Where Is A New Fight Night Game?

[billybong]

Floyd Mayweather Jr. was it's original titled "Knockout Kings" Actually in the beginning, everyone was on the boxing games but then other than Mike Tyson

[RACZILLA]

When it comes to combat sports I'm not convinced I'd even want to try and build a traditional $60 box product game at this point.

For boxing I'd rather see an offering that's got a really tight core game with a lower than usual barrier to entry to draw more people in. F2P, maybe an offering as part of a subscription if it comes from a large publisher, etc.

I think initially it might be OK if the game didn't have a ton of depth if it had a good core loop that brought people back. Then over time you could prove out the concept and add additional features that help bring in or better retain players.

There's more competition than ever when it comes to how people spend their time. Like any successful title, a boxing game would have to make people feel invested so they continue to come back. I think that's hard to do when you require a AAA type feature set that turns something that's ultimately a niche product (not just sports but a subset of a subset) into a sink or swim proposition where you either make or lose your money in the first 7-14 days. It's just an awful lot of risk to ask someone to take on.

As tools become more accessible maybe we'll get lucky and an indie dev will pop up with a vision for the next great boxing game. In the meantime I'll continue to enjoy what we've got since there are no guarantees beyond that.

[SHAKYR]

Quote: Originally Posted by RACZILLA

When it comes to combat sports I'm not convinced I'd even want to try and build a traditional $60 box product game at this point. For boxing I'd rather see an offering that's got a really tight core game with a lower than usual barrier to entry to draw more people in. F2P, maybe an offering as part of a subscription if it comes from a large publisher, etc. I think initially it might be OK if the game didn't have a ton of depth if it had a good core loop that brought people back. Then over time you could prove out the concept and add additional features that help bring in or better retain players. There's more competition than ever when it comes to how people spend their time. Like any successful title, a boxing game would have to make people feel invested so they continue to come back. I think that's hard to do when you require a AAA type feature set that turns something that's ultimately a niche product (not just sports but a subset of a subset) into a sink or swim proposition where you either make or lose your money in the first 7-14 days. It's just an awful lot of risk to ask someone to take on. As tools become more accessible maybe we'll get lucky and an indie dev will pop up with a vision for the next great boxing game. In the meantime I'll continue to enjoy what we've got since there are no guarantees beyond that.

Dang, you just sucked the air out the post Raczilla...lol! I like what I put in bold. I'm a greedy boxing fan, quite few other boxing fans and boxers feel the same way as I do. I just wish these fans and boxers were more outspoken and supportive. I agree with everything in bold.

[jmarcguy]

I got on FN Champion for the first time in a year. I enjoyed this game but there's so much wrong with it. I've never understood the online scoring. I've had rounds where I landed 15 - 20 more punches than my opponent & I lost the round. Not endless jabs either but hooks & uppercuts. My opponent loaded up on power punches. I've had guys back up constantly & throw these robotic straight punches to the body. Over & over & that wins a fight. The game rewards you for playing video game boxing. You can't truly move & give Angles. You can't control a round with a jab. I'm not talking about 5 or 6 jabs over & over but using a stiff jab to break rhythm.

Playing last night was the same bs.

[RACZILLA]

Quote: Originally Posted by jmarcguy

I got on FN Champion for the first time in a year. I enjoyed this game but there's so much wrong with it. I've never understood the online scoring. I've had rounds where I landed 15 - 20 more punches than my opponent & I lost the round. Not endless jabs either but hooks & uppercuts. My opponent loaded up on power punches. I've had guys back up constantly & throw these robotic straight punches to the body. Over & over & that wins a fight. The game rewards you for playing video game boxing. You can't truly move & give Angles. You can't control a round with a jab. I'm not talking about 5 or 6 jabs over & over but using a stiff jab to break rhythm. Playing last night was the same bs.

I remember feeling like the scoring was a little bit better the way the game shipped on the disc. I think the last title update made the scoring somewhat inconsistent.

Of course if you want to play online you've got to use the latest update.

