TeamXbox: Physics-based gaming has the potential to be more much more lifelike, since it’s obviously based off of the same Newtonian principles as our reality. But there have to be pitfalls to a wholly physics-based system in a boxing game. Can you comment on the more notable , physics-based hurdles during Round 4’s development?

Fight Night Round 4 team: Because we’re using physics in Round 4, and we’re monitoring the collision between the glove and the head or the glove and the body, the glove actually has to touch the body part. We’re not going to name any names [whether it be one of our games or some other boxing franchise], but as crazy as this may sound, actual contact, very often, didn’t have to happen at all in some previous games. So, in order to hurt a guy, your glove didn’t actually have to touch your opponent; there was a collision volume somewhere…and they collided “behind the scenes.” Ergo, the guy got hurt. Along those lines, there’s just more to deal with from a development standpoint; this punch was glancing, this punch was partially deflected, this punch landed cleanly and so forth.


TeamXbox: You mentioned earlier about “not naming any names,” so we might as well. TXB gave Don King Presents; Prizefighter a 5.9 out of 10. Assuming that you played it for research purposes, what would you score it in comparison to Round 4?

Fight Night Round 4 team: [everyone chuckles] This is our PR response: We’re not in the business of scoring other games. If you take the athlete approach to it, we’re not going to “talk trash” at the press conference…we’ll just let our fists do the talking in the ring. We did play [Prizefighter] though, and they did a lot of things really well.






TeamXbox: The classic lineup in Round 4 is impressive. Was there a classic fighter that you really wanted for the game, but, for whatever reason, it didn’t work out?

Fight Night Round 4 team: Yeah, there are a couple boxers. Holyfield, Mayweather, De La Hoya…and, of course, some of the old guys from Round 3, such as Marciano and Dempsey. The Photo Game face feature makes it pretty easy to create anyone though, as long as you have a high quality image for scanning.


TeamXbox: It seems as though ego would play a part in who ends up in the game. Like, one boxer refusing if he was ranked lower than one of his rivals…

Fight Night Round 4 team: Yes. It’s not always up to us who ends up being in our game. Sometimes the guys just aren’t interested. Or there’s a big push for guys wanting to be on the cover. Or their demands are generally unreasonable. It really relates well to why some match-ups never happen in real boxing.

A story related to this occurred in Las Vegas when we were talking with boxers about being in the game. We told one heavyweight contender—again, not naming any names—that we could probably hook it up and get him in. He e-mailed us back and said that he didn’t want to be in Fight Night, but wanted his own game with his name on it. [team laughs] I can only think of one athlete that has his name on an EA game, and that’s Tiger Woods. And there’s no “Tiger Woods” of boxing at this time.


TeamXbox: Given Fight Night’s track record, it’s pretty much a guarantee that the game is going to sell well. But let’s say it was a “hard sell.” What’s the one feature of Round 4 that would be its absolute hallmark?

Fight Night Round 4 team: That’s a pretty easy one. It’s the new physics system and what that brings to gameplay. And you’re right—if you put Fight Night Round 3 in a box and called it Fight Night Round 4, it would probably sell on prestige alone. But what we wanted to do is figure out how to raise the bar, and that demanded a physics-based system. The speed, the responsiveness and, simply, having it feel like a “real” boxing game is something we can really hang our hat on. The physics provide a realism that other fighting games—whether simulation or arcade—will have to go at bat against when trying to achieve that organic feel of two fighters tussling in the ring.