Review Fix: Rex Dickson and Brian Murray Talk Madden 15

[CM Hooe]

Quote: Originally Posted by Big FN Deal

You framed this post and others as if a video game has to do one or the other when that's clearly not the case. My point was that other simulation video games provide multiple ways to interact with their games, options, options, options. Directly to the bold, again those games are simulation video games, not video games or simulations first. I don't understand why you keep bothering to emphasize Madden being a "video game" when my critiques are founded in what other video games do/have done. I don't think any gaming studios that currently produce the most lauded quality sports sim video games have to remind themselves that they are making video games, like I have stated to you repeatedly, that's a given.

Because to the casual gamer there's no difference.

For example, no one I work with at SRRN Games plays Madden. I am the only sports gamer at my video game office. Very few people I work with even watch NFL football. My colleagues, should they ever play Madden assuming their current level of knowledge, won't care or even notice that this year's game doesn't have AI jostling between the WR and DB downfield. The game already looks plenty enough like real life - speaking to graphics and animation - for them to reasonably think that Madden is an authentic NFL video game.

What they will notice is if the game teaches them the gameplay mechanics of throwing passes down field, of identifying running lanes, of breaking tackles, of making tackles, of playing coverage, of calling plays. They will care about how to play and succeed at the game first and foremost.

It's not that a game can't be authentic and a video game. Clearly it can be both. My argument is that anything the user touches has rather obvious priority, and the game will rightly be designed as such.

[strawberryshortcake]

Quote: Originally Posted by CM Hooe

This would be all well and good, and I actually like this idea. However, it's not a game with a high score component if you don't introduce a means for the user to control it. The user can't play the mini game without having a mini game to play. You've clearly (by implication) introduced control mechanics and a mini-game with which to prove skill in using those mechanics here - again, this is good, I like this. The existence of user mechanics wasn't assumed in the premise I was countering, though. All that was offered was (paraphrasing) that Tiburon ought to make the game "more sim" and offer more robust AI before innovating the user experience, and that the opposite approach to this is asinine. That doesn't make sense to me. It's not how I would go about making a game. It offers effectively nothing to the user of the game with respect to directly playing the game. Just putting in WR-DB interaction / foot planting / whatever by itself without a means for the user to engage with the improvements doesn't cut the mustard for the average person and thus it's likely not going to even be considered. Put more simply - why should an average gamer - who isn't necessarily a student of the game of football and in-fact may be playing Madden for the first time ever in Madden 15 - care about the mechanics of playing wide receiver if he's never asked to play wide receiver and run routes? Why is focus on that worth the developer's time and attention over any means by which said user can actually control the game and affect the outcome - be it the Precision Modifier running controls, the new tackling gameplay mechanics, the new pass rushing mechanics, etc. etc.? Heck, even foot planting for the ball carrier was complimented by the Precision Modifier and new ball carrier controls, so the user has reason to pay attention to his ball carrier's feet to some extent. To be perfectly clear, I'm by no means arguing that Madden shouldn't get more realistic or shouldn't add these things. Realism is the direction I want the series to go. However, I understand that Madden is a console video game first, and any and all design decisions Tiburon makes about things to add to the game are going to be based around that fact and the assumptions which come along with it.

Introduce "trophies" or in game accomplishments. Cash in on these trophies or cards online for upgrades, 50 user controlled picks (interceptions) in a season; 5 user controlled interceptions in a single game; run routes with a wide receiver and beat the defender ... Use the weaker teams (browns, dolphins, jaguars, etc) and you get bonus points, bragging rights. Get a hands of steel trophy ... Something to get the casual to want play either a wide out or a defensive back. Beat the defender, press x or a button to raise your arms to signal to the CPU quarterback that you're open. Draw 25 pass interference penalties ... Get some type of ego reward.

Footplanting .... Posterize the defensive back with your wide receiver route running stick skills. Red zone ... Beat Richard Sherman with Calvin Johnson. Introduce footwear... Focuses on footplant. Put the defensive back on his butt ... Something.

Marketing just have to learn how to spin things to cater to new and experienced gamers. Wide receiver vs. defensive back tournaments. Offensive vs Defensive lineman tournaments. The burden is on the marketing team to spin simulation elements that will appeal to the masses. Be a baller. Be a football player.

