NCAA Football 10 Blog: It's in the Details

[Hey_Rebby]

Quote: Originally Posted by OMT

Right. Those endzones are for bowl games and championship games only. Home endzones is based on photo reference.

Thanks for answering.

[Allaboutme]

Quote: Originally Posted by canes21

lool you just mentioned a bunch of tiny things. Like the half time show, pregame show, sideline interaction, refs. Thats what we want, thats what made 2k5 solid gold.

yes but when i quoted that guy about his things and he replied its the little things that makes the game golden he was talking about hand towels and endzone fonts, compared to what i just stated they are very very little things that can be omitted and no one would care.

[IamLEGENDsince87]

OMT, any chance of Texas getting white cleats for the away unis? and getting rid of Boston Colleges black cleats?

[FootballDetails]

Please remove the EA Sports logo from the field goal nets.



It's obviously ironic to proclaim "It's in the Details" and then show a field goal net incongruously emblazoned with a bright EA SPORTS logo.

In this circumstance, the particular detail (dictated by a collective effort to ensure accurate representation of college football) should be an empty net.

A prominent video game logo on the net violates the goal of simulation. A detail would be lost, and that's no small loss because..."It's in the Details"

It most certainly is.

So please remove the logo from the net. Putting it on the net is almost tantamount to putting it on the field.

There are appropriate places for the EA logo. The nets and the field are not two of them.

Hey, this is a simple misstep that can be corrected. You guys are doing a great job, but I felt the need to say something. (Forget about the fact that we're talking about field goal nets in 2009. That's already frustrating.)

And the refs? The refs will be in the game.

I think marketing withheld the visual evidence to prevent premature exposure. The refs should quietly slip back in the game. Don't call attention to it, EA. It's been too long without them. Put 'em in, and move on.

That aside, keep up the great work!

"It's in the Details!" I'm with you on that. Obviously. That's why my name is Details.

[Bigdmo9999]

Anyone notice that the net isn't connected to anything?

[Hellisan]

Quote: Originally Posted by Details

Please remove the EA Sports logo from the field goal nets. It's obviously ironic to proclaim "It's in the Details" and then show a field goal net incongruously emblazoned with a bright EA SPORTS logo. In this circumstance, the particular detail (dictated by a collective effort to ensure accurate representation of college football) should be an empty net. A prominent video game logo on the net violates the goal of simulation. A detail would be lost, and that's no small loss because..."It's in the Details" It most certainly is. So please remove the logo from the net. Putting it on the net is almost tantamount to putting it on the field. There are appropriate places for the EA logo. The nets and the field are not two of them. Hey, this is a simple misstep that can be corrected. You guys are doing a great job, but I felt the need to say something. (Forget about the fact that we're talking about field goal nets in 2009. That's already frustrating.) And the refs? The refs will be in the game. I think marketing withheld the visual evidence to prevent premature exposure. The refs should quietly slip back in the game. Don't call attention to it, EA. It's been too long without them. Put 'em in, and move on. That aside, keep up the great work, Team 10! "It's in the Details!" I'm with you on that. Obviously. That's why my name is Details!

I agree.. The EA logo right on the net would be a huge eyesore and would really sort of ruin the "realism" effect of the game. Really hoping that doesn't make it into the final version.

[siir]

So i guess that there will be no PS2 version.

[Allaboutme]

Quote: Originally Posted by Bigdmo9999

Anyone notice that the net isn't connected to anything?

I think you'll survive if it stays that way, or maybe not?