koberulz wrote:Leftos wrote:The freedom to act is still there, there's no vetos, but there's a lot more consequences, which is what makes MyGM so much more engaging
'Tedious' is a better word, IMO.
I apologize for singling out one line. But this just really irks me. You just quoted one of the developers, and corrected him, about something you've never touched or played, nor have much information to go on. Re-reading it, it's not as bad as I initially interpreted it, as you go on to say "I can't see", however it still just bugs me. We know nothing about the added benefits of all these additions, or how avoidable/ignorable the entire concept really is. We don't know if the meetings are completely intrusive (Live PDA anyone?), or passive such as the GM sitdowns in MyCareer.
As for the "too indepth", the ticket pricing and other stuff which seems to be influenced by the Madden series, will most likely be completely avoidable. In the Madden series they were always just more of an immersion adder, or however you'd put it.
Definitely will be nice to get more clarification on the benefits to dealing with these idiot owners

rather than just ignoring them though.
One possible benefit I could dream up, is allowing your team to go over the luxury tax for example. Sweet talk and brown nose your Billionaire Russian owner enough, and maybe he lets you sign 3 max contracts from free agency? Who knows, there a plenty of possibilities. Maybe some owners/markets are more enticing to players ala LA, New York, vs Milwaukee, Cleveland?
I think one of the main reasons for people being so hesitant about the new mode, is that these kind of things never worked that great in sports games (not just 2K) in the past (like Shadow said, team chemistry, demanding players, CPU GM AI with regards to trades and rotations etc.). It doesn't matter to them that the new mode is being produced by completely different people, or that it's built from the ground up, or w/e. We've all heard the "improved CPU trade AI" or w/e multiple times and continue to see blatant and immersion breaking flaws in CPU AI logic that have continued to persist. I believe this is more in line with what Shadow is talking about. We by no means are blaming this on any one person, and it's clear that improvements have slowly been made on these 'smaller' issues throughout the years, but I believe this is where the skepticism or hesitancy stems from.
Also Leftos thanks for the additional info, can't be easy coming to these boards sometimes where the posters are so critical of even a little tweet