With regards to the mini game controls, you implement those into the game either as a general blanket that encompasses all modes, or simply a simulation mode or in all madden mode. Money can be made if marketed properly with the proper avenues. Return on investments can be had. Simulation elements can be marketed. The creative genius in the marketing department just needs to huddle up. Everything can be marketed if you've got the know how.

[bucky60]

Quote: Originally Posted by CM Hooe

Because to the casual gamer there's no difference. For example, no one I work with at SRRN Games plays Madden. I am the only sports gamer at my video game office. Very few people I work with even watch NFL football. My colleagues, should they ever play Madden

So the game should be built for your colleagues who have absolutely no interest in Madden or football? Gee, my mom has absolutely no interest in football. Should the game be designed for her too?

Or maybe, a football game should be designed for someone with some interest in football. If you keep trying to dumb down games to the lowest common denominator, no game would ever be any good.

I think we're losing perspective on some kind of balance. The Show does it. NBA2K does it.

[NicVirtue]

Quote: Originally Posted by bucky60

So the game should be built for your colleagues who have absolutely no interest in Madden or football? Gee, my mom has absolutely no interest in football. Should the game be designed for her too? Or maybe, a football game should be designed for someone with some interest in football. If you keep trying to dumb down games to the lowest common denominator, no game would ever be any good. I think we're losing perspective on some kind of balance. The Show does it. NBA2K does it.

Thus, trying to please everyone, pleases no one, but just maximizes your sales. At the end of the day, the sale is all that matters.

[StefJoeHalt]

Quote: Originally Posted by CM Hooe

Because to the casual gamer there's no difference. For example, no one I work with at SRRN Games plays Madden. I am the only sports gamer at my video game office. Very few people I work with even watch NFL football. My colleagues, should they ever play Madden assuming their current level of knowledge, won't care or even notice that this year's game doesn't have AI jostling between the WR and DB downfield. The game already looks plenty enough like real life - speaking to graphics and animation - for them to reasonably think that Madden is an authentic NFL video game. What they will notice is if the game teaches them the gameplay mechanics of throwing passes down field, of identifying running lanes, of breaking tackles, of making tackles, of playing coverage, of calling plays. They will care about how to play and succeed at the game first and foremost. It's not that a game can't be authentic and a video game. Clearly it can be both. My argument is that anything the user touches has rather obvious priority, and the game will rightly be designed as such.

CM I understand ur point here..but may I ask u this? If they played another football title game which I won't mention..do u think these non football people would see the difference? See the movements? The basics of movements? The interaction of all 22 players?

I think ur giving those gamers/casual core not enough credit..once the graphics "wear" off..I'm pretty sure they would notice the issues..what's funny is my belief is hardcore Football gamers are the one's that can't turn Madden down..cause they need the "fix"


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[strawberryshortcake]

I know users have brought up the possible fact that it's not so much about catering to casuals, but the lack of coding talent to create a better representation of simulation football fundamentals.

If and if Madden was more simulation or even full fledge simulation (because the coders did it properly), I doubt the marketers would say "this is not going to work, we don't know how to market this." They would still be able to market it like it's the greatest thing ever. Their marketing campaign might even be better if the game was more simulation.

You might even say it's the coders that's steering the marketing direction. You might even say the marketing team can only work with what they've got. You might say the problem with Madden stems not from the suits or marketers, but the coders.

[The_Balm]

Quote: Originally Posted by NicVirtue

Thus, trying to please everyone, pleases no one, but just maximizes your sales. At the end of the day, the sale is all that matters.

And if you keep pleasing no one long enough, your sales will die too.

[K_GUN]

Quote: Originally Posted by CM Hooe

Because to the casual gamer there's no difference. For example, no one I work with at SRRN Games plays Madden. I am the only sports gamer at my video game office. Very few people I work with even watch NFL football. My colleagues, should they ever play Madden assuming their current level of knowledge, won't care or even notice that this year's game doesn't have AI jostling between the WR and DB downfield. The game already looks plenty enough like real life - speaking to graphics and animation - for them to reasonably think that Madden is an authentic NFL video game. What they will notice is if the game teaches them the gameplay mechanics of throwing passes down field, of identifying running lanes, of breaking tackles, of making tackles, of playing coverage, of calling plays. They will care about how to play and succeed at the game first and foremost. It's not that a game can't be authentic and a video game. Clearly it can be both. My argument is that anything the user touches has rather obvious priority, and the game will rightly be designed as such.

Probably one of the smartest posts ive seen here in about 5 years....👍


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk