Is madden building on a broken foundation?

[Lakers 24 7]

Re: Is madden building on a broken foundation?

Is QB not arguably the most important position in all of Football? Are you saying that it is not important to at least do a half-hearted job of simulating arguably the most important position in the game?

Understand something, I'm not saying that they have to make it so that you are actually throwing passes Kinnect style, but i don't think it's asking too much to at least TRY and replicate what is unequivocally one of the biggest facets of the game.

I'm sorry, seeing the whole field and pushing a button, doesn't do it for me lol. You can not play any other position in Madden, other than maybe Kicker if you have the timing down pat, with your eyes closed and be successful most of the time. You can play QB in Madden with your eyes closed and be successful at an unrealistic rate. Try it. Snap the ball, go backwards, and hit any pass button after a couple seconds and see if you can't complete a decent amount of passes. Now try and run the ball with your eyes closed. Try and play defense with your eyes closed. See if you have the same success.

How could that possibly be even remotely simulating playing QB?

I agree that QB play is too simple and too easy, but the reason for that is because the AI and schemes in the game are awful. Even if you put in a QB cone the passing game is still going to be easy. Either way you still don't need to read defenses, either way the window isn't as small as it is in real life, the AI will still be bad, and the looks you get from defenses in Madden is very vanilla. That's why the passing game is so easy. Building off of the vision cone isn't going to change any of that. So, you can put that in and the game still wouldn't be a simulation because the X's and O's are still not present. How the plays run out would not be a realistic simulation.

As far as your first point goes, it all depends on how you view the game. I think they have all star mode, or whatever it's called. For those who want that first person experience from a specific position. But, at its core I don't think any football game was built to truly be a first person experience. That's just not what the game is truly about. On Madden or 2k, you have command of the entire field.

I think the argument you guys are trying to make here, would be equivalent to bashing an RTS game because you can't play from the first person perspective of a soldier. I just don't think the game is intended to be first person in any aspect.

[Only1LT]

Re: Is madden building on a broken foundation?

I agree that QB play is too simple and too easy, but the reason for that is because the AI and schemes in the game are awful. Even if you put in a QB cone the passing game is still going to be easy. Either way you still don't need to read defenses, either way the window isn't as small as it is in real life, the AI will still be bad, and the looks you get from defenses in Madden is very vanilla. That's why the passing game is so easy. Building off of the vision cone isn't going to change any of that. So, you can put that in and the game still wouldn't be a simulation because the X's and O's are still not present. How the plays run out would not be a realistic simulation.

As far as your first point goes, it all depends on how you view the game. I think they have all star mode, or whatever it's called. For those who want that first person experience from a specific position. But, at its core I don't think any football game was built to truly be a first person experience. That's just not what the game is truly about. On Madden or 2k, you have command of the entire field.

I think the argument you guys are trying to make here, would be equivalent to bashing an RTS game because you can't play from the first person perspective of a soldier. I just don't think the game is intended to be first person in any aspect.

Whether the defenses, or schemes, or locomotion, or anything else you want to name, is realistic in the game, does not change the fact that the passing mechanic, as is, is Arcadey and unrealistic.

You could have everything else recreated perfectly, but if you still have a skycam view, and no look mechanic, and don't have to go through progressions, and just hit a button while the AI generates a tethered passing trajectory for you, the passing game will still be unrealistic.

You can try and explain why it is everything else's fault, but the passing game mechanic all you want, but at the end of the day, it's still part of the non-realism problem.

And I wouldn't complain about an RTS view, because an RTS is not a simulation. Anytime EA wants to stop calling Madden a sim, is the day when I no longer complain about anything in the game, ever.

And for the record, I never mentioned that they need to use a cone or have it be first person. There are many ways that they could make the passing game more realistic than it is currently without use either of those 2 things. When you are talking about a mechanic that is about as unrealistic as it gets, it would be impossible that there wouldn't be tons of ways that could make it more realistic.

[Broncos86]

Re: Is madden building on a broken foundation?

