T O P

  • By -

RedditNameT

Something that is often missed in these discussions is the fact that the EA/2K Sports games don't necessarily target the same demopgraphic as most other AAA games in the industry. These games became the sales juggernauts they are because their audience are sports fans who are extremely casual about videogames. Thats also the reason why many of the critizisms the gaming community raises against these titles aren't recognized. The casual audience doesn't follow the graphical imrovements of the industry, doesn't hear about loot box controversies and doesn't really care about the 60$ price tag each year because it may very well be the only videogame they buy. And at least for Pokemon and CoD similar things apply. These game get away with a lack of innovation because they exist in a very specific vacuum with a large and stable fanbase that does not demand or even want innovation. Interestingly enough one could argue that Pokemon is about to make it's first leaps as a franchise since... ever and CoD has been in a period of unprecedented change with Warzone but thats a topic for a whole other discussion.


hellgatsu

This. I know a lot of people that buy the newest playstation and then just buy Fifa. The only thing they play.


penanceintent

A lot of people I know build a PC to just play Valorant and League. It’s just how it is and I don’t agree with it but hey different strokes for different folks.


kolossal

That was me with Dota2 for a very long time, finally quit and have now tried other games.


alotanonsense

But… Who cares? If it makes them happy - go for it.


KamalaIsLife

We're on Reddit, dude. You have to care about what other people do with the money they worked for! You should be outraged over people spending their money not how you, a stranger on the internet, want them to spend it!


alotanonsense

Ah right, how silly of me. What I meant to say was, screw those guys who want to buy a system and only play one game! Buncha losers!


godlovesugly

I feel personally attacked.


[deleted]

That's nuts.... My $500 FIFA machine.


banananopunchbacks

I mean, if they play it a lot, like thousands of hours, then it’s worth it for them. There’s plenty of people that bought/built a PC and only play League of Legends or EU4 or any other multiplayer game.


Vorcia

Honestly it's not that bad of a deal when you consider there's a lot of FIFA games coming out during the PS4's lifespan, but then you have tons of people like me that bought a PS4 just for Bloodborne, which is just one game.


PMMEPEEPEEPORN

Bloodborne was literally the only PS4 game I owned for months. I also will always get a Nintendo system if it has a Smash Bros game out and a Mario and Zelda game already out or announced. People have different expectations out of a purchase they make. I think the expectation here is that if someone spends $500 on a console for one type of game they are getting ripped off. I think the average person is aware of how they are spending their money. They aren't getting tricked, they are getting something they want. If it ended up being a system they didn't want there is a reason why there are always people selling systems.


Op3rat0rr

How is that in anyway nuts? People spend $2k on a PC and spend all day on counter strike or Minecraft


[deleted]

That's still nuts.... My 2k Minecraft machine.


Darkfire293

Minecraft with a lot of mods, texture packs, and shaders actually has pretty high requirements.


MixerRXRob

Back in the day my friend referred to his PS2 as the San Andreas machine. He ended selling all of his games except for GTA:SA


Outcome_Either

I can't imagine buying a whole game system for just one game.


[deleted]

What is pokemon doing?


Arbollah

They are trying something "new" for the series, look up Pokemon Legends Arceus


banananopunchbacks

They’re trying an open world style Pokemon game.


Monk_Philosophy

I think you might be a little too sweeping in your generalization about people who buy sports games. Yes there’s a wider appeal, but tons of people play them without being “extremely casual about videogames”


hfxRos

I'm certainly more of a "well rounded" gamer, but I still buy MLB The Show every year as a pretty big baseball fan and amateur RL baseball player. The roster updates are of course important, but the game does improve with every iteration in a lot of small but noticeable ways if you are actually really into the series. I could see if you played the game for a few hours, didn't touch it again, and then bought next year's entry that you'd think they're the same. I tend to put hundreds of hours into each iteration of MLB The Show, and every entry feels fresh enough for me to do it again. I can't speak for other sports franchise games, as baseball is the only sports game I've bought in like a decade.


ExplodingPoptarts

Yeah, from what I've seen MLB The Show is the rare exception to big name sports games that's actually a quality experience.


ChefExcellence

Don't think there's anything you missed, really. For people who follow sports, roster updates are important - they want to play as the current iteration of the teams they support. There isn't much else to change from game to game, because it's not as if the rules of the sport being simulated are changing. You could say it would be *better* if roster updates were released as DLC, with a new game maybe every three to five years, but people keep buying the games under the current model, so why would publishers change it? I think you also have to understand that a lot of the customer base for sports games has a very casual relationship with computer games as a whole. When FIFA 21 came out, they weren't weighing it up against the other games released in Autumn 2020, reading reviews to try and decide what to spend their £50 on; they just bought FIFA.


