The more videos I watch, the less I seem to see the impact of the Infinity engine

[roadman]

Quote: Originally Posted by kjcheezhead

This reminds me of when Madden 10 came out and people realised protak wasn't very good. EA fans would chastize the critics with a "you guys wanted consectutive hit tackles and EA gave us pro-tak. They are moving in the right direction at least". So let's look at your examples. It plays out a lot like Protak if you ask me. You mention the new pass mechanics. However, the NCAA vids show some pretty serious route manipulation at times. The game has physics but it's centered around the ball carrier/wrs for the most part. Seems like it would be great for chip blocks and finally rid us of the engage/disengage blocking system Madden has had since 2000. Again EA didn't go far enough in my opinion. The new online franchise is a huge improvement over previous years but it's came at the cost of offline features that are very important to some guys. I totally understand some guys displeasure here. My point is each and every addition put into Madden 13 that OS screamed for hasn't quite had the affect some of us were hoping for or comes at the cost of something else. Going off the E3 vids at least.

Point taken, but people didn't realize about Pro-tak until the game was in their hands. I have NCAA and I enjoy the pass trajectories and animations a lot. I'm not alone in this feeling,either.

Maybe others will hate the new pass trajectories and new animations as much as they hated pro-tak if they go into it feeling like that.

Just saying we should all wait the experience on our own vs E3 vids. Sage admitted the demo and E3 vids didn't do any justice for him, but the game did.

[roadman]

[quote=KBLover;2043906818.

But if they had addressed the player behavior of the OL/DL, I might not be having any "internal conflict" about this game. But knowing it's just going to be the same thing - maybe I just wait until M14 and see then.[/QUOTE]

Since the physics engine wasn't started till January, I doubt they had any time for OL/DL. Not excusing.

[juggalotusx]

Isnt the new engine just overlapping the old one?Plus they said they have been working on it for a few years now, my guess this is why 11 and 12 lacked alot. There are many issues with the madden series that have been there for years and each year gets over looked for the next big thing when maybe if they fixed the stuff in the first place we wouldnt need the next big thing, thats all I mean.I like were its heading just wish they would take the time to make it right. Last note the beta has done for along time now atleast 4 months to polish up the game. I think that is enough time to fix some things, go that extra mile for the fans who give EA millions of dollars a year for a game..

[Broncos86]

Quote: Originally Posted by KBLover

Because half the problem is the player behavior. All the physics out there won't make the player run his arc and use leverage if the player AI doesn't have him behave that way. The physics make it play out better/more realistically, but it doesn't create the mentality of the player. That's always my thing when physics gets brought up because it doesn't address the goal/logic of each player on each play. It just makes their existing logic play out more realistically. If the player behavior/logic is the problem... I can wait until next year too - might be when I buy the game. But if they had addressed the player behavior of the OL/DL, I might not be having any "internal conflict" about this game. But knowing it's just going to be the same thing - maybe I just wait until M14 and see then.

I personally think player behavior is limited by what the engine allows. A more diverse engine will allow better behavior tuning. 3-4 doesn't work right, solely due to what's possible. New physics= more realistic 3-4 behavior possible.

[Tyrant8RDFL]

Quote: Originally Posted by D_Fos

They put gamers 1st, I would love to see Sony have the NFL license. Its not bc the grass is always greener on the otherside but bc the proof is in the pudding.

The only thing we need to realize is that even if Sony was to get the NFL license it does not guarantee anything.

The guys who pour there heart and soul in MLB the show, would not be the same guys working on the NFL game. Its only going to matter if they use the right foundation for the game, and the right personal.

Sony use to do NBA games , and they all sucked.

[Sef0r]

Quote: Originally Posted by roadman

This OS forum has been screaming for a physics engine and they are implementing that this year.

Quote: Originally Posted by roadman

(And yes, before anyone who is reading this doesn't think I know we've been screaming about other things, ie momentum, ol/dl, penalties, etc.... I'm well aware of that, too.) All of us want a realistic NFL playing game.

Contradiction.

Unfortunately I've been playing too many so called improved versions of Madden and been disappointed that I just wait until the NFL decides to allow another developer to make an NFL game.

[KBLover]

Quote: Originally Posted by Broncos86

I personally think player behavior is limited by what the engine allows. A more diverse engine will allow better behavior tuning. 3-4 doesn't work right, solely due to what's possible. New physics= more realistic 3-4 behavior possible.

