Infinity vs Ignite - Do you see/feel a difference? Is it meeting your expectation?

[CM Hooe]

Quote: Originally Posted by MajorSupreme

Now, this scenario with EA's "physics". You try to push me, but mid push, because I tilted my head, you're FORCED into a grotesque, scheduled, predetermined animation where you awkwardly slide to my waist and tackle me instead. That's NOT physics. And if I'm wrong, please explain how what EA puts out is physics so we all can understand and put it to rest.

At some point the game does play out an animation with some portion of it that cannot be modified, thus the non-responsiveness. Tiburon does this so the players in the interaction - the ballcarrier and the tackler - can still appear to have agency within a football context during the scenario rather than appearing as lifeless rag dolls, which is what a full-on RTP implementation would entail. It has consequences such as what you are describing where there are some weird quirks with respect to physics alone, but it's a design decision they have made and are comfortable with.

That doesn't mean that real-time physics is not in the game. Again, the physics system augments the animation system, we all know that, that is how it was presented to us in the Madden 13 build up.

[hanzsomehanz]

Quote: Originally Posted by CM Hooe

Madden's real-time physics engine augments its canned animations with respect to the results of its calculations of ballcarrier - tackler interactions.

Yes, that is what was purposed by Vic Lugo in M13 but the physics library has sinced regressed and no longer augments the amount of physics based animations we see but rather we are seeing more and more outcomes thst are NOT driven by any instruction from the Infinity Engine that would deliver physics based instructions on producting a realistic real life physics based outcome which would consist of real life physics formulas (mass, force impact, momentum etc.) which is why the team had intelligent folks staffed.

Now the animations are clearly straying from the IE impetus and are functioning standalone which, for example, does not require any physics formula to allow a back to stumble forward when he should not or a tacklee to fall backeafds from a block only to then leap forward mid flight before he falls to the ground and then make a tackle.

Infinity was a term to describe the augmentation process and it was more evident in 13 than 14 and 15 - the animations are no longer augmented (increased in variation by phyisics instructions) but rather the phyics animation library is now scaled back due to less impact from the Vic Lugo's IE tech and more impact by pre-determined, non phyics instructed animations (old, original style they have used for ages).

If Vic or someone on that Infinity Engine team stayed promoting this feature: I am sure we would continue to see more surprises in animations as we were in M13 and moreso in 15 and 16 instead of a regression.

Evidentently, the Infinity Engine is no longer marketed nor is it buildiing into any final build - its infancy was killed in a stillborn fashion and we are not seeing the maturity from it that we expected.

If we have eyes to see: we can all agree the animations (in M14 & 15) are no longer being augmented (↑) by any physics engine instruction (Infinity Engine) that pushes the characters to interact in a multitude of new fashions on every interaction but rather we are seeing the opposite of what the term augment and infinite represent.

If we are seeing less opposed to more: we cannot be seeing any form of augmentation - breast augmentation does not shrink your breast size; the Infinity Engine was purposed to increase the animation size due to the phyisics instructions of the Infinty Engine tech.

Related to the general topic and not in response to the quote above: Ignite Engine is not some tech that rivals what the Infinity Engine offered Madden in M13 but rather it is a motherboard liason of sorts for all EA Sports brands to build their hardware and software on.

Sent from my SGH-I727R using Tapatalk

[MajorSupreme]

Quote: Originally Posted by CM Hooe

So to be clear, you think EA gets away with blatantly false advertising as to what they have in their product? The game was explicitly designed to NOT be Backbreaker as the developers didn't want rag doll tackles everywhere. Thus the animations are still needed to govern how a ball carrier may go to the ground. That was clearly explained during the Madden 13 build-up. Again, I'm inclined to believe the people who actually worked on and made the game as to how exactly their game works. It's not Backbreaker, but it doesn't have to be to have a real-time physics implementation. There are quirks which need to be worked out, such as the example you describe, but to outright deny the presence of something which is quite obviously in the game strikes me as, well, a lot of things. I honestly can't believe that this is actually an argument that's happening.

I respect you, CM, you're extremely intelligent, but I think you are very wrong on this one.
I don't think they lied, which is funny to me. Someone in charge looked at these canned, horrific animations and said "Yup! That's football."

But, if I were to give you the definitions to the words and phrases: Mass distribution, weight, power, work, momentum, velocity, and gravity, do you honestly see that in Madden? I don't. This is Frank Gore.

Pretty big guy. Why in the world would he ever be able to move EXACTLY the same as Danny Woodhead.

He shouldn't. Forget they are two different styles of backs, but Gore WEIGHS MORE, has more MASS, get him going downfield and he'll plow someone with his body using that momentum, momentum being MASSxVELOCITY. But none of this factors in. Thus, NOT, I repeat NOT physics to the true definition.

EDIT: This post was made in respect without seeing CM's next post, just a notice.

