Message to EA from me and mabe the rest of the community

[BIG GREEN]

You guys have talented people working for you...friends and family i'm sure. However, it's also evident that there are talented and hard working people here in this community also. We do quality and dont get paid.

Question: Why not hold some sort of skinning and modeling (for any kind of graphics) competition for live 2004 prior to the game's release and include the best ones in the final game? (eg. lebron's cyberface)

Question: If EA has a job opening..why not look within this community for applicants?

Question: Why not have a little more personal contact with us by posting occasionally here. Show people that you listen.

Question : Why not release offical patching utilities and game development kits to help us help you improve the game..and ultimately sales (money..chi ching!)

I'm not comparing the fan's work with your work...but it is something to consider. Other development companies hire people out of their communities...talented people who can do an equal or better job than their current employees. Whether you guys will admit it or not...communities help drive a game in the market..and showing a little more love to the fanbase wouldn't hurt you guys. Atleast give people a chance.

Now ofcourse..no one from EA will reply..but i know you'll read this (Tim..heh). Peace.

[Santiago Roza (Kq)]

Man, I'm with you. As a patchmaker, I've always felt that EA thinks of us as their whores: Do they use us? Yes. Do they give a damn about us? No. In fact, it's even worse than that: at least whores get paid...

Am I being a crybaby? Maybe, but other companies do things that EA doesn't:
- Other companies create official utilities to encourage patchers... EA doesn't even provide enough info to the 3rd party creators of the tools (We're still waiting for a way to edit speech!).
- Other companies use the feedback from their fan base to get ideas on how to improve the game... EA ignores one wishlist after the other (Hello? Custom teams?).
- Other companies organize competitions and awards, and even include 3rd party stuff in new editions of the game... EA doesn't even know we exist, and prefers releasing a game with 90% of generic rookie faces than adding our creations.
- Other companies keep fluent contact with the main members of their communities, participating actively in their forums... on the other hand, it's rumored that people from EA visits these forums, but I have never seen one of them posting (aside from Tim, who comes from the NLSC).
- Other companies hire people from their community when they have a job opening (who has more experience and love for the game?)... EA did it... once.

I can understand if EA guys don't really care about the community and only think of this as a job. But remember that a better relationship with the community can produce a better game (= more bucks).

I'd really like to know what patchers and notorious community members have to say about this. Tony, Andrew, Shane, Ben, Gene, Travis, Alex, David, DANet, Don, Jose, and of course Yohance and the rest of the guys... Do you feel fairly respected by EA?

[Andrew]

Since I'm a roster patchmaker, I'm not bothered by the lack of official editors and so forth. Working with the DBF files is easy when you know how. Similarly, I personally have nothing to bring to the development of NBA Live (sidenote: I had another attempt at cyberface creation last night. I'll stick to rosters. ) I'm not really offended that EA isn't offering me a position.

I understand other patchmakers desire though, since graphics patches require a lot more skill.

Custom teams are an example of the Wishlist not being answered. Mind you, we haven't actually compiled an "official" Wishlist for the last few years - the Live 2004 list was the first since Live 2001. It should be noted that some of the wishes have been granted before - Franchise Mode being the most prominent.

Considering the anti-EA sentiment in the NLSC Forum, it's not surprising that EA reps do not post. I'm not blaming anyone in the community, because there's no rule that says you cannot speak ill of EA (although constant bashing just ruins discussion). I'm just stating the facts - if an EA rep frequently posted in the forum, he or she would likely get flamed. I point to the abuse of Tim a couple of years back as an example.

I know this must seem like I'm sticking up for EA, and I guess in a way I am. Some things, like EA reps not posting here, can be explained. The best way for me to answer the question Kq put forward would be to say that I don't feel personally disrespected by EA. But I can see why other people feel that way. I'm not saying anyone is wrong or that people shouldn't feel how they feel, I'm just saying that I personally don't feel that way.

[thetruth]

I agree with you guys. However I think the problem lies with the fact that ea doesn't respect there Live fan base.

EA has shown it knows how to support a game community as evident with the Fifa Series. There Fifa has to fight for every game they sell as there is strong competition abundant in soccer gaming. They have to compete with Winning Eleven , which put out equally good if not better games. Thats why Fifa representatives have constant forum discussions, have made the game patcher friendly, and created a patching tool for the game in order to keep their fan base.

EA has only had to compete with the 2k series for a couple years. This has allowed EA to relax and forget what put them on top. The only way i see EA valuing Live fans is for the 2k series to totally dominate the market this year and make Live have to earn back fans.

I only wished 2k came out for PC, then EA would be in real trouble.

[jwin]

i think ea should, to some degree- or in some way, have more interaction with communities like this one in order to get a better balance between what they envision taking the game to another level to be, and what the gamers feel are the things that will get it there. wishlists are fine, but it's basically here are the things we want to have, then they make choices on what they feel they can put in, and what gets possibly cut out. but if there was an interaction on those ideas, for example- people want an allstar weekend loaded with activities like the three point contest, and rookie challenge, but ea thinks it might be too much to fit, so they propose maybe a 2 disk set that would include these types of things for a little more than what the game costs at present, it would give more room for balancing out what gamers want and what ea can do. it seems that as soon as the game turns out to be less than what people expected and they express their displeasure, or criticize ea there is no more interaction. but if they explain as they develope the game as to why certain features can't be included in the next version, and also give suggestions to see what interest people have in some of the things they are considering, the game could turn out to be more of what both sides want. there will probably never be a game that is perfect for every single person that buys it, but collaboration between both sides should eventually produce a product that both can be content with until there is a game that is as close to perfect as possible.

[DaManFromGapo]

[quote="kimani_7]
I only wished 2k came out for PC, then EA would be in real trouble.[/quote]

yeah...this would provide serious competition between the two companies. EA sports vs. Sega. Maybe EA does need a competitor so that they will try harder to improve their games. They won't be able to rely on their NAME anymore if Sega does release an NBA game to the PC.

[LegoSHAQ]

Question: If EA has a job opening..why not look within this community for applicants?

Hello? Where do you think Tim came from? He founded this site before he went to work for EA...

Question: Why not have a little more personal contact with us by posting occasionally here. Show people that you listen.

Tim tried that when 2001 came out and he coped alot of shit. I don't blame him for not wanting to post here often anymore.

Question : Why not release offical patching utilities and game development kits to help us help you improve the game..and ultimately sales (money..chi ching!)

We already have heaps of good tools developed by the community. Also NBA Live 2003 was really the first stepping stone to where "patching" was supported by the game with the custom art option. Previous versions of Live had been patched but it really wasn't supported by EA Sports. I suggest we wait and see what they have for us with Live 2004. If they expand on the custom art option and make the game fully patchable I am sure there will be tools to do so.

Am I being a crybaby?

Yes. NO OTHER COMPANY BOTHERS TO MAKE A BASKETBALL GAME FOR PC... So why whinge when EA Sports are the only ones listening and providing this game to the PC market?

[BIG GREEN]

ANYWAY....


Andrew..concerning people flaming EA reps...that's why you and i are here buddy . This forum is a pretty flame and spam free area (spare for a few who try to insite flame and reaction ...and they need to take a hint). I dont see them going through any sort of problems if they got more involved with the community.

The point of me starting this thread wasn't an attack on EA or how they do stuff..just some questions and suggestions that if looked at...would benefit both sides greatly.

[Metsis]

Yeah, this isn't flame... Just smoke without fire right... You boys are pissed off at EA, and you have in your minds some right to do so.

But the fact is that EA is upgrading the game as well as they can. You have to put out a game each year and now that you have to do these games to all of the consoles and still to the PC. It isn't really a surprise that the first edition of this console age is pretty much identical to the consoles. But there is only a year to do the game all over again and you cannot add too much to that in order to test the game thoroughly. They have the new team with Tim still learning the ropes and getting the hang of things.

And I still say that this is no official Live game forum. This is a good forum for it, but there is no involnment with EA here basically. Though I'm happy with Andrew that he keeps getting in EA's face every now and then... And getting us some "inside" information.

This is an untapped resource and it will be tapped into at some point and then we will have a little more say, but making a CPU game is a long and difficult process and you do what you must to make things work. There are tons of difficult choices that need to be made and they aren't always the choices they want to make. Meaning that the hectic timetable for development doesn't allow for somethings.

I still say EA has done alright in my books, but I think the game would benefit from a say two year development plan much more then now. EA could release official roster patches couple of times a year to keep the rosters real and develop the game with a longer development plan.

