Don Bradman Cricket 17 General Discussion

[Chief]

Hey Big Ant, and the DBC community,
I have a suggestion for the new Don Bradman Cricket game which has probably been mentioned before. I would absolutely love to see the equivalent of a FIFA Ultimate Team in DBC. To me having a DBC ultimate team would be F*****g awesome( Excuse my language). Imagine if you rated all the players, and you started of with let's say 15 bronze cards from a starter pack, which could be domestic players. For example I get a Chris Hartley, rated 61 with all his regular physical attributes and batting, bowling and fielding stats and skills levels. You could be able to purchases different types of packs and Auction and bid for cards on a live market. Aswell as single player games, tournaments, and multiplayer games and tournament,which earn you coins. There could be silver cards for the better players, such as Cameron Bancroft, rated 73. And then gold players like Joe Burns, rated 84. Then you have your top players which could be Diamond Cards, for players like Steve Smith, rated 96 for example, Virat Kohli, David Warner, and there would be no rated card higher then 99, which could be Sachin Tenulkar, and Don Bradman for example. You could have last players aswell. (this is more sort of like the NBA 2K MyTeam) I could only imagine for me how much better this game would be, considering how good it is already, with an ultimate team. With the career mode and all the other features this game would not ever run out of things to do. I really hope a member of the team sees this and takes it into consideration, because I'm sure there are a lot of other people out there that would love to see this happen. If you do like this idea then please let me and the community know in a reply. And if you have any suggestions or critiques, then please don't hesitate to put them out aswell. Thanks for taking the time to read this.
Cheers, Joel
This is a post from big ant forums

I'm a big fan of this from a commercial POV, but it's 100% dependent on licenses. It would require very big publishing resources to make in pretty much every area, and I'm not sure it's totally feasible (although I think it would be the best way to actually make a Cricket game a viable business).

 

[blockerdave]

I'm a big fan of this from a commercial POV, but it's 100% dependent on licenses. It would require very big publishing resources to make in pretty much every area, and I'm not sure it's totally feasible (although I think it would be the best way to actually make a Cricket game a viable business).

which, in a nutshell, is why it's a HORRENDOUS idea from a gamer's perspective, and people after these sort of game modes are mugs.

when i bowl as Martin McCague in England's Worst XI, it's my choice. the idea game mode where i'm expected to use his modern-day equivalent by force, and play or worse PAY (on top of my original purchase) to upgrade him to Steve Harmison, is an absolute joke. (Yes, I know it's an optional mode I'm under no obligation to pay, but still.) Make the game commercially viable in other ways (e.g. innovate a solution like the academy that can reduce expense on player creation and licenses, run a kickstarter, sell me more stadia as DLC etc.).

Ultimate Team is a prime example of the psychology of branding and the mob rule of morons. You've paid £50 for this game, you can be anyone, play as anyone, but look we've added this "NEW FEATURE" where you're restricted in who you can play as, and have to work to play as anyone better, or you can pay even more and cheat your way to it... and the mugs fall for it. "oh look at this great FEATURE, why don't other games have this FEATURE where my purchase is just the start of my expense". it's not a feature you morons, it's a bill, as Chief has just said.

I'd really hope such a feature never comes anywhere near the DBC franchise.

 

[Chief]

EXACTLY right. When you have a limited fanbase, it's a question of finding a different payment model that allows your biggest fans to spend what they want on your product, rather than cap out at a premium one-off payment. Kickstarters/different prices for Early Access, bespoke rewards - these are all ways to reward fans for paying more in, without fleecing them with virtual knick-knacks and pay-to-win mechanics.

 

[Biggs]

I will never ever support or pay money for any cricket game that actively introduces further pay options after purchase. That is not, in any shape or form, in the spirit of cricket.

Optional DLC is fine.

You don't pay more money to see the second innings of an ODI.

 

[Chief]

I will never ever support or pay money for any cricket game that actively introduces further pay options after purchase. That is not, in any shape or form, in the spirit of cricket.

Optional DLC is fine.

You don't pay more money to see the second innings of an ODI.

