Recycling of features-will this lead to a better experience?

[4thQtrStre5S]

For the user, options are always better, in general...I guess in Head to Head/online games, many things have to default to a standard setting...

If options are bad, then the sliders in Madden must really be a problem...And of course the sliders get no attention, and they remain broken and without any clue as to how they work or affect anything in game..

[blockdownkickout]

Quote: Originally Posted by 4thQtrStre5S

For the user, options are always better, in general...I guess in Head to Head/online games, many things have to default to a standard setting... If options are bad, then the sliders in Madden must really be a problem...And of course the sliders get no attention, and they remain broken and without any clue as to how they work or affect anything in game..

I think if they just make the game a realistic simulator. And make mechanics work right. Make WRs run good routes and make defenders cover them like they would in real. And quit trying to please people that don't know football but want to play the game.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[UWfan206]

Quote: Originally Posted by CM Hooe

I think there's a significant difference between "recycling" and "reimplementation" that is ignored in the topic question.

What is the difference between those two? Re-implementation is bringing something you implemented in the past back so in layman terms it is recycling. The only thing that will be significant is whether or not the stuff they re-implemented/recycle will be a huge difference from years past but that is yet to be determined.

[SolidSquid]

Quote: Originally Posted by CM Hooe

The vision cone did do what it was built to do, and that's exactly what the problem with it was. It hindered the game's accessibility and usability, which resulted in a sizable portion of Madden's audience disliking it. The vision cone was cumbersome to control (required the user to take his thumb off the face buttons, meaning a longer delay between when the user wanted to throw and the QB actually throwing the ball) and/or doubled the number of inputs required to make a simple throw (if the user used the "snap to receiver" button command). It was an ergonomic nightmare. A user can already see a receiver breaking open with his own eyes; making sure his quarterback "sees" him too with an ugly flashlight overlay is an contrived inconvenience at best and an exercise in frustration at worst, particularly with a blitzing defense bearing down on the QB. I readily understand what it was trying to do - create a concept of a QB's vision. It was effective at doing that, but at a usability cost, and a very high one at that, and Madden is already a hard enough game for new players to come to grips with without the vision cone. I would be thoroughly surprised if it is ever reintroduced into the game. Sure, but not without a cost. Every option added into or left in the game is another variable to account for when doing gameplay balancing / tuning or diagnosing online desync bugs. For example, the issue at the launch of Madden NFL 15 where some users playing head-to-head games in Connected Franchise were getting disconnected from each other on account of differing settings in their kicking HUD. Removing things outright which don't thematically fit with the current direction of the game allows for more developer attention for the things which the developer actually wants to focus on. The developer sometimes has to pick and choose its battles with these things, and Tiburon obviously doesn't feel that the vision cone is the hill its wants to die on. Personally I think this is the best decision for the game; others may disagree and that's fine.

I never had to take my thumb off the face buttons, holding the left trigger and pressing a face button automatically moved the cone to that reciever. It's bc people couldn't be bothered to learn nuances like that, and reading coverage pre snap and changing your primary reciever(who the cone would be on at the start of the play) that people disliked it and it was removed.

[roadman]

Quote: Originally Posted by SolidSquid

I never had to take my thumb off the face buttons, holding the left trigger and pressing a face button automatically moved the cone to that reciever. It's bc people couldn't be bothered to learn nuances like that, and reading coverage pre snap and changing your primary reciever(who the cone would be on at the start of the play) that people disliked it and it was removed.

Let's not forget that one of the other bigger issues was there was a lot of complaints of the field looking like a flashlight was turned on.

People hated that.

[SolidSquid]

Quote: Originally Posted by roadman

Let's not forget that one of the other bigger issues was there was a lot of complaints of the filed looking like a flashlight was turned on. People hated that.

True but then they go and add the tackle cone which does the same thing. I woulda been fine with them removing the actual cone but still keeping the mechanic. Highlight he receiver button or something so you know which one you're on.

[FaceMask]

Quote: Originally Posted by SolidSquid

True but then they go and add the tackle cone which does the same thing. I woulda been fine with them removing the actual cone but still keeping the mechanic. Highlight he receiver button or something so you know which one you're on.

That would've made way more sense to do. The flashlight was completely ridiculous to look at. A great idea implemented poorly which is kind of Tiburon's way of doing things.

[Skyboxer]

For me I get the most frustrated when we continually only have 1 way to play the game. Multiple passing OPTIONS would go a long way. (ie.. NFL Fevers multiple choices we had)
For some reason EA thinks there has to be 1 and only 1 way to play the game.