It's not all bad... I have seen a complete software product with far worse problems then EA's releases and the fact is that EA's releases have always worked. Maybe not the way you wanted them to, but worked non the less. (NHL 97 is the exception that confirms the rule, man that was awful) I really haven't seen an awful NBA Live game ever... I respect EA's effort. I'm not saying that it couldn't be better.

[Tony]

I agree with Yohance... and Kq on this matter... EA has hired only ONE person from an NBA Live community, and that was like 2-3 years ago, right? I mean, what David (LegoShaq) says there are all valid points, we should all be grateful we even get the game for PC, but I am confused why they don't hire talented artists to make their games great at the start, personally I'm still dreaming of an NBA Live game that will not need to be patched... Here are just some comments from a general gaming public, after one of their users posted some screenshots of my recently released top 3 draftpick patch, from a forum of a certain extremely respectable gaming website:

BTW If the patch guys can get it so good, why the fark can't EA in the first place?

after seeing those shots, im gonna go ahead and get live 2004 for pc. but 2k4 and ID for xbox.

Why don't they hire the guys that make these face patches to make the ones in the actual game? Those are incredible.

That's what I was thinking. Those are awesome. They look exactly like the real guys, and the amount of detail is just amazing.

I am going to get Live for the PC I forgot how good those patches are. I will stick with sega for console and role with live for the PC

YOU'VE GOTTA SELL THESE PICTS TO EA OR SOMETHING...BE AN ARTIST INTERN OR SOMETHING...I GIVE CREDIT WERE CREDIT IS DUE...IF THE GAME LOOKED LIKE THE PICTS U MADE SEGA SPORTS WOULD B BANKRUPT. YOUR PATCHES ARE TIGHT AS [censored you naughty boy]...

...Those patch pics are off the chain! EA needs to hire this Tony cat quick, fast and in a hurry.

tony, have u ever thought of showing your work to EA. Im sure with that type of work you would be sure to rack up some bling bling
But seriously, you should lookat soome internship or something
Mad props on the patches

If NBA Live has decent gameplay this yr.. I migh twitch from ID to NBA live again

Tony, i'm getting 2003 on PC tomorrow just because of you and the other guys on nbalive.org

Now, as evidenced by some extracted comments there, I, and a couple of other patchmakers, just sold for EA a dozen or so copies. Also, most of those people there (and 90% of general gaming public I assume) aren't even aware patching websites exist. They base their decision on buying the game on what they see put out on screenshots, and made by EA, which is why 2k series have the competitive edge, since graphically they owned the Live series this year. But personally I think, patchmakers in the end made the graphics of NBA Live 2003 10 times better than anything in the 2k series... but, wouldn't be in EA's interest to put out great graphics from the beginning... and do that by hiring, as Kq puts it, notorious community members? I'm sure they'd sell more copies, which is ultimately their only goal - earn more cash.

I believe many EA employees have seen the stuff we patchers do, since they keep using our ideas to improve their next year's games... but I guess its not in their interest to hire talented people to do their graphics, since we (patchers) are the people who keep their games alive (atleast in the pc market), and they get patches of their games for free, because we just do this kind of stuff for fun, as a hobby. We are probably idiots for doing it, and EA uses us, as Kq so eloquently put it, their whores.

Once I made a suggestion to Tim that EA Sports should hire some of the most talented patchmakers to make their games even better, but the response was something in the lines of "EA has talented graphics people, you'll see how the graphics will be great in this year's game" - as evidenced, the improvement wasn't as big as most patchers make them.

[Metsis]

This will be short...

I think Live games have always looked good *period*

There are some flaws in them ofcourse, but the creators don't have a week to work on LeBron James's face etc.

[BIG GREEN]

Live has looked good yea....but the cyber faces...man o man. Those can definitely be better for sure. Not only those, but other graphics can be better. The models themselves can be better. Players over the past couple years have look too muscular...now this year they *appear* stubby, textures on the jerseys are off ..etc. I'm hoping i'm wrong though.

BTW..metsis..you break on some nice points...as well as everyone else.

[Colin]

Even if the faces are done perfectly there will still be patches, just because there might be a "gives x a new hairstyle and facial hair" (unless they do a rotating cyberface thing like rodman of Live 98) patches. PLus they will not patch all the shoes etc.

[LegoSHAQ]

I think Live games have always looked good *period*

Agreed ..

I'm still dreaming of an NBA Live game that will not need to be patched...

Well keep dreaming because it will never happen.. even if EA released a "perfect" game.. different people will still think players should look different etc.. For example. In Live 2003 I thought the Kobe cyberface was near perfect and was the best cyberface in the game. Yet it is the most patched cyberface? why? because people have different views of what players should look like.. also players apearances change and EA cannot have current looks for faces they made 6 months prior to release.

and EA uses us, as Kq so eloquently put it, their whores.

Thats just silly.. EA don't force you to do the patches.. if you feel so used then don't do them..

[Tony]

I think Live games have always looked good *period*

Agreed. Good. But not great. Which they should be.

There are some flaws in them ofcourse, but the creators don't have a week to work on LeBron James's face etc.

A perfect face can be made in less than an hour if you put your mind up to it... and if you have great pics at your disposal, like EA does of every living player, it'd take even less... maybe 15 minutes per face.

Well keep dreaming because it will never happen.. even if EA released a "perfect" game.. different people will still think players should look different etc.. For example. In Live 2003 I thought the Kobe cyberface was near perfect and was the best cyberface in the game. Yet it is the most patched cyberface? why? because people have different views of what players should look like.. also players apearances change and EA cannot have current looks for faces they made 6 months prior to release.

I thought it was the best Kobe face EA ever made... but Kobe has only been patched so much because there is such a fanbase for him. Personally, I thought the face could've been a bit better, so I made it better... only once, and it took me 10 minutes to do it. But that's not the topic of this discussion.

The only thing I really wanted to say was, EA can and should kick up a notch on their graphics, and if they need people to improve them, there are proven guys out in their fanbase they can choose from - it's mutual benefit.

[Nick]

Man.

I look at patching for NBA Live more as a hobby than a chore, it's fun. i like seeing the end result. i'm not really fussed if EA don't hire me... but some replies from EA would be nice.

[EGarrett]

I thought it was the best Kobe face EA ever made... but Kobe has only been patched so much because there is such a fanbase for him. Personally, I thought the face could've been a bit better, so I made it better... only once, and it took me 10 minutes to do it.

The NLSC: Sooner or later...every thread becomes a Kobe thread.

Wouldn't it be kinda strange to expect EA to hire teenagers who live thousands of miles away from their home offices?

[benji]

The irate patchers in this thread aren't teenagers...early 20's

[TRUball]

The NLSC: Sooner or later...every thread becomes a Kobe thread

lol, ya, kobes the best... lol, but why would ea hire some kid and start paying them money who is patching the games and stuff without being paid already so why would they pay you when you are doing it for free already

[Santiago Roza (Kq)]

Let's not focus on the hiring thing exclusively, because that wasn't the core of this thread.

But now that you guys have brought the subject, let me clear out a few things: I never wanted them to hire me (or meant that in my post), because I know my stuff was never that good and this isn't even my profession... I'm not that stupid.

What I do think is that they should at least consider their fan base for job openings... Why? Cause I'm sure Tony and maybe some others could do a much better job than some of the guys working at EA (whose cyberfaces mostly suck, and are developed slowly: every game comes with no rookies!).

And these guys are not "kids", not all of them live thousands of miles away, and even if they did they could do some stuff as freelance workers (have you guys ever heard of money transfers... they're amazing, you don't have to be there physically to cash a check).

And to "kobes_4real", who said

why would ea hire some kid and start paying them money who is patching the games and stuff without being paid already so why would they pay you when you are doing it for free already

you should consider that they're already paying to the other guys, so why not use their money to pay for guys that can do a better job?

[TRUball]

you should consider that they're already paying to the other guys, so why not use their money to pay for guys that can do a better job?

this is true, but i guess i should just stay out of this topic as i am not even a patch maker, i just enjoy talking about basketball, even if it is nba live b-ball, i was just bored so i just put my imput in this convo so i will stay out of these topic from now on k?

[BIG GREEN]

People seem to be singling on the hiring thing just to nitpick. There are other topics raised here...why yall only looking at one thing? Also, none of us said hire us specifically...it was just a question/suggestion.

Man.

I look at patching for NBA Live more as a hobby than a chore, it's fun. i like seeing the end result. i'm not really fussed if EA don't hire me... but some replies from EA would be nice.

yes nick..we have been doing this for years. None of us do this as a chore either...this was not implied. This is a hobby for me and everyone else...one would be a fool to do this for any other reason. You're missing the point of this convo my friend.

