More Links

mackandmoon · 07-28-2003, 09:46 AM

I have been scanning thru different threads & certain written articles today & it's really kinda sad that so many gamers don't care about the most important aspect of any game which is GAMEPLAY. So many of these debates are about modes/options that really don't mean too much to what the games are actually modeled after which is the GAME of FOOTBALL. The question I ask is why have gamers let modes like Franchise, Dynasty, Crib, etc. become the deciding factor in whether or not a GAME of Football is the most realistic on the market?(FPF is a gameplay mode) Have sports gamers become so shallow to the actual game of football?

Now I know I'll probably be flamed about my questioning these modes, but ask yourself why is Tecmo Bowl considered one of the greatest football games of all time & it had no fluff modes? It's kinda pathetic that certain companies know that the state of sports game players are shallow in their quest for a realistic game of football because they have become # crunchers & statboys in the like of PTI. It is beginning to puzzle me where our sports games will end up because the more we support these fluff modes the farther we will get away from the field & actual gameplay. I've already read threads where some gamers buy Madden just to sim a Franchise. You mean to tell me that gamers actually sim a football game? Have we become that lazy? Is the gameplay that bad?

I've noticed that many gamers say that Madden will be good for Franchise & ESPN will be good on the field. Well if both games aren't good on the field then what's the purpose?
VC is being singled out because they choose to concentrate on the field & keep franchise to a minimum yet everyone from Madden fans to 2k fans still aren't satisfied because they didn't include the latest stat tracking fluff mode/fantasy team mode. Many are knocking FPF before they even try it & don't want anything to do with it because it might challenge the brain & reflexes. Isn't this what videogames are supposed to do? Do any of you remember playing Contra, Ghost & Goblins, etc. where you had to actually play the game to master it or beat it? Do you remember the sense of accomplishment when you did it? Now in this day & age you can just sim a game & to a person like me who PLAY videogames it just a form of cheating!!

If we gamers don't start to support people who remember what videogames are about & keep buying into modes/options
that cover up bad GAMEPLAY then we will kill off the genre that we all supposedly love. If we keep complaining to companies that remember what videogames are about & cause them to follow other companies then we will be left without OPTIONS. I don't think any of us gamers would want to be left with no options for that would mean that we are forced into the liking/buying same thing.

Graphik · 07-28-2003, 10:08 AM

Alot of ppl play a game for the gameplay, but its not bad on the game companies part to add incentives to buy the game. If Madden, 2k4, Fever and Gameday only mode was Play Now then how would the sales look?

What I've been saying since the beggining is that ESPN is taking a pagge out of EAs book. Fill the game up with more and more modes and NEW features to attract the casual gamer. The thing is with Madden is that they have to do that anymore, they've already established a deep fanbase. Sega has been tryna do that the last few years. All the FPM, Crib, Owners, Playmaker, Charge, Chain reaction, 1000 new animations, etc, are inncentives to buy the game. Its like selling a car with all that crap you see in the commercials.

I'm sure both companies did thier part to make sure gameplay is up tp par but I tell you one thing, the gameplay will never be perfect. If it is, then consumers will never have a reason to pick up next years installment. But as for features, all it is is a reason for Joe Doe to pick up the game. If it was just simply "Play Now" for each game, then Joe would'nt know what to get.

LIGNUM55 · 07-28-2003, 10:10 AM

jmarks2001 · 07-28-2003, 10:13 AM

I think that the people on this on other forums are mainly concerned with gameplay. But when you're discussing a product that is yet to be released, it's hard to go into too much detail. You need to get your hands on a game to get a real feel for game play.

On the other hand, extra features can be conveyed through a post much easier. It's easier to talk about what a game does as opposed to how it feels/plays.

Graphik · 07-28-2003, 10:20 AM

Quote:

jmarks2001 said:
I think that the people on this on other forums are mainly concerned with gameplay. But when you're discussing a product that is yet to be released, it's hard to go into too much detail. You need to get your hands on a game to get a real feel for game play.

On the other hand, extra features can be conveyed through a post much easier. It's easier to talk about what a game does as opposed to how it feels/plays.

Great Point. With features, we already have a strong idea how it will play. Its obvious in the name. But we are clueless to how gameplay is cause no one here has really played it. Come Sep 2nd, thats when you see multiple threads about gameplay.

GTheorenHobbes · 07-28-2003, 10:30 AM

I agree, Mack. If the on-field gameplay is boring or stale, then I can see why all the extra modes would be important. But it's the on-field gameplay that gets my $50 every year. Maybe I'm in the minority on this, but I wouldn't hesitate to buy a game that only has Play Now mode, if it plays a great game of football.

Graphik · 07-28-2003, 10:46 AM

Quote:

GTheorenHobbes said:
I agree, Mack. If the on-field gameplay is boring or stale, then I can see why all the extra modes would be important. But it's the on-field gameplay that gets my $50 every year. Maybe I'm in the minority on this, but I wouldn't hesitate to buy a game that only has Play Now mode, if it plays a great game of football.

See thats the thing. If this was Maddens, ESPNs, Fevers, and Gamedays first year. And the only thing on thier was Play Now, which one would you get? Tough one right? But if you happen to see one that had "5000 animations" on the box, that would make your choice easier right?

mackandmoon · 07-28-2003, 11:24 AM

I agree with some of your post but my problem is that now those incentives are the focus of the games. These incentives are selling more games than the gameplay. This is where I find the majority of the problem. Ask yourself, where do we go with incentives after this year? Now that Madden has the Owner's Mode could you list some things that they can add now that will change the game? It seems that eventually the incentives will run out & what's left? GAMEPLAY. So if the gameplay isn't top notch then everything else should be second fiddle. It's like putting thousands of dollars in a vehicle to paint, upholster, & beef up the outside & keeping the engine knocking & sputtering.

Alot of people are complaining about FPF but it's actually a gameplay mode & people are running away from it. I know none of us have actually played it yet but noone is actually optimistic on these boards about it but a few VIDEOGAME players. This only reinforces the fact that many sports gamers are not actually sport gamers. Not because they wont actually like FPF, but because it's a turn-off because it's not a stat mode which doesn't involve any gameplay of the game of football. The main question is where are we headed as sports videogame players if we choose fluff over substance?

07-28-2003, 09:46 AM	#1
mackandmoon Rookie OVR: 2 Join Date: May 2003	Why have gamers let....... I have been scanning thru different threads & certain written articles today & it's really kinda sad that so many gamers don't care about the most important aspect of any game which is GAMEPLAY. So many of these debates are about modes/options that really don't mean too much to what the games are actually modeled after which is the GAME of FOOTBALL. The question I ask is why have gamers let modes like Franchise, Dynasty, Crib, etc. become the deciding factor in whether or not a GAME of Football is the most realistic on the market?(FPF is a gameplay mode) Have sports gamers become so shallow to the actual game of football? Now I know I'll probably be flamed about my questioning these modes, but ask yourself why is Tecmo Bowl considered one of the greatest football games of all time & it had no fluff modes? It's kinda pathetic that certain companies know that the state of sports game players are shallow in their quest for a realistic game of football because they have become # crunchers & statboys in the like of PTI. It is beginning to puzzle me where our sports games will end up because the more we support these fluff modes the farther we will get away from the field & actual gameplay. I've already read threads where some gamers buy Madden just to sim a Franchise. You mean to tell me that gamers actually sim a football game? Have we become that lazy? Is the gameplay that bad? I've noticed that many gamers say that Madden will be good for Franchise & ESPN will be good on the field. Well if both games aren't good on the field then what's the purpose? VC is being singled out because they choose to concentrate on the field & keep franchise to a minimum yet everyone from Madden fans to 2k fans still aren't satisfied because they didn't include the latest stat tracking fluff mode/fantasy team mode. Many are knocking FPF before they even try it & don't want anything to do with it because it might challenge the brain & reflexes. Isn't this what videogames are supposed to do? Do any of you remember playing Contra, Ghost & Goblins, etc. where you had to actually play the game to master it or beat it? Do you remember the sense of accomplishment when you did it? Now in this day & age you can just sim a game & to a person like me who PLAY videogames it just a form of cheating!! If we gamers don't start to support people who remember what videogames are about & keep buying into modes/options that cover up bad GAMEPLAY then we will kill off the genre that we all supposedly love. If we keep complaining to companies that remember what videogames are about & cause them to follow other companies then we will be left without OPTIONS. I don't think any of us gamers would want to be left with no options for that would mean that we are forced into the liking/buying same thing.

07-28-2003, 10:08 AM	#2
Graphik Prsnr#70460649 OVR: 22* Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Chi-Town, Ill-State Posts: 10,580	Re: Why have gamers let....... Alot of ppl play a game for the gameplay, but its not bad on the game companies part to add incentives to buy the game. If Madden, 2k4, Fever and Gameday only mode was Play Now then how would the sales look? What I've been saying since the beggining is that ESPN is taking a pagge out of EAs book. Fill the game up with more and more modes and NEW features to attract the casual gamer. The thing is with Madden is that they have to do that anymore, they've already established a deep fanbase. Sega has been tryna do that the last few years. All the FPM, Crib, Owners, Playmaker, Charge, Chain reaction, 1000 new animations, etc, are inncentives to buy the game. Its like selling a car with all that crap you see in the commercials. I'm sure both companies did thier part to make sure gameplay is up tp par but I tell you one thing, the gameplay will never be perfect. If it is, then consumers will never have a reason to pick up next years installment. But as for features, all it is is a reason for Joe Doe to pick up the game. If it was just simply "Play Now" for each game, then Joe would'nt know what to get.

07-28-2003, 10:10 AM	#3
LIGNUM55 Banned OVR: 1 Join Date: Jul 2003	Re: Why have gamers let.......

07-28-2003, 10:13 AM	#4
jmarks2001 Rookie OVR: 4 Join Date: Jul 2003	Re: Why have gamers let....... I think that the people on this on other forums are mainly concerned with gameplay. But when you're discussing a product that is yet to be released, it's hard to go into too much detail. You need to get your hands on a game to get a real feel for game play. On the other hand, extra features can be conveyed through a post much easier. It's easier to talk about what a game does as opposed to how it feels/plays.

07-28-2003, 10:20 AM	#5
Graphik Prsnr#70460649 OVR: 22* Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Chi-Town, Ill-State Posts: 10,580	Re: Why have gamers let....... Quote: *jmarks2001 said:* I think that the people on this on other forums are mainly concerned with gameplay. But when you're discussing a product that is yet to be released, it's hard to go into too much detail. You need to get your hands on a game to get a real feel for game play. On the other hand, extra features can be conveyed through a post much easier. It's easier to talk about what a game does as opposed to how it feels/plays. Great Point. With features, we already have a strong idea how it will play. Its obvious in the name. But we are clueless to how gameplay is cause no one here has really played it. Come Sep 2nd, thats when you see multiple threads about gameplay.

	MLB The Show 24 Review: Another Solid Hit for the Series
	New Star GP Review: Old-School Arcade Fun
	Where Are Our College Basketball Video Game Rumors?

07-28-2003, 10:30 AM	#6
GTheorenHobbes Banned OVR: 21 Join Date: Jul 2002	Re: Why have gamers let....... I agree, Mack. If the on-field gameplay is boring or stale, then I can see why all the extra modes would be important. But it's the on-field gameplay that gets my $50 every year. Maybe I'm in the minority on this, but I wouldn't hesitate to buy a game that only has Play Now mode, if it plays a great game of football.

07-28-2003, 10:46 AM	#7
Graphik Prsnr#70460649 OVR: 22* Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Chi-Town, Ill-State Posts: 10,580	Re: Why have gamers let....... Quote: *GTheorenHobbes said:* I agree, Mack. If the on-field gameplay is boring or stale, then I can see why all the extra modes would be important. But it's the on-field gameplay that gets my $50 every year. Maybe I'm in the minority on this, but I wouldn't hesitate to buy a game that only has Play Now mode, if it plays a great game of football. See thats the thing. If this was Maddens, ESPNs, Fevers, and Gamedays first year. And the only thing on thier was Play Now, which one would you get? Tough one right? But if you happen to see one that had "5000 animations" on the box, that would make your choice easier right?

07-28-2003, 11:24 AM	#8
mackandmoon Rookie OVR: 2 Join Date: May 2003	Re: Why have gamers let....... I agree with some of your post but my problem is that now those incentives are the focus of the games. These incentives are selling more games than the gameplay. This is where I find the majority of the problem. Ask yourself, where do we go with incentives after this year? Now that Madden has the Owner's Mode could you list some things that they can add now that will change the game? It seems that eventually the incentives will run out & what's left? GAMEPLAY. So if the gameplay isn't top notch then everything else should be second fiddle. It's like putting thousands of dollars in a vehicle to paint, upholster, & beef up the outside & keeping the engine knocking & sputtering. Alot of people are complaining about FPF but it's actually a gameplay mode & people are running away from it. I know none of us have actually played it yet but noone is actually optimistic on these boards about it but a few VIDEOGAME players. This only reinforces the fact that many sports gamers are not actually sport gamers. Not because they wont actually like FPF, but because it's a turn-off because it's not a stat mode which doesn't involve any gameplay of the game of football. The main question is where are we headed as sports videogame players if we choose fluff over substance?

More Links

Why have gamers let.......