Is EA Hype/PR the cause for ESPN low scores...

[JRod]

Now before we start to think black hawk helicopters and Jared being bought and sold like Enron stock....

What possible reason is there for ESPN getting such low scores? In my first day with MVP, I caught the no walks, steals thing and the strangeness of the "exact" canned pitching model.

I'm two days into ESPN, and the only things I can find wrong with it, is little factors that could have been better tuned. There is a roughness to the game but so far, the game-killers are hard to find. I will say that not all the features work like they are supposed to. In FP baseball mode, I've seen the CPU players stand and watch hits go by them. I really liked FP until I saw this. I don't know if FP mode was enough even without that bug for me to play it, but I loved the BHP cam, and the bat-cam.

So has EA marketing department done such a good job of setting the agenda of gamers. To take something out of politics, it's like EA Sports of defining what baseball games should be about instead of character (gameplay) and policy (gameplay).

I will say that my expectations for WSB were very very low. So maybe that's it. I expect nothing and I got a good game of baseball. Where MVP promised a lot and I was sorely disappointed.

Either way, I just don't understand many reviewers and sports reviewers anymore. MVP is a very buggy game. One where you have to accept problems just to have fun. It is a very fun game. Yet in ESPN, there are some things that take away from the fun factor but yet it's a very solid baseball engine.

There are people that are turned off from politics, well I'm pretty offended by some of the baseball reviews this spring. Anyway just some thoughts and wondering what the good community here has to say.

[ScoopBrady]

JRod,
You have to look at the situation from a different perspective. I know it's hard to do but think of it this way. Most gaming sites or publications write reviews for the typical gamer. The masses if you will. When it comes to writing reviews for sports games they write them with the average sports gamer in mind, not the sports freaks like us. Now the average joe sports gamer just wants a sports game that looks and plays like the sport it represents that is fun. They don't get into the little intricacies of the sport like we do so to them no walks or franchise mode bugs aren't an issue. One thing EA does extremely well is make fun sports games even if they are not the most realistic out there. Add to this the fact that they are wrapped up in a shiny little graphical package and it's a no-brainer for most publications or gaming sites to score EA sports games high.

Now I would venture to say that only 25% of the people who buy sports games from EA are really into sports and take their sports games seriously while 75% just want a fun little sports game. I would also venture to say that those numbers are reversed for the Sega Sports titles with 75% being really into sports and 25% wanting a fun little sports game.

That's why I take anything IGN, Gamespot, or print mags say about sports games with a grain of salt. I'll read the review but I don't trust the review. If you notice, most of these reviews don't touch on the meat of the gameplay, but rather focus on graphics, controls, and fun factor.

From the average joe sports gamer perspective I really don't think EA receives unwarranted scores at all. But when I look at it from a diehard sports gamer perspective I think their scores might be a bit inflated.

That's why there are places like DSP and OS. They're places where diehard sports game fans can get the opinions from others who share their longing for realism in a sports game.

[XXXIV]

Scoops got it nailed
The dudes who reviewed the games arent sports gamer.

Im not even sure their gamers at all but just newbie journalists who have to start their great carreers somewhere.

Its best to rent and review your own game or get thoughts on these games from these types of forums where REAL sports gamers post.

[Badgun]

You know, the funny thing is that there are bunch of people that really believe there is no lefty power shortage. I mean they vehemently deny it and usually attack anyone that posts something asking about "the lefty bug". I haven't been to OS today, but I bet if you go there and go to the MVP forum, you will find at least 2 or 3 threads on the first page asking or complaining about the lefty bug. It's hilarious the way they defend "their" game. I think for the most part everyone agrees that there is a problem with leftys hitting the long ball, but there are some that just will not admit it and won't let others discuss it either.

I've played 80 games into my dynasty and here are my hr totals.

Albert Pujols 32
Scott Rolen 19
Reggie Sanders 15
Jim Edmonds 2

Also, I have not given up a hr to a left handed CPU hitter the entire season so I'm pretty sold on the fact that there is a lefty bug.

I can live with the lefty bug to an extent, I can live without walks and steals to an extent, but the one thing that I think irritates me the most about MVP are the constant diving catches by the CPU. It got to the point that I was seeing 7 or 8 a game and I think that's what will ultimately do me in with MVP.

Despite all that stuff, MVP is still a lot of fun and I can understand why a lot of people defend it, but the reality of it is that it can't hold a candle to ESPN in terms of gameplay and AI. Once Sega puts out a roster update or someone puts a good one out for Action Replay, I will go deep into my ESPN franchise and probably put MVP on Half.com.

[Bill_Abner]

The reason for the "low" scores (and the scores have been in the 80s, for the most part) I think is 100% based on graphics and animation. The average reviewer whose editor throws a sports game in front of them plays ESPN, doesn't see much on the surface that is different from last year and they slap an 80% on it. Nice, clean, neat. And wrong.

[Slumberland]

I will say that not all the features work like they are supposed to. In FP baseball mode, I've seen the CPU players stand and watch hits go by them. I really liked FP until I saw this. I don't know if FP mode was enough even without that bug for me to play it, but I loved the BHP cam, and the bat-cam.

