The (un)official OS QB Vision Cone Screenshot Thread

[wwharton]

Quote: Originally Posted by BezO

From the screen shots, it looks like everone's cone stretches about 50 yards, except for Bulger's. In theory, I don't think it will be a problem. Even on deep passes, you usually let go of the ball long before the WR is 50 yards down the field. But on broken plays...

That's how normal people play... many people online or casually run backwards until they feel they have no chance of getting sacked and then look upfield which would be after every route and then throw. unfortunately that's the biggest problem.

[wwharton]

Quote: Originally Posted by Phillmattic

Alright, but using the analog stick to control the vision cone would fall under the category of being more of a "video game player" rather than a sim player. Players shouldn't be punished because they know how to pick apart a defense without having to use a cone to check receivers. That should put the defensive programming at fault, players shouldn't be handicapped cause the defense in the game is just so horrible. And as far as cheese goes, I hate to see these "sim" players scan through receivers against a player that applies good pressure on the QB. And do you guys really think EA would implement a feature that would turn off most of it's fan base because of it's difficulty. If you think this is going to be the saving grace to the Madden series then your going to be severely disapointed. Instead of a handicap feature, how about just making better defense? And as far as it being realistic, it's not like you can't see the whole field yourself anyways, not being able to hit a receiver because you aren't quick enough to highlight him in your QB's vision is going to be frustrating as hell.

It's not the analog stick, it's the triggers. This is a big difference b/c as quick as you can turn your head left and right you can hit a trigger left or right. Let me also say the bulk of this post doesn't apply to me. I prefer 2k5 over Madden 2005 mostly b/c I believe that its natural structure forces you to play the game more realistically so I agree with what you're saying but in terms of Madden, if they're not going to "fix" it, this is one of the best alternatives they've done in years... and I think it has added benefits that prove its worth.

I don't mean to make you seem like a novice and I apologize if you feel attacked in that way. But the reality is an NFL QB snaps the ball and based on the play he takes a 1, 3, 5 or 7 step drop unless it's play action or he's rolling out and at the end of that drop he should be firing to his primary target if open. He may have a total of 2 or 3 seconds to figure out that option one is covered, option 2 is covered, option 3 is covered. After a couple of seconds he needs to move, throw the ball away, dodge a tackler, etc. What needs to happen is the QB reads the defense presnap and during his drop, looking at his first target and then checking down to 2nd, 3rd, etc. Just going from your post, this is not how you play. The cone is a pretty good simulator of this. Better QBs may see that option 3 is wide open while looking at option one and better QBs have a bigger cone meaning more options will be in their field of vision. It plays out pretty realistically for how you SHOULD play QB. You and most casual players don't play like they should.

It really just sounds like you are mad at EA making the game what EA claims the game to be... a simulation of reality. Many madden haters call the game arcade b/c of the ability to be as successful playing the game the way you describe it as you would be trying to play it like a real QB (like a "sim").

[coogrfan]

Quote: Originally Posted by wwharton

That's how normal people play... many people online or casually run backwards until they feel they have no chance of getting sacked and then look upfield which would be after every route and then throw. unfortunately that's the biggest problem.

I don't have the quote in front of me, but I do recall that in an interview someone from EA stated that dropping back too far would either cause the cone to shrink or make the passer so inaccurate that a completion would be virtually impossible (I'm a little fuzzy on it now). I'll see if I can find the specific link.

[slickdtc]

Quote: Originally Posted by coogrfan

I don't have the quote in front of me, but I do recall that in an interview someone from EA stated that dropping back too far would either cause the cone to shrink or make the passer so inaccurate that a completion would be virtually impossible (I'm a little fuzzy on it now). I'll see if I can find the specific link.

I know that when scrambling (which you can do without dropping the passing icons now), your cone does shrink. I'm not sure about moving regularly (i.e. not hitting the scramble button) though. That's good, so now people can still run with Vick but not be as dangerous because, even though they can make your LB come off coverage, it'll be tough to still get it to the receiver that is left open because the cone has shrunk.

[dieselboy]

Quote: Originally Posted by ZXLT

He wouldn't have a cone.

If he was at WSU, it would probably be atleast half the field.

[wwharton]

both of those things would be great... sounds like they may have gotten it right

[backbreaker]

You can use the right analog stick for vision, I just though I would reiterate that, I keep seeing people talking about the triggers, its both.

[wwharton]

i mentioned the triggers b/c he was saying how difficult it would be to use the analog stick. the triggers may not be preferred but would definitely be a piece of cake.