A little more 16 news from IGN

[aholbert32]

Quote: Originally Posted by chris luva luva

I find it interesting that EA's marketing team couldn't find more apparent ways to show-off this "new" lighting system... If anything, the onus is on THEM to prove their point. I have a hard time blaming the consumer for being underwhelmed when the marketing team IMHO failed to show off a touted feature. Either someone is incompetent or the improvements are so subtle that they couldn't be easily represented. Which makes me personally wonder why it's being shown off as being something worthy of shown off.

I dont think this isnt a "touted feature." No one here is going to buy the game simply because of "improved lighting". This isnt something that going to be on the back of the box or anything that we expect EA to heavily promote.

Shoot this is the only part about lighting in that entire article:

"According to EA, lighting and time of day have both been improved, and “helps highlight” Madden 16’s updated player likenesses."

Its not a new "lighting system". Its improvements to their lighting. I'm not going to blame EA for acknowledging something they think has been improved. I'm also not going to say its improved or not improved until I see more of the game.

[chris luva luva]

Quote: Originally Posted by aholbert32

I dont think this isnt a "touted feature." No one here is going to buy the game simply because of "improved lighting". This isnt something that going to be on the back of the box or anything that we expect EA to heavily promote. Shoot this is the only part about lighting in that entire article: "According to EA, lighting and time of day have both been improved, and “helps highlight” Madden 16’s updated player likenesses." Its not a new "lighting system". Its improvements to their lighting. I'm not going to blame EA for acknowledging something they think has been improved. I'm also not going to say its improved or not improved until I see more of the game.

Maybe "touted" was too strong of a word. My main point of emphasis is that their marketing team failed to display these improvements in a manner that makes it apparent. That's their job, no?

If this improvement is good enough to be part of their slow trickling of information, then it should warrant the time to properly promote/sell it. I'm simply saying that I cannot fault these posters for feeling underwhelmed because this "improvement" wasn't shown off well by the people who are charged to do so.

[mestevo]

Quote: Originally Posted by chris luva luva

Maybe "touted" was too strong of a word. My main point of emphasis is that their marketing team failed to display these improvements in a manner that makes it apparent. That's their job, no? If this improvement is good enough to be part of their slow trickling of information, then it should warrant the time to properly promote/sell it. I'm simply saying that I cannot fault these posters for feeling underwhelmed because this "improvement" wasn't shown off well by the people who are charged to do so.

It's IGN showing it off, not EA. Where's the lighting blog, the lighting q&a? Are these really EA 'failures' or just IGN churning out an article for some more clicks for the same screenshots everyone else is posting? Just seems like reaching just to be able to say EA is doing something bad when it's much simpler: just bad journalism.

[poopoop]

Quote: Originally Posted by aholbert32

Feel free to question me. Plenty of people do. My point isnt that EA hasnt ever lied. My point isnt even that they arent lying about the lighting being improved. My point is that we should wait and see more videos and screenshots before accusing them of lying here. Same goes for other features. They claim that pass interference is in the game. I havent seen a video or screen shot that shows pass interference animations yet. Does that mean its not in the game?

This doesn't make any sense at all.

Saying "I don't think the lighting is improved based on the few screenshots I've seen so far," isn't at all the same as "I don't think pass interference animations are in the game, because they aren't in the few screenshots I've seen so far."

It seems fairly obvious that improved lighting would be something you'd be able to see throughout the game, whereas pass interference animations are something you may see on a small % of plays. So I'm at a loss as to why you'd even make that comparison.

If anything, if EA is going to talk about their new lighting, but it isn't something that's readily apparent in their screenshots/videos... it's poor marketing at best. And considering that there usually isn't a significant leap between the initial look of the game and the final product, people aren't out of line for questioning it. But I guess we can get caught up in the semantics of whether or not EA is "lying" for absolutely no reason at all.

[roadman]

Quote: Originally Posted by poopoop

This doesn't make any sense at all. Saying "I don't think the lighting is improved based on the few screenshots I've seen so far," isn't at all the same as "I don't think pass interference animations are in the game, because they aren't in the few screenshots I've seen so far." It seems fairly obvious that improved lighting would be something you'd be able to see throughout the game, whereas pass interference animations are something you may see on a small % of plays. So I'm at a loss as to why you'd even make that comparison. If anything, if EA is going to talk about their new lighting, but it isn't something that's readily apparent in their screenshots/videos... it's poor marketing at best. And considering that there usually isn't a significant leap between the initial look of the game and the final product, people aren't out of line for questioning it. But I guess we can get caught up in the semantics of whether or not EA is "lying" for absolutely no reason at all.

Note the post above yours.

EA didn't write the two sentence blurb, it was IGN.

I doubt if EA markets lighting as a back of box feature.

[IndyColts2]

EA also likes to use words like "improved" or "enhanced" because it's a word that can have many different meanings. To them the word "improved" in relation to Madden can be just a touch up in our minds. If they made a feature only slightly better in their opinions, then it is technically improved because they say it was improved.

[poopoop]

Quote: Originally Posted by roadman

Note the post above yours. EA didn't write the two sentence blurb, it was IGN. I doubt if EA markets lighting as a back of box feature.

Stop with the strawman arguments. I'm not suggesting that EA is marketing improved lighting as a back of the box feature.

I guess you missed the part of the article that said "According to EA, lighting and time of day have both been improved." If people don't see the improved lighting, that "according to EA", is in the game, who's feet does that fall on? IGN's huh?

[roadman]

Quote: Originally Posted by poopoop

Stop with the strawman arguments. I'm not suggesting that EA is marketing improved lighting as a back of the box feature. I guess you missed the part of the article that said "According to EA, lighting and time of day have both been improved." If people don't see the improved lighting, that "according to EA", is in the game, who's feet does that fall on? IGN's huh?

Strawman?? Ok

You said EA is doing a poor job of marketing lighting.

Improved and enhanced.

It's only 1 screenshot of the lighting, correct?

I saw another screenshot that looked good.

Depends on each person's interpretation of improved and enhanced.

Too early for me.