Your very own camera argument thread.

[Johnny "Too Tall"]

Quote: Originally Posted by RaiderKtulu

Classic Camera - see the whole field all at once, throw the ball to whatever receiver happens to be open. On Defense, it's a pure guessing game and you don't know where the ball is going until it gets there - thus all of the quick player switching that goes on to be involved on the play. Backbreaker Camera - scan the field looking from WR to WR trying to find the open player. On defense, you can actually follow the QB's eyes because he has to look where he's throwing. You can truly anticipate where a ball is going by watching the QB. Which do you think is closer to the real thing? When have you EVER been blindsided while playing Madden or 2k5/8? Sure, you may have gotten hit from behind because you couldn't get rid of the ball quick enough - but you saw it coming. Just because something has been done for a long time doesn't make it the best option. Your 20 year old TV and dvd player may still look good to you - but HDTV and Blu-ray are still better.

I hope your not trying to say god view is an old tube and this camera view is blue ray. That's just laughable. I will give you that this camera does a better job of replicating what it would be like to be an individual player on the field, though in all honestly not all that realistically. You can make an impact on D, running can be fun, passing can is a challenge which I like--all in all I'm actually warming up to the camera.

But if you think being able to view the whole field from a god perspective to being limited to the behind the player view of a particular player is some sort of addition by subtraction I have to disagree with you there.

I don't prefer to see it from one players point of view--I never really wanted a quasi simi experience of what it would be like to be on the field. I love to orchestra the entire team from the heavens above. So while I'm warming up to the camera and beginning to appreciate its, the idea that this is some kind of great innovation in football game is a little far fetched to me.

It's just a different, more selective, defined, whatever, way of playing the game. That's cool that they wanted to go in this direction but if this was the standard view for football gaming of the future Id be pissed. I hate to beat a dead horse but all I really want is options-wouldn't mind using this camera view from time to time-but I'm never happy with not having options.

[RaiderKtulu]

Quote: Originally Posted by Johnny "Too Tall"

I hope your not trying to say god view is an old tube and this camera view is blue ray. That's just laughable. I will give you that this camera does a better job of replicating what it would be like to be an individual player on the field, though in all honestly not all that realistically. You can make an impact on D, running can be fun, passing can is a challenge which I like--all in all I'm actually warming up to the camera. But if you think being able to view the whole field from a god perspective to being limited to the behind the player view of a particular player is some sort of addition by subtraction I have to disagree with you there. I don't prefer to see it from one players point of view--I never really wanted a quasi simi experience of what it would be like to be on the field. I love to orchestra the entire team from the heavens above. So while I'm warming up to the camera and beginning to appreciate its, the idea that this is some kind of great innovation in football game is a little far fetched to me. It's just a different, more selective, defined, whatever, way of playing the game. That's cool that they wanted to go in this direction but if this was the standard view for football gaming of the future Id be pissed. I hate to beat a dead horse but all I really want is options-wouldn't mind using this camera view from time to time-but I'm never happy with not having options.

You're resistant to change. Lots of people are. That's the point I was making with the dvd/blu-ray comparison.

You're right in that they're different ways to play. One way is more like watching a game on TV, the other is like being on the field. Neither one is perfect, but they're aiming for different goals. Madden doesn't offer a close up Backbreaker-style camera. Why should Backbreaker give you a Madden-style camera? They're different games that just happen to be based on the same sport. You don't complain because Forza doesn't have any street racing or turbo boosting, and you don't complain about Burnout Paradise not having defined tracks. They're both racing games, but they're doing different things. It's not about "having options" when those options go against the goal of the game.

I'm probably risking a banning or something by saying this, but the biggest reason the camera angle in Backbreaker is an issue for people is because they're upset at how far behind Madden is on the other aspects of the game. Period. If they were happy with Madden, they'd be much more willing to play Backbreaker for what it actually is...or they wouldn't bother with it at all. Because they aren't happy with Madden, they're looking other places to get the experience they're looking for.

[Johnny "Too Tall"]

Quote: Originally Posted by RaiderKtulu

You're resistant to change. Lots of people are. That's the point I was making with the dvd/blu-ray comparison. You're right in that they're different ways to play. One way is more like watching a game on TV, the other is like being on the field. Neither one is perfect, but they're aiming for different goals. Madden doesn't offer a close up Backbreaker-style camera. Why should Backbreaker give you a Madden-style camera? They're different games that just happen to be based on the same sport. You don't complain because Forza doesn't have any street racing or turbo boosting, and you don't complain about Burnout Paradise not having defined tracks. They're both racing games, but they're doing different things. It's not about "having options" when those options go against the goal of the game. I'm probably risking a banning or something by saying this, but the biggest reason the camera angle in Backbreaker is an issue for people is because they're upset at how far behind Madden is on the other aspects of the game. Period. If they were happy with Madden, they'd be much more willing to play Backbreaker for what it actually is...or they wouldn't bother with it at all. Because they aren't happy with Madden, they're looking other places to get the experience they're looking for.

I pretty much agree with that, though even if madden had great A.I., features and franchise mode ( which would satisfy me ) I would still love to play this game from a god cam perspective simply because the physics and tackling would be awesome to see from that perspective. Like you said god came is like watching it on tv, Id love to see the action like that... I'm willing to say at this moment that I think its acceptable that they chose this path;I don't like it--I would really love to play this game from a god cam perspective-and I still think it could cost them in sales- but I respect it and will hope that madden is better this year.

[mestevo]

Lack of options is a problem, it's a decision they made and will have to live with. I wish it wasn't, because then we could focus on the kind of football the game actually plays, since there are probably much bigger problems there than the angle we see them at. Many people won't bother though, and if you're a fan of the franchise you don't want people have have such a superficial reason to not buy the game, since it detracts from anything 'groundbreaking' you may believe they've achieved. Analogous excuses don't really cut it, it's a problem no matter what you compare it to or try to downplay it as being similar to.

[RaiderKtulu]

Quote: Originally Posted by mestevo

Lack of options is a problem, it's a decision they made and will have to live with. I wish it wasn't, because then we could focus on the kind of football the game actually plays, since there are probably much bigger problems there than the angle we see them at. Many people won't bother though, and if you're a fan of the franchise you don't want people have have such a superficial reason to not buy the game, since it detracts from anything 'groundbreaking' you may believe they've achieved. Analogous excuses don't really cut it, it's a problem no matter what you compare it to or try to downplay it as being similar to.

Like I said... If Madden did everything people wanted it to do, this wouldn't be an issue. You'd already HAVE your classic football game camera with real physics and player interaction, and this game, if it existed at all, would get looked at BECAUSE it was a different way to play the sport, not as a potential replacement.

The problem here is what Madden isn't doing, not Backbreaker.


I'm done with this. If your mind is made up, then it is what it is. Play the game, don't play the game... I don't really care. As long as it sells enough to justify a sequel with improved AI and injuries, I'm good. It doesn't need to sell 10 million copies to be a success, and if it just happens to make enough waves to force some improvement in other games, even better.

[Anaxamander]

I actually like the camera, but let me say this: If they give us the option for alternate controls, why not the option for an alternate camera?

[Buckeyes_Doc]

Tell me, what in the world does Madden have anything to do with the camera in BB?

If someone doesn't like the camera in BB, people defend the camera by bringing up Madden and bashing Madden. How is that a logical defense to the camera in BACKBREAKER?

[Old Mr T]

Everyone I know really wants to buy this game due to the physics and gameplay mechanics, but will only do so if BB provide a classic camera.

I am really looking forward to a new football game, so hopefully the BB people will add a classic camera so that I can enjoy the game with friends.