The EA football perception??

[GiantBlue76]

Quote: Originally Posted by Broncos86

Let's use the NASCAR example. An individual who gets the gist of NASCAR, but may not really understand all the ins and outs of stock car racing, will buy the game with his/her generic understanding. If a casual gamer has to handle the game at a level that an experienced NASCAR driver, he/she could become easily frustrated. The gamer understands that cars go round and round. They understand drafting, and that tires are changed one side at a time. But beyond that? Heck, I don't even know. When I play a racing game, I want to go fast and pass cars. Now, someone who is deeply passionate for NASCAR might be looking for the true experience. They have the steering wheel and the pedal. Heck, they even have the clutch. They want to handle it all. That kind of experience is going to be daunting for the casual gamer who just wants to sit down, hold down the "gas" button and pass cars. With Madden, it's no different. Not every football fan knows what an A gap or a B gap is, why the weak LB is called the Will, or what the difference is between a DT and a NT. They know that RBs run the ball, QBs throw the ball, the offensive line blocks, etc. That's a vague simplification, but THAT is the majority of gamers that buy Madden. Most have an idea of what football is, and Madden represents that to them in an adequate way. And were we not ALL accepting of that at one point? Did any of us question Madden 92 when the offensive line and defensive line essentially just ran into each other?

Very fair points made here Bronc, for sure. However, a casual gamer is not someone who is going to be wowed by Madden. It's a tough spot to be in from a business standpoint. You can dumb down and simplify the game in hopes to get NEW customers, but then you put yourself at risk of disappointing recurring customers. Or you can better appease your existing customers at the risk of not growing sales. I think Tiburon went too far in the other direction.

[Broncos86]

Quote: Originally Posted by Big FN Deal

I know this has been said, in some shape or form repeatedly but it's worth saying again. No one is asking for EA to make Madden alienate the "casual" gamer. All they want is a way, option, setting or some factory mode, that makes the game play as realistic as possible. Starting with the development cycle of Madden 10, EA has been consistently talking about a balance between realism and fun while saying things like "yeah, we could make ____ more realistic but that would take away from the pick up and play appeal of Madden". That's fine, most people understand that this is a business and there are more casual consumers than hardcore football enthusiast. However, I will never understand and have yet to see it explained, how from a business POV or a common sense one, that precludes EA from adding a "realistic" factory setting option, that's as realistic to NFL football as Tiburon can make it, in Madden. If I missed that explanation, someone please direct me to the link.

From my point of view, it simply comes down to the fact that Madden 06 - 09 was crap. The developers will never say it outright, but Ian Cummings did allude to this several years back when he mentioned getting the foundation right. What that means is that the foundation laid by Madden 09 and previous was just terrible. You had nanos galore, rocket catches everywhere, wonky QB animations, and more! It was just HORRIBLE. Boot up Madden 09, if you have it, and try to run the ball. You will get so darn upset at your blockers.

Why hasn't EA accomplished what you want? Simply put, because they need the foundation to make it happen. How can they split the game when the game itself isn't even "right" yet? They know it. They can't openly say it, that'd be a PR nightmare. But the current dev team knows that they're fixing the mistakes made by previous teams. It started with Madden 10, and we're just now starting to see some of the improvements. It's SOO much harder, as a developer, to fix than to innovate.

The issue is simply time, resources, and fixing what's broken. And it's the fixing part that is the hardest. It's one thing to build from scratch. But when you have to build around stupid mistakes that make no sense, it makes your job even harder. "Why not scrap it, then?" Because the Suits wouldn't allow that. Madden MUST launch annually, and the development team must adhere to that time frame. Thus, limited time, limited resources, and fixing inherited problems.

[bucky60]

Quote: Originally Posted by Broncos86

Thus, limited time, limited resources, and fixing inherited problems.

I believe limited time and limited resources, but that's by choice. More resource could have been added, and different releases could have been worked on in parallel. I really believe, EA see's no competition and they made a business decision to move more slowly. That's not me criticizing EA, I think that's just realistic.

I do criticize EA for making the decision of scrapping all the PS2 modes/code from this current Gen. We are paying to get modes PUT BACK INTO THE GAME.

[Broncos86]

Quote: Originally Posted by tazdevil20

Very fair points made here Bronc, for sure. However, a casual gamer is not someone who is going to be wowed by Madden. It's a tough spot to be in from a business standpoint. You can dumb down and simplify the game in hopes to get NEW customers, but then you put yourself at risk of disappointing recurring customers. Or you can better appease your existing customers at the risk of not growing sales. I think Tiburon went too far in the other direction.

I think Tiburon made some terrible Madden games from 2006 - 2009. And I think that's really biting them in the butt. But I do think they're trying to fix that. And I'm pretty sure there are a variety of aspects of Madden that drive the developers crazy, but they're not allowed to fix them (yet). For example, a casual gamer wouldn't care at all about zone coverage improvements. Heck, I'm sure they didn't even know if man coverage or zone coverage was ever broken. But it's an example that the development team does want to make Madden a better sim game. But as I said just above, it's going to take time.

