume of modes that the series has churned out. By the end of the last console life cycle they had that thing packed with modes for many different types of player.

I like competition, but I'd be concerned that it would split the market and EA would decide to pull back on the budget instead of push it forward. Regardless, if 2K came in tomorrow and built a new game, it could potentially be years behind what EA has. As mentioned, crazy risk there.

[psicodude]

Originally Posted by Esoteric

I normally played about 5 games of EASHL, then stopped.

The majority of my NHL play is either offline in Be A GM, or with buddies on the couch.

Still planning to buy this day 1.

Bingo. I am certain that EA has analyzed the stats from NHL 14 and made the decision to cut EASHL because so few people actually play it. The just did the simple math - it requires 10% of our development resources to put in a feature that 3% of players use (numbers made up, of course).

I personally know about a dozen guys that own 14, and not one of them plays EASHL. I feel bad for the guys on this forum that do play it, but this is a business decision that makes sense to me.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by psicodude

Bingo. I am certain that EA has analyzed the stats from NHL 14 and made the decision to cut EASHL because so few people actually play it. The just did the simple math - it requires 10% of our development resources to put in a feature that 3% of players use (numbers made up, of course).

I personally know about a dozen guys that own 14, and not one of them plays EASHL. I feel bad for the guys on this forum that do play it, but this is a business decision that makes sense to me.

They said they plan on putting out it something similar in, but the trouble was it was too glitchy to include by the release date

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Russic

A little while ago I was cycling through the NHL 14 modes. Because I only play GM mode, I kinda forgot the volume of modes that the series has churned out. By the end of the last console life cycle they had that thing packed with modes for many different types of player.

I like competition, but I'd be concerned that it would split the market and EA would decide to pull back on the budget instead of push it forward. Regardless, if 2K came in tomorrow and built a new game, it could potentially be years behind what EA has. As mentioned, crazy risk there.

There really aren't that many modes though.

Outdoor Games, Tournaments, Vs., Online Vs., NHL 94 'mode' etc are all basically the same thing. Same game with different rules.

GM Connected had real potential. Be A GM Mode is decent, Live the Life is pretty awful and Be A Legend is basically just Live the Life, which is an extension of EASHL.

There are some different 'modes' but they aren't particularly different.

Again, it seems like the 'quantity' approach rather than quality. Instead of fixing the AI, we'll add NHL 94 mode which is essentially a huge step back from the gameplay of the skillstick with a couple of cosmetic changes like bluetint on the ice. Meh.

It's just so much flash in place of substance, and that's how the news of this release feels. "Check out these slow motion visuals, oh, and there's no EASHL and Be A GM mode is the same as it's been for the last 5 years.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

There really aren't that many modes though.

Outdoor Games, Tournaments, Vs., Online Vs., NHL 94 'mode' etc are all basically the same thing. Same game with different rules.

GM Connected had real potential. Be A GM Mode is decent, Live the Life is pretty awful and Be A Legend is basically just Live the Life, which is an extension of EASHL.

There are some different 'modes' but they aren't particularly different.

Again, it seems like the 'quantity' approach rather than quality. Instead of fixing the AI, we'll add NHL 94 mode which is essentially a huge step back from the gameplay of the skillstick with a couple of cosmetic changes like bluetint on the ice. Meh.

It's just so much flash in place of substance, and that's how the news of this release feels. "Check out these slow motion visuals, oh, and there's no EASHL and Be A GM mode is the same as it's been for the last 5 years.

How many "different" ways is there to play a hockey game though?

The gameplay needs to get better, but one thing that EA Sports does do is give you different ways to play.

I would say they have more options to play then more critically acclaimed games like NBA 2K and MLB The Show. The issue comes with the gameplay.

Live The Life
Be A Pro
Be A GM
Hockey Ultimate Team
Vs.
Online VS.
Tournaments/Playoff
Gimmick Games (NHL 94, Outdoor Games)
NHL Moments Live

EASHL
GM Connected

I would also argue that hockey is the hardest game to get right from a gameplay perspective. It is the quickest game with the least structure (IMO).

