You are all saying this worries you yet none of you are saying why it worries you. Maybe I just don't get it but what is so worrisome about Rob's post?

Ok this statement worries me....

"Having said that though, this is a fighting game (albeit with a very complex play space) and it is always preferable to keep the controls of a fighting game as simple and intuitive as you can"

I dont want "simple" controls!!! it should take you some time to master the controls, i dont wana play some noob who after pressing two buttons has got me on the ground in an anaconda choke.. I dont see how you can "Authentically and realistically" portray MMA with simple controls.. if it goes that way, then it will be leaning towards being "arcady"

I'm not saying make the controls Rocket science, but make them so that when you take your opponent down, or lock on a submission you do so because of your skill as a player, not because you pressed a button and watched the computer do it for you. I know alot of guys on here that want the skill factor when playing.. not simplified arcade controls.

This other statement worries me also.....

"Our core gameplay should be an experience that you can just jump into and play, but we will try to put enough depth around it to keep you coming back to the game"

I think what i said above explains why i'm worried about that statement... and try?? try to put enough enough depth in it? i'm not a fan of the word try.

I may be wrong and i hope i am but i dont want a short and sweet pick up and play experiance.. which it seems to me like part of there market focus has ben turned to.. if i did i'd go buy Street Fighter, or Tekken.

cem_ea_id.Rear_naked_poke wrote:Ok this statement worries me....

"Having said that though, this is a fighting game (albeit with a very complex play space) and it is always preferable to keep the controls of a fighting game as simple and intuitive as you can"

I dont want "simple" controls!!! it should take you some time to master the controls, i dont wana play some noob who after pressing two buttons has got me on the ground in an anaconda choke.. I dont see how you can "Authentically and realistically" portray MMA with simple controls.. if it goes that way, then it will be leaning towards being "arcady"

I'm not saying make the controls Rocket science, but make them so that when you take your opponent down, or lock on a submission you do so because of your skill as a player, not because you pressed a button and watched the computer do it for you. I know alot of guys on here that want the skill factor when playing.. not simplified arcade controls.

This other statement worries me also.....

"Our core gameplay should be an experience that you can just jump into and play, but we will try to put enough depth around it to keep you coming back to the game"

I think what i said above explains why i'm worried about that statement... and try?? try to put enough enough depth in it? i'm not a fan of the word try.

I may be wrong and i hope i am but i dont want a short and sweet pick up and play experiance.. which it seems to me like part of there market focus has ben turned to.. if i did i'd go buy Street Fighter, or Tekken.

I want depth, customization and options. This is what keep us hardcore fans happy and supportive. The casual fans are going to buy the game regardless because that's what they do. They will play it until the next talked about game comes out.

I hate that us hardcore sports gamers really get alienated. When you say you are making the game for casual and hardcore fans it's impossible. You will turn a hardcore fan into a casual fan because he will become disappointed and play something else.

ps3.POETICDRINK2U wrote:

cem_ea_id.Rear_naked_poke wrote:Ok this statement worries me....

"Having said that though, this is a fighting game (albeit with a very complex play space) and it is always preferable to keep the controls of a fighting game as simple and intuitive as you can"

I dont want "simple" controls!!! it should take you some time to master the controls, i dont wana play some noob who after pressing two buttons has got me on the ground in an anaconda choke.. I dont see how you can "Authentically and realistically" portray MMA with simple controls.. if it goes that way, then it will be leaning towards being "arcady"

I'm not saying make the controls Rocket science, but make them so that when you take your opponent down, or lock on a submission you do so because of your skill as a player, not because you pressed a button and watched the computer do it for you. I know alot of guys on here that want the skill factor when playing.. not simplified arcade controls.

This other statement worries me also.....

"Our core gameplay should be an experience that you can just jump into and play, but we will try to put enough depth around it to keep you coming back to the game"

I think what i said above explains why i'm worried about that statement... and try?? try to put enough enough depth in it? i'm not a fan of the word try.

I may be wrong and i hope i am but i dont want a short and sweet pick up and play experiance.. which it seems to me like part of there market focus has ben turned to.. if i did i'd go buy Street Fighter, or Tekken.

I want depth, customization and options. This is what keep us hardcore fans happy and supportive. The casual fans are going to buy the game regardless because that's what they do. They will play it until the next talked about game comes out.

I hate that us hardcore sports gamers really get alienated. When you say you are making the game for casual and hardcore fans it's impossible. You will turn a hardcore fan into a casual fan because he will become disappointed and play something else.

Brilliant point... couldn't of point it any better myself.. 5 *

ps3.POETICDRINK2U wrote:

cem_ea_id.Rear_naked_poke wrote:Ok this statement worries me....

"Having said that though, this is a fighting game (albeit with a very complex play space) and it is always preferable to keep the controls of a fighting game as simple and intuitive as you can"

I dont want "simple" controls!!! it should take you some time to master the controls, i dont wana play some noob who after pressing two buttons has got me on the ground in an anaconda choke.. I dont see how you can "Authentically and realistically" portray MMA with simple controls.. if it goes that way, then it will be leaning towards being "arcady"

I'm not saying make the controls Rocket science, but make them so that when you take your opponent down, or lock on a submission you do so because of your skill as a player, not because you pressed a button and watched the computer do it for you. I know alot of guys on here that want the skill factor when playing.. not simplified arcade controls.

This other statement worries me also.....

"Our core gameplay should be an experience that you can just jump into and play, but we will try to put enough depth around it to keep you coming back to the game"

I think what i said above explains why i'm worried about that statement... and try?? try to put enough enough depth in it? i'm not a fan of the word try.

I may be wrong and i hope i am but i dont want a short and sweet pick up and play experiance.. which it seems to me like part of there market focus has ben turned to.. if i did i'd go buy Street Fighter, or Tekken.

I want depth, customization and options. This is what keep us hardcore fans happy and supportive. The casual fans are going to buy the game regardless because that's what they do. They will play it until the next talked about game comes out.

I hate that us hardcore sports gamers really get alienated. When you say you are making the game for casual and hardcore fans it's impossible. You will turn a hardcore fan into a casual fan because he will become disappointed and play something else.

Exact, plus casual fans would be happy anyways just using a small fraction of the available arsenal EA would offer. They would just jump in throw punches and kicks without getting into the more complicated maneuvers that exist in MMA.

All I have to hope for is options, have a more arcady (jump in and play) mode for the casual fans and players, but for the rest of the game give us the depth us hardcore fans really want in the game.

I would like a little depth aswell. A competitive game is alot more fun than something people can pick up within minutes. I could understand you would want to make this game appealing to the casual players though.

However I still hope for some depth that will seperate the better players. Striking will always be the easier aspect of the game but I hope the grappling is a little more advanced. (Obviously the Striking could feature advanced movement though).

That being said, I am not worried about anything. I have not seen any gameplay yet at all. And for everyone else, in comparison can someone name me a true fighting sim. I want to know what kind of control scheme people are leaning towards.

Yeah,i'm a little bit worried about dev words..Nothing "dramatic" i mean,we have to watch how does the game works so the following words are just my opinions .I wish a real MMA simulation,it's not a matter of how many buttons you have to push to take a fighter to the ground but just the feelings.The importance to play a match with your console pad and feels like watching a real MMA fight!I would like to play a game where technical knowledge of MMA helps you to win the fights and careers.For example make a side transition to mount position and be satisfied and a little bit closer to winning a fight.Not just one of unnembered transitions like Undisputed where you throwing 1000000000 punches,you make 100000000 submissions attempts etc..I know it's hard to develope an MMA game,i respect your job and i'm happy to play an MMA game by EA.But i'll be honest,i don't want to play an arcade game.. keep up the god work

P.S again sorry for my bad english

I prefer simple controls and complex gameplay. I think the depth should not be in the controller but in the way the game actually plays.

I don't doubt that the game will have a lot of room for strategy and learning the mechanics of the game.

ps3.POETICDRINK2U wrote:

cem_ea_id.Rear_naked_poke wrote:Ok this statement worries me....

"Having said that though, this is a fighting game (albeit with a very complex play space) and it is always preferable to keep the controls of a fighting game as simple and intuitive as you can"

I dont want "simple" controls!!! it should take you some time to master the controls, i dont wana play some noob who after pressing two buttons has got me on the ground in an anaconda choke.. I dont see how you can "Authentically and realistically" portray MMA with simple controls.. if it goes that way, then it will be leaning towards being "arcady"

I'm not saying make the controls Rocket science, but make them so that when you take your opponent down, or lock on a submission you do so because of your skill as a player, not because you pressed a button and watched the computer do it for you. I know alot of guys on here that want the skill factor when playing.. not simplified arcade controls.

