Was/has there been any franchise info released?

[bucky60]

Quote: Originally Posted by ggsimmonds

7. Add some offseason goodies: Maybe it is because it is camp time but I think it would be cool if some type of camp was added to the offseason. Make it skills trainer and open practice but I want it to feel like it belongs. The primary reason is another topic but lets just say I think they should do away with "development speed" as is and make potential and possibly other ratings for rookies kinda hidden. The only way to reveal the ratings is give them reps in practice and preseason. Lets use Manziel as an example. The Browns did not magically know every attribute (development speed included) when they drafted him. They need to see him in camp, practice, and game situations to get an idea of the player they have. Find a way to mimic this in game. It would make practice/preseason important and it would make for an interesting in game decision on whether or not to start that rookie. I need to stop now before I start writing a small novel. Lets just say there is a lot I want added to CFM

I would like to see this tied to Scouts/Gm's and coaches evaluation attributes. We don't know a persons true potential, but some evaluators are a lot more accurate than other evaluators in trying to determine this. It's what I call actual vs perceived values. The perceived values would be more accurate with staffs better at evaluating and how much time the player has been on your team or in the league.

Not just potential, but for all non-physical/measurable attributes, I would like to see the actual attributes be hidden and show perceived attributes.

This would help give a realistic importance to scouts and coaching staffs being hired. Spend the money on better coaches (including coordinators and positions coaches) and better scouts and your view of your teams abilities and potentials will be more accurate.

For this to really make a difference, you would have to tie in other coaching staff qualities and how they would effect other aspects of the game, like teaching ability, some way to tie in gameplanning, etc. So when you hire a coaching staff, you have to decide which coaches will best fit your team and philosophy. You want better evaluators, better teachers, better game planners, etc. Do you want to spend the extra $'s on the best coaches that do most aspects of coaching well. Hire a mix of coaches in your coaching staff to try and strike a balance between evaluating, teaching and game planning.

The GM/Scouting staff can concentrate on evaluating rookies and players on other teams, while your coaching staff can concentrate more on evaluating your own players.

There are just so many ways to make the off field more realistic and with much more depth. This XP system just absolutely drives me crazy. I'm afraid the new practice stuff will be more of the same. Continue to be an arcade, unrealistic progression system.

Choice would be good here. One progression system for those that want the arcade stick/stat/mini game progression and another option that tries to implement real world factors in player progression. Take a guess which one I would prefer.

I would also like to see a hidden peak age start and peak age end to help distinguish between early and late bloomers and long distinguished careers.

For drafting rookies, the hidden actual values, along with the shown perceived values would help facilitate early round busts and late round gems in a draft. Also, draftees should immediately have their physical/measurable's displayed and your scouting staff would give perceived values for the more subjective attributes.

Add practice schedules for training camp, preseason and regular season, both team and individual drills. Mold the team the way teams are molded in real life. Make the practices simulatable that doesn't penalize for simulating them.

So much could have and should have been in this game by now.

[Ueauvan]

so they went the skills trainer route for a franchise/sim game? as i play coach i would have preferred design the weeks schedule and it happens (ala 2k5) rather than use my l33t stick skillz (which i dont have, which is why i play coach in real terms less "arcade-ey"

this schedule would have a chance for each roster member to improve in areas that the schedule affected, film, physical, 7 on 7, scrimmage with pads etc., every week. the cpu would design what it needed to enable its roster members to meet their scheme expectations at that position. therefore practice helps all teams

[CM Hooe]

Quote: Originally Posted by Ueauvan

so they went the skills trainer route for a franchise/sim game? as i play coach i would have preferred design the weeks schedule and it happens (ala 2k5) rather than use my l33t stick skillz (which i dont have, which is why i play coach in real terms less "arcade-ey"

The problem with weekly prep scheduling mechanics is that, based on previous implementations, they simply aren't fun in the general sense of the word. There's no interactivity on the part of the user and no ability for the user to influence the result, which in a video game that isn't a text sim is paramount to its fun factor.

Madden NFL is not a text sim and is not designed to be purely a coaching game, therefore it must have active components. I argue that thematically a weekly prep scheduling mechanic does not fit the from a game design standpoint for the overarching vision of the game.

[bucky60]

Quote: Originally Posted by CM Hooe

The problem with weekly prep scheduling mechanics is that, based on previous implementations, they simply aren't fun in the general sense of the word.