Quote: Originally Posted by bucky60

I believe limited time and limited resources, but that's by choice. More resource could have been added, and different releases could have been worked on in parallel. I really believe, EA see's no competition and they made a business decision to move more slowly. That's not me criticizing EA, I think that's just realistic. I do criticize EA for making the decision of scrapping all the PS2 modes/code from this current Gen. We are paying to get modes PUT BACK INTO THE GAME.

That's a fair criticism, and it should be a criticism pointed at management that made that decision. I'm sure, somewhere down the chain of command, someone crunched numbers, looked at sales, and said "this is your team budget for the year, hire/fire within this budget."

And you're right, it sucks that we're just now getting "roles" back into the game. But, at least we're getting them. At least the current team said "wow, why aren't these in the game? Let's get them back."

[Big FN Deal]

Quote: Originally Posted by Broncos86

Let's use the NASCAR example. An individual who gets the gist of NASCAR, but may not really understand all the ins and outs of stock car racing, will buy the game with his/her generic understanding. If a casual gamer has to handle the game at a level that an experienced NASCAR driver, he/she could become easily frustrated. The gamer understands that cars go round and round. They understand drafting, and that tires are changed one side at a time. But beyond that? Heck, I don't even know. When I play a racing game, I want to go fast and pass cars. Now, someone who is deeply passionate for NASCAR might be looking for the true experience. They have the steering wheel and the pedal. Heck, they even have the clutch. They want to handle it all. That kind of experience is going to be daunting for the casual gamer who just wants to sit down, hold down the "gas" button and pass cars. With Madden, it's no different. Not every football fan knows what an A gap or a B gap is, why the weak LB is called the Will, or what the difference is between a DT and a NT. They know that RBs run the ball, QBs throw the ball, the offensive line blocks, etc. That's a vague simplification, but THAT is the majority of gamers that buy Madden. Most have an idea of what football is, and Madden represents that to them in an adequate way. And were we not ALL accepting of that at one point? Did any of us question Madden 92 when the offensive line and defensive line essentially just ran into each other?

I don't agree how this subject is often phrased as a one or the other type decision. Madden can be as realistic as possible and still be casual accessible through the use of setting options. The same way anybody can go in and turn off "out of bounds" in a basketball game can be adopted for football fundamentals represented in Madden.

There was a podcast discussion a while back where some Madden devs were discussing defensive PI and penalties in general. The devs said something to the affect of "yeah, we could look at the frequency of penalties in real NFL games and scale that into Madden but that wouldn't be fun for most people". Now, I am paraphrasing but that's the jest of it. So because "most people" wouldn't find realistic penalty frequency "fun", EA doesn't include anyway of making penalties called realistic for those that would. Ditto for things like pass trajectory, proper passing mechanics, locomotion, and player ratings.

These are the type of business decisions that have been made for Madden these past 6 years that don't seem logical.

[kjcheezhead]

Quote: Originally Posted by Big FN Deal

K_GUN, it's like you completely missed the point of my post. It is a better business decision to have a game both hardcore and casual gamers can enjoy rather than one group over the other. So from a business POV, EA not adding a realistic factory setting option to Madden, makes no sense unless they are not/were not capable of making it. The casual demographic you are referring to, could continue to have the Madden they have come to expect while offering hardcore gamers an optional factory setting for optimal realism. Win-win for both consumers and EA's bottom line.

It's not really a better business decision tho. I wish it was, trust me I do, but it isn't. Let's say for instance that EA invested the time and money to allow defensive gap assignments and tiered play calling. Would all the time/money spent on that really be noticed by your average 12-14 year old or his father? How many hardcore gamers that pass on Madden now would suddenly run to the store to pick it up because of these additions?

It's much easier and quicker to have the blocking/play calling they have now, and the investment to make it more realistic would either A) turn off casual gamers and/or B) not produce enough of a return in hardcore gamer sales to warrant it.

[Broncos86]

Quote: Originally Posted by Big FN Deal

I don't agree how this subject is often phrased as a one or the other type decision. Madden can be as realistic as possible and still be casual accessible through the use of setting options. The same way anybody can go in and turn off "out of bounds" in a basketball game can be adopted for football fundamentals represented in Madden. There was a podcast discussion a while back where some Madden devs were discussing defensive PI and penalties in general. The devs said something to the affect of "yeah, we could look at the frequency of penalties in real NFL games and scale that into Madden but that wouldn't be fun for most people". Now, I am paraphrasing but that's the jest of it. So because "most people" wouldn't find realistic penalty frequency "fun", EA doesn't include anyway of making penalties called realistic for those that would. Ditto for things like pass trajectory, proper passing mechanics, locomotion, and player ratings. These are the type of business decisions that have been made for Madden these past 6 years that don't seem logical.

Fair points. All I can say is what I've already written, regarding a sound platform to build upon. Now, you brought up what I'd consider subjective points, such as player ratings. And I think what I've written previously already covered pass trajectory, etc. I don't really want to re-type those paragraphs. Read my response to Big FN Deal.

[mestevo]

Much easier to please one group rather than try and appease both only to lose everyone. I don't think that's exactly what they're doing but that wording is best for this casual v. hardcore debate being had IMO.

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk