Why Was Poe Pushed to the Outside After Years of Supporting Boxing Video Games?

There is something about my relationship with the boxing video game industry that I have struggled to understand for years.

How does someone go from campaigning nonstop for the return of boxing video games, connecting developers with boxers, brands, industry contacts, and potential opportunities, to eventually feeling like he has been pushed to the outside?

That question becomes even harder to ignore when I look at what happened with SCI and Undisputed.

This is not about me believing that a company owes me employment, money, a position, access, or special treatment. It is about trying to understand how a relationship that began with mutual respect appeared to change so dramatically.

Before Undisputed Became What It Is Today

Long before Undisputed reached consoles, long before the major marketing campaigns, boxer announcements, content creator events, sponsorships, and wider industry recognition, I was already campaigning for the return of a serious boxing video game.

I had been doing it for years.

When many boxing fans believed another major boxing game might never happen, I kept talking about it.

I kept writing.

I kept building wishlists.

I kept discussing mechanics.

I kept reaching out to companies.

I kept talking to boxers.

I kept trying to demonstrate that a real market still existed for boxing games.

And when SCI appeared, I did not look at the company as competition or something I needed to protect myself from.

I wanted them to succeed.

I was going out of my way to send developers, brands, boxers, and other potentially useful contacts in their direction.

And I would have done the same thing for almost any serious company trying to build a boxing video game.

My goal has always been bigger than one studio.

I want boxing properly represented in video games.

An Early Conversation With Ash Habib

Early in SCI's development, Ash Habib contacted me.

During a phone conversation, Ash told me that he respected what I had been doing for boxing video games for all those years.

One statement in particular stayed with me.

He essentially acknowledged that I had continued campaigning for a boxing game when many other fans had given up.

That meant something to me because this was never some temporary interest.

I had been fighting for this genre for decades.

At that point, it felt like SCI understood what people like me represented.

Not just customers.

Not simply content creators.

But boxing people and longtime boxing gamers who had spent years trying to explain what had been missing from the genre.

The Scan Conversation

There was another conversation that eventually became part of this story.

Ash told me that I was going to be scanned into Undisputed.

This was something I later confirmed numerous times through conversations with people connected to the studio.

I did not invent the idea.

It was something that had been discussed.

Eventually, however, it disappeared.

There was no scan.

There was no real explanation that satisfied the questions surrounding what changed.

And from my perspective, the relationship with the company also began feeling different around that period, particularly after personnel changes inside the organization.

I am deliberately not naming certain individuals because this article is not about making unsupported accusations against a specific employee.

People within the community have their own theories about when and why SCI's direction changed. Some have associated that shift with people who previously worked for major publishers, including EA.

I cannot independently prove that any particular employee caused SCI to change its approach toward me, nor am I claiming that as established fact.

But I can describe what I experienced.

The Strange Part Is That I Didn't Really Care About Being Scanned

This may sound strange considering everything I just wrote, but being scanned into the game was never the most important issue to me.

Would it have been cool?

Absolutely.

Would it have meant something after supporting boxing games for so many years?

Of course.

But that was never why I supported SCI.

I cared far more about whether they were going to build the boxing game many of us believed ESBC could become.

I wanted realistic boxing.

Authentic boxing.

Different boxer identities.

Meaningful footwork.

Inside fighting.

Clinching.

Realistic defense.

Proper punch mechanics.

Ring positioning.

Boxer tendencies.

Boxer capabilities.

Traits.

Mannerisms.

Ring IQ.

Realistic stamina.

Proper vulnerability.

A meaningful corner system.

Realistic knockdowns.

Realistic referee interaction.

A deep creation suite.

CPU versus CPU.

Customization.

Options.

Sliders.

And systems deep enough that boxing knowledge actually mattered.

If SCI had delivered the boxing experience I had spent decades campaigning for, being scanned into the game would have been a footnote.

That is what people sometimes misunderstand.

This was never primarily about Poe getting something from SCI.

It was about boxing getting something from SCI.

Then Something Else Started Happening

Another thing began bothering me.

Content creators who once communicated with me regularly seemed to become increasingly distant.

People who used to talk openly with me suddenly appeared more cautious.

Interactions changed.

Some relationships became noticeably colder.

And naturally, I began asking myself why.

Was it because I became increasingly critical of Undisputed?

Was someone telling creators to keep their distance?

Were creators concerned that publicly associating with one of SCI's strongest critics might hurt their access to the studio?

Were people worried about invitations, early information, interviews, tournaments, trips, partnerships, or other opportunities?

Or was it simply a collection of unrelated personal decisions?

I do not know.

And that distinction matters.

I am not going to state that SCI officially ordered anyone to stop communicating with me unless evidence proves that happened.

But I am absolutely entitled to ask why relationships changed so dramatically.

Criticism Should Not Erase Years of Support

This is where the entire situation becomes uncomfortable.

When SCI needed support, I supported the existence of the project.

When the boxing video game genre needed attention, I was there.

When opportunities appeared to connect people, I tried to connect them.

When I knew boxers, developers, brands, or other people who might help move boxing gaming forward, I tried to open doors.

But supporting a company does not mean promising never to criticize its product.

That is not support.

That is public relations.

I was never hired to become SCI's public relations department.

My loyalty is to boxing and to the possibility of creating the best boxing simulation possible.

If something looks unrealistic, I am going to discuss it.

If a mechanic does not properly represent boxing, I am going to explain why.