You're talking about "further pay options" being uncool, but at the same time saying "optional DLC is fine". Where, for you, does the line get crossed? Is it the TYPE of DLC/additional content?

 

[blockerdave]

You're talking about "further pay options" being uncool, but at the same time saying "optional DLC is fine". Where, for you, does the line get crossed? Is it the TYPE of DLC/additional content?

For me DLC is legitimate if it enhances the experience but isn't simply making up for lack of out of the box stuff.

So - additional stadia (providing a reasonable amount ootb) updates or expansion of licensed uniform or kit items would be acceptable.

DLC or micro transactions to buy "upgrade" items such as a bat that hits 20% further etc. are beyond the pale, and Ultimate Team modes that are just micro-transaction farms for idiots have no place.

Yes Ultimate Team fans, I'm calling you idiots, and I'm right.

 

[Arindam98]

How about just a team called World XI instead? That way, when we click on "Replace with best" (or manually update it), that one gets replaced with real names and attributes too.
Of course, we can simply create it via the Academy, but I think it would be more cool if this team comes out of the box.

By the way, which team will play against Big Ant Studios in the practice mode, this time around?

 

[Westindies]

one more week to go

 

[Dutch]

one more week to go

Payday? Haircut? Birthday? First date?

 

[Biggs]

Where, for you, does the line get crossed? Is it the TYPE of DLC/additional content?

Very good point... and it's a total grey area, isn't it? IMO; DLC is content that changes the game fundamentally in multiple ways and enhances it to a greater extent than say, unlocking something or giving a player an advantage other than playing the game and nutting it out. So DLC would be a multi-pack of visual and gameplay enhancements and depending on what they are (on a case-by-case basis) and whether or not they should've been in there in the first place, I would support it.

The way I've seen micro-transactions in games function (that I've not purchased because of it) is they give the user a paid-way to buy elements of the game quicker than simply playing the game, which is asinine.

 

[MattW]

<insert not speaking on behalf of Big Ant disclaimer here>

The way I've seen micro-transactions in games function (that I've not purchased because of it) is they give the user a paid-way to buy elements of the game quicker than simply playing the game, which is asinine.

I'm okay with that kind of thing - provided the game is not designed to make that feel necessary. If someone wants the glory of winning without putting the effort in, I'm okay taking their money - though I would never understand that attitude.

Problem is that making it not feel necessary cuts in to profits, so you rarely see publishers handling microtransactions well. It can be done.

 

[Chief]

There's currently 4 key models out there:
Premium - Classic one-shot payment ($50 and the game is yours).
Subscription - Essentially premium, but you are "renting" the game" for a particular period.
Freemium - The game itself is free, with optional micro-transactions.
Paymium - You pay for the game, and then optional microtransactions.

I think it's the last model that is the most problematic and likely to cause friction.

 

[blockerdave]

There's currently 4 key models out there:
Premium - Classic one-shot payment ($50 and the game is yours).
Subscription - Essentially premium, but you are "renting" the game" for a particular period.
Freemium - The game itself is free, with optional micro-transactions.
Paymium - You pay for the game, and then optional microtransactions.

I think it's the last model that is the most problematic and likely to cause friction.

I don't know if it's possible or cost-effective but I was wondering if you could utilise say the fifa game face type technology to have users pay to submit their pictures for use as crowd models?

So I could say pay a 5er and say I'm a fan of England and Gloucestershire and then I might appear in the crowd for those teams...

This might give you more crowd diversity and get an income stream during development. I don't know how popular such an option would be but I think there'd be some take-up if the cost would be reasonable.

You could also use the improved crowd in reaction cut scenes at wickets, boundaries, milestones etc.

 

[Dutch]

I'd pay a tenner to see myself running naked onto the pitch at Lords, waving my nads to the gathered members before joining the tail end of a beer-snake....

 

[Punk_Sk8r]

If they want to introduce DLC then why not...it's not an uncommon business model these days and looking at it from a company/business stand point you'd have to have some good reasons to not add DLC. When it comes to cricket games not sure how it'd work, maybe if they had some huge framework like a deep online system (something fifa-esque) then charging for additional things becomes easier...There's probably other ways too but I don't know any