Anyone tempted not to buy?

SonicKante
123 posts Has Potential To Be Special
Convince me why I should buy Fifa 19. As an avid Fifa Pro Clubs player I am extremely disappointed at the apparent lack of improvement to the game mode. In fact I have seen zero improvements. I do not want to spend big bucks on Ultimate team and don't enjoy offline modes.

Please in form me why I should get Fifa 19 (or why not)

Thank you

SonicKane

Comments

  • Forca-Barca
    2994 posts National Call-Up
    It’s up to you lol
  • If clubs is all you play and you were hoping for improvements then you’ve already answered your own question
  • Boysie91
    8147 posts League Winner
    Will many still be playing clubs in 18? I sometimes struggle to get a game now lol
  • Pwalie86
    1213 posts Professional
    Depending on the demo. I'm trying my best not to buy it brand new as I don't want to give EA my money. For the things they bring in every year, it certainly isn't worth £50-60.

    Red Dead 2? Now at £50-60 that is an absolute bargain. Games with quality workmanship and pride will always be worth it. Brilliant and balanced modes so you're getting what you want for the money you pay. Games like Fifa only have FUT to entice a huge playerbase and that is a pay-to-win strategy.

    Yes, Rockstar uses microtransactions also, but their offline game is still full of depth and quality. EA Sports could learn from that.
  • SonicKante
    123 posts Has Potential To Be Special
    It’s up to you lol

    Whilst you are right. I do not know everything about Fifa 19. There may be something amazing in it I don't know about. Or I may be convinced to buy due to mature reasoning. Some good replies here so far.
  • SonicKante
    123 posts Has Potential To Be Special
    edited September 2018
    If clubs is all you play and you were hoping for improvements then you’ve already answered your own question

    I used to play Seasons. Then I played UT as it is so popular. But it just seems a waste of money to me. I am good at controlling a team in pro clubs (any) and competitive in head to head modes..
    Boysie91 wrote: »
    Will many still be playing clubs in 18? I sometimes struggle to get a game now lol

    I've barely played fifa in months. I did one drop in earlier and it said 2000 were online on pro clubs.
    Boysie91 wrote: »
    Will many still be playing clubs in 18? I sometimes struggle to get a game now lol
    Pwalie86 wrote: »
    Depending on the demo. I'm trying my best not to buy it brand new as I don't want to give EA my money. For the things they bring in every year, it certainly isn't worth £50-60.

    Red Dead 2? Now at £50-60 that is an absolute bargain. Games with quality workmanship and pride will always be worth it. Brilliant and balanced modes so you're getting what you want for the money you pay. Games like Fifa only have FUT to entice a huge playerbase and that is a pay-to-win strategy.

    Yes, Rockstar uses microtransactions also, but their offline game is still full of depth and quality. EA Sports could learn from that.

    I'll take a look at that game and see if it interests me. Thanks
  • Pwalie86
    1213 posts Professional
    SonicKante wrote: »
    It’s up to you lol

    Whilst you are right. I do not know everything about Fifa 19. There may be something amazing in it I don't know about. Or I may be convinced to buy due to mature reasoning. Some good replies here so far.

    Fans in the crowd can now take pictures of themselves. :D

    With these groundbreaking features, I feel i may cave in and spend some rent money on Fifa 19.



  • Alp_2760
    1952 posts Play-Off Hero
    Pwalie86 wrote: »
    Depending on the demo. I'm trying my best not to buy it brand new as I don't want to give EA my money. For the things they bring in every year, it certainly isn't worth £50-60.

    Red Dead 2? Now at £50-60 that is an absolute bargain. Games with quality workmanship and pride will always be worth it. Brilliant and balanced modes so you're getting what you want for the money you pay. Games like Fifa only have FUT to entice a huge playerbase and that is a pay-to-win strategy.

    Yes, Rockstar uses microtransactions also, but their offline game is still full of depth and quality. EA Sports could learn from that.

    Completely misleading thing to say. Game alike red dead take years to develop. It's like comparing an assassin's creed game to skyrim or fallout.

    Also, one is an open world action rpg and another is an annual sports title. You're comparing an apple to a cucumber.
  • Alp_2760
    1952 posts Play-Off Hero
    To the op, if you need someone to convince you to buy a game, don't buy it. You either want to play it or you don't, either is fine. Also, buying a game based on an anonymous person telling you to, on a forum? That's a tad weak.
  • Tubpac
    1642 posts Play-Off Hero
    If you play pro clubs. No need to buy.
  • SonicKante
    123 posts Has Potential To Be Special
    Alp_2760 wrote: »
    To the op, if you need someone to convince you to buy a game, don't buy it. You either want to play it or you don't, either is fine. Also, buying a game based on an anonymous person telling you to, on a forum? That's a tad weak.

