Madden 2006 - A Review...........

[Graphik]

Quote: Originally Posted by Briman123

Thats not true people still play Counter-Strike 1.6 over Counter-Strike: Source and 1.6 is from the times of 1998. Aside from Custom made Maps CS 1.6 hasn't changed for years and people love it and play it. When it comes to non-sports games usually the older titles with bad graphics are the best.

Thats because all signs pointed to Counter Strike: Source being a step back from the original. I mean when you get the total package in a game. For instance, after playing Splinter Cell, would you play a game like Mission Impossible that has the same elements but executed poorly. Or a game like GTA then go on and play something like Driver or True Crime? Thats taking a step back. Once you see the possiblilities at how much a game can innovate, its tough to go back and play anything less.

[KBomber]

Quote: Originally Posted by LBzrule

After playing some more online games the last few days, while I first bought these comments, I'm going to have to change my perspective on them. Espeically after playing guys using Jamal Lewis and Jerome Bettis I have seen and I have run several off tackle running plays where I actually ran in both B and C gaps. I played against someone using Jamal Lewis yesterday and he kept hitting my defense in the B gap 6 yards here, 5 yards there. A truck stick here and a truck stick there I have seen the scenario of a DE coming from the other side of the field. But it is not like presented here as if it happens every time someone runs an off tackle play. Thus I would not call it un sim. Sometimes it happens, sometimes it does not. Alot of it has to do with the alignment of the defense.

Sounds like you are mostly playing on-line from your comments, in which case some of my review may not apply. I don't play online, so my experiences with the game are entirely based on playing the CPU

Relative to the slowdown mechanism, I think it's applied more to mid-range RB's. I noticed it in SS Mode, with my CAP who was a low 70's rated player. With him, I saw this effect quite a bit, and usually in the context where I changed the play at the line to adjust to what the D was giving me.

Quote: Originally Posted by LBzrule

I'm sure the QB thing has to be there, although I have yet to see it against the A.I. And I sure have not seen it in online games. My one complaint with the A.I is that it is kinda easy, just like ESPN was. My third day with the game, I beat the Colts 6 to 3 and held Manning under 150 passing. RB's out of the backfield can be defended. It again depends on the call. A cover 2 zone it's an INT. If you run man coverage and then go with Man Lock the Linebacker covers the RB really tight. This is a correctable issue IMO. You can make a game plan adjustment by simply assigning the OLB's to the backs and they may never be open. That issue can be solved through smart game planning.

The AI issues are very prevalent when playing the CPU. That's where the swing pass seems to work best. Your notes about limiting the opposing RB are true enough, but I'm mostly talking about working that play against the CPU D. It just never adjusted. Same thing goes, and I'm not sure if I read it here or in another thread, about CPU RB's outrunning their blocks.

On the human controlled side, I found that many times when I ran the ball, after waiting for my linemen to get to where they could block a LB or CB, those defensive players just slid right off them and made plays with no worries. Logic suggests to me that if I properly set-up an LB or CB with a lineman that I should be looking at positive yardage. Overall I found that it didn't always work that way. When running inside the line, I became frustrated with the clumping of players in the line which is prevalent and makes reading the blocks goofy at times

Quote: Originally Posted by LBzrule

Never have problems getting my defensive line to get pressure. Again alignment of the defense is an important part of it. And there is a contradiction here. First the argument is made that the defense has trouble with certain routes. Then the argument is made that the game is skewed to give the advantage to the LB's and DB's Which is it? From my perspective, especially in online games, the game plays alot like 2k5, with nearly unstoppable TE lobs, but that's only if the other user gets time to throw it, which I do not give him. Now I wholeheartedly agree with the blocking. Good gawwd that's one of the most annoying things about the game to me. You cannot get off a block to save your life. To be honest if it were not for that, as far as the gameplay, I would not have too many issues with it.

