Does madden want a realistic game?

[Nunyerbiz]

Quote: Originally Posted by ForUntoOblivionSoar∞

Less than three seconds on average to throw so as to match realistic NFL pass rush time (i.e. MORE DIFFICULTY)

I don't think the time-to-pass stat is intended to accurately track the effectiveness of pass rush. Plenty of throws come out in less than 2 seconds because the play is designed for the throw to come out in less than in 2 seconds, doesn't mean the QB is going to be sacked if he looks to another read. I think the average time to sack is a higher value then time to pass... somewhere between 4-5 seconds last I read up on it... and even that is only counting plays where an actual sack occurs. So I don't think "three seconds to release or your sacked" is realistic to the NFL game.

[ggsimmonds]

Quote: Originally Posted by ForUntoOblivionSoar∞

Many of us point out that they’d have fewer interceptions if they learned how to read a defense. I do not consider those people complaining about interceptions as sim players. They are players on the cusp of joining the Dark Side, but they aren’t there yet. Now, PSYCHIC DEFENDERS are NOT realistic and are therefore not sim. But if you are throwing picks because you are depending on classic Madden techniques that require zero defense reading, and then you complain about ints, you aint sim.

Quote: Originally Posted by JoshC1977

I agree with your points of what many true sim gamers want, but I read Aestis’s point differently. I think he was making the point that a lot of self-professed “sim” gamers really aren’t and if that was what he was driving at, I agree. Lots of players play “sim mode” but really aren’t “sim” in terms of how they play. The current sim mode, in my opinion, needs to be labeled as “madden classic” and a true sim style developed with many of the aspects you nicely laid out. Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

I was alluding to the same thing I think Aestis was in his post, and that is that many people consider themselves sim gamers, but other people could take issue with that designation.

Consider this hypothetical:
Someone considers themselves a sim gamer and says they want a realistic experience. Unfortunately they are not very knowledgeable on the Xs and Os of football. They also still want to win more often than not and be in the chase for SBs regularly. Are they sim?

Quote: Originally Posted by Shogunreaper

Eh i don't think that's always true, this game is way worse with interceptions than past maddens. The cpu will turn around and catch the ball even when they should have no idea its coming. They seem to be just generally more aware of the ball, most of the time. I recently played through all the ps3 madden games and the difference is night and day.

With respect, I believe you are so very wrong on this. I don't see nearly as many unrealistic interceptions as I did in the past.

[jfsolo]

Quote: Originally Posted by ggsimmonds

I was alluding to the same thing I think Aestis was in his post, and that is that many people consider themselves sim gamers, but other people could take issue with that designation. Consider this hypothetical: Someone considers themselves a sim gamer and says they want a realistic experience. Unfortunately they are not very knowledgeable on the Xs and Os of football. They also still want to win more often than not and be in the chase for SBs regularly. Are they sim? With respect, I believe you are so very wrong on this. I don't see nearly as many unrealistic interceptions as I did in the past.

In my opinion, if someone wants high win totals and deep playoff runs to be achievable regardless of their football knowledge then could be still called sim, but should play on rookie or pro. Above pro, football knowledge needs to become increasingly more important and a fundamental part of being successful.

[ggsimmonds]

Quote: Originally Posted by jfsolo

In my opinion, if someone wants high win totals and deep playoff runs to be achievable regardless of their football knowledge then could be still called sim, but should play on rookie or pro. Above pro, football knowledge needs to become increasingly more important and a fundamental part of being successful.

One of my biggest wishes is that eventually Madden's AI evolves to the point where either that is the only thing difficulty level touches or there can be a separate "AI intelligence" setting.

Two games comes to mind. A pc strategy game called Galactic Civilizations had this (think it was the second, the third took a step back). The programmers made a very smart AI that had complex code that made for a challenging opponent. Up until the very last difficulty level, the level only determined how much of the code the enemy used. The last level added bonuses to production and wealth. Each opponent had separate sliders for intelligence and bonuses, so you could make a very smart enemy that doesn't produce well, or a production monster that is dumb as ****.

I think NBA 2k has something similar. I remember Czar saying he recommends superstar level because that is the level where the AI has access to all the tools under ACE to stop you. Above that at HOF level the AI gets attribute bonuses also. Below superstar the AI is limited in gameplan.

[JoshC1977]

Quote: Originally Posted by ggsimmonds

Consider this hypothetical: Someone considers themselves a sim gamer and says they want a realistic experience. Unfortunately they are not very knowledgeable on the Xs and Os of football. They also still want to win more often than not and be in the chase for SBs regularly. Are they sim?

Great hypothetical! Here's my thought:

You don't have to be super-knowledgable (or skilled) to play "sim". To me, "sim" is as much a mindset as anything. Do you value losing as much as winning? Do you play by doing things as realistically as what you see in real life or do you take the 'easy way' out when things get tough and exploit the game?

You don't have to be overly knowledgable about the Xs and Os to know that rolling your QB out to the right on every freakin' passing down isn't sim. You don't have to be knowledgable about Xs and Os to know that it is highly unrealistic to run the same formation (and 2-3 plays) the entire game. You don't have to be knowledgable about Xs and Os to know that checking-down the entire game to exploit CPU shortcomings isn't sim. Even if you don't know crap about the Xs and Os but watch the game on TV, you can quickly identify things that people do that "don't hapen in real life".

I will flat out tell you that I am not an Xs or Os guy. I have a very good understanding of football rules but begin falling short on playcalling and things like that, I understand general concepts and player roles based on fronts/formations. But when you drill down into the more technical terminology and concepts, I struggle. I was physically unable to play the game as a kid (and now I am older), so I don't have the experience of "coach speak". Nonetheless, I consider myself a sim gamer.