It might be semantics, but just because someone calls Madden a "simulation," this doesn't require that the game mimic it's true life counterpart in every single facet (e.g. Simcity).

[Only1LT]

Re: Is madden building on a broken foundation?

It might be semantics, but just because someone calls Madden a "simulation," this doesn't require that the game mimic it's true life counterpart in every single facet (e.g. Simcity).

I'm not sure if you were addressing me with that comment or not, but I agree with you, and I never said that it did.

To use the definition of simulation again, key elements of something real needs to be recreated to qualify as a sim. In my personal opinion, there are quite a few key elements that have not been recreated realistically, so those things are what I criticize the game, and devs, for. Remove the sim label and I don't think I have a right to complain, so I wouldn't. For me, it's that simple.

If there were something that were not possible to implement, I wouldn't critique them for that either, but I KNOW I have NEVER asked for anything that is impossible to do, because I've already witnessed it somewhere.

I just want more realism in the game where ever possible. That is all I have ever, and will ever, ask for.

[SageWonder]

If a game is 80% sim, 10% arcade, and 10% bugs or glitches, I'd consider it sim. We are never gonna get a 100% sim game because there's always that human element involved.

All we can hope for is to have a game crammed with as many sim elements as possible.

Posted using the power of knowledge.

[Lakers 24 7]

Re: Is madden building on a broken foundation?

Whether the defenses, or schemes, or locomotion, or anything else you want to name, is realistic in the game, does not change the fact that the passing mechanic, as is, is Arcadey and unrealistic.

You could have everything else recreated perfectly, but if you still have a skycam view, and no look mechanic, and don't have to go through progressions, and just hit a button while the AI generates a tethered passing trajectory for you, the passing game will still be unrealistic.

You can try and explain why it is everything else's fault, but the passing game mechanic all you want, but at the end of the day, it's still part of the non-realism problem.

And I wouldn't complain about an RTS view, because an RTS is not a simulation. Anytime EA wants to stop calling Madden a sim, is the day when I no longer complain about anything in the game, ever.

And for the record, I never mentioned that they need to use a cone or have it be first person. There are many ways that they could make the passing game more realistic than it is currently without use either of those 2 things. When you are talking about a mechanic that is about as unrealistic as it gets, it would be impossible that there wouldn't be tons of ways that could make it more realistic.

This is why I'm trying to say that we need to distinguish between realism and simulation, they're not one in the same. I'm not at all arguing that the passing mechanics are realistic. Sure, in a literal sense they absolutely are arcade. The point is, you can have the most realistic passing mechanics possible, with a first person point of view, but that still doesn't make the game a simulation. Like I've said, put those ideal mechanics in Blitz. Is Blitz now a simulation?

That's why the argument for simulation is very black and white. Either you're getting realistic outcomes from the input variables, or you're not. That's also why you can have a simulation, but not necessarily a ton of realism. My 2d interface could better simulate what happens between a 3-4 cover 2 shell and an I-form, than a glitzy game that looks realistic, but fails to simulate strategic principles of football.

I also, think you're completely off base in saying that an RTS can't be a simulation. Like I've said, it all depends on how you're viewing the game, unless you want that first person perspective then they can be a simulation. If they weren't then the Army would have no use for the games I mentioned.

When the Army war games, and tries to predict how different conflicts will play out. You think they're running a simulation that depicts the viewpoint of each individual soldier? Of course not right.. Yet, the data and outcome they're getting is still realistic.

[SageWonder]

On a different subject, anyone remember when headtracking was first implemented in Madden? I think it was in 03 or 04, can't remember. Defenders would actually try and keep eye contact on the ball or ball carrier. Then it just vanished. That's the most aggravating thing about this entire ordeal.

Features that should have remained in the franchise and built upon were inexplicably removed. It's so frustrating arguing now about things like this, knowing that the engine and gameplay engineers are capable of this. We shouldn't even be having some of these discussions right now.

Posted using the power of knowledge.

[Lakers 24 7]

Re: Is madden building on a broken foundation?

