WATCHING this made me realize he has a point

[Lynx34]

I'm not saying on this particular play there's anything too terrible; he even pointed out the blocking is acceptable (it's not perfect, but on this play it looks "good enough"). I think a lot of it is Apex just being Apex. Personally, while I think he's overly harsh, it's good that there are people like him to constantly bring to attention things that need to be worked on.

Anyway, what I want to get at is that the philosophy that the ends (accurate results) justify the means (unsatisfactory game engine) is fundamentally flawed. This is because of human control. In a CPU v. CPU match up, it holds up because the computer "knows" the engine in and out and does not have any issue with any of the hiccups in the game engine so each AI controlled player will react to the play around them as programmed and do so just fine.

But a human player can be tricked by these hiccups and adjust their control accordingly. Let me give an example. Let's have the human player be on defense. Now say that an AI-controlled tackler or two starts bringing the ball carrier down and the human player is controlling a nearby defender. This human player may think, "oh, I'm gonna go join the gang tackle to bring him down faster." This is logical and makes sense, and is "football smart." That is, defensive coaches preach gang tackling because it is effective in achieving the goal of bringing down the ball carrier as fast as possible.

However, the magic equation in the background determines that the ball carrier will break this particular tackle. Moreover, the poor animation is unclear about this until after the human player attempts to dive onto the pile. Because the human controlled player doesn't "actually" join the tackle, it adds no additional benefit and the break tackle goes through unchanged. The ball carrier breaks free and the human team's defense is out one more player than it should be.

This is just one example that illustrates how the improper means cannot possibly result in the proper results once there is human control involved. Another would be in the case of suction blocking where a player may make a cut to one side of a block pre-suction despite a defender 5 yards out because the other side looked to be covered by a DE, let's say, and would be a tackle for loss. Once he gets suctioned however, it becomes apparent that a huge gain could have been achieved, if the player would have gone outside the block rather than inside and the play becomes radically changed.


tl;dr:
This is a long rambling and I don't know if it made any sense. But my point is, if the human expects the means to be accurate and they aren't, then the results cannot be accurate because the human is not on the same "playing field," pardon the pun.

[canes21]

That video made me realize how big a step EA has made this year with NCAA 11. It looks so good in motion. It actually looked like a real play. Some things were wonky like the first missed tackle animation, but overall that play was better than anything 09, 10, etc. offered. I can't wait to play it myself.

Now, onto the whole results>visuals. Yea, thats right, but I'd rather have the game look realistic since we can always go in and get realistic results with sliders. Now, I think we should get both and it looks like it this year, but when we can always tweak the gameplay to get a realistic result, thats a good thing. As gamers we cannot tweak the animations with sliders.

[Rivals]

I agree with some of the other posters in that the first missed tackle actually seems more awkward than the second. The defender just doesn't deflect properly and the follow through animation kinda skips. However, the second tackle really wasn't bad. While the momentum of the play would take it toward the sideline, the OP isn't recognizing that the tackler is also trying to bring the running back down - straight down. Even on high tackles, defenders will use their own body weight to force a runner down. The pulling motion in that animation is represented accurately by the runner being tugged back toward the defender making the tackle. But again, I'm no physics major. I stayed at a Holiday Inn once, but only came away knowing how to speak Mandarin Chinese.

Quote: Originally Posted by NEOPARADIGM

That's exactly the point I was trying to make above, man: result > animation. It's just a missed/broken tackle - leave it at that, ya know? Maybe it doesn't look the way we'd like it to, but there's simply nothing explicitly wrong with the play either, especially considering the dozen or so ratings & attributes that factor into the play as well. I even understand "suction blocking" in this same way: guys get "sucked" into a block when they've "lost" the encounter, plain and simple. No it's not Euphoria, but it's how the engine works, and for what it is, it's fine. The sort of things you have to overlook in order to make these games "good" is so minimal, I'm literally shocked at how many people think they suck. I thought 08 on PS3 sucked because it had a crap framerate, but once they cleared that up in 09, I was peachy. I thought 10 was great, too. And I have no doubt 11 will be right up my alley. Does that mean I have bad taste in sports games, or does it mean I understand the engine? Heck, I'm to the point where all these "fix the gameplay" posts seem like nonsense to me. And is it any coincidence that people fawn over The Show around here, considering its gameplay is last-gen through and through? Heck, I've even seen people come right out and say "I want last-gen gameplay with next-gen graphics." Sorry for being so all over the place; this post is like five years in the making. My point is simply that getting too caught up in the game's animations is the catalyst for a lot of people's malcontent with this franchise. I look at results first then animation, and in so doing I don't have nearly the amount of complaints most everyone else seems to with the gameplay. Cheers.

I could hug you right now. Seriously. I've been saying this forever. The idea behind the engine is that there ARE missed tackles, broken assignments, bad blocks on plays, etc. The problem is they just don't LOOK exactly like they should so people throw a fit. Like you said, the results are fine, which is why I found last years game a blast, and am looking forward even more to this year's.

[JerseySuave4]

Quote: Originally Posted by NEOPARADIGM

It's obnoxious to take animations that seriously. It's the result of the play that takes precedence, not the other way around. If more people looked at it that way, there'd be way more people happy with these games. Sports games this gen simply aren't going to accomplish what this dude is expecting/demanding.

i agree, i think we're getting way to picky and nitpicking every little thing if it isn't 100% like real life. Video games were so much more enjoyable 10-15 years ago when we didnt have internet message boards to nitpick every little thing and people enjoyed the games for what they were.

[ConVick]

Disgusting. I remember one interview where Ben mentions no canned animations...

[ConVick]

Quote: Originally Posted by DickDalewood

I could hug you right now. Seriously. I've been saying this forever. The idea behind the engine is that there ARE missed tackles, broken assignments, bad blocks on plays, etc. The problem is they just don't LOOK exactly like they should so people throw a fit. Like you said, the results are fine, which is why I found last years game a blast, and am looking forward even more to this year's.

Must be you and quite a few people; I almost found NCAA 2010 unplayable...but that's probably just me

[prototype561]

Yeah we need a real physics engine in the game. I swear the physics where better on the last gen. consoles. That play just looks horrible in motion. The first miss tackle looked lame, and then 3 ala players should have killed the rb but they just laid down while one man made the tackle.

They really need to scrap the engine, stop the damn "tweaking". Every year they keep trying to put a band aid on a gun shot wound. One object is 200lbs another object is 300lbs and they are moving at the same speed, the 300lb object is going to win every time, thats just basic physics. For the animations they need to get some real athletes to do them, not some random joe blow. I swear everytime i see one of those " making the game" videos there is always some non athletic guy doing the mocap. You get a real football player to simulate football moves. DUH