I'll give an example that happened on one of my streams (when I was playing and not 'testing') a few weeks ago. I was in a tight CFM game (3-4 point spread). My opponent was down and driving at the end of the game. They got the ball in the red zone and clock was ticking (they had one timeout still left)....5...4...3 (they are trying to snap the ball and no way they will make it)....2... I used one of my remaining timeouts since they were (for whatever reason) not going to do it themselves. It gave them one play in definite scoring range and a chance for me to lose the game. The comment I made to my chat was along the lines of, "I would have hated to win that way". (and had I not called the timeout, I would've agonized over that and probably started my CFM over). Yeah....I'm a bit weird ...but my point is that sim "is" what you put into it.

[Nunyerbiz]

Quote: Originally Posted by jfsolo

In my opinion, if someone wants high win totals and deep playoff runs to be achievable regardless of their football knowledge then could be still called sim, but should play on rookie or pro. Above pro, football knowledge needs to become increasingly more important and a fundamental part of being successful.

I understand what you're saying here... but I'm not sure it's possible. Stick skills will keep most afloat until knowledge catches up. My son was 9 years old when he got Madden 16 for Christmas... He had zero football knowledge at the time and it took maybe two weeks with the game for him to consistently smoke All-Pro. After a certain amount of time with any video game, the success/fail criteria become pretty apparent. Anybody with average intelligence is going to figure out what an open WR or a stacked box or a deep zone or whatever looks like and how to counter. He didn't need to know squat, playing the game is what gave him his football knowledge... and it didn't take long. At the end of the day, football isn't as complicated as we like to think it is.

[ggsimmonds]

Quote: Originally Posted by JoshC1977

Great hypothetical! Here's my thought: You don't have to be super-knowledgable (or skilled) to play "sim". To me, "sim" is as much a mindset as anything. Do you value losing as much as winning? Do you play by doing things as realistically as what you see in real life or do you take the 'easy way' out when things get tough and exploit the game? You don't have to be overly knowledgable about the Xs and Os to know that rolling your QB out to the right on every freakin' passing down isn't sim. You don't have to be knowledgable about Xs and Os to know that it is highly unrealistic to run the same formation (and 2-3 plays) the entire game. You don't have to be knowledgable about Xs and Os to know that checking-down the entire game to exploit CPU shortcomings isn't sim. Even if you don't know crap about the Xs and Os but watch the game on TV, you can quickly identify things that people do that "don't hapen in real life". I will flat out tell you that I am not an Xs or Os guy. I have a very good understanding of football rules but begin falling short on playcalling and things like that, I understand general concepts and player roles based on fronts/formations. But when you drill down into the more technical terminology and concepts, I struggle. I was physically unable to play the game as a kid (and now I am older), so I don't have the experience of "coach speak". Nonetheless, I consider myself a sim gamer. I'll give an example that happened on one of my streams (when I was playing and not 'testing') a few weeks ago. I was in a tight CFM game (3-4 point spread). My opponent was down and driving at the end of the game. They got the ball in the red zone and clock was ticking (they had one timeout still left)....5...4...3 (they are trying to snap the ball and no way they will make it)....2... I used one of my remaining timeouts since they were (for whatever reason) not going to do it themselves. It gave them one play in definite scoring range and a chance for me to lose the game. The comment I made to my chat was along the lines of, "I would have hated to win that way". (and had I not called the timeout, I would've agonized over that and probably started my CFM over). Yeah....I'm a bit weird ...but my point is that sim "is" what you put into it.

Great post. I agree, to me "sim" is more of a mindset than anything else. To me it boils down to what takes priority, beating a videogame or playing a football game.

As for your final paragraph, you're not alone. Against the AI I frequently deny penalties, intentionally commit my own, run out of bounds instead of scoring, punting after turnovers, etc. I do those things when I think Madden's flaws would unfairly work to my benefit, like when the AI QB took sack after sack. I wouldn't do what you did in that scenario, but I get the motivation behind it

[khaliib]

Here’s a question I have?

In terms of the ideology of “realistic”, how do they program the game to fulfill this role against such a broad subjective perception while fulfilling the challenge aspect with the terms “Phsych and Robo” quickly being the first words to be uttered?

To me instead of using the term “Realistic” which truly is subjective depending on your experience with the sport of football, we should be talking and approaching the game build from the ideology of “Replication”.

Replication limits subjectivity and the mundane arguments that lead down a rabbit hole of nowhere and provides aspects that are tangible to build from.
- this guy should have a SPD rating of at least 96 vs he runs a 4.3

- this guy has a 93 CTH rating and shouldn’t be dropping balls vs he catches the ball with his body

etc, etc, etc....

I truly believe we’ve arrived to point we are at because EA has been trying to do the “Realistic” thing that’s so subjective and have gotten away from the concept of simply “Replicating”.

What is Realistic is so fleeting from one moment to the next, gimmicks and fantasy mechanisms are settled on to try and cover such a broad spectrum of gamer perceptions.

I can guarantee my brand of Realistic probably wouldn’t be an enjoyable experience for a lot of gamers and the same could be said with the role reversed.

We’ve experienced years of Madden built as a Realistic version, but we’ve yet to experience a Madden game built as a Replication.

I’m tired and bored of continuing to try and obtain this Realistic thing year after year, and now on another console generation.

Let’s try Replication for once and at least see what the game experience would be like!!!