This other statement worries me also.....

"Our core gameplay should be an experience that you can just jump into and play, but we will try to put enough depth around it to keep you coming back to the game"

I think what i said above explains why i'm worried about that statement... and try?? try to put enough enough depth in it? i'm not a fan of the word try.

I may be wrong and i hope i am but i dont want a short and sweet pick up and play experiance.. which it seems to me like part of there market focus has ben turned to.. if i did i'd go buy Street Fighter, or Tekken.

I want depth, customization and options. This is what keep us hardcore fans happy and supportive. The casual fans are going to buy the game regardless because that's what they do. They will play it until the next talked about game comes out.

I hate that us hardcore sports gamers really get alienated. When you say you are making the game for casual and hardcore fans it's impossible. You will turn a hardcore fan into a casual fan because he will become disappointed and play something else.

I do agree here, but they did manage to make both for the NHL series, in both controls and gameplay, so I am sure they can do it for the MMA Series as well

I personally don't mind if they balance somethings toward gameplay over real life MMA. if it comes down to something being unfun because its realistic or fun because its not AS realistic. I would take the fun over realism anyday.

I understand the desire to have both accessibility and complexity but I really think it is one of those intangible golden egg things that people keep pushing for in the game industry. The desire for both scenarios usually translates into a myriad of nightmarish executions when attempted in a game since "complexity" is such a subjective term.

Skate was complex and had a harsh learning curve but it redefined the expectations for extreme sports games. If you want to innovate you're are going to have to ignore accessibility since all accessibility really is, is a familiarity with rehashed conventions in game design. Don't worry, it will be accessible by the sequel.

Madden is, on paper, a very complicated game but it is accessible because we've essentially been playing the same madden game since 1992.

All that being said I am reserving my opinion on MMA until I get a demo in my hands and find out how the grappling works since that is where innovation is required and where accessibility should be ignored.

xbox.BallPtPenTheif wrote:I understand the desire to have both accessibility and complexity but I really think it is one of those intangible golden egg things that people keep pushing for in the game industry. The desire for both scenarios usually translates into a myriad of nightmarish executions when attempted in a game since "complexity" is such a subjective term.

Skate was complex and had a harsh learning curve but it redefined the expectations for extreme sports games. If you want to innovate you're are going to have to ignore accessibility since all accessibility really is, is a familiarity with rehashed conventions in game design. Don't worry, it will be accessible by the sequel.

Madden is, on paper, a very complicated game but it is accessible because we've essentially been playing the same madden game since 1992.

All that being said I am reserving my opinion on MMA until I get a demo in my hands and find out how the grappling works since that is where innovation is required and where accessibility should be ignored.

great point!!

and i totally agree with you about madden, it can be very complex with playcalling and strategy and trying to expose the opposing teams weaknesses, BUT someone thats a football fan can easily pick up madden and play it for the first time and still have fun... same goes with nba live and nhl, both are games that are easy to pick up and play but can take a good while to fully master... i too will reserve my opinion on it until i get a hands on look at the game and the mechanics, thats the only fair thing to do... i wouldnt be too worried as of now

Don't panic guys, I think you are reading a little too much into my words. We are not talking 2 buttons and a d-pad here. Having said that, I will reserve further comment until we can be a little more forthcoming about the gameplay mechanics.

Cheers,

Rob

easw.EA_RobHyder wrote:Don't panic guys, I think you are reading a little too much into my words. We are not talking 2 buttons and a d-pad here. Having said that, I will reserve further comment until we can be a little more forthcoming about the gameplay mechanics.

Cheers,

Rob

LOL

cem_ea_id.Rear_naked_poke wrote:
I may be wrong and i hope i am but i dont want a short and sweet pick up and play experiance.. which it seems to me like part of there market focus has ben turned to.. if i did i'd go buy Street Fighter, or Tekken.

Sorry to disappoint you, but SF and Tekken have 2 of the deepest fighting systems around.

Take a look at Tekkenzaibatsu.com or shoryuken.com once in a while. You'd be surprised.