Madden NFL 25 Trailer - Run Free

[slick589]

Quote: Originally Posted by PVarck31

I think the "Fun Free" is a typo. Which is pretty poor proofreading if so.

Par for the course with EA!! Lol

[ncaafootball14markus]

Quote: Originally Posted by BV11

Exactly, it should look like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrSTsl7jEpY They had it right 8 years ago. 8 YEARS AGO.

wow i cant believe the graphics LOOKED THAT GOOD Back on ps2. i totally forgot. what the hell happened?!?!?!

[infemous]

"The defense also had more big hit moments (not sure if its because my thumbs are weapons) or because of the new heat-seeker control. I felt like when I had to go for risky tackles or take on blockers, I still had a chance to lunge and make a play. Lastly, don’t hurdle towards my player in Madden 25, I never go low…Or do I? #Lockup"

Anyone else read this?

http://www.maddentips.com/madden-nfl...ok-1-run-free/

Anyone else find the need for EA to equalise their overpowering of offense with CPU assistance reeks of laziness and uninspired/fundamentally flawed game design?

Defense is basically being relegated to CPU determining the outcome with hardly any skill required.

Timing a tackle will disappear, as will timing an interception... Yet the fundamentals (coverage/pursuit) that really effect these things will be ignored and glossed over... Typical.

Can't be any less excited for Madden after reading that article.

[jaymoe83]

That video just pissed me off

[CM Hooe]

Quote: Originally Posted by infemous

Defense is basically being relegated to CPU determining the outcome with hardly any skill required.

To this end, Tiburon's in a little bit of a damned-if-you-do damned-if-you-don't situation.

On one hand, there are people on this forum who want ratings to determine everything, regardless of user interaction. The in-game CPU assistance works to this end; it helps the user get a controlled player in a correct position to make play, minimizing required stick skills by reducing the opportunity for error by the user; for example, not getting enough depth in zone coverage.

On the other hand, there are comments such as this which want the game to require skill to play and minimal CPU assistance. That the game should be unforgiving to players who are poor on the field with no recourse for poor ability.

Which is best? Personally, I think the former, so long as the CPU assistance can't force a player to play better than his ratings. Based on my experience with the Defensive Assist and Ball Hawk features in Madden 13, CPU assistance doesn't give a player an unfair ratings boost; I assume any further assists will be implemented in a similar manner.

[infemous]

Quote: Originally Posted by CM Hooe

To this end, Tiburon's in a little bit of a damned-if-you-do damned-if-you-don't situation. On one hand, there are people on this forum who want ratings to determine everything, regardless of user interaction. The in-game CPU assistance works to this end; it helps the user get a controlled player in a correct position to make play, minimizing required stick skills by reducing the opportunity for error by the user; for example, not getting enough depth in zone coverage. On the other hand, there are comments such as this which want the game to require skill to play and minimal CPU assistance. That the game should be unforgiving to players who are poor on the field with no recourse for poor ability. Which is best? Personally, I think the former, so long as the CPU assistance can't force a player to play better than his ratings. Based on my experience with the Defensive Assist and Ball Hawk features in Madden 13, CPU assistance doesn't give a player an unfair ratings boost; I assume any further assists will be implemented in a similar manner.

I personally feel that ratings should affect your skill as a player to execute something.

If I have a CB who is in perfect coverage, I may be able to increase his chances of making an INT (despite 55 Catching) because I pressed the button at the right time. That is a marriage of skill and ratings. The chances of the DB not catching that ball will increase with higher catch ratings and higher catch ratings only.
The key thing in that hypothetical is the CPU's ability to recreate perfect coverage, and for the game to abide by real life physics. If my DB is 3 yards behind the WR on a streak route, there is no way that my DB should be able to jump up and CATCH the ball, regardless of his ratings. I may, if I have a physical freak like Patrick Peterson, in my attempt to make a play on the ball, deflect it slightly but that is it.

If my CB has awful coverage ratings, or a horrible combination of ratings, besides catching, he should only be of use if Tim Tebow throws a ball right to him about 7 yards away from his man.. If the CPU controls that player, the ratings should determine the likelihood of success. If I am controlling that player, his ratings should determine the likelihood of success, although they may be increased due to good timing.

With regards to tackling... I do not want my LB to be CPU controlled when I am trying to tackle a player. The Ball Hawk feature irritated me (not only because in my 32 team CCM there were numerous individual players with 18 INTs on a season and half the league's starting QBs had thrown 30+ INTs) because players, even guys like Ed Reed, would try an intercept a ball but get ridiculously flat and get burned for a huge play. Meanwhile, despite the odd play here and there, the 99 speed CB would be able to track any ball all over the field. The real ratings such as play recognition did not matter as long as Ball Hawk was activated. If a guy was slow and you used Ball Hawk, he'd get there too late.. if he was fast he was there in an instant.

Ed Reed gets to balls downfield so quickly because he reacts faster than everyone else. If he is 99 Play Recognition, he should see a throw and move on it before someone who has 70 play recognition would. If I press Ball Hawk, I need to know that Ed Reed is already on his way and I'm just usering something that has a good chance of happening anyway. Instead, its fundamentally flawed because that is never the case.

I have similar concerns with tackling. What use would it be to have an elite LB with great skills at recognition and pursuit (but may be 75 speed) when anyone could just get an 80 speed LB and use the 'heat seeker' all play long to blow plays up as quickly as possible? How can I trust that EA will implement the system fairly and accurately?

If it was left to skills, then I would know that if I wanted to make a tackle with a bad LB, I'd have to make sure he was in perfect position and hope support comes should the tackle be broken.

I think that was an unnecessary and complicated way of explaining myself so I'll try to paraphrase (excuse me its early lol)

Basically, if the game is unable to implement these features that accurately take into account the ratings and traits of a player, then why should we be forced to cede control to the CPU?

I cannot intercept a pass without being at the mercy of the CPU messing it up for me, regardless of how good the player I'm controlling is. Likewise, my opponent is at the mercy of the CPU because I can compensate for a terrible player's shortcomings with the help of the CPU.

If I have control and am responsible for the play, such as me not getting deep enough when strafing to set up the user INT, then I will feel more comfortable in giving up the 80 yard TD.
Having a great player get owned by a bum because the CPU's calculations are fundamentally flawed beyond my control is infuriating.

Implement things properly or let me be ENTIRELY responsible (with ratings affecting personal percentages for actions)

[MontagueBall]

Here we go again.......

[raidertiger]

All those animations are from madden 13. What has changed? This game looks like a joke so far.