Less control but smoother animations or More control but more robotic movements

[Only1LT]

Why people are labeling Madden as the control game and 2K the no control game is beyond me.

There are definitely times during 2K when the player loses some control. A good example would be the right stick and juking. Flicking once on the stick will keep the player in control, but doing more flicks to link moves, you will lose some control I agree. But it's not like there are times in Madden when you don't lose control either.

Catching animations are notoriously long and often times, disadvantageous in Madden. How many times does the AI go into a spinning catch animation for no reason that causes you to step out of bounds, or worse yet, if you are the defender, goes to a catch animation that totally takes you out of the play and allows the WR to break a long play or score?

Sacrificing control for realistic animations is not something that we should be too concerned with, because we are already doing just that in Madden.

Now, I would be willing to sacrifice even more control for more realistic running animations. What I mean by that is, for some reason, Madden has gotten away from momentum and gone more with being able to cut on the dime. Interestingly, it was the 2K series that always used to have cut on the dime running, which I hated, and then they went to momentum based running in 2K5, and actually implemented it better than Madden did.

To make a long story short, I would rather that we lost some control while cutting sharply, which would trigger a foot plant and body rebalancing animation, as opposed to being able to stop and turn on a dime (or close to it) and have no real penalty for changing directions at high speeds. That just isn't realistic, and to me, isn't worth the loss of realism for the added control.

[rckinAPhilliezhat]

Quote: Originally Posted by Only1LT

Why people are labeling Madden as the control game and 2K the no control game is beyond me. There are definitely times during 2K when the player loses some control. A good example would be the right stick and juking. Flicking once on the stick will keep the player in control, but doing more flicks to link moves, you will lose some control I agree. But it's not like there are times in Madden when you don't lose control either. Catching animations are notoriously long and often times, disadvantageous in Madden. How many times does the AI go into a spinning catch animation for no reason that causes you to step out of bounds, or worse yet, if you are the defender, goes to a catch animation that totally takes you out of the play and allows the WR to break a long play or score? Sacrificing control for realistic animations is not something that we should be too concerned with, because we are already doing just that in Madden. Now, I would be willing to sacrifice even more control for more realistic running animations. What I mean by that is, for some reason, Madden has gotten away from momentum and gone more with being able to cut on the dime. Interestingly, it was the 2K series that always used to have cut on the dime running, which I hated, and then they went to momentum based running in 2K5, and actually implemented it better than Madden did. To make a long story short, I would rather that we lost some control while cutting sharply, which would trigger a foot plant and body rebalancing animation, as opposed to being able to stop and turn on a dime (or close to it) and have no real penalty for changing directions at high speeds. That just isn't realistic, and to me, isn't worth the loss of realism for the added control.

so true.

[LAKE4742]

Personally, I don't want to sacrifice control for realism. That's what making a game based on skill is about.

There should be a learning curve, and right way to achieve success in a game. Not have the game try and force it on me, or make it easy for me. I want to learn to play it the right way, just as real players have to learn. Only difference is I'm on the sticks.

There is no automatic dropback in APF2K8. You have total control. BUT, if the play calls for a 3 step dropback, and I pull it off with precision, then my chance at success for that play is heightened. THAT is much more rewarding for me, then the game doing it for me.

Having great animations is one thing. But when those animations defy physics, or take away control, that's no good.

[SoxFan01605]

Quote: Originally Posted by REDRZA

I don't think they are mutually exclusive. In fact, half the time i don't even feel i have control when these animations are playing out. I think they need to give us more control, while making the animations as smooth as possible. Look at games like MLB 09, NHL 09, FN rd 4 has amazing visuals, realistic animations AND PHYSICS! It can be done.

Not entirely true. No, they might not have to be mutually exclusive, but often times they are to a larger extent than people realize.

-MLB 09, much like NBA 2K and NFL 2K is constantly critiqued by plenty of people for "scripted" play. Som of the same people who didn't get behind 2K5, don't get The Show. A big reason behind that is there are several areas where control is diminished in favor of smoother animations, ratings based mechanics etc. Sacrificing a level of control for smoother look/feel probably has no better current (a successful) example than MLB 09, in fact.

-NHL 09 has plenty of phsyics issues away from and around the puck (including the puck too actually, but that is less of a control related gripe). Also, I'd imagine they can "cheat" on momentum a bit (meaning take a bit longer to adjust for animation) seeing as the ice effects make for a larger window. That said, I'd agree that it is one of the better examples out there (along with FIFA, IMO) of real physics based play, however.

-FNR4 is the weakest example, as it's a one on one experience. There is no running, secondary object to consider (a ball), high variety of close interaction (aside from a singular hold, etc). Even still, it misses the mark on physics at times and suffers from poor/goofy animation at others.

The point is, all those games, at one point or another, had to lean towards one direction or the other and they have less going on in terms of a combination of constant motion and direct contact than football does.

2K5 leaned towards rating influence and some automation/extended animation to achieve it's realism. That was on an older system, so I'm sure there is some more wiggle room in terms of compromise. They did take a direction though.

Without direct knowledge of programming, I couldn't state just how much symmetry is currently possible, but there are indeed sacrifices to be made. It becomes a question of just how much and how well Ian and crew can balance them out and which way sales/user feedback dictates they should lean, IMO.

[LAKE4742]

Quote: Originally Posted by Only1LT

Why people are labeling Madden as the control game and 2K the no control game is beyond me. There are definitely times during 2K when the player loses some control. A good example would be the right stick and juking. Flicking once on the stick will keep the player in control, but doing more flicks to link moves, you will lose some control I agree. But it's not like there are times in Madden when you don't lose control either. Catching animations are notoriously long and often times, disadvantageous in Madden. How many times does the AI go into a spinning catch animation for no reason that causes you to step out of bounds, or worse yet, if you are the defender, goes to a catch animation that totally takes you out of the play and allows the WR to break a long play or score? Sacrificing control for realistic animations is not something that we should be too concerned with, because we are already doing just that in Madden. Now, I would be willing to sacrifice even more control for more realistic running animations. What I mean by that is, for some reason, Madden has gotten away from momentum and gone more with being able to cut on the dime. Interestingly, it was the 2K series that always used to have cut on the dime running, which I hated, and then they went to momentum based running in 2K5, and actually implemented it better than Madden did. To make a long story short, I would rather that we lost some control while cutting sharply, which would trigger a foot plant and body rebalancing animation, as opposed to being able to stop and turn on a dime (or close to it) and have no real penalty for changing directions at high speeds. That just isn't realistic, and to me, isn't worth the loss of realism for the added control.

Exactly.

[BezO]

Quote: Originally Posted by Only1LT

There are definitely times during 2K when the player loses some control. A good example would be the right stick and juking. Flicking once on the stick will keep the player in control, but doing more flicks to link moves, you will lose some control I agree. But it's not like there are times in Madden when you don't lose control either.

You don't sound like you have a problem with this, but it would seem wierd to me that someone strings together moves and has a problem with them finishing. I wouldn't classifiy that as a loss of control.

For the folks that feel 2K is less responsive, can you give an example of an animation?

[Richie2k10]

2k games feel less responsive...i guess... because they have working physics, momentum, and all that jazz.

Playing as a corner, running full speed than stopping, turning on a dime, to make a pick, is control a player doesnt need to have.

[big_larry]

yea this is what happens in nba 2k9. the animations look very realistic and smooth but sometimes you have any control over the players. i rather have more control.