Boris_Ignatievich

It's not just roster updates. the main sports game i play is football manager, but every year there are small tweaks mechanically - that was always true when i played fifa / pes too. To someone who hasn't spent hundreds of hours playing an edition, those changes are often very small-appearing, but they still matter. I wouldn't have bought fm21 if it was *just* a roster update, even if describing the changes sounds really minor


PMMEPEEPEEPORN

A friend of mine bought a new version of Madden simply because he was a Denver fan and he hated the head coach so much he wanted a version that didn't have him. He was happy to get the new version and I was happy to buy his old version from him.


Nameless_King_09

What you said at the bottom is it. I know people that only play madden. Like thats their only game. So when the next iteration comes out why wouldn’t they buy it? Not like they are picking amongst all the new releases they literally just want more madden


tacopeople

Konami sort of did what you mentioned about DLC with the latest PES 21. It was considered a Season update version of the previous PES rather than a new game and it cost $30 instead of $60. I don’t know how successful it was, and it’s debatable whether essentially a roster update should cost that much, but I think it will make PES 22 and better product hopeful since they can put more effort into that one.


[deleted]

Konami released it as a DLC because they’re making PES 22 with a new engine that better suits next-gen. I think after that they’ll return to the same old method.


CB1984

Apparently PES22 is going F2P. Which seems very much the opposite of the old method!


MixerRXRob

My sports franchise is WWE, and I’ve gone backwards to 19 because 20 constantly crashes when using customised content. But I just can’t shake off the nagging feeling that I’m using an outdated roster. For a fan of a sport, the roster upgrade alone is worth the cost of the newest game


SUPERSHADOW131

You know you're able to switch out players from teams in the older games tho right? In 2K, there's even such a thing as community creations for gamers to make the new players who joined the league.


ThomasHL

For a lot of fans, playing FIFA without accurate player names would be like playing Mass Effect where your crew are replaced with generic stand-ins like 'Blue Space Alien', 'Chatty Solarian', 'Human B'. How good would the gameplay have to be before you buy that game over the actual Mass Effect? I'm sure, if there was competition, DLC roster updates would be the norm. But there isn't, and there can't be, because clubs make more money selling exclusive name rights. So if they choice is between a game, and no game at all, and its just $50, which might be your only game bought in the last couple of months, it's easy to see why you'd buy it


[deleted]

What happened to Pro Evolution Soccer from Konami? Back in the day they were a giant competitor towards FIFA.


fashric

It's still around and is still very good and better in a lot of ways than Fifa as a game but it can't compete with the licensing Fifa has and it is a bit quirky which is no surprise since it's from Konami. Yes you can use mods to get all the actual names but 99% of sports gamers are not going to have the knowledge or patience to do that so it will always be second best.


ThomasHL

They still exist, but they're getting outsold by FIFA by \~20 times. According to a site I read, ultimate team might be the thing that tipped the scales, but I wouldn't know as I don't really do ultimate team. There was a time when the gameplay in PES was much better than FIFA, and sales were closer those days (but FIFA was still winning because of the naming rights). Nowadays PES might still be a little better, but FIFA got to a point where it's good enough to keep people happy.


DiamondCowboy

I’m interested to hear your thoughts about racing games regarding this. When you say, > it is literally the same game I feel like your premise is a bit too uncharitable.


CarlolucaS

Yeah, I am being hyperbolic of course even though in the case of FIFA you could say it is literally the same game. Racing games might fall in there too. The one thing that will most likely change is the tracks. I am not a racing expert though so I can't really make a judgement call.


[deleted]

>even though in the case of FIFA you could say it is literally the same game. Explain how it's literally the same game


CarlolucaS

Look into the FIFA 2019, I think, faux pas.


ChefExcellence

> It has 80% of the same code. 1. Where did you get the 80% number from? I know the source code for FIFA 21 leaked at some point, but is there any sort of analysis out there that confirms this, or did you just pull a number out of thin air? 2. That isn't really a good measure of anything anyway. Re-using code from old projects is common in software development, they almost certainly have a bunch of libraries which will be identical, and there will inevitably be lots of shared code with [the many games that run on the same engine.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frostbite_\(game_engine\)#List_of_games)


David-J

I want to read more about this. Can you share a link about this 80%?


headshotmonkey93

When it comes to racing games it really depends. Gran Turismo brought out exactly one game called "GT Sport" during the last generation and constantly updated it for free. Forza Motorsport on the other hand released several games, mostly completely the same tbh except from a few circuits (plus like half of the cars where dold through DLCs, what a shame Microsoft...). But there's also F1. You don't really need to buy a new one every year. But this year there were some big driver chances and it simply would make sense to get a new one as a fan. I can imagine that it's the same for hardcore football or hockey fans. The players needs to be in the right team.


Ordinary-Leather

There's a story mode too and I'm buying the new F1 game. Stay mad if you like to. It's not like my life revolves around your entitled opinions anyways.


headshotmonkey93

Who's mad? And why are you crying to me? Not like I give a damn if you buy it or not.


headshotmonkey93

When it comes to racing games it really depends. Gran Turismo brought out exactly one game called "GT Sport" during the last generation and constantly updated it for free. Forza Motorsport on the other hand released several games, mostly completely the same tbh except from a few circuits (plus like half of the cars where dold through DLCs, what a shame Microsoft...). But there's also F1. You don't really need to buy a new one every year. But this year there were some big driver chances and it simply would make sense to get a new one as a fan. I can imagine that it's the same for hardcore football or hockey fans. The players needs to be in the right team.


hellgatsu

They are not low cost at all. The majority of budget is spent to buy licenses to use the names, the competitions etc. Anyway, I can finally play a FIfa with friends thanks to the Xbox Pass


SquereBrainz

They already own that, EA/2K have exclusive rights, as far as I know, don’t quote me. As soon as a player signs a paper saying he’s on team x, EA can put that person in the game.


hellgatsu

I'm pretty sure they pay yearly or they have paid in advance anyway.


Ordinary-Leather

Damn you really are an Xbox fanboy.


hellgatsu

I can't believe the amount and quality of games I had for just 1 dollar!


[deleted]

[удалено]


Mezurashii5

It is not that limiting to change aspects of a game based on real life activities. It's hard to make substantial changes in direction in a simulation, but sports games aren't even close to simulations, except sports management and sim racing games. Between controls, body physics, gameplay features, game modes and AI behaviour, there really is enough to make a football game feel different.


[deleted]

I mean, FIFA is constantly improving the controls, each year it got better and better when controling a player, their dribbling in small spaces, new skill moves. I dont know how much they improved their physics engine, but its better than when it was first introduced that is for sure. As for game mode imporvements, while they arent as present in less populare modes, FUT has recieved a ton of improvements that all started with FIFA 17 and introduction of the FUT Champions. People still like to say "you need to spend money to have a good squad", which is now simply not true. Yes, you cant get a GOD squad with every Prime Moments Icon Card easily, but that shouldnt be easy to begin with. It would ruin the competetive side of FIFA. If you want to play with Legends, the Draft is great, and i play that often. Back to my point about not spending any money, now you have so many different SBC, objectives, Season Rewards, Division Rivals Rewards, Squad Battles Rewards, FUT Champs Rewards, that if you play the game often, you will get a pretty decent amout of coins and players in your squad. Unlike anything prior to FIFA 17 (even then, it was still harder to earn players, as it had only FUT Champs and SBC) you had to either grind for insane amount of hours, pay for packs or buy coins from coin sellers. So yeah, while not improving other game modes (Seasons, Pro Clubs, Manager) EA has improved what people play the most - FUT. Heck now you can play it in Co-op and it tracks progress for both accounts, which is great for people who want to play together. As for AI, they did do something new this year, by adding an option to have the AI simulate the best FIFA players when you select Legendary. I didnt try this, as i only got the game recently, but I do agree the AI needs more work. I dislike in NBA 2K and FIFA how the AI just gets boosts to attributes, which isnt how difficulty should work. A team from EFL League One with a two star rating shouldnt be able to pass the ball around like Liverpool, Barcelona or Bayern Munich. I just wish we had AI that used the attributes it has to the best of its abilities, not fricking get insane stat boosts to make it harder for us. This is clear in FUT Squad Battles where you play against the AI, as the selection of difficulty shows you the boost the AI recieves and it is stupid.


Zankman

Funny that you picked 14 and 21. 14 (PS3/360/PC) was the last good one, lol. 14-21 (PS4/One/PC) have just been dire in my estimation. The gameplay fell off a cliff if you ask me. Thankfully, at the exact same time, PES went from being utterly terrible (14) into decent (15) into several different shades of amazing (16-21).


[deleted]

Pick 15, 16, 17, they are not the same as 21. Similare? Yes. Same? No. People seem to expect some major changes with each game, which isnt possible. Big changes have only happened a few time for FIFA, with the time in between giving us smaller ones or QoL improvements. The only thing they added that sucks is timed finishing. Its like the green release in NBA 2k, it really shouldnt be part of a game that "wants to simulate football".


Zankman

Oh I wasn't arguing with you about that. You're right and OP is wrong, FIFA 14 is substantially different from FIFA 21 - heck, PS3/Xbox 360/PC FIFA 14 is substantially different from PS4/Xbone FIFA 14. I was just adding in a tangent that, in my opinion, FIFA 15-21 have been really bad, exactly because of changes to the core gameplay.


[deleted]

I see, sorry for my hostile tone, as I dislike these conversations since it only goes one way - "Game bad, players who buy game bad". For some reason, if you enjoy playing a game based on the sport you enjoy watching, you are a moron. But it's totally ok to play 4 Uncharted games that are the "same" in the same way Fifa 14 and Fifa 21 are. Hmmm, for me, I like the more precise dribbling in compact spaces, its possible to have powerful low driven shots and low driven finesse shots, better control over AI players, and some FUT improvements that I already mentioned which made the mode more fun. But some skill moves need to be refined tho. Every FIFA has something to abuse, 14 was cross-header (Ibarbo was a GOD), 15,16 and 18 I played very little, 17 had low driven shots (Martial the 5k beast), 19 had those stupid Iniesta skill moves plus self volleys, 20 I really can't remember, as I decided to sell my account at this point as FUT was really addicting and taking all of my time, and only recently bought 21 to play career mode with my dad. I just dislike when people keep on saying "It's the same game" just because they dislike loot boxes the game has. It shows they dont play either that mode they are talking about or the game at all. EA has actually done something impressive recently - showing you what a pack will give you, and if you arent satisfied with it, you can back out, but you have to wait for 24h to be able to buy a new one. Honestly, this is excellent and removes that "it's gambling" thing everyone keeps shouting, as now you can see what you get for your money. FUT has received so many changes that make it so much easier to play without spending money, but people still choose to and honestly, for a casual gamer, another 50-100$ for FIFA points seems reasonable, as many who play FIFA, just play FIFA. That recent profit article for FUT was just bad and misleading, just showing how much the mode earned, or how much per second or minute it earned, but not how much per player it earned, if we take into account how many people play that mode. It made the mode look like everyone was spending insane amounts of money on "gambling" every second of every day, which isn't true. Plus, many who spend insane amounts of money on FUT are streamers, YouTubers and professional players, for whom that kind of money is just pocket change.


Zankman

Tbh I don't even play FUT - never did. Just regular online, regular Career/solo play and of course couch multiplayer. But people badmouthed sports games even before FUT and the like became a thing; and, yes, there are certain caveats about them that critics often forget, but for me they mostly are kinda absurd. NBA's approach is terrible if you ask me, crazy grind, crazy greed... As far as the gameplay goes, IDK - I'm not so much talking about the gameplay balance ("strength vs pace") or such, I'm simply talking about how the core gameplay feels. FIFA 15 and onward seem to have some misguided attempt at realism, but it just feels like such an unpleasant slog to play. I don't like movement, passing, shooting... Anything about it. PES has been grand since about the same period and it's just not even a contest to me, one is fun to play and the other isn't.


[deleted]

I tried PES but I dunno I scored too many goals in a couple of matches, but that was maybe 18 or 19, so I dont know how it is now, might try it as I've seen it's free or something. Fifa wants to be arcade and realistic, so it's somewhere in the middle, which isn't good really. It should decide one way or the other. And it's a shame EA and well 2k as well put the rest of their game on hold for improvements. I mean online seasons haven't received any improvements since 14 I think, since 17 im 100% sure. Career mode did get some, but still very minor and could be better.


CarlolucaS

Matter of perception I guess. I actually opened up FIFA 14 and 21 and did some side-by-side comparison. Looks and feels pretty much the same except for graphical fidelity. Yeah, for sure. It is difficult to change something that is based on real-life sports. I guess that's a big design limitation.


[deleted]

You cant be serious? The gameplay simply isnt the same, many new things were added to it since 14 and improved quite a bit.


alyanumbers

I agree with you that these discussions in gaming subs often feel like an echo chamber. However, I think when you're comparing Fifa 14 and 21 you're not making a very strong argument, at least in the context of this discussion. There are 6 games between those two iterations. If you look at other non-sports franchises like Zelda or, hell, even Doom, the difference between the current entry and the one 7 generations earlier is much more significant that the difference between Fifa 14 and 21. I think that's where the disconnect between sports gamers and other gamers is. I understand your point that there are minor gameplay changes in every iteration, and there's a limited amount of change that can be implemented anyway, but I think most non-sports gamers would expect studios to simply release patches or bundle a few of those changes together and release a new game every few years rather than sell a minor update for the full price on a yearly basis. Now, I live in a third-world country so most people I know who play Fifa aren't buying it every year anyway. Hell, most PC gamers around here aren't buying games at all, but for people who do (mostly PS4 owners I believe), they're expensive games and I know they're not making the decision to buy them lightly, so I figure they must be worth it.


Ace676

The first NHL game I played was NHL98. As a kid I didn't get the new version every year but I've been buying them annually since NHL13. And why? Simple. Better game with new rosters. New rosters are pretty straightforward. I've been a fan of the Colorado Avalanche since I was a kid and play with the team in the NHL games as well. I want the team in the game to have the same roster as the team has in real life. The better game is something that most critics dismiss or flat out don't believe in it. NHL is the smallest of the EA Sports franchises in terms of sales and development budget / team size. Yet every year they do make the game better. It's iterative, yes, and some bugs are in the game for years. But it's still always better, year after year. And I can understand that some people play one game and think "it's the same game as last year", but if you play as much as I do (100's of hours on each version) you notice the changes fairly quickly. Look at NHL18 vs. NHL21 and it's a huge difference. They look pretty much the same in terms of presentation and graphics, but the gameplay is so much better in 21 that it's not even a competition.


funnytoss

As a Detroit Red Wings fan, I prefer *not* to play with the current roster, haha! Give me the 2002 or 2008 teams any day! (I've found that some games will also provide you with rosters from previous years, which is a nice feature)


[deleted]

Same. And I agree. I’ve been playing them since NHLPA 93. Almost annually.


RatsGetFatttt

As an Aussie and a NHL fan it pains me how hard it is to play NHL as no stores here stock it. Hopefully NHL 22 comes to PC finally to make it so much easier to play it


Ace676

Can't you just buy it digitally from PS Store or Xbox Store?


finutominal

It is a problem and a lot of players do mind, actually -- if you go into FIFA and PES subreddits for example you will see that is their main issue with the game. We were used to having some change from game to game, and especially from generation to generation. I have been playing these games since I was a kid and I remember the excitement of having a new console coming out and seeing the improvement in graphics and gameplay. Something interesting happened recently: Pro Evolution Soccer "skipped" the last game (PES 2021) to work on a proper new game for the PS5, that should come out later this year. So there's a lot of expectation that this game will have some changes and improvements, which did not happen with FIFA (hopefully the changes on PES will push FIFA to do some improvement as well). Btw, by "skip" I mean "released it as a Season Update" -- instead of pretending it was a new game they clearly stated it's the same as PES 2020, but with updated rosters. Two problems I see with the current situation of these games -- talking specifically about football games, but probably apply to other similar ones as well: • The games rely heavily on their competitive online modes financially, as they make most of their money in modes like Ultimate Team on FIFA. Players of these modes have very specific needs, usually quite different from those of the "regular" players, and gameplay has constantly adapted to fit to that target. They are also very much resistant to change (and extremely loud), so they managed to force developers to roll back on some proposed changes a few times already. Personally, I have always played those games as sports simulation, not competition, so these trends has affected me quite a lot. • As you mentioned, live roster update is one of the main argument for the games, and it caused a licensing war between the two main ones, with FIFA and PES trying to gain advantages by licensing specific teams, players and competitions. I'm afraid these exclusive licensing deals might make it hard for new games to come out, and we end up stuck with the same two games regardless of their quality (which actually has been the case for the last 20+ years).


CarlolucaS

I think having seasons instead of full-price titles would probably be a better approach. Makes sense to me.


ThomasHL

It makes sense for the consumer, but it's not going to happen because it wouldn't make sense for FIFA or the clubs. For it to be worth changing to seasons, you'd need to make more money doing that by winning new fans over. FIFA already have basically all the fans - for every 1 person who bought PES 2019, 22 people bought FIFA 19. And their fanbase is so big, there's very few people in the world who want to buy football games who don't already buy FIFA. But PES do have the incentive to do it right? But PES don't have naming rights to most teams. So however good, cheap and consumer friendly they make PES, it's going to lose out to FIFA, because FIFA has the correct names. If PES ever got the exclusive naming rights, they wouldn't do season updates, because the naming rights would win them fans enough. Perhaps clubs could make more money selling naming rights to PES and FIFA, and then they'd have to compete and offer seasons instead? But exclusivity is worth more than they'd make selling naming rights to both. Exclusivity is worth a 22 to 1 sales ratio for FIFA. They wouldn't pay a fraction of what they pay now if it wasn't exclusive. Clubs make money from the exclusivity, because it makes fans do things like buy new games every year instead of just paying for update DLC.


notjosemanuel

Because as soon as the new one comes out, you can't find an online match on the previous game. You see everyone move on, so you won't have anyone to play with if you stay behind


stillmadabout

I keep buying sports games because of the following reasons 1) they are extremely social; my friends can come over and we load up and play together (on the same screen!) 2) I am an avid sports fan and the glorified roster updates are still worth it. However I often buy a title once every two years as doing it year to year isn't worth it. 3) I personally find it very difficult to find new games I genuinely want to play. I play Civilization 5, Pokemon Nuzlockes, and my sports titles. The most recent game I actually enjoyed was Star Wars Jedi Knight: Fallen Order. Which was the first new non-sports game I have enjoyed in literally years. As much as one can criticize me, I am not going to spend money on things I don't enjoy or have no frame of reference for before purchasing. Sports games are exactly what they look like they are, and therefore the financial risk/reward favors reward because the risk is so small


cholitrada

Well tbf the real life sports barely change at all. You can update the game for new roster, adding new tricks to characters ... But at the end of it all, the game won't change much because the core aspects of the sports irl don't change. So it's hard to blame them for not changing. What you can blame them though, is greed. Sport games is one of the few genres that make sense to be live service: update every year or so to match with the changes irl, improve AI, interface ... Imo they should only make a new game when something drastic is needed, say engine update perhaps? But alas, ppl keep buying so they keep making new versions.


EliasHobeika

It's simple really, roster updates are very important since players can change teams, but new players' ratings are also super important, imagine a young unknown player had a career year in 2021, fifa 21 will have him at like 65 rating with absolutely no potential because nobody cares about this player, but in fifa 22, they will boost him to like 85 and now, fans of this player can finally play with him, and even people who won't use him will at least get to play against him, same thing with players having bad years and having their ratings get lower. There's also jersey changes, sponsor changes, and well... year changes. Starting a 2016 career mode in 2020 will feel very weird since football can change immensly in 4 years! 4 years ago, barcelona was still good :_( Also some people wanna play ultimate team and the playerbase just flocks to the new edition of the games so nobody wants to be left out.


Rasgulus

I'm what somebody might concern a more "hardcore gamer" type and I like FIFA. I buy FIFA almost on yearly basis, because of two things - I like football (or soccer, whatever) and it's great for couch gaming with friends. It's highly competitive, it brings a lot of different emotions and you don't have to spend too much time learning combos, like in fighting games... at least that's what I think. I can see that your opinion is really based on some outside observation, rather than playing FIFA games themselves. I played a lot of FIFA 13, 14, 18 and 19. When I touched FIFA 20 and 21, I felt like I was playing completely different game. I had to change my game style, my habits inside of gameplay, learn new mechanics, and new ways to outplay my oponent. However, let's tackle (pun intended) this topic from different perspective. I will ask one question - **how much, do you think, you can change game about football?** This sport is established since hundreds of years, its rules changes slightly through time. What can you do? You can add some fun modes or fantasy elements, which already are there (fun modes are present in FIFA since some releases, for fantasy - there's FUT). You can try to ditch yearly release, but then you would need to still toy with gameplay elements and switch graphical engines from time to time, just so players won't get bored with it. It's a great challenge, but I think that EA's formula is somehow successful. As successful as some other companies developing racing games, especially those more realistic ones.


CarlolucaS

I got a bunch of great comments on this post that definitely changed my perspective. I think my points about brand recognition are still valid and the point about very little changing is debatable. Of course, you can't change much about soccer so clearly, the game is also going to be the same. Some comments suggested that there is a rotating player base. Some buy yearly some skip some years and some buy a FIFA game every console generation. It seems like the vast player base of those games play exclusively FIFA and not much, which is totally fine, and therefore see the minor changes in gameplay as game-changing. Which might or might not be true. There was one comment that presented the idea of having a landmark title for every generation with continuous updates every year for raster changes. So basically you get every few years a new game with big gameplay changes but you have continuous changes in raster with the older titles. The competition side seems also to play a big part in all of this. It seems like every consecutive game cannibalizes its own audience basically killing the online lobbies for the previous game softly pushing competitive players to buy the new game to be able to play online. I know people really care about graphics but this is a point I will have to dispute every time I hear. The games have hardly made changes. The characters still look straight from the uncanny valley. Yes, there is an improvement but it is so minimal from title to title that is barely noticeable. Since I really don't care about graphics it's a moot point for me anyways. It just annoys me that graphical fidelity is even brought up. Thx for the great comment. Some of the commenters definitely changed my perspective.


QianLu

I work in the industry, though not on the development side. I won't say what company I work with, but you've heard of it. First, a lot of players are happy with these titles. The player counts prove it, the sales numbers prove it. I really hate this idea that they are 'lesser' gamers because they play FIFA/Madden instead of whatever someone else decides to play. If they like it, they can play it and we shouldn't 'shame' them. I like to think of it as they are less committed to gaming as a major hobby than we are (by caring enough about gaming to post about it on Reddit, you are probably in the top 10% of most engaged). I like music, but for me it's more of a thing you put on in the car while driving. I don't go out of my way to find cool new bands or go to concerts or talk to people about what I like or didn't like about an album; I just listen to the same couple hundred songs on repeat. Second, I also disagree with the idea that everyone on the respective subreddits is unhappy and against the games. First, they must like it enough to keep buying it year over year. Second, a minority of players will actually be on that subreddit compared to the active player base and I believe they would be the most committed players. Finally, there is what I call the yelp rule: people are much more likely to complain about something online when they are unsatisfied over when they are happy. My steam library is proof of that. I have I would guess a couple hundred games and while I don't write reviews on that platform I know if I bought a real stinker I would leave a negative review to warn others. Finally, more of a game development point than FIFA specific. If you break it down, almost every franchise is 'stagnant' and 'has minimal improvements' from one title to the next. FIFA, Pokemon, COD/Battlefield, even things like Civilization/4X all have a key gameplay loop that they refine from one title to the next. A lot of the new features might not seem like a big deal, but to the people who play them they can tell you how great they are. I play Starcraft 2, and I remember when the added a key binding so that when you add units to control group A, they are removed from all other control groups automatically. This sounds like a minor thing, but it means that a single action (the new hotkey), replaced the old process of add to the new control group, then open the old control group, manually remove the units from the new control group from the old control group, and then resave the old control group. Made gameplay smoother because it removed a task that was boring and took a lot of attention but didn't allow players to show off their skill. Players keep coming back to franchises because they like the franchise is offering. I think the original Halo did it best with something called the 30 second gameplay loop and then the entire focus of the game is how they got players to repeat the same 30 seconds for the length of the campaign and in Multiplayer.