    Nope. I am looking for more info about why I should buy. I'm bought fifa for years. I can save a lot of time by gaining any extra info here that isn't easy for me to find. Or alternative ideas for games. Rather than playing this game for another year without getting feedback first. Some of my friends are getting fifa 19, but that isn't enough to convince me to buy right now.
  • I SiR MartY I
    5450 posts Big Money Move
    New boots for Pro Clubs, totally worth the money to play FIFA 18.5 with new boots.
  • Alp_2760 wrote: »
    Pwalie86 wrote: »
    Depending on the demo. I'm trying my best not to buy it brand new as I don't want to give EA my money. For the things they bring in every year, it certainly isn't worth £50-60.

    Red Dead 2? Now at £50-60 that is an absolute bargain. Games with quality workmanship and pride will always be worth it. Brilliant and balanced modes so you're getting what you want for the money you pay. Games like Fifa only have FUT to entice a huge playerbase and that is a pay-to-win strategy.

    Yes, Rockstar uses microtransactions also, but their offline game is still full of depth and quality. EA Sports could learn from that.

    Completely misleading thing to say. Game alike red dead take years to develop. It's like comparing an assassin's creed game to skyrim or fallout.

    Also, one is an open world action rpg and another is an annual sports title. You're comparing an apple to a cucumber.

    When the apple and the cucumber cost the exact same price, you kind of can compare in terms of value for money.
  • Pwalie86
    1213 posts Professional
    Alp_2760 wrote: »
    Pwalie86 wrote: »
    Depending on the demo. I'm trying my best not to buy it brand new as I don't want to give EA my money. For the things they bring in every year, it certainly isn't worth £50-60.

    Red Dead 2? Now at £50-60 that is an absolute bargain. Games with quality workmanship and pride will always be worth it. Brilliant and balanced modes so you're getting what you want for the money you pay. Games like Fifa only have FUT to entice a huge playerbase and that is a pay-to-win strategy.

    Yes, Rockstar uses microtransactions also, but their offline game is still full of depth and quality. EA Sports could learn from that.

    Completely misleading thing to say. Game alike red dead take years to develop. It's like comparing an assassin's creed game to skyrim or fallout.

    Also, one is an open world action rpg and another is an annual sports title. You're comparing an apple to a cucumber.

    Well, Apple is a type of phone and a cucumber is something you'd get a better signal on. :D

    But it just sells my point more. Annual releases are unnecessary, because with the updates we get, we could easily just get it through a patch. Yes rpg games and sports titles are so different, but if Red Dead released every year it would grow tired and stale. Like Assassin's Creed.

    It would be better just having patches over certain years and when they make good advancements in technology is when the games should be released properly. Otherwise people are not really getting what they're paying for. If EA were to take time out and spent it on developing better animations and AI on a higher level then surely it would be worth the wait. This is why annual sports titles always look like they've just had a lick of paint. It's not enough and that's why every year it looks like it's just been patched.

    Fifa 19 with what's been added this year is perfect for an annual patch upgrade. If they cut the prices to £20-25 then it would be fair for the consumer, and the consumer comes first.
  • Diggy
    13618 posts Has That Special Something
    You get a free reset :trollface:
  • Forca-Barca
    2994 posts National Call-Up
    SonicKante wrote: »
    It’s up to you lol

    Whilst you are right. I do not know everything about Fifa 19. There may be something amazing in it I don't know about. Or I may be convinced to buy due to mature reasoning. Some good replies here so far.

    My fault didn’t give good feedback. I would get it only because the game may be more updated and will have an easier chance finding more matches or wait until Black Friday
  • AADCFC
    155 posts Has Potential To Be Special
    The beta was th worst football game I’ve played Ina. Long time. If it’s like that I’m not buying
  • Mc_chigby
    646 posts An Exciting Prospect
    Pwalie86 wrote: »
    Alp_2760 wrote: »
    Pwalie86 wrote: »
    Depending on the demo. I'm trying my best not to buy it brand new as I don't want to give EA my money. For the things they bring in every year, it certainly isn't worth £50-60.

    Red Dead 2? Now at £50-60 that is an absolute bargain. Games with quality workmanship and pride will always be worth it. Brilliant and balanced modes so you're getting what you want for the money you pay. Games like Fifa only have FUT to entice a huge playerbase and that is a pay-to-win strategy.

    Yes, Rockstar uses microtransactions also, but their offline game is still full of depth and quality. EA Sports could learn from that.

    Completely misleading thing to say. Game alike red dead take years to develop. It's like comparing an assassin's creed game to skyrim or fallout.

    Also, one is an open world action rpg and another is an annual sports title. You're comparing an apple to a cucumber.

    Well, Apple is a type of phone and a cucumber is something you'd get a better signal on. :D

    But it just sells my point more. Annual releases are unnecessary, because with the updates we get, we could easily just get it through a patch. Yes rpg games and sports titles are so different, but if Red Dead released every year it would grow tired and stale. Like Assassin's Creed.

    It would be better just having patches over certain years and when they make good advancements in technology is when the games should be released properly. Otherwise people are not really getting what they're paying for. If EA were to take time out and spent it on developing better animations and AI on a higher level then surely it would be worth the wait. This is why annual sports titles always look like they've just had a lick of paint. It's not enough and that's why every year it looks like it's just been patched.

    Fifa 19 with what's been added this year is perfect for an annual patch upgrade. If they cut the prices to £20-25 then it would be fair for the consumer, and the consumer comes first.

    You're asking the gaming community to change its entire system which has been running for 30 years now. Although I agree one day it will change to something similar to what you desire we are a good number of years away from that I am afraid.
  • OldMateCampbell
    293 posts Sunday League Hero
    Your choice mate, I'll be buying anyway as much as I wish I wouldn't
  • Alp_2760
    1952 posts Play-Off Hero
    Pwalie86 wrote: »
    Alp_2760 wrote: »
    Pwalie86 wrote: »
    Depending on the demo. I'm trying my best not to buy it brand new as I don't want to give EA my money. For the things they bring in every year, it certainly isn't worth £50-60.

    Red Dead 2? Now at £50-60 that is an absolute bargain. Games with quality workmanship and pride will always be worth it. Brilliant and balanced modes so you're getting what you want for the money you pay. Games like Fifa only have FUT to entice a huge playerbase and that is a pay-to-win strategy.

    Yes, Rockstar uses microtransactions also, but their offline game is still full of depth and quality. EA Sports could learn from that.

    Completely misleading thing to say. Game alike red dead take years to develop. It's like comparing an assassin's creed game to skyrim or fallout.

    Also, one is an open world action rpg and another is an annual sports title. You're comparing an apple to a cucumber.

    Well, Apple is a type of phone and a cucumber is something you'd get a better signal on. :D

    But it just sells my point more. Annual releases are unnecessary, because with the updates we get, we could easily just get it through a patch. Yes rpg games and sports titles are so different, but if Red Dead released every year it would grow tired and stale. Like Assassin's Creed.

    It would be better just having patches over certain years and when they make good advancements in technology is when the games should be released properly. Otherwise people are not really getting what they're paying for. If EA were to take time out and spent it on developing better animations and AI on a higher level then surely it would be worth the wait. This is why annual sports titles always look like they've just had a lick of paint. It's not enough and that's why every year it looks like it's just been patched.

    Fifa 19 with what's been added this year is perfect for an annual patch upgrade. If they cut the prices to £20-25 then it would be fair for the consumer, and the consumer comes first.

    The games get more than just a lick of paint but if you feel that way don't buy it. It really is that simple. Plenty of people don't though which is probably why EA are continuing to make huge amounts of money on it. If enough people genuinely didn't like it, they wouldn't buy it, big films and franchises flop all the time. It isn't as simple as saying 'people buy it because it's all they have' etc, that's rubbish. If the majority felt the way the vocal minority did, fifa would crash.

    The games change plenty enough to warrant a full game price, in my opinion. If I didn't feel that way, I wouldn't buy them. I skip every couple of assassins creed games for this very reason.
  • Alp_2760
    1952 posts Play-Off Hero
    Breeze wrote: »
    Alp_2760 wrote: »
    Pwalie86 wrote: »
    Depending on the demo. I'm trying my best not to buy it brand new as I don't want to give EA my money. For the things they bring in every year, it certainly isn't worth £50-60.

    Red Dead 2? Now at £50-60 that is an absolute bargain. Games with quality workmanship and pride will always be worth it. Brilliant and balanced modes so you're getting what you want for the money you pay. Games like Fifa only have FUT to entice a huge playerbase and that is a pay-to-win strategy.

    Yes, Rockstar uses microtransactions also, but their offline game is still full of depth and quality. EA Sports could learn from that.

    Completely misleading thing to say. Game alike red dead take years to develop. It's like comparing an assassin's creed game to skyrim or fallout.

    Also, one is an open world action rpg and another is an annual sports title. You're comparing an apple to a cucumber.

    When the apple and the cucumber cost the exact same price, you kind of can compare in terms of value for money.

    No, you can't. They're different products, they just happen to fall into the category of food.

    If you hold any regular title such as fifa, Madden, CoD, assassins creed etc to the standard of red dead, gta 5 etc then you're just disappointing yourself through your own misguided expectations.

