Make it a little more like madden

[coogrfan]

Quote:

---

LedouxRoc said:
If coogrfan thinks player ratings should be the absolute determining factor in winning games, he must also believe that the Panthers(example) shouldn't have been in the Superbowl because teams like the Eagles, Dolphins, etc have more talented players.


I can run fast, but not so fast when I'm tired or lazy. The potential is still there however, and that's where the gamer comes into play.

---

I didn't mean to imply that player ratings should be the sole factor in determining who wins(if I wanted that, I would go back to APBA or Strat-0-Matic Football ).

Console sports sims attempt to strike a balance between the players ratings and the gamers abilities. Madden/NCAA leans towards the former, while ESPN puts more emphisis on the latter.

"The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, but that's the way to bet"-Damon Runyon

[wwharton]

Quote:

---

coogrfan said:

Quote:

---

LedouxRoc said:
If coogrfan thinks player ratings should be the absolute determining factor in winning games, he must also believe that the Panthers(example) shouldn't have been in the Superbowl because teams like the Eagles, Dolphins, etc have more talented players.


I can run fast, but not so fast when I'm tired or lazy. The potential is still there however, and that's where the gamer comes into play.

---

I didn't mean to imply that player ratings should be the sole factor in determining who wins(if I wanted that, I would go back to APBA or Strat-0-Matic Football ).

Console sports sims attempt to strike a balance between the players ratings and the gamers abilities. Madden/NCAA leans towards the former, while ESPN puts more emphisis on the latter.

"The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, but that's the way to bet"-Damon Runyon

---

bingo... and that's where preference comes in. personally (tell me if you agree with this) i think that if ESPN players could look smooth running with their style or Madden players didn't look as smooth with their style then most if not all would prefer the ESPN style. that's obviously just my opinion but i think those that prefer EA's style do so b/c of the look it gives which is less important to me.

[coogrfan]

Quote:

---

wwharton said:

Quote:

---

coogrfan said:

Quote:

---

LedouxRoc said:
If coogrfan thinks player ratings should be the absolute determining factor in winning games, he must also believe that the Panthers(example) shouldn't have been in the Superbowl because teams like the Eagles, Dolphins, etc have more talented players.


I can run fast, but not so fast when I'm tired or lazy. The potential is still there however, and that's where the gamer comes into play.

---

I didn't mean to imply that player ratings should be the sole factor in determining who wins(if I wanted that, I would go back to APBA or Strat-0-Matic Football ).

Console sports sims attempt to strike a balance between the players ratings and the gamers abilities. Madden/NCAA leans towards the former, while ESPN puts more emphisis on the latter.

"The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, but that's the way to bet"-Damon Runyon

---

bingo... and that's where preference comes in. personally (tell me if you agree with this) i think that if ESPN players could look smooth running with their style or Madden players didn't look as smooth with their style then most if not all would prefer the ESPN style. that's obviously just my opinion but i think those that prefer EA's style do so b/c of the look it gives which is less important to me.

---

No, I don't think I agree. While I do think the look of the running animations is a big part of most Maddenites disdain for ESPN, I don't believe it's the sole reason. Imo, when you hear Madden fans deriding the ESPN series as "too arcady" this is what they're refering to, so I don't think simply smoothing the running motions is going to change their minds.

[morpheus007]

Coog, what exactly is too arcadey? Come on that is a very generic reason. I want some hard examples of why they think ESPN is too arcadey.

I know you checked out the Madden Challenge on G4TV. Brian Finneran was a GOD. Outjumping and outrunning the entire league. I would have thought he was SUPERMAN had I not known better. Come on
you got to come up with more than that. Not trying to start anything, but too arcadey????

Maybe its too challenging, just my opinion!!!!! Each to his/her own.

[coogrfan]

I wasn't saying I think ESPN is an arcade game, I was refering to one of the standard complaints from Madden fans about ESPN. To be specific, most Madden fans feel that player ratings don't play a big enough role in ESPN, that most success is based on button-mashing skills(again, that's not my opinion, just stating my perception of the average Madden fans thoughts on this subject).

As for your example, I agree that the scores in Madden tourneys are ridiculous. But that is result of the general lack of attention paid to defense in the Madden series in recent years. This years version sounds as though EA is taking steps to give defenses a fighting chance. We'll see.

[Graphik]

You know, personally I enjoy both playing styles. On one hand you got Madden where the ratings take more effect than user control then on the other hand, you got ESPN where user ability shines.

I enjoy the botton mashing affect for the reasons that most of you described already and the botton holding also plays a significant role if you feel that you want the ratings to decide the game. One good example of a game that is strickly ratings based is Front Page Sports Football and Baseball. The ratings played more of an effect than anything in the game and the statsitics showed that. But of course, the user control was minimulized. In a game like ESPN, its more about the the user control that accounts for the immersivness.

One thing I do enjoy is immersivness. I like the fact that I can feel myself break tackles and utilize my skills to determine a loss from a gain. In Madden, it also feels good to know that your superstar RB will defitnitly play to his real life abilities and break tackles and the ratings will determine a loss or a gain. Its 2 diffrent concepts that make the game feel so good. But one feels better because its the user that makes it happen and not the cpu. Sometimes you want that.

In Madden, I can probably get 300-400 yards no problem because my team is sopposed to adverage 300-400 yards offense each game and the ratings take a significant role and helping you reach the adverage. In ESPN, it took me almost half a season to break over the 200 yard mark with a decent team. Why? Because I did'nt have the skills to reach over 200 yards. It made me earn it.

The reason why I like both concepts is because both concepts are unique to each other. Its like switching from a stick shift to a automatic from time to time. Sometimes you want complete control and sometimes you just want it to be simplistic. Not saying Madden is a simple game because its not. Its just that I'm moody sometimes. Thats why I still do play Strat-O-Matic games and I can immediatley switch over to Electric Football where the control is in my hands. I like both because....sometimes you feel like a nut.....

[morpheus007]

COOG, the things that Madden is doing on defense should help make the games more competitive.
And I appreciate your repsonse regarding the "too arcadey" issue. Much appreciated. Well sometimes
you just cann't teach an old dog a new trick. Peace.

[morpheus007]

Graphiks, well said. You got skills.