How Close are we to a COMPLETELY NEW Madden ENGINE?

[Exonerated]

Quote: Originally Posted by bxgoods

Your not getting a new engine this generation, we're probably 2 Maddens away from the XBOX 720 or Playstation 4 coming out. It makes no sense to make a new engine now.

More like 5 years way. They just released the Move what, yesterday?

[Only1LT]

Quote: Originally Posted by Exonerated

doesn't need a new engine.

Does need new engines lol.

[Hova57]

There will more likely be a new 360 before playstation. Sony already sent a firmware through to read 3-d games , i think sony is going to get the most out of this system especially because of the rough start. i think we'll be closer to 2016-2020 before we get another system from sony

[Exonerated]

i hope madden gets Move support.

They need to shift development onto PS3.

PS3 madden sales are set to eclipse 360 madden sales next year. 2 years at the latest.

[guaps]

Quote: Originally Posted by Exonerated

i hope madden gets Move support.

If they can apply support for a motion-controlled user interface on top of the foundations of the game, I'm all for it. If they try to incorporate it in the game, I'm very skeptical and would rather see them not attempt (they don't have a strong history of introducing new features without messing something up). Personally, however, I would still use the old controller system.

[LiquorLogic]

Quote: Originally Posted by REDRZA

I think with Madden they are in a weird predicament. I don't know if they are afraid to change the formula, or it's that they spent all that money for the NFL license limiting development funding, or the fact they have no competition. All i know is the game will never change unless it stops selling. It's just a shame that NHL fans, FIFA fans, MLB (The show) fans, NBA (2K) fans ALL get VERY solid representations of their favorite sports, and we get essentially the same game each and every year.

They're not afraid to change the formula. The formula has, and has had for years, some serious flaws. They're aware of these flaws. I believe that EA is unwilling to change, meaning they're unwilling to spend the money to change, the formula. They're already locked into the deal with the NFL. They've paid what, a half a billion dollars( or more) for the NFL license ? If you factor in the ESPN, Arena league and the NCAA license, EA has easily invested a billion dollars in exclusive licenses. That was basically the business model for this generation of systems, and they have no choice to stick with it until the deals are up. They're not going to invest more money in a new engine or make any significant changes or additions to the development team.

The good thing is that it seems as if EA is getting away from this type of approach. It hasn't really increased their sales, so what's the point of spending all this money to freeze out the competition ? It's cheaper, and more profitable, to simply compete.

[Pared]

FYI:

A new "engine" isn't always needed. People said the same thing about 2k bball and now look at them.

They just need to keep hacking away and cleaning up what they can every year.

[adembroski]

Quote: Originally Posted by Only1LT

1- I disagree that the "piecemeal" redesign process is happening. People need to get this notion that Locomotion is some innovation out of their heads. Madden is 11 is not the first Football game to have a locomotion engine. Hell, it's not even the first Madden to have one. If anything, I think that this is another example of an old feature, returning, finally. I understand if people disagree.

I never said it was "innovative". Innovation isn't necessary, function is. Locomotion is a functional representation of player movement, where as the previous system was pure video game.

I don't see how whether a feature is a 'returning feature' or a 'new innovation' is relevant to the question at hand.

Quote:

2- I somewhat agree that cursor based hitting in a Baseball game is videogamey, but a batter DOES aim at the ball to contact it. I prefer zone swing mechanics myself, but there are those that just want it to be a timed swing and nothing else. I would rather cursor based hitting than that.

Kinda sorta. A batter doesn't think "the ball is going to cross the plate 4 inches, 45 degrees from the low outside corner" and then swing the bat at that point. Rather, while he does have to have a relative idea where the ball is going to make contact, it's mostly hand-eye coordination than a conscious 'aim'. A natural swing is going to go where you are looking. It's just how human mechanics work.

I despise cursor systems for this reason. Quarterbacks don't "aim" their throws. Again, location of a throw is a natural function of technique and hand-eye coordination. Look at the spot you want the ball to go too and let your mechanics get it there. It isn't a conscious thought process, and to take away the instinctive, reflexive aspect of passing (or hitting) by introducing cursors is not representative of the sport.

Quote:

As far as it relates to Football, there is just no two ways about it. There is no way that anyone can make a reasonable case that the current Madden Passing mechanic is all that realistic. I'm sorry, "on rails" passing, which is what we have in Madden, is about as unrealistic, non-immersive, and unimaginative as it gets.

