What is Realistic?

[lnin0]

Seems like everyone has their own idea of what realistic football is and isn't. So I decided to look it up by the numbers.

Per Game Team Averages based on 2007 NFL regular season

62.8 Number of Plays
33.3 Passing Attempts
27.3 Rushing Attempts

02.2 Sacks
06.3 Yards Lost per Sack
01.6 Fumbles

80.9 QB Rating
61.2 Completion %
01.0 INT

110. Rushing Yards
04.4 Rushing Yard per Attempt

22.6 Yards per Kickoff Return
09.1 Yards per Punt Return

93.1 Accuracy of FG under 40 Yards
67.4 Accuracy of FG over 40 Yards (drops to 47% for 50+)

[cdon2k]

Take into account that those are for 12 minute quarters.... madden is 5 minutes.

[tyler289]

Quote: Originally Posted by cdon2k

Take into account that those are for 12 minute quarters.... madden is 5 minutes.

You mean 15 minute quarters?


Realistic has a different definition for each team and game. For example, if I'm the Patriots against the Falcons, I should win handidly, but lose if I throw bad INTs or just overall play poorly. That happens. But if I'm the Cowboys against the Giants, it should be a hard-fought, close football game, unless one side totally implodes. That's not always the case in these games, but it's getting better.

[cdon2k]

Right right, had basketball on the brain for some reason.... must be the olympics!

[SolidSnake07]

Quote: Originally Posted by tyler289

You mean 15 minute quarters? Realistic has a different definition for each team and game. For example, if I'm the Patriots against the Falcons, I should win handidly, but lose if I throw bad INTs or just overall play poorly. That happens. But if I'm the Cowboys against the Giants, it should be a hard-fought, close football game, unless one side totally implodes. That's not always the case in these games, but it's getting better.

I guess you never heard of the saying "on any given sunday". Just because you play with the Pats against the Falcons doesnt mean you should only have to stay awake with the controller in your hand and POOF you get a win. Should Falcons be less challenging than say the Colts or Chargers? Yes but to win handidly? I dont know. Also there are gonna be times when two evenly matched teams have games that turn into one sided blow outs. Again, any given Sunday.

[jtdribbles25]

^ok. so what determines the reality factor. I was thinking about this for a couple days on my own. Like the ncaa game, people complaining about the kick returns, but the average is pretty close. But "we" wanna change it so now it's returns to just the 25 or so. What exactly is ok. And Im not talking glitches and so forth. I'm saying how to decide the game has too many pics, or the running game is too strong. Do we want the defenders to drop every pass or just some. Are we not trying to call a gameplan that creates stops and pics or not.

I can't recall seeing anyone proudly displaying multiple loosing seasons. Are we trying to lose. Or do we just want the computer to beat us. And if so why, due to exactly what. It seems that the game can never be good enough. And im not defending the game or anything like that. But I was legitimately questioning myself the other day. Trying to figure out which sliders to use and why. If im the falcons and beat the pats because brady threw 3 pics, is the interception slider the problem? If he goes 85% is he robo-qb?

I use the 49ers. Gore is what I consider the strength of the offense. So I run a lot. Playing 8min quarters and giving my running core about 33-36 carries per. Generally racking up about 100 yds. But having 24-26 t.o.p. Winning against teams because Im controlling the ball. And if they make even 1 mistake or possession, I can win games 17-10 most of the time. So, how hard do I make my running game. Well, statistically Im doing close to what my team was doing in winning situations. And if I make the running game tougher whats acceptable. right now avg. 3.5 ypc. Thats reasonable, but is it too much. If I decrease it and then I struggle to run it's because of the boost the defense gets. i dunno. the line is blurry for me right now. But I think it's an interesting thread....

[lnin0]

Yeah, that was kind of the point I was thinking about as well. I see a lot of people saying sacks are impossible but I get 1 or 2 against the CPU almost every game. That is right around the NFL avg so how many is too little or too many? Of course these are averages and if you looked at individual games there are some variances so where do you draw that line.

People have to realize everyone has a different way to play. For every guy posting the running game is too hard there is another guy saying it is easy. The game has to walk this blurry line and ultimately there are going to be people on both sides that do not agree (and these will generally be the loudest voice).

The single player game is an online primer for me so I keep it at five minute quarters and don't expect to see 100+ yard rushing games or statistical accuracy. Looking at the real averages I wonder how many are playing full length games or at least games that are putting up similar play count numbers. Do the stats come closer to avg then or are the under or over? I imagine EA knows a lot of people won't be playing 15 minute quarters so the model has to be tuned for that and that blurry line gets even harder to make out.

I am just kind of tired of all the "me me me" post which only concern themselves about how the game fits 'me' when in fact the developer has to think "you and you and you" and try to find a balance between everything. Not that the game is without fault or that we shouldn't all want the perfect fit but buying a game isn't like buying a pair of pants - there are always compromises. I think people sometimes need to look at adapting their own styles a little bit rather than always crying for patches to adapt the gameplay to them.

As I think back on my decades of gaming I don't remember utmost realism ever being tied to the enjoyment we had playing. We all played games for fun and accepted they were nothing more than computer programs with their own built in quirks and rules even when branded by some real world counterpart. They always talk about graphics in reference to the uncanny valley but I think it holds true to gameplay as well - especially in games that are emulating something from the real world. Why do we accept movies as an escape from reality but not games anymore? It would be a lot more fun to be a gamer right now if people came to grasps with the fact, that no matter how a game looks or what is represents, it is still just a game.

[otis_coole]

I think this is a great question, and I would like to hear everybody's opinion on this topic. For me, Madden should be more than realistic, it should have variety, so I could play realistic, or arcade and have fun doing either. I think the stat simulator for franchise is almost perfect (QB% is the only thing people seem to be complaining about), I think they need to improve off season logic overall.

But I think overall, if Madden could give me more and more options (QB Vision for example), I think I could find a nice combination of options, to attain my level of "realism"

To answer your question though, realistic means to me that madden's in game stats, logic etc. are all in line with nfl averages, and the teams they are playing with specifically.

*hope that made sense