Question...would you pay an extra monthly fee for No DDA/ELO?

jimshredder said:

Because spending a ton of money to challenge it in court wouldn't be worth it - so no one does it

The pros - you can to sign on to a videogame message board and prove to all the nay sayers that there was DDA

The cons - you lose well over $100k in legal fees

,

Maybe Elon Musk might play Madden one day, then we would finally have someone with the resources and motivation to challenge EA's obvious DDA

Looking into a court case for DDA is very interesting. EA is one of the biggest companies in the world so it is very easy for them to sweep certain cases under the rug.

That being said, I believe that someone with enough resources and a good enough legal team could prove DDA in EA games. As we all know, EA owns a license for DDA but claims they never have or never will use it. For all the community knows, they could be using it right now but the reason they haven’t been caught is that no one has the legal resources to take them to court.

I personally believe that EA uses DDA to make “a fairer game experience“, or at least that’s what the EA social media manager would say if they ever got caught. In reality, DDA makes games tighter making you feel like you can never get a blowout win and need to play more. If you play more, naturally you play better teams which will eventually beat you, in a scummy way or not. Once you get beat a couple times, you start wondering if your team is bad. And then you make the money-hungry company more money and repeat the cycle. This is what I believe EA hopes for in what I call the “DDA Cycle”. 

TLDR: EA uses DDA to generate more playtime and money, and the reason they haven’t been caught is because no one has had the legal team/resources.

One example of DDA is you losing the game by 14 with pretty much no time left. You throw a route that was incomplete all game because a defender looked at you the wrong way. End of the game down 14, you throw that same route and you make the catch between 2-3 defenders but the clock runs out. The game is programmed to make certain animations trigger depending on the score and anybody who doesn't see it hasn't been playing this game long enough.

EightyOne said:

Oh dear, the fall back of every online dickhead out there - casual insults. Don't demean yourself mate, engage with the substance of my point. I said nothing about my ability to play Solo Battles (I don't play them at all), just that All Madden was 'harder' than Rookie. Is it or not?

Regarding that 'proof' of yours. I don't need to go type "EA DDA lawsuit" bud. I'm not the guy asserting there's conclusive proof online that the game doesn't fiddle with difficulty in H2H matchups - that's you.

Maybe its you that's needs to do that. EA 's denial is caveated to fuck and also strangely specific. The plaintiffs didn't 'lose' the case and EA didn't 'win'. There was no ruling and the case was dropped. That case incidentally focussed on whether DDA was being used to push people towards buying loot boxes. It didn't focus on whether it existed but, just so you know, EA has stated on the record that the intention of this technology was to prevent players from becoming too bored or frustrated with the challenge a game presents in order to keep them playing. Seems odd that they'd admit that and then, erm, not use it?

But listen, you believe what you want then. Just don't talk so dogmatically about it.

Cool story

droblunts313 said:

Cool story

Yeah, what I thought. Can't engage on the substantive points.

RedIsNotBlue said:

EA's officially released statement concerning DDA. They admit having a patent on it but claim they don't use it.

Ensuring play is fair is critical to all of us at EA, and we’ve tried to be as clear as possible that this commitment applies to us just as much as it does to our players. We’ve publicly said before that we do not use any scripting or “Dynamic Difficulty Adjustment” (DDA) or anything similar that would automatically adjust the difficulty of gameplay in FIFA, Madden and NHL Ultimate Team matches.

Our clear statements were recently challenged in a lawsuit that alleged we did, in fact, use DDA in Ultimate Team modes. We’re pleased to share that the plaintiffs have now dismissed their case. We provided them with detailed technical information and access to speak with our engineers, all of which confirmed (again) that there is no DDA or scripting in Ultimate Team modes. This is the right result.

While EA does own a patent for DDA technology, that technology never was in FIFA, Madden or NHL, and never will be.  We would not use DDA technology to give players an advantage or disadvantage in online multiplayer modes in any of our games and we absolutely do not have it in FIFA, Madden or NHL.

EA and the FIFA, Madden and NHL teams remain committed to fair play.

There’s definitely DDA in regs and franchise mode (“Even Teams” toggle) so it makes sense if that’s where the patent stems from. Never seen anyone in the MUT community complain about DDA until I started reading the posts here. I think some people are just better at the game. 
 

As much as we like to hate on EA for inconsistency in gameplay there’s still skill gap with both knowledge of the game and stick skill. There’s a reason pro players win 95% of their games against non pros.

EightyOne said:

Yeah, what I thought. Can't engage on the substantive points.

Don’t hate the player hate the game. 🤣

savagedevron said:

There’s definitely DDA in regs and franchise mode (“Even Teams” toggle) so it makes sense if that’s where the patent stems from. Never seen anyone in the MUT community complain about DDA until I started reading the posts here. I think some people are just better at the game. 
 

As much as we like to hate on EA for inconsistency in gameplay there’s still skill gap with both knowledge of the game and stick skill. There’s a reason pro players win 95% of their games against non pros.

You sound like an intelligent, pragmatic individual though. Sadly, with competitive games I believe this is the minority. The majority will look for reasons and scapegoats for why they lost a game whether they exist or not.

RedIsNotBlue said:

You sound like an intelligent, pragmatic individual though. Sadly, with competitive games I believe this is the minority. The majority will look for reasons and scapegoats for why they lost a game whether they exist or not.

You don't get it.

EA are on record with this - "the intention of this technology was to prevent players from becoming too bored or frustrated with the challenge a game presents in order to keep them playing."

So its not about losing (although obviously someone must lose for the other player to win). EA wants people to KEEP PLAYING. Think about it. Of course they do. YOU want to keep playing. But who plays a game that's too easy? Or too hard? 

Personally I see DDA in games I win as much as I lose. Sure, I don't want to lose games I shouldn't but I don't want to win games I shouldn't either. Anyone that plays MUT or CFM for any length of time will see both. As an example go for it on every 4th down for a few days. See how often you don't make it because of BS. Psychic coverage. A dropped pass. Crazy sack. Notice how your 5th win in MUT H2H is always harder. These things might annoy the fuck out of you at the time but its proven that players come back to a game that challenges them rather than bores them. Of course, a lot of those players will also (wrongly IMO) think a higher OVR team is the solution and either grind for coins (engagement) or buy packs ($$). Either way, EA wins.

So yeah. Players that accept DDA exist aren't necessarily bad losers. But how many people post about it if they win? I win a lot of games. Most of them I probably should win but not all of them. If I won every game I'm sure I'd get bored of it and stop playing and I understood a long time ago that the numbers on the cards of the players on my roster will often mean shit.