A Rant about Madden.......minus the bashing

[PGaither84]

To stay on the not-bashing topic. I would like to see on All-maden, and even all-pro the computer "out think" the user. The problem in the past was that you could call a play and use playmaker to flip the run with out flipping the formation and the D would flip their overload. That wouldn't be bad, but you couldn't "fake out" the computer. The computer "knew" your plays. If you called a run out of 4 wide, the computer came out in a base 4-3. If you called a formation audible into a pass to take advantage of the mismatch, the computer would audible into pass D backing peple off into coverage. If yuo then change into a play action they don't move. If you then switch to a run they came back to the line. It was MADDENing

I have played against really good sim-style players before. I know how to set up play action and fake out where the blitz is coming from. Show them on thing and bring another. I loved to call 4 wide single back formations on 3rd and 7 and call a counter toss after sending a man in motion to detect zone or man coverage and gain big yards. I loved on one third down sending a heavy weak side blitz out of the 3-3-5 Nickle and on another drive look like I was coming back to the same play [or a reverse going strong side] only to drop back into zone and send the corners as the user QB would "freak out" and scramble out of the pocket to buy time against said perceived blitz only to run into the outside blitzing corners. If they stayed in the pocket, they would have been safe. These are just a few examples of elaborate planning and having fun with Madden in years past.

My point is that at least on All-Pro and All-Madden you should have to work for your wins. There should be a separation from what plays the user calls and what the computer calls. At least in years past the computer knew your calls and every adjustment you made. You could not fool the computer on certain plays. Madden could be so much deeper than it is and i can only hope one day it will be.

There should be a feature where home field advantage matters. Taking a crowd out of a game with a big play or a huge stop. When you look at the "coach cam," players who have a lower "consistency" rating [a rating that should be in the game along with leadership, and both should improve or decrease depending on your staff and other factors. See J.J. Stokes getting worse over the years while others like Vernon Davis has a sudden change of heart. See Matt Ryan's leadership and Alex Smith's lack of it, etc.] would not have a route because the QB and he WR are not on the same page. The WR will run a random wrong route and be confused. the same should be for defenders who may drop into a hook zone when they are in man or blitz and vise versa.

Again there is so much that could be done with this game. I can only sit back and hope it will be done.

I just want a solid football game that is a challenge. If you think the game is too hard, play Pro or Rookie mode.

I can't find the video or the link, but Halo 1 for the X-Box and PC had legendary mode where the Dev tam talked about how they made the AI really smart and adapted to the player and found cover and tried to swarm you and use tactics to kill the player. Then they ******** the AI back for each difficulty level. Like the OP said, many game makers won't do this because it is a lot of hard work so they will just make a short cut and cheat the play instead of making the game truly more difficult. It's frustrating as a gamer. As a good friend of mine says, regarding Fallout 3 "Head Cripple?!? I shot you in the head with my bullet and you're still alive with Head Cripple?!? Mutants i can understand, they're mutants, but solders and random raiders? Are you serious?" When something dumb happens in a game from now on we just jokingly say "Head Cripple." Needless to say, in Madden 10 there are a nubmer of times we have made that comment.

[PGaither84]

Quote: Originally Posted by RaiderKtulu

...and if the game were to have "perfect" playcalling AI, then you'd never run into situations like, oh, a certain New England team deciding to go for it on 4th & 2 deep in their own territory while clinging to a small lead late in the 4th. Programming AI to behave like a human opponent is not an easy task. The AI calling the right play every time is just as unrealistic as the "cheating" is now.

When you have Tom Brady and that offense against Peyton Manning and your D is a shadow of what it was just two-to-four years ago you do. People like you question the call because it failed. You put the ball in Tom Brady's hands and let him win the game for you in that situation. He failed to o so. That happens. I was surprised by the use of their time outs, not the call to go for it on 4th. If you can't get two yards with that team, you shouldn't win anyway, and they didn't.

Years ago the Chiefs went for it on 4th and goal from the 1 against the Raiders when down by 3. Marty said after the game "if we couldn't go out there and get one yard, we deserved to lose. We got that one yard and we won. End of story."