[fistofrage]

Quote: Originally Posted by RACZILLA

I remember feeling like the scoring was a little bit better the way the game shipped on the disc. I think the last title update made the scoring somewhat inconsistent. Of course if you want to play online you've got to use the latest update.

The game was so much better when it shipped. Unfortunately the online win at all costs whiners complained they couldn't win by button mashing so they patched and destroyed the game for the most part. It can still be decent offline, but its worse now than at launch.

Unfortunately the DLC is tied to the patched so in order to use the DLC that you paid for you have to have the patch even for offline. It really stinks.

[aholbert32]

Quote: Originally Posted by ILuvMN81

Excellent article, good discussion. I'd like to say I'd love to see a new Fight Night or really any boxing series come to the newer consoles. I'd hope it could co-exist with UFC since I like both. Never tried EA UFC, but it sounds like I should be glad I didn't. The last UFC game I played was THQ's UFC 3; it wasn't perfect, but it had some great modes and content. I hope EA does what the THQ UFC series developers did and listen to the fans and evolve. I kind of like the story mode in FN Champion, it was something different. As for my thoughts on UFC vs boxing in the real world...hmm, gotta go with boxing. Boxing is more available and accessible; it's on NBC occasionally. If it weren't for the UFC on Fox, I'd never see an event. Cut the cable long ago and even if I had cable, I'm not paying the $ for the PPVs, especially sub-par ones.

Couldnt disagree more. Before the Haymon PBC series started a month ago. High level boxing hasnt been on regular or free cable TV since the 80s. The only non-PPV, Showtime or HBO boxing was ESPN's Friday Night Fights and random cards on FS1 and NBCSN.

Haymon's employees have even been quoted as saying that the reason they started the PBC series was because Boxing wasnt accessible anymore and openly admit to copying many elements from the UFC including production elements, the choice to go on broadcast TV and the promotional structure.

Also even with the PBC, I dont know how you can be a boxing fan and not have access to HBO/Showtime/PPV unless you are illegally watching fights or waiting until they appear on Youtube. Without HBO or Showtime, you havent seen the following fighters:

Floyd, Manny, GGG, Cotto, Kovalev, Stevenson, Chavez Jr., Martinez....the list goes on and on.

[aholbert32]

Quote: Originally Posted by Wiggy

To clarify on this, EA and the UFC were still making the deal and these financial decisions in late 2011 or early 2012, so the "spectre" of Brock that I referred to was very real. EA saw a company with high buy rates (because of Brock), and they made the deal with that in mind. Even when losing, Brock was a huge draw, which explains why he's so coveted by the UFC now.

I have to disagree with this. There was no "spectre of Brock" in early 2012. He just got destroyed by Overeem, retired and signed with WWE in January 2012. The UFC and EA knew that Brock was not coming back for 3 yrs when he signed that deal so I dont know how that would motivate EA to make the UFC deal.

There are clear reasons why EA is more focused on the UFC than Boxing:

1) Costs: Its significantly cheaper to create a UFC than a boxing game due to the fact that the UFC license comes with 99.9% of the likenesses of the fighters under contract. Unlike with Fight Night, you dont have to negotiate a deal with each individual fighter. While FN has always done decent numbers when it comes to sales, the cost of signing fighters like Ali, Pac, Tyson etc. are expensive.

2) Roster: I still play FNC regularly and the reason why is because I was able to expand the roster through Fighter Share. I have great versions of Floyd, GGG and other fighters that I downloaded over the years. That helps me deal with the fact that FNC's roster is kind of small.

What sucks is that any future version of Fight Night WONT HAVE A FIGHTER SHARE. EA is now gunshy about lawsuits and is not adding that feature to future games (Brian Hayes confirmed it when it was missing from UFC). Now it didnt kill EA UFC because EA consistently added new fighters and 6 months later had 90% of the fighters that people were requesting. They were able to do that because as I stated before, it costs them nothing to add fighters to the game (thats why the DLC was free). You cant do that with Boxing because again you have to pay each fighter individually.

I would love to see a new Fight Night but I can understand why EA is slow to make that happen. A UFC game is cheaper from a development and promotional (free promotion at every UFC event).