If something that existed in the original ESBC vision disappears, I am going to ask what happened.

If the community is told something that appears inconsistent with what players are experiencing, I am going to question it.

That should not make somebody an enemy.

Boxing Experience Changes How You See a Boxing Game

There is another uncomfortable reality surrounding criticism of boxing games.

Not everyone evaluating these games understands boxing at the same level.

That does not mean their opinions are worthless.

But perspectives are different.

Someone who has boxed can notice things that an ordinary player might overlook.

Foot positioning.

Weight distribution.

Range.

Punch trajectories.

Defensive responsibility after punching.

The relationship between the lead foot and rear foot.

Balance.

Hip rotation.

Shoulder position.

Punch recovery.

Inside positioning.

How a boxer closes distance.

How somebody exits after throwing.

How fatigue changes technique.

How pressure is applied without simply walking forward throwing combinations.

These details matter.

So when I criticize something, I am not necessarily criticizing it because I dislike SCI.

Sometimes I am criticizing it because I recognize something that does not resemble what happens inside an actual boxing ring.

A company making an authentic boxing game should want those conversations.

Was Poe Blacklisted?

That brings us back to the uncomfortable question.

Was I blacklisted?

I cannot present that as a proven fact.

I have never been shown an internal SCI document saying, "Do not work with Poe."

I have never seen an official company directive ordering content creators to stop talking to me.

Without evidence like that, it would be irresponsible to present blacklisting as established fact.

But I can say that from my perspective, something changed.

Relationships changed.

Communication changed.

Opportunities changed.

A previously discussed scan disappeared.

People who once interacted regularly became distant.

And that change seemed to become more noticeable as my criticism of the game's direction increased.

Those facts, experiences, and timelines are why I continue asking questions.

If Criticism Makes Someone Untouchable, There Is a Larger Problem

The larger issue is not even about me.

It is about what kind of community boxing video games are going to have.

If developers primarily surround themselves with people who praise them, what happens to legitimate criticism?

If creators believe that being too critical could cost them access, what kind of feedback reaches developers?

If longtime boxing people are considered difficult simply because they challenge unrealistic mechanics, who is protecting authenticity?

That creates an echo chamber.

And echo chambers are dangerous for sports games.

A boxing game needs people willing to say:

That doesn't look like boxing.

That mechanic doesn't make sense.

That boxer doesn't move like himself.

That defensive system is too generic.

That stamina system encourages unrealistic behavior.

That punch animation ignores proper mechanics.

That feature existed before. Why was it removed?

Those are not attacks.

Those are development questions.

I Was Never Campaigning for One Company

This is something I want to make extremely clear.

I have never wanted SCI to be the only boxing developer.

I want competition.

If EA wants to return with Fight Night, I want to see it.

If 2K and Visual Concepts want to build a boxing game, I want to see it.

If Dimps is developing something serious, I want to see it.

If an independent studio develops something revolutionary, I want to see it.

If another publisher approaches boxing differently, I want to hear its vision.

Competition benefits boxing fans.

So when I sent contacts toward SCI, it was never because I had pledged allegiance to SCI.

I was trying to help boxing gaming.

I would help another legitimate project tomorrow if I believed it was seriously trying to push the genre forward.

The Irony

The irony is that someone can spend decades asking companies to make boxing games, help promote the genre, introduce people, generate ideas, create thousands of concepts, keep discussions alive during periods when virtually nobody was making boxing games, and still eventually become viewed as a problem because he refuses to stop criticizing what he believes is wrong.

Maybe I became inconvenient.

Maybe my expectations became uncomfortable.

Maybe I asked too many questions.

Maybe companies would rather communicate with people who are easier to manage.

Or maybe some of what happened has explanations I have never been given.

That is exactly why I continue asking.

I Don't Need Everyone to Agree With Me

Developers do not have to agree with every idea I write.

Content creators do not have to agree with me.

SCI does not have to agree with me.

Players certainly do not have to agree with me.

But disagreement should be handled through discussion.

Show me why the mechanic works.

Explain the design decision.

Demonstrate why something cannot be implemented.

Tell the community what tradeoffs were necessary.

Have serious boxing conversations with people who understand the sport.

Do not simply isolate the people asking the hardest questions.

Because sometimes the person irritating you today is pointing toward the problem your customers will complain about tomorrow.

My Goal Hasn't Changed

I am still campaigning for the same thing I was campaigning for before SCI existed.

A boxing video game that respects boxing.

A game where strategy matters.

A game where boxer identity matters.

A game where styles matter.

A game where boxing intelligence matters.

A game where casual players can enjoy themselves without forcing every player into simplified arcade mechanics.

A game deep enough that people can spend years learning it.

A game capable of showing younger players why boxing is called the sweet science.

SCI was once one possible path toward that goal.

It was never the goal itself.

So whether a company invites me into the room, keeps me outside of it, scans me into a game, ignores me, agrees with me, disagrees with me, or considers me too critical, I am going to keep discussing what boxing video games can become.

I was doing that before Undisputed.

I was doing it while Undisputed was being developed.

And I will continue doing it after Undisputed.

Because this was never only about one game.

It has always been about boxing.

This framing makes the article stronger because it asks hard questions without presenting an unverified company-wide “blacklist” or one employee’s alleged influence as proven fact. It also keeps the central argument where you wanted it: your relationship with SCI changed, but your real priority was always the realistic and authentic representation of boxing, not personal access or being scanned into the game.