[bkrich83]

Same guys every time.. Just like clockwork.

[NicVirtue]

Quote: Originally Posted by CM Hooe

So to be clear, you think EA gets away with blatantly false advertising as to what they have in their product? The game was explicitly designed to NOT be Backbreaker as the developers didn't want rag doll tackles everywhere. Thus the animations are still needed to govern how a ball carrier may go to the ground. That was clearly explained during the Madden 13 build-up. Again, I'm inclined to believe the people who actually worked on and made the game as to how exactly their game works. It's not Backbreaker, but it doesn't have to be to have a real-time physics implementation. There are quirks which need to be worked out, such as the example you describe, but to outright deny the presence of something which is quite obviously in the game strikes me as, well, a lot of things. I honestly can't believe that this is actually an argument that's happening.

To address the bold part, Yes...Yes I do, and here is 1 reason why.



Clearly, that "Actual Game Fottage" is no where found in Madden 25, on PS4, nor on XB1. Animations, interactions, even the visuals in that trailer, are NOT in Madden. Is that not false advertising?

As for the physics, I'm not denying that there is some kind of physics, but to call it "real time" is an over statement. Physics governed by animations will only get you so far if you only have a hand full of animations to apply said physics to. There's nothing wrong with having animations. The other game had animations, but they had a whole heap of them, and til this day I find myself seeing things I've never seen before. With Madden, you see everything the game has to offer in just a few games.

The whole "Physics You Can Feel" catch phrase did nothing but fall short, because the players do not behave, they don't have weight (that actually matters at least), and they all react the same way to with the same animations in every situation. Where as the Physics in Backbreaker made the players behave, they all felt like they had weight to them (until the play is over then everyone is practically a dandelion in the wind), and they all reacted differently in different situations. THAT is the kind of physics needed for "football"...what we have now is geared for Maddenball....but I suppose that's where I lose the argument, because after all, it is Madden.

[Mr.Smif]

The Ignite engine ain't nothing but marketing hype for Madden, it does not affect Madden at all. Fifa and Madden are very similar but yet Madden has failed to use game-play elements from Fifa such as foot-planting, physics, and jostling in Madden. Didn't the Ignite suppose to make it easy for games to share technologies?
And the Infinity Engine is a joke, its a broken engine that's reached its full potential. Because if it wasn't broken we would have seen way more growth by now, but instead its declined. It will be replaced by entire new engine in a couple years.

[CM Hooe]

@MajorSupreme -

Generally speaking, I see ball carriers with higher STR + TRK ratings fall forward, and I see players with high move ratings (i.e. SFA / SPM / JKM) fall forward if they attempt to execute said high-rated move but the game determines that the player should be tackled, albeit with a different animation than just "falling through a guy" (which is what typically happens with a player with high TRK but a failed tackle break).

It's always been my opinion that height and weight have very little if anything at all to do with how players perform in Madden - that they are simply cosmetic - and that player ratings drive the whole game. I have nothing to back that up, but if weight mattered, I should see a difference between a 190 lb player with STR 99 and a 330 lb player with STR 99; I have never seen this (and how one would calculate relative strength is an interesting design problem; how much would weight vs STR matter in that interaction? and why should two equal ratings not mean the same thing?). Presumably, then, I'm assuming that ratings drive the physics system rather than height and weight.

As to Gore and Woodhead playing out as similar backs in the game - we're simply not playing the same game, and I'm sorry that yours apparently doesn't work.

[MajorSupreme]

Quote: Originally Posted by CM Hooe

@MajorSupreme - Generally speaking, I see ball carriers with higher STR + TRK ratings fall forward, and I see players with high move ratings (i.e. SFA / SPM / JKM) fall forward if they attempt to execute said high-rated move but the game determines that the player should be tackled, albeit with a different animation than just "falling through a guy" (which is what typically happens with a player with high TRK but a failed tackle break). It's always been my opinion that height and weight have very little if anything at all to do with how players perform in Madden - that they are simply cosmetic - and that player ratings drive the whole game. I have nothing to back that up, but if weight mattered, I should see a difference between a 190 lb player with STR 99 and a 330 lb player with STR 99; I have never seen this (and how one would calculate relative strength is an interesting design problem; how much would weight vs STR matter in that interaction? and why should two equal ratings not mean the same thing?). Presumably, then, I'm assuming that ratings drive the physics system rather than height and weight. As to Gore and Woodhead playing out as similar backs in the game - we're simply not playing the same game, and I'm sorry that yours apparently doesn't work.

If you're alluding to me being deluded or having deficient eyesight, go ahead and say it then. Ask anyone, they run the same, they cut on a dime the same and can pull off any move the same. I dare you right now to put on M25, control Woodhead. Notice he is faster than Gore, but Gore can cut on the dime just as well as he can. And don't think you can "punk" me with your pity for my "broken game." You being a mod, you should lead by example.