[Yamer]

Maybe I completely misinterpreted that bit about the Be A GM mode, but from my reading it doesn't sound like it will be an entirely recycled mode from the last game/generation. To me, it sounds like they are saying they wanted to have that basic structure in place for the Fall release, but that they will be patching in additions as they finish and meet approval.

Over the last handful of years I have finally transitioned my mindset into the realities of the industry: basically, that we live in an era of patches, additions, and DLC. It's the new model, and it is what we should all expect. Deadlines haven't changed, budgets have relatively the same ratio, but complexities in design and consumer expectations have skyrocketed. That's a dangerous equation. At least now, with new distribution models and online access, games are able to be fixed/patched and made better in what is essentially a new form of a production cycle. I'm thankful for that, although I do admit that I wish this department of EA were more diligent with their patches and updates.

I'll be buying the game on release day, and it will be the reason I purchase the next generation Xbox One console. I know it won't be completely polished, but I also know I haven't played a game perfectly ready and complete right out of the box in what seems like a decade.

[puckedoff]

It would be cool if they had training camp / world juniors / olympics in the Be A Pro.

[Yamer]

Originally Posted by puckedoff

It would be cool if they had training camp / world juniors / olympics in the Be A Pro.

It would, but I imagine pounding out licensing with the IIHF would be damn near impossible.

[Diemenz]

Originally Posted by psicodude

Bingo. I am certain that EA has analyzed the stats from NHL 14 and made the decision to cut EASHL because so few people actually play it. The just did the simple math - it requires 10% of our development resources to put in a feature that 3% of players use (numbers made up, of course).

I personally know about a dozen guys that own 14, and not one of them plays EASHL. I feel bad for the guys on this forum that do play it, but this is a business decision that makes sense to me.

According to the Ea forums more people play it then Online Be a GM and Hut combined so I don't think the math was that simple. Again there isn't any concrete numbers I can reference I'm just referencing the amount of EASHL teams and the post from Ea developers saying as much about NHL 14.

I can say the opposite about my experiences with EASHL as I know about 25 guys who play and only play EASHL or online leagues. Again this is most likely reasoned because I myself play EASHL so it would make sense that my friends do as well.

Considering EASHL made several hundred of thousands of dollars on people purchasing boosts and unlocks saying that removing EASHL is a smart business decision doesn't hold water as companies don't like to throw away revenue streams for no reason.

This wasn't a business decision in any way it was a development decision. The developers were unable to compete the additional modes in the time they had so they went forward with what was completed. To again reference that it wasn't a business decision, EA themselves have said EASHL as well as online GM will be in upcoming releases. If it's not good for business now it's not good for business A year later.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

How many "different" ways is there to play a hockey game though?

The gameplay needs to get better, but one thing that EA Sports does do is give you different ways to play.

I would say they have more options to play then more critically acclaimed games like NBA 2K and MLB The Show. The issue comes with the gameplay.

Live The Life
Be A Pro
Be A GM
Hockey Ultimate Team
Vs.
Online VS.
Tournaments/Playoff
Gimmick Games (NHL 94, Outdoor Games)
NHL Moments Live

EASHL
GM Connected

I would also argue that hockey is the hardest game to get right from a gameplay perspective. It is the quickest game with the least structure (IMO).

I appreciate how you responded.

Again though, Live the Life, be a Pro, Be a Legend, all the same thing, but none of them work very well. Instead of having three different brands on one subpar gaming mode, why not put the effort into making a better gaming mode. A problem in one iteration of the game I can understand and won't fault too harshly depending on what it is, but to have the same problems in multiple releases, year after year? It's inexcusable in my opinion.

I don't know of many people, or read about them either, who play those modes because they are so crappy. It's a novelty that wears off quickly when you get sent to the minors with A+ positioning and 2 points per game average.

Instead of fixing what is a huge problem in that game mode, they gave us NHL 94 mode which limited gameplay...

[mdubz]