[Full Surface]

I agree with most of the points being said here. But let's not forget, the guys who work for EA have over 2,000 graphic files to create and they don't rest often (like patchers do). They just can't stop whenever they feel like it. There is a deadline that has to be met. When your boss orders you to make all the cyberfaces of the New Jersey Nets players and gives you a week to do so, YOU have to do it. They can't be all perfect, there has to be some flaws. There's 29 teams in the NBA and there are more than 500 players in the game including the All-Star decade teams. It's not as easy as a job you can think of doing.

[BIG GREEN]

Like tony said (which is very true)...EA has access to hi-res pics. They dont have to go hunting the net for pics back and forth. Give some patchers a hi res pic..of faces, hair and body parts...and one of us alone could get the whole nets team faces done in a week.

I invite everyone to re read the top post. I'm not saying EA has to hire anyone here if they dont want to...and also i dont want to compare their graphics workers ability with fan patchers...i just think they need to be more involved in the community. Thats my main thing here. When i wanna work in video games..i will finish getting my degree and go in person with my portfolio and look for a job.

[DANet]

I was thinking about this thread on the way to work today...

First...we can't forget how good we do have it...we get a basketball game for the PC which I think is one of the most patchable sports games available...and I think that the NBA Live team does keep the patchers in mind when creating the game. The rosters can be modified with a simple everyday DBF editor and the graphics can be patched by simply placing a file in a special directory. Why would EA implement the customart feature and provide us with the customart guide except for our benefit? It certainly had no value for EA since the game does not even use the customart feature by default...

The graphics and rosters can be edited in the NHL and FIFA series but the rosters can only be edited using a special roster editor...and the graphics require the use of GFXPAK or similar utility to import the graphics. The roster editors and graphics utilities are created by the community...no patching tools are provided by EA for these series' either.

And we can't forget the infamous Madden series...arguably the most detailed game in EA's catalog but TOTALLY unpatchable...

Can EA improve things for NBA Live patchers? Certainly...but have they totally ignored us...absolutely not.

I have seen cases where people in a community have been hired to work on a game. I will use the Papyrus NASCAR Racing series as an example...there is a guy named Brian Simpson and another guy named John Beatty who have painted many of the cars used in the NASCAR series game (their names are actually in the credits when you exit the game). Both of these guys are still active in the NASCAR Racing community...releasing their own updates for a game that they helped create!

Having said that however...I think we must keep in mind that EA is a very big company...which has its own "Human Resources" department whose sole purpose is to deal with the company personnel issues...including handling the hiring of new employees. I think the NBA Live guys are well aware that this community exists but I doubt that their human resources department really does. When the NBA Live guys want to hire someone for their team I'm sure the HR people give them a stack of resumes and say "Here...pick a few potential employees from this pile of resumes and then we'll contact them about a job interview". The pile of resumes I'm sure is packed with art/graphics school graduates boasting full Photoshop, 3D studio etc. skills and each resume probably includes an impressive little portfolio showing off applicants abilities. To go hunting down potential employees over the internet...people who live in all corners of the globe...seems kind of pointless when you've got a stack of resumes sitting on your desk.

Again...since EA is a big company...I imagine EA's interaction with the community is somewhat restricted by their legal department. If you've seen the pre-release interviews that EA does every year before the new version of the game is released...you'll remember that they all have to pass through some sort of legal review process before they can be published. Posting information in a forum could potentially cause problems for EA and I would imagine that EA employees are at the very least strongly discouraged from participating in online discussions related to thier work.

However, I absolutely agree with the issue that EA should interact more within the NBA community. Both EA and the patching community could benefit from EA's interaction with the community. Through meaningful discussions with the people who play the game EA could better improve future versions of the game...and the patching community would benefit as well if EA would provide a bit of assistance figuring out some of the tricky areas of patching. Perhaps EA doesn't want to post in the fan based forums since they would have to rely on the mods on those sites to defend/protect them from abuse. At the very least I think they should post in their own EA discussion boards...

The relationship between EA and the community can definitely be improved...but I think perhaps the frustration vented at the NBA Live team is slightly misdirected. I suspect that the company policies at Electronic Art Inc. are the biggest obstacle that needs to be overcome...rather than the attitude of the NBA Live team.

Anyway...that's my 2 cents...