I really hope there's some kind of fix for this. I really, really like FP mode, but the fielders do become idiots. Not a gamekiller by any means, but it's frustrating that an otherwise enjoyable mode is broken.

[Jared]

Everyone here has great points. Just a few comments,

JRod,

I don't think EA Sports is defining what a game "should be". I think they know what impresses most gamers and goes with it. And really, MVP is a pretty impressive game when you start playing it. Excellent animations, fun pitching control, solid presentation, realistic (albeit flawed) ball physics. It's just that they focus more on the things that are impressive to start than the less cosmetic stuff (ranging from realistic rosters to too many diving catches (this, btw, annoys the hell out of me) to home run hitting problems).

On top of that, EA has the best PR around right now. What they did to build hype for MVP Baseball this year was excellent....it had gamer's mouths watering. Other companies haven't figured out how to do that. Compare the pre-game hype for MVP to ESPN, or even compare the hype of a FIFA (poor game) to a Winning Eleven (sublime game). EA knows how to hype a game, and no one else does.

But you combine the hype with an improved game like MVP is and present it to reviewers that normally review RPGs or first-person shooters, and they're gonna write great reviews. They don't have the time to put 25+ hours into a game review, because of deadlines and other reviews. Fortunately we have that time here....but it also means that we don't get reviews up near a release date.

Another random thing is that one of the ways to build hype for games is screenshots. Like the new screenshots for Madden 2005. Ooohhh, they've got defined shoulder pads now. And gameplay movies. I remember before this years (or last years) NFL Fever came out and they released gameplay videos to show the graphics. Which were nice, but there were a couple of completely unrealistic 80 yard bombs in there that made me think, "This game is gonna blow."

Anyways, part of the hype is screenshots and movies, and EA games tend to have very pretty screenshots and movies. And the companies that have access to betas get hyped up about the graphics and don't pay as much attention to the gameplay aspects that we all crave.

As for the average Joe.....I really don't know if they'd prefer great graphics and average gameplay over average graphics and great gameplay. I really think that most gamers think that EA's gameplay is the best, primarily because they haven't been exposed to much else (and in many cases, this is true). But if you gave 1000 soccer gamers a copy of Winning Eleven 7 and a copy of FIFA 2004, I bet that 900 of them will be playing WE7 long after time has passed....same likely with MVP and ESPN (though I haven't played ESPN yet....this is assuming from everyone's comments here that it's better).

But EA knows how to work the hype for a game, whereas other companies don't. And most gaming publications (not all though) don't focus on what makes a sports game truly great. The combination leads to the review scores that we've seen.

[webdanzer]

I agree that the scores look at the graphics and animations first and foremost, and that really shouldn't be a surprise coming from maintream review sites. It happens to both sports and non-sports games.

I don't understand the 'anti-lefty bug poster' vehemence myself, Badgun. The thread I started here got some 'spirited' response, and OS is, you are right, ridiculous about it. Some of it comes from ignorance and fanboyism, but a good deal of usually more logical and observant posters came out against the idea of the lefty bug as well.

Heck, Bill Abner posted numerous times he didn't see the problem. I don't know if he ever acknowledged it.

[Bill_Abner]

I agree that the scores look at the graphics and animations first and foremost, and that really shouldn't be a surprise coming from maintream review sites. It happens to both sports and non-sports games.

I don't understand the 'anti-lefty bug poster' vehemence myself, Badgun. The thread I started here got some 'spirited' response, and OS is, you are right, ridiculous about it. Some of it comes from ignorance and fanboyism, but a good deal of usually more logical and observant posters came out against the idea of the lefty bug as well.

Heck, Bill Abner posted numerous times he didn't see the problem. I don't know if he ever acknowledged it.

I noticed the lefty bug in the HR Challenge thingy, but I hit plenty of homers with Griffey and Dunn in MVP and when I unlocked Ruth he would mash balls consistantly. Everyone and their mom says it's there, though. Maybe it's an Xbox/PS2 glitch? I dunno.

[ScoopBrady]

Bill,
You're not alone there and I had the Xbox version (switched over to PC now). While I had the Xbox version I definitely noticed the problem in HR Showdown but never noticed it during gameplay. Corey Patterson led my team in HR's with more than Ramirez and Lee combined and by a few over Sosa. I also had lefties like Helton and Ventura go yard on me all the time. It must have something to do with sliders is all I can think.

[Brando70]

Here's the thing about ESPN: In order to appreciate how good this game is, you really have to have played a lot of baseball games over the last several years. You have to know what fundamentals have been missing from the Acclaim/EA/Sega/989 games of the past. All of us noticed how much better ESPN is because we're the ones submitting wishlists to these companies asking for more walks, fewer home runs, better gameplay in general.

But Bill's right -- most reviewers start with presentation in their analysis. And ESPN does look and sound like WSB 2k3. So right away, a reviewer thinks they didn't change much, and unless he knows the history of what's been missing from baseball gameplay, he won't notice how much this game has changed.