Madden NFL 23 Gameplay Improvements Revealed - Pass Coverage, Pass Rush, QB Contain & Much More

[canes21]

Quote: Originally Posted by CM Hooe

I had not even considered that and now I am even less enthused by this year’s game, assuming Tiburon didn’t build out this change all the way through.

This is a potential drastic change. For someone that is 99.99% vs CPU only, the updated defensive tactics were one reason I could not go back to NCAA 14 anymore. Run fits, matching coverages. Those were in Madden and I found it impossible to play NCAA without them.

Now we are taking a step backwards it seems, and if the CPU is spot dropping all of the time, I'm not sure I'll be able to stick around playing multiple seasons. Unless EA has really tuned and balanced everything, I'm worried the defensive changes may be a massive step backwards for me.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[Qcsports4]

Quote: Originally Posted by jfsolo

[/b] If folks are going to melt down, I hope they at least read all the info about zones changes before doing so.

Some of those actually sound encouraging as far as zone coverage and the reactions by DBs. Glad for the Locomotion animation where DBs will turn their hips,feet etc. However,I wonder what movement animations there will be if one of the DBs bite on a play action pass?
Also, it'll be good for the DBs and maybe some LBs to adjust their outside coverage in the end zone but, let's say zone coverage calls for a DB to move towards the outside/sideline area to cover that zone. Well, let's say a TE has clearly beat the LB that's covering him on a post pattern right near that zone the DB is covering. If no one is on that zone for that DB to cover(short zone or near the sideline), will that DB just stand there and watch the TE run free unabated?

[Dagan]

I'm going to throw for 10,000 yards with Sam Howell as a rookie.

[CM Hooe]

My singular hope for spot drop zone coverages is that the additions and changes for pass rushers and blitzes work as advertised.

An example of the thing I fear is the legacy issue of Gun Trips TE - PA Crossers vs Cover 3, where the QB has way too much time and gets the opportunity to throw a hi-lo stretch on the opposite side of the play where defenders have wandered off to cover grass. This I believe is an example of a “third window throw” mentioned frequently in the notes, and those plays are immersion breaking and extremely annoying to try to defend. Previously seeing a Trips TE formation from the offense triggered a Cover 4 Quarters call by me by default, because that was my only answer to this exploit.

If those third window throws are no longer reliably viable because of generally reduced time to throw (in addition to other spot drop zone coverage behavior additions and changes), then I think I will be at peace with the existing match coverage functionality set for one more year.

[ggsimmonds]

Quote: Originally Posted by jfsolo

[/b] If folks are going to melt down, I hope they at least read all the info about zones changes before doing so.

It tells us what the priority is and what the foundation/focus will be moving forward. Many people hoped that Madden would get deeper and better match the real life product. But this seems to indicate that instead Madden is going a different route. The "single source of truth" line all but eliminates the chance that the coverage shell is decoupled from the front (a request had by many). And its not how real life playbooks work.

I had hoped when I heard that Madden himself would be on the cover that this meant a greater emphasis on the cerebral and strategy side of football, but doesn't seem that is the case.

Match defense is no longer a priority. Don't expect too many improvements or additions to it moving forward.

[Broncos86]

I'd say EA has a balance they have to strike and they need to be careful about how they do it. For every gamer who says the playbooks don't reflect real life, there are likely 2 more casual gamers complaining that the game is too complicated.

It's a complaint I've heard echoed about just playing the game from some people. Too many buttons to press, too many things to remember. I'll admit that I played more of the NHL 94 Retro release than I did NHL 21. It's not nearly as authentic, but damn it's fun.

So while I understand the complaint, part of the issue is more complexity creates a barrier to entry. And the more complex a game is, the more casual gamers feel they have to "keep up" with the gameplay or just feel overwhelmed and unwilling to buy the game.

It's a tough line for EA to walk, and I understand the situation. And as my history here should show, I am no EA apologist or "fanboy." But I'd like to think I take an objective approach to things. I also understand the downer it causes for the guys who really want to get into the playbook and feel like they're calling plays as an actual coach would.

I hope that Madden 23 can strike that balance and offer something for both.

[jfsolo]

Quote: Originally Posted by Broncos86

I'd say EA has a balance they have to strike and they need to be careful about how they do it. For every gamer who says the playbooks don't reflect real life, there are likely 2 more casual gamers complaining that the game is too complicated. It's a complaint I've heard echoed about just playing the game from some people. Too many buttons to press, too many things to remember. I'll admit that I played more of the NHL 94 Retro release than I did NHL 21. It's not nearly as authentic, but damn it's fun. So while I understand the complaint, part of the issue is more complexity creates a barrier to entry. And the more complex a game is, the more casual gamers feel they have to "keep up" with the gameplay or just feel overwhelmed and unwilling to buy the game. It's a tough line for EA to walk, and I understand the situation. And as my history here should show, I am no EA apologist or "fanboy." But I'd like to think I take an objective approach to things. I also understand the downer it causes for the guys who really want to get into the playbook and feel like they're calling plays as an actual coach would. I hope that Madden 23 can strike that balance and offer something for both.

It's probably more like a 5 to 1 or more ratio, IMO.

[ggsimmonds]

Quote: Originally Posted by Broncos86

I'd say EA has a balance they have to strike and they need to be careful about how they do it. For every gamer who says the playbooks don't reflect real life, there are likely 2 more casual gamers complaining that the game is too complicated. It's a complaint I've heard echoed about just playing the game from some people. Too many buttons to press, too many things to remember. I'll admit that I played more of the NHL 94 Retro release than I did NHL 21. It's not nearly as authentic, but damn it's fun. So while I understand the complaint, part of the issue is more complexity creates a barrier to entry. And the more complex a game is, the more casual gamers feel they have to "keep up" with the gameplay or just feel overwhelmed and unwilling to buy the game. It's a tough line for EA to walk, and I understand the situation. And as my history here should show, I am no EA apologist or "fanboy." But I'd like to think I take an objective approach to things. I also understand the downer it causes for the guys who really want to get into the playbook and feel like they're calling plays as an actual coach would. I hope that Madden 23 can strike that balance and offer something for both.

Good post, but I will disagree (or offer a different view) with the largest point -- EA needing to strike a balance. It does depend on how you frame it and the context. Yes there should always be a balance between fun factor and realism. Framed that way I agree with you.

However ultimately one side of that equation has to take precedence. If you try to toe the line 50/50 you end up doing neither particularly well.

A way to look at it is like this: What is the central design goal?
A) To create a fun football videogame
B) To create a realistic replication of the NFL

The vast majority of the time those two are not contradictory to each other and there will be a lot of overlap. So why is the question important? Because it provides the foundation that you build from and everything will follow from the answer to the question. Its determining what is the first block in the flowchart.

The barrier to entry you bring up is a valid concern, but simplifying the game is not the best solution imo. Making it more accessible is the preferred approach. Simplifying the game is the lazy alternative to making any game more accessible.

Taken at surface level I wouldn't be worried about match coverages being moved to an option within coaching adjustments. In theory its the best approach. Make the game accessible to a broad audience while allowing deeper options for others. 2k does this reasonably well with their coaching features. But EAs track record is what causes concern. With EA if a feature is not a priority it often means it is neglected entirely.