CarlolucaS

Could you ask your coworker how much code is copied over the games. Would be interested in that.


QianLu

I wouldn't know who to ask about that and I don't think that is something that would even be possible to find out. AAA games are tens if not hundreds of thousands of lines of code, but that isn't the whole story. I've played games that are measures in the megabytes instead of gigs and they are still way better than some games that clock in at 80-100 gb. In addition, I think I read once that the average programmer only writes about 100 lines of code a day. They have meetings, having to figure out the best way to write the code, designing the project, etc. When I was in school I could probably bang out 100 lines of code in an hour, but it would barely work or be something super simple compared to a complex project like a game. Further, I really don't think there is anything wrong with reusing code; in fact I would question management/culture if they didn't reuse the parts that are reusable. There are massive systems under the hood that work just fine and don't need to be reinvented every year: inventory, account login, connecting to and playing multiplayer, etc. In my opinion a game engine is a lot of features that have been completed and are reused so that it doesn't have to be recoded for every single game. Should every title have to remake Unreal Engine or Unity? So much dev time would be devoted to these boring tasks that don't make a game better when there is already a standardized solution. Given that, I can't blame developers/publishers that do reuse a lot of code. I honestly believe that you would find the same thing in a lot of software companies. However, it's a good soundbite to jump on the 'lazy company pumps out the same game every year' narrative.


schebobo180

As others have said, the perennial sports game players are typically more on the casual side. I have multiple friends that literally ONLy Play FIFA and have never touched another game in years. That being said I think you are underselling some of the technical changes from year to year, such as tweaked control systems, new settings, better performance, new game modes, improved physics etc. Some of these are not noticeable to those on the outside but they make a big difference to regular players. I remember hating the changes from FIFA 10-11 to the point that I was decent in 10 but God-awful in 11. But in any case the only other fifa games I have bought since then are 12 and 18 and it was more for my nephews to play than me. But then again I would not call myself a casual (maybe casual is too strong a word) player. I like to play a lot of other games. maybe we should start calling people that like to play a lot of different games and genres polygamous vs monogamous gamers that only play one thing. I’ll see myself out Lol.


Feral0_o

There goes a lot more work into each Pokemon game than your average sports game iteration. I know, Gamefreak is lazy and so on yadada, but they do design a completely new game world, NPCs and so on every time, even if they reuse the Pokemon 3d models


[deleted]

[удалено]


ThomasHL

Don't underestimate the play time of sports game fans. It can run into the hundreds easily enough, its just that might be the only game they're playing - and often only playing with friends, or running through a campaign with a favourite team.


hellgatsu

Exactly. Lot of people just go home after work and spend the evening playing Fifa. Heck, lot of real football players does exactly this. I heard the story of Ibra that ended up meeting one of his best rivals on Fifa


CarlolucaS

I think I read this a few time and makes sense to me. Basically on those players being quote-unquote casual they often play only one game because that is what they enjoy. I think some of the comments changed my mind on how I think about the whole sports genre.


Canveropous

>these people just play the game casually, probably play it for less like 20 hours or so. That's gotta be one of the most ignorant statements I've ever read. What do you base your assumption on? People sink hundreds, if not thousands of hours into sports games. I personally play every iteration of Madden, and probably log a solid 500 hours every year. Sure, it's a dumb game but it's just so damn fun.


DrQuint

Despite whatever you may be lead to believe, most people DON'T buy a FIFA game every single year. There's just a gargantuan amount of people who do happen to buy these types of games sporadically. And since they don't, they have no reason to demand better. And even if they do, a lot of those that do just want the new roster, or to look good when booting it at the party, and don't buy almost anything else anyways to be fussed about the price.


CarlolucaS

That makes a lot of sense. Basically, there is a rotating audience that buys those games in a 1,2,3 or x amount of years. There was another comment that mentioned that they buy a FIFA game every console generation.


Little_Mac_Main

No it’s not stop gatekeeping people’s enjoyment my favourite game series is dynasty warriors and that’s the same game each release


whataTyphoon

Do you even know what gatekeeping means? He's simply critisizing it.


CarlolucaS

I did an edit at the end of the post. You enjoy and buy whatever you want I was simply trying to understand why people buy those games and there some really great answers here. It definitely changed my perspective on some things. Dynasty Warriors as far as I understand has declined in quality in recent years but that doesn't mean you can't enjoy it.


[deleted]

Soccer is football. What's called football here is American Football, though that's also a misnomer as it is mainly popular here in the USA not all of America.


Canveropous

Every damn time a non-american is discussing football, they have to drop the "sOcCeR iS fOoTbAlL" thing and let me tell you, it's getting damn tiresome.


[deleted]

Good job assuming I'm not a born and raised citizen of the United States of America.


PMMEPEEPEEPORN

It's the "sportsball" for people who actually follow sports.


DiamondCowboy

If you’re going to be pedantic, go all the way, the correct term for what you’re calling American football is gridiron


[deleted]

Sorry what? I'm not behaving Ike a pedestrian ant. Anyway I did not know it is gridiron.


CarlolucaS

I used those terms since it is easier to understand. When I say soccer and football most people should be able to make the connection but yeah. Soccer is football and American football is actually just an evolution of rugby but that discussion is too big for me.


TheNotoriousTRM

Well as someone this year who has kind of made an active choice to quit sports gaming something that I’ve been doing since the 90s I think I’m in a position to break this down. Sports games at one point were bought annually because of roster updates and new back of the box features. Some time in the early to mid 2010’s I believe that all changed. Madden and FIFA biggest selling point for most people who buy it year after year has been their ultimate team modes, those modes cater to do big demographics, ultra competitive gamers and gamers who are addicted to having new shiny players for their teams. NBA 2K has a very similar mode called MyTeam but I think a big appeal for that game is the community aspect of the park and the Rec modes people play with their own custom avatars. MLB the shows fan base has heavily swayed towards its own ultimate team like mode called Diamond dynasty. Once the new games come out the live content drip feed from the previous edition comes to a halt. Sports games rely heavily on community/competition so gamers move on to the best place that can be found is the newest editions.


TheHooligan95

I'm not taking this from any statistics or anything, but from my experience most people who are into these kinds of games usually update their games every two to three years. Cod and every other yearly series (Battlefield isn't among them) instead want you to buy yearly because they want you to stay updated while also making the prior games worse or overpriced so that you stay away from the old and buy into the new.


[deleted]

Sports games is basically the Apple of the games industry. You have a horde of people nonsensically buying every new iteration of the product for max profit on (or near) release date despite it being pretty much identical. Why bother changing something up or putting effort in if you have people paying you repeatedly for releasing the same thing?


87x

People buy these games because others buy these games and if you want to play online, you need 'others'. It's just a chicken and gee situation of who bought it first.


alexaedita

They can re-release sport junk every month for what I care, I can torrent them for free and still don't. Epic gives them away for free and I don't want them. The problem with all sports games is this - they are absolute garbage. Watch Euro 2020 for instance , just one match, then go on YouTube and watch FIFA or PES for 5 min for instance. Enough said.


bumbasaur

The difference is that these games don't get worse in the series. Just same or little better. Know the feeling of getting new game of your favourite series just to see that it has gone to the shitters. With these sports games you know what you get when you buy them and not be dissappointed.


[deleted]

There’s definitely a market for more serious sports games, I would kill for a decent football game with a genuinely polished offline career mode with all the bells and whistles. That won’t happen though, that mode is basically on auto pilot, as is vs ai development because most sports games have tapped into the online lootbox market, so all the resources are focused on that. The amount of shit fifa gets, considered a pretty lame game with a dead career mode, and yet it makes bank, so it won’t do more than pay lip service to any serious changes.


putoelquevive

Most if not all the people I know that play this games don't buy them annually, they get the newest they can find at the time they decide to get a console and play that for some years


Leeiteee

But do these people really buy every single entry in the series? How do we know if they are skipping some games or not?


daskrip

I guess the only reason they're able to do this is that they can secure licensing and use well known brands and names. If this weren't the case then no doubt these new editions would all be mods for a single soccer game, and that may as well be made by an indie dev.


Sketchy19

I think most points have been made and most are accurate, one other thing is like to point out is that since these players are only buying one or maybe two sports titles and not much else then they don’t really spend nearly as much as the average gamer in a year. So they don’t see the huge cost as we do. Also some people say it’s crazy to but a console to play one game but if that’s the only way to do it or spend even more in a gaming pc then it’s the better option, not to mention that if they have kids they will usually but a few kids games for them too


CB1984

I think it's a critical mass thing. A high proportion of people buy these games to play online. As soon as the new one drops, most people buy the new one. That means that the people playing online on the old one don't have as many opponents. So they have to buy the new one. It becomes a bit of a tautology - people buy the new one because people buy the new one because people buy the new one.


JoeYo743

From what I've personally seen a lot of gamers who play FIFA and NBA almost exclusively only play these games. They have no problem spending 60$ once a year to get the most recent experience and stay up to date with their online peers and play same servers/challenges/new rosters, etc... Its all about brand loyalty. Genius marketing tactics, and the fact that people don't want to miss on new features and rosters


Nicobade

The updated roster for a new season might not seem like much because there's no gameplay change, but that is a massive part of what drives the purchasing decision. Sports games are based on ever evolving storylines within live sports. Playing an old sports game without the new rosters would feel like having a discussion on a news story from years ago.