Let me back track a little bit, and go back to what I said earlier. Forget I ever mentioned simulation vs realism. If you're trying to simulate QB play then I agree those things need to implemented. I understand you guys want the important positions to be simulated, in which case all of your points are absolutely right.

However, I think the games intent is to simulate a game of football (in a very broad view), which is an entirely different perspective. Best comparison again, RTS to FPS. Both can be simulations, it just depends on what you're trying to simulate. What perspective are you after...

[Only1LT]

Re: Is madden building on a broken foundation?

This is why I'm trying to say that we need to distinguish between realism and simulation, they're not one in the same. I'm not at all arguing that the passing mechanics are realistic. Sure, in a literal sense they absolutely are arcade. The point is, you can have the most realistic passing mechanics possible, with a first person point of view, but that still doesn't make the game a simulation. Like I've said, put those ideal mechanics in Blitz. Is Blitz now a simulation?

That's why the argument for simulation is very black and white. Either you're getting realistic outcomes from the input variables, or you're not. That's also why you can have a simulation, but not necessarily a ton of realism. My 2d interface could better simulate what happens between a 3-4 cover 2 shell and an I-form, than a glitzy game that looks realistic, but fails to simulate strategic principles of football.

I also, think you're completely off base in saying that an RTS can't be a simulation. Like I've said, it all depends on how you're viewing the game, unless you want that first person perspective then they can be a simulation. If they weren't then the Army would have no use for the games I mentioned.

When the Army war games, and tries to predict how different conflicts will play out. You think they're running a simulation that depicts the viewpoint of each individual soldier? Of course not right.. Yet, the data and outcome they're getting is still realistic.

I'll tackle the easiest point first.

I never said that an RTS couldn't be sim. I just said that they are not advertised as sims so I wouldn't complain about the view. When I play Starcraft, I have no expectation of simulation considering I am using an alien race to combat another, and colossal facilities and structures are created from nothing but crystals in a matter of seconds.

As far as the gov't using an RTS to "sim" some real world scenario, going back to the definition of sim, not every aspect needs to be realistic, only key elements, so if the gov't thinks that enough key elements are recreated realistically for their tastes, more power to them.

As for the first part of your post, I'm inclined to drop it at this point, because it isn't going anywhere. You might be perfectly happy to call a game a sim that has nailed every aspect of Football, but still has this current passing mechanic, but I am not. I am not saying, and never said, that if they made the passing game realistic that the whole game becomes a sim, so I don't know where you are going with the Blitz example. All I am saying is that as long as one of the most important elements of the game is totally unrealistic, then it isn't a sim in my opinion. I don't care if the stats or outcomes turn out realistic in the end. I will just agree to disagree.

Again, it isn't black and white.

[Only1LT]

Re: Is madden building on a broken foundation?

Let me back track a little bit, and go back to what I said earlier. Forget I ever mentioned simulation vs realism. If you're trying to simulate QB play then I agree those things need to implemented. I understand you guys want the important positions to be simulated, in which case all of your points are absolutely right.

However, I think the games intent is to simulate a game of football (in a very broad view), which is an entirely different perspective. Best comparison again, RTS to FPS. Both can be simulations, it just depends on what you're trying to simulate. What perspective are you after...

You are entitled to your interpretation. I don't share it though.

Like I said before, I just want realism added everywhere that it is possible to be added, and I want what is currently in the game to become more realistic than it currently is.

Nothing more, nothing less.

[WhiteMan22]

Re: Is madden building on a broken foundation?

Don't care about all the hate Madden gets year in and yer out.

I'll admit, I bought it last year without looking at any info and I was just wasn't going to buy it in general. I just had the money, bought it, and very much enjoyed it

This year, I've been reading more info and I'm getting pumped. I never liked online franchise to begin with since I don't got many friends who enjoy sports game like I. And it's very hard to get into a franchise by going through the random lobbies and join people's parties.

I am getting NCAA 12 opening day along with this game. I need my NFL fix and Madden does it for me whenever I need it.