Double-teaming existing already in the M12 engine. The difference is DL isn't even give that "random double team" and/or they didn't put it in for pass protection too. They could have put in "double team 75% time of the defense is in a 3-man front". It would be just more random die-roll game play, but, from what it looks like, that's how it is when the OL double-teams on run plays.

Is that ideal? No, but would it at least occupy blockers and free up gaps? Yes, it would.

Do we need a new engine to tell 4-3 DE to get upfield? Can't players run upfield now? (of course they can) I don't think we really needed Infinity to stop the clipping - just respect hit boxes at all times - I mean, that's how collisions were detected all this time before.

Again, not ideal and I'm all for a new, better way to do it. I just don't think this better way was required to get more player logic in the game. If players can move and interact, they can be given logic to change how they move and interact. This is a ridiculous example, but if the game looked like and used the same engine Galaga on the arcade - the players could curve out and then come in. The OL could curve in towards the QB. The G could just not be "allowed" to leave their spots while the T battled the DE. Heck, the scorpion-like monster had double-team "blocking" protecting it as it swooped in to attack sometimes.

Surely, the M12 engine is more refined than Galaga's 1980-something engine. So I think it's already possible.

Physics makes the movement and interaction look, feel, and resolve much better, but physics + same logic = good looking bad execution, imo. Better logic + no physics = bad looking/not optimally achieved good execution, imo.

Obviously, I want both. But if I must choose, I'd take the latter, though I realize I am likely the crazy guy in the corner again.

I think the player behavior is solely a logic issue. Behavior resolution (i.e. the result of whatever the players tried to do) is definitely helped by physics and even what pieces exists of the Infinity Engine. Clipping dying alone is great.

I just don't think we needed physics to stop a lot of the whack stuff we've seen. I mean - we needed physics to have the MLB not run around the OL to try to get to the ball carrier? Or to stop the warping/sliding?

Other games somehow avoided this without physics. Not just 2K, but FBPro, Tecmo Bowl, etc.

[Broncos86]

Quote: Originally Posted by KBLover

Double-teaming existing already in the M12 engine. The difference is DL isn't even give that "random double team" and/or they didn't put it in for pass protection too. They could have put in "double team 75% time of the defense is in a 3-man front". It would be just more random die-roll game play, but, from what it looks like, that's how it is when the OL double-teams on run plays. Is that ideal? No, but would it at least occupy blockers and free up gaps? Yes, it would. Do we need a new engine to tell 4-3 DE to get upfield? Can't players run upfield now? (of course they can) I don't think we really needed Infinity to stop the clipping - just respect hit boxes at all times - I mean, that's how collisions were detected all this time before. Again, not ideal and I'm all for a new, better way to do it. I just don't think this better way was required to get more player logic in the game. If players can move and interact, they can be given logic to change how they move and interact. This is a ridiculous example, but if the game looked like and used the same engine Galaga on the arcade - the players could curve out and then come in. The OL could curve in towards the QB. The G could just not be "allowed" to leave their spots while the T battled the DE. Heck, the scorpion-like monster had double-team "blocking" protecting it as it swooped in to attack sometimes. Surely, the M12 engine is more refined than Galaga's 1980-something engine. So I think it's already possible. Physics makes the movement and interaction look, feel, and resolve much better, but physics + same logic = good looking bad execution, imo. Better logic + no physics = bad looking/not optimally achieved good execution, imo. Obviously, I want both. But if I must choose, I'd take the latter, though I realize I am likely the crazy guy in the corner again. I think the player behavior is solely a logic issue. Behavior resolution (i.e. the result of whatever the players tried to do) is definitely helped by physics and even what pieces exists of the Infinity Engine. Clipping dying alone is great. I just don't think we needed physics to stop a lot of the whack stuff we've seen. I mean - we needed physics to have the MLB not run around the OL to try to get to the ball carrier? Or to stop the warping/sliding? Other games somehow avoided this without physics. Not just 2K, but FBPro, Tecmo Bowl, etc.

But again, I'm also arguing development time. I'm not just talking about what's possible, I'm talking about the time needed to prioritize those fixes. If a band aid to line play takes up time that would've been spent elsewhere, then I'll deal with the shoddy line play for one more year.