    There are a few reasons not to hold this standard.

    1 - these games take years to produce. Like 3-5 years. If all games took that long, it would be ridiculous.

    2 - they can take that long because they are less 'niche'. There will be plenty of people whose only game in common is red dead. You'll have 1 person who doesn't ever buy fifa, another who never buys CoD and another that never buys madden but there's a good chance all 3 will buy red dead. Because its a completely different style and genre of game. So they can afford to wait longer between profits.

    3 - as I said before, they are totally different styles of game. Games like fallout are very deep and immersive, they have to be because they don't have the online functions that a game like fifa or CoD have. The solo campaign in CoD is almost a tutorial and generally very short but it's the online, competitive side that keep the games going for the year.

    4 - there's a reason you don't see games like fallout at esports events. They aren't competitive. For games such as fifa etc to remain fresh and keep bringing in audiences, they have to launch it regularly but the cost of doing so will be pretty high. The licenses, player rights, game faces etc are a lot of work which take months to do. They aren't going to be doing all fo that for a recurring £20 a year fee. That's ridiculously cheap.

    I think it's incredibly naive to just pass it off as a 'patch'.
  • Mc_chigby
    646 posts An Exciting Prospect
    Alp_2760 wrote: »
    Breeze wrote: »
    Alp_2760 wrote: »
    Pwalie86 wrote: »
    Depending on the demo. I'm trying my best not to buy it brand new as I don't want to give EA my money. For the things they bring in every year, it certainly isn't worth £50-60.

    Red Dead 2? Now at £50-60 that is an absolute bargain. Games with quality workmanship and pride will always be worth it. Brilliant and balanced modes so you're getting what you want for the money you pay. Games like Fifa only have FUT to entice a huge playerbase and that is a pay-to-win strategy.

    Yes, Rockstar uses microtransactions also, but their offline game is still full of depth and quality. EA Sports could learn from that.

    Completely misleading thing to say. Game alike red dead take years to develop. It's like comparing an assassin's creed game to skyrim or fallout.

    Also, one is an open world action rpg and another is an annual sports title. You're comparing an apple to a cucumber.

    When the apple and the cucumber cost the exact same price, you kind of can compare in terms of value for money.

    No, you can't. They're different products, they just happen to fall into the category of food.

    If you hold any regular title such as fifa, Madden, CoD, assassins creed etc to the standard of red dead, gta 5 etc then you're just disappointing yourself through your own misguided expectations.

    There are a few reasons not to hold this standard.

    1 - these games take years to produce. Like 3-5 years. If all games took that long, it would be ridiculous.

    2 - they can take that long because they are less 'niche'. There will be plenty of people whose only game in common is red dead. You'll have 1 person who doesn't ever buy fifa, another who never buys CoD and another that never buys madden but there's a good chance all 3 will buy red dead. Because its a completely different style and genre of game. So they can afford to wait longer between profits.

    3 - as I said before, they are totally different styles of game. Games like fallout are very deep and immersive, they have to be because they don't have the online functions that a game like fifa or CoD have. The solo campaign in CoD is almost a tutorial and generally very short but it's the online, competitive side that keep the games going for the year.

    4 - there's a reason you don't see games like fallout at esports events. They aren't competitive. For games such as fifa etc to remain fresh and keep bringing in audiences, they have to launch it regularly but the cost of doing so will be pretty high. The licenses, player rights, game faces etc are a lot of work which take months to do. They aren't going to be doing all fo that for a recurring £20 a year fee. That's ridiculously cheap.

    I think it's incredibly naive to just pass it off as a 'patch'.

    Agreed. You are also asking for the gaming industry which has been running for 30 years to suddenly change its tune and release patches instead of annual games. The Fifa series has been running for probably most of this forums lifetime with a game coming out every year.

    Yes I do believe one day we might see a system where games are patched every couple of years between releases but I cannot see that happening anytime soon.
  • because playing an old soccer game is ****
  • Pwalie86
    1213 posts Professional
    I reckon it's another reason EA wouldn't allow an edit mode because they know with how much they put in every year isn't enough and if they allowed Fifa 18 to suddenly have an edit mode and the community did their own work then I reckon sales will drop and people would still be spending points on FUT on Fifa 18..if that's still possible. I'm unsure because I don't play that mode.

    If there was a way to remake UEFA license then I never would buy Fifa 19.

    That's what EA Sports do. They always add 1 thing every year that's amazing and the rest of the game is still the same.

    With UEFA license I really feel already that there's no point in buying Fifa 20, but guarantee there will be another feature (not a plethora of features) that tempts you all over again. It's how they work.
Sign In or Register to comment.