Is football's logic just too hard to put into a video game?

[Dmacho]

Is football's logic just too hard to put into a video game?

No, it's been done before.

[KillRoy]

Quote: Originally Posted by Dmacho

Is football's logic just too hard to put into a video game? No, it's been done before.

Really, what game? As far as I'm concerned, its never been done...

[Dmacho]

Quote: Originally Posted by KillRoy

Really, what game? As far as I'm concerned, its never been done...

APF 2k8

[KillRoy]

Quote: Originally Posted by Dmacho

APF 2k8

Its a lot like 2k5. the problem I have with it is the fact that hot routes are still the name of the game. corner routes and posts are the most effective routes in that game. I do like how its easier to run against dime and nickel which it should be but its still heavily based on hot routes and once you learn them, it makes the game a lot easier. It also has that "stuck in animation" feeling, which is ridiculous. It still has that "stick to you like glue" feeling aswell. But atleast it does football better than madden does, not much better but still better, I'll give it that much.

But as far as logic goes??? hmmmm... I really don't think it does "logic" that well. But its a video game, what can we really expect?

[ridemooses]

I just posed about how the game is too complicated to control with the controllers we have for PS3 and 360. Basically, the same idea. Good thoughts.

[ianlast]

If there's any sport where they should be able to nail it, it's football. Think about it. Football is essentially a scripted sport. There are some moments of spontaneity, but not nearly as many as in hockey, basketball or soccer. Baseball would be the easiest, and I think you could argue they've come closer than any other game to nailing the logic of the sport (with MVP 2005 and The Show being the best examples). Too bad baseball is my least favorite sport.

[KBLover]

I would agree baseball is the easiest. Heck, there's successful baseball games that don't even use physics (OOTP).

It also helps there's a LOT of statistical data with which to work in baseball, so it's easier to develop ratings and ratings vs ratings systems that more accurately reflect real life. Also, those stats are largely the direct result of physical actions more than mental decisions.

Football requires both - and that's where it's lacking. The stats in football are results, but those results can happen for a lot of reasons. An INT by the QB can happen not only because the QB threw a bad pass. Maybe he made a good, technically speaking, pass to a bad spot (bad read). The WR and QB weren't on the same page (each player made a different read), or maybe the defender just made a great play on the ball. Perhaps it was tipped, etc.

Football games seem to miss out on a lot of that and then on top of that there's the "create challenge" aspect because people might complain if they have an easy time with a top team, even though it would be realistic for that team to own teams all day. Some of that "creating challenge" leads to the defenders sticking too good and button timing meaning more than actual ability of the players. Then there's the "fun" aspect, i.e. people like to see big plays and super moves even if realistically, these things happen once or twice a season or game, not once or twice per drive. The frequency aspect of "sim" is often overlooked, imo.

I do think it can be done, but I think it would take a shift in how games are made and the kinds of games the football gamer community as a whole wants.

[KBLover]

Quote: Originally Posted by ianlast

If there's any sport where they should be able to nail it, it's football. Think about it. Football is essentially a scripted sport.

Yes and no.

The plays are scripted. But there's also adjustments on those plays and/or the actions the players take to achieve what the play describes and that's not always going to follow some pattern. A LT would know what the play assigns him to do, say block the RE and "bait" him upfield so the HB can come in behind it or slip out on a screen or such. But what if the RE rushes inside? What if the RE bullrushes? What if the RE drops in zone? What if the RE reads what the LT is planning (he reads a key or some tip-off), what does the LT do then?

So while the play art, so to speak, is scripted and gives players tasks, things happen on the field and the players still need to make their own decisions and sometimes things just don't go according to plan.

WR have it the same way - option routes are "scripted spontaneity" in that the WR picks the route he's running based on what he's seeing in coverage. Zones have different holes vs the same route. Which "window" does the WR sit in, or does he continue his route? Does he adjust his route - say to get the 1st down or if he sees his QB in trouble?

HB - play assigns a gap to hit, but we've all seen backs that cut back on their own, or bounce outside on their own, etc.