The only way I can see to significantly improve on it is to make it more route-and-timing based rather than simply reacting to where the receiver is going. Having played QB, after so many repetitions, it becomes instinctive. You don't "aim" passes.

Quote:

3- There is plenty wrong with Backbreaker, but as I've said many times, this was the first attempt by a company that has no where the resources of Tiburon, is not an American company and knows little about Football (this is a fact because I am on their official forums where they have dev interaction) and are far more concerned with showing that their tech is amazing for a Football game in particular, and all games in general, than they are with making a killer Football game themselves.

I'm not saying Backbreaker didn't accomplish its mission, I'm saying that the tech is only better than what Madden has in the visual department. It looks better. That's it. Otherwise, it is not as functional a representation as Madden. Madden looks canned, but a much greater variety of results of contact occur in Madden. Broken tackles, extended tackles, branching broken tackles, etc.. No, it's not nearly as visually enticing, but it's much more tactically realistic.

It's like comparing Madden to a text-sim of football. Sure, a dot on a plain green background doesn't look as realistic as Madden, but the variety of outcomes means in the end, it's more tactically realistic.

Quote:

Now what does that all mean? On the whole, Madden gets more things right than Backbreaker from a Football perspective, but is this really a surprise given all that I just said previously? The fact of the matter is that there is plenty wrong with Madden too, and what should really be taken away from Natural Motion's attempt is that there are still new ideas out there in terms of videogame Football. I enjoy Backbreaker more than I do Madden 11 at the moment, but I would be hard pressed to tell you that it is some ultimate Football simulator either, that everyone should copy. What I would say is that just because Backbreaker fails in many areas of execution, doesn't mean that there is NOTHING in that package that could benefit Madden. The biggest thing that the devs at Tiburon should take from that game is the realization that there ARE still new ideas waiting to happen. It would behoove them to create some of ther own, if not take inspiration from others. And yes, inspiration CAN come from even a "failed" attempt, which is what many people see Backbreaker as.

And what I'm saying is, from a sim-oriented person (which doens't apply to everyone) its more important to me that the game be tactically sound as a representation of football than it does look like football. Flawed animations don't bother me as much as great animations that allow no variety in result. Frank Gore does not go down because someone's hand brushed his cleats.

Is Madden a great representation of NFL football? No, not yet, but it's a lot closer even in the tackling department than BackBreaker. And what Locomotion and Real Assignment AI illustrate is that A.) The team in place is capable and B.) The team in place is willing.

Neither are, by definition, "innovative", but they are functional and the best representation of what they seek to emulate on the market today.

Quote:

4- I hope you aren't insinuating that ratings in Madden matter lol. There may be a ton of them, and they may be broken up into categories that make perfect sense and that should be conducive to having the best rating system, but in practice (and on YouTube lol) we see this to largely not be the case.

They do matter, quite a bit, though not to the extent that we'd all like to see. When you spend as much time on sliders as I have, you can see the differences. The fact remains that the differences are too subtle, I agree, and that needs correction.

Quote:

5- Run Blocking is improved in 11, but not fixed by a long shot. I also don't feel comfortable calling run blocking logic an innovation, and the fact that it took them well over 20yrs to get it some what right, doesn't engender the same amount of confidence in Madden's future, for me, that it does in you.

I never called it an innovation. It isn't "innovative", it's logical. Its the right step. Maybe it should have been done 15 years ago. It wasn't. Now it has been. Why does it matter when? This team took over just prior to the release of Madden 09 and in 2 years have left what the previous team, who ran things for 4 years, in the dust. It "isn't there yet", but did you really expect a 1 year turnaround? It took FIFA 3 years, it took NHL 3 years... and those two games didn't have the following Madden does when they began their adjustments.

I would venture to say that nothing NHL or FIFA have done are particularly innovative. Rather, they're common sense fundamentally sound changes that made the games more realistic and, by extension, more fun.

Quote:

Lastly, other than the lighting, I don't see why people think NCAA is so much better than Madden. Not saying that they are exactly the same, but to say that they are not the same would be splitting hairs. If NCAA is the shining hope for future EA Football... I won't even finish that sentence.

Well, the reason I think NCAA is "so much better" is because it's better tuned. On the surface, it's the same game. The underlying odds and ends make it far better. Its tactically sound, for the most part. The ratings do matter, far more than in Madden. Maybe if you look no deeper than the stats of a given game, I can see not feeling that, but taking the time to study your roster and observe their performance makes it quite clear that the ratings don't just matter, they're downright critical in NCAA.