I don't meant to take it out on your personally or anything, I just get sick of ignorant comments by arm chair coaches that question the calls of proven greats. Especially a FIVE time Superbowl winning coach [people, remember, he was the defensive coordinator for the NY Giants starting in 1985 and won two Superbowls in 1986 and 1990 with them and that his defensive game plan from the NYG's 20-19 upset of the Bills is now in the Hall of Fame,] and who led his team to a just short of perfect 18-1 season. So let's see, 5-1 in the Superbowl against person on the internet. I say going for it on 4th and 2 is a good call.

[hatisback]

Quote: Originally Posted by PGaither84

When you have Tom Brady and that offesne against Peyton Manning and your D is a shadow of what it was just two-to-four years ago you do. People like you question the call because it failed. You put the Ball in Tom Brady's hands and let him win the game for you in that situation. He fail to win the game. That happens. I was surprised by the use f their Time outs, not the call to go for it on 4th. If you can't get two yards with that team, you should win anyway, and they didn't. Years ago the Chiefs went for it on 4th and goal from the 1 against the Raiders when down by 3. Marty said after the game "if we couldn't go out there and get one yard, we deserved to lose. We got that one yard and we won end of story." I don't meant o take it out on your personally or anything, I just get sick of ignorant comments by arm chair coaches that question the calls of proven greats, especially a FIVE time Superbowl winning coach [people remember he was the defensive coordinator for the NY Giants starting in 1985 and won two Superbowls in 1986 and 1990 with them and that his defensive game plan from the NYG's 20-19 upset of the Bills is now in the Hall of Fame.] And who led his team to a just short of perfect 18-1 season. So let's see, 5-1 in the Superbowl against person on the internet. I say going for it on 4th and 2 is a good call.

What does this have to do with the AI?

[Tito78]

All this talk about difficulty levels has got me thinking; what if the difficulty of playing a certain team depended SOLELY on their ratings. If we want the teams to play like their real life counter parts, then how realistic is it to be able to beat a team like the Saints with a team like the Browns ?

The difficulty levels may be causing to AI to interfere in a sense; not allowing the ratings to actually do their job. It could be the reason that ratings, for the most part, are irrelevant. Players get attributes boosts on all of the levels if I'm not mistaken. The user on the lower difficulty levels, and the CPU on the higher ones. If you're boosting ratings of players to affect performance, it's going to be tough for the user to feel the difference between players.

Instead of 4 difficulty levels, how about 32 ? Make the difficulty depend on the ratings of the players on your opponent's team. If you're a beginner, trying to beat the Colts with the Redskins probably isn't going to happen without turnovers from Colts, and/or big plays on special teams by the Redskins. It should be next to impossible to win a shoot out against the Saints with the Chiefs, no matter how good you are in madden. In order the win, the Saints, whether they're controlled by a human opponent or the CPU, should have to make mistakes in order for the Chiefs to win.

Basically if you're a newbie, then you should play against teams like the Bucs, Skins, Lions, etc. with teams like the Saints, Colts or Vikings. If you're a very good madden player, you should try to beat teams like the Vikings and the Saints, with the Skins or the Lions.

This could also add depth to the franchise mode because users would have to build their team. They'd have to scout and draft well to have success; they couldn't just rely on their ability to win regardless of the team their playing with.

[PGaither84]

Quote: Originally Posted by hatisback

What does this have to do with the AI?

Did you read what/who I qouted from? He said that if there was proper AI, Madden wouldn't do that. I disagree. There needs to be far more advanced AI. I agree with the OP.

[hatisback]

Quote: Originally Posted by PGaither84

Did you read what/who I qouted from? He said that if there was proper AI, Madden wouldn't do that. I disagree. There needs to be far more advanced AI. I agree with the OP.

Okay, I misunderstood what you were saying. My bad.

Honestly, doing the AI like I suggested in the beginning could trigger calls like that, considering the following:

If you haven't stopped them on 3rd down all day, they may try to go for it on 4th and short to end the game, because they have had success.

I believe before we get that complicated though, EA should start with the AI just making the offense and defense play depending on formations, success of past plays and such. They can add in situational add ons later down the line of something that caliber.