In answer to your question it is both. The curl pattern is about as devastating a play against the CPU as there is. To my mind it is almost certain money and based on what I read in the defense, one of my most natural responses to the defense that always met consistent gains was to audible a curl for one of my WR's. On fades, I find that the CB's can make remarkable recovery on throws, even lobs, for picks. In a sense I found that the response by the D encourages throwing curls and into the flats with RB's to the point where you can go to town nickel and diming it against the CPU all day long

Quote: Originally Posted by LBzrule

When you say the timing of the plays just seems wrong, more needs to be said there. Just left it as a blanket statement.

I may have explained this more in another thread or post, but I find that the aspects of some routes and run plays just seem to take too long to develop in comparison to other parts of the play. I've generally found the timing in the 2K series somewhat more realistic in that you need to read, react and get the ball out of the pocket. To me the QB pocket play is still superior in 2K5 as is the timing of how plays develop

Quote: Originally Posted by LBzrule

As far as improvements, I think there are plenty here, although alot of them have already been done. Tiburon just took some of those things I re-worked them to enhance their game. I'm not here to grade the review, I think it was a good review, although I think differently on some of the issues.

I agree that there are improvements over Madden 2005, but that was a title that left me very cold to the series. I didn't find it to be one of the better Madden efforts in recent years. I think the passing cone is a great addition, but overall there is a sameness to the game compared to what was already pre-existing in Madden circa 2003 & 2004. My issue isn't whether Madden is a decent game or not, to me compared to the body of games that are out there it is clearly above average as reflected by my score. My thought is that Madden hasn't made strides to tangibly extend itself past where it was as a title in 2003 & 2004. Are graphics and presentation core to this issue? Yes, but there are also lagging gameplay issues that are native to the Madden engine that are still there.

To me, as invested as the audience for Madden is, they have a true right to expect more, even within the development for the current generation of hardware. It's been shown that it can be done. It just hasn't been on display in Madden football. As a community we have a right to expect more, at least that's my opinion

Quote: Originally Posted by LBzrule

The biggest problem game play wise for me is the blocking and lack of double team blocking. I really do not have problems with them allowing the curls and hitches be high percentage routes. This has been in video games before. There was a game last year where the curl was money too in particular against man coverage. But alas, I'm not here to compare and debate about which game is better. Good review Have fun...

Thanks for your comments. Just as a note, the point of my original review was not as a Madden 2006 vs NFL 2K5 thread. I've tried to avoid that where possible. I think we need to continually reflect Madden back on itself to see where it has been and where it should be as a title. As said, I think there is much more that they could do with it in a number of areas. I don't think it's a bad game, I just question whether it's done enough to be worth throwing $50 at it for what it does differently than past editions. I know my answer. Only the gaming public can determine if this is what they want to accept for their money

Have fun.........

[KBomber]

Quote: Originally Posted by coogrfan

Wow, I couldn't disagree more on this one. In Madden's version of weekly prep you're actually playing the game, even if it is the same play over and over. 2k's prep system was about as entertaining as filling out one's taxes.

Hang on, we're talking about two different things here.

Bangpow said that Weekly Prep was tedious and took too long. I responded by saying that it doesn't take as long as Madden's practices, particularly in SS Mode where you are running a minimum of of 10 plays 10+ times

In terms of which is more relevant, I said that actually practicing seemed more realistic as an interpretation to me, albeit one that is time-consuming

Hope that clears my thoughts up on that item

Have fun............

[LIGHTNING]

In addition to the flaws in Madden 2006 discussed in this thread, it seems that there is little difference between the teams. It is much like playing the same team with different uniforms each game.

[KBomber]

Quote: Originally Posted by LIGHTNING

In addition to the flaws in Madden 2006 discussed in this thread, it seems that there is little difference between the teams. It is much like playing the same team with different uniforms each game.

TO be fair, I don't know that this is really the case. I think you see a definite difference in how teams play, especially if you get into a game with teams like Indianapolis, the Ravens (especially when on offense going against their D...) and when you get match-ups against Superstar players. I do think that the scouting report in the Gameplan section is helpful, but I think I rather pick my own counter plays in that part of the game. I think the CPU picks goofy counters by and large

Have fun..............