To who? You're not speaking for me.

Quote: Originally Posted by CM Hooe

There's no interactivity on the part of the user and no ability for the user to influence the result,

The user has a lot of ability to influence the result if a realistic progression system is designed well. Just a different type of control. A more realistic type of control.

Quote: Originally Posted by CM Hooe

Madden NFL is not a text sim and is not designed to be purely a coaching game, therefore it must have active components. I argue that thematically a weekly prep scheduling mechanic does not fit the from a game design standpoint for the overarching vision of the game.

The game has an auto pass feature and has had CPUvsCPU in the past. It is not purely a joystick game. A realistic progression system may not have the "fun factor" for you and a significant % of others, but it still would for a significant % of us.

A real solution would be having the choice of an optional unrealistic arcade progression system or a realistic progression system.

[CM Hooe]

Quote: Originally Posted by bucky60

To who? You're not speaking for me. The user has a lot of ability to influence the result if a realistic progression system is designed well. Just a different type of control. A more realistic type of control. The game has an auto pass feature and has had CPUvsCPU in the past. It is not purely a joystick game. A realistic progression system may not have the "fun factor" for you and a significant % of others, but it still would for a significant % of us. A real solution would be having the choice of an optional unrealistic arcade progression system or a realistic progression system.

I know I don't speak for you in specific and I'm not trying to. I also don't think that the game is directly targeted for you given its current vision and design aims. Madden has almost _always_ kept user control at the forefront of its experience, with some small optional concessions shoe-horned in to accommodate niche players (e.g. auto-throw).

I think I do speak for a large number of people in that it's more fun to throw passes and to shed blocks than it is to manage a spreadsheet and solve a scheduling problem, especially in a game where the primary game mechanics involve throwing and shedding blocks moreso than scheduling. Personally, if I wanted to make a spreadsheet, I'd boot up Excel. Conversely, when I boot up my XBOX, I want to actively play a video game.

It's neither right nor wrong that Madden is designed as it is; Tiburon is free to make whatever game they want. It's worth keeping in mind what their aims are when considering potential additions and changes to the series, however. If Madden is directly taking away user control with a feature add or change, they are doing something counter to the rest of their game design and thus weakening the cohesiveness of their total package. Just look at the rest of their feature adds so far this year - be it the new defensive line controls, the new tackling controls, or the new camera controls - the features which give the user more control and freedom as to how he plays the game are always the ones being added.

[thudias]

Does anyone else have a problem with scouting players and not being able to stack them on a board for drafting? You know like one that all the teams use. We should be able to grade the players we scouted. As it sits right now it is virtually impossible to keep track of who you really want what round you target them in. We are really given no reason to move up or down the board within a round because how the scouting is. All the rookies are in one list and you can sort by position, drafted speculation and a couple of potential attributes... SO weak.

[bucky60]

Quote: Originally Posted by CM Hooe

If Madden is directly taking away user control with a feature add or change, they are doing something counter to the rest of their game design and thus weakening the cohesiveness of their total package.

How does an optional Auto-Pass weaken the cohesiveness of the total package? Or take away user control?

How does an optional realistic progression system weaken the cohesiveness of the total package, or take away user control?

[CM Hooe]

Quote: Originally Posted by bucky60

How does an optional Auto-Pass weaken the cohesiveness of the total package? Or take away user control?

It doesn't, because it's also an incredibly easy thing to add which is disabled by default and most users will never even know exists. It's just (more-or-less) a booelan flag which keeps the CPU passing AI on even if the user has control of the passer; i.e. minimal effort to implement.

Quote:

How does an optional realistic progression system weaken the cohesiveness of the total package, or take away user control?

Because it takes away resources from something that would add control. It's counter to the progression paradigm which is already in the game, which gives the user as much control as possible. It's duplicated effort for the same feature because a player progression mechanic already exists, which means this community at-large would likely get up-in-arms about Tiburon wasting their time working on a second method for the same game mechanic rather than adding new game mechanics into franchise mode. Finally, it arguably already exists in the game; just go to the progression screen, press Y / Triangle, and all the XP is spent by each player automatically based on however the AI best sees fit, absolving the player of the responsibility to progress players on his own.

Adding a second progression system is wasted effort.