Fact or Fiction: NCAA Football 12 Outlook

[ChaseB]

Quote: Originally Posted by khaliib

Write-ups like this has really shed a light on how differ's in opinion and expression on OS has changed drastically from how things were done several years ago. If your going to bring Jayson's comments up, only to break down his perspective to justify yours, at least give him the opportunity to refute your argument agaist his comments in this write-up. Kind of Garbage to gang/team up against his write-up as though his statements were off base. To me, a good write-up will have the views of both sides to contrast both levels of thinking instead of what seems to be a subtle attempt to attack a Majority of OS'rs that seemed to agree with Jayson write-up. I get that some staff don't want to Rock-the-Boat with EA Developement Team, but be fair and allow the other side of the coin to be seen in this type of write-up. Would've been nice instead of going this route, you could've did a write-up about the negatives expressed by "YOUR" community and the Ideas/Fixes that this community has Tested to be viable remedies to some of those negatives. Gloating over "Some" of the positive things that the game has done, does not change the "Fact" that this game is not were it should be in 2012, period. My facts to support this claim comes from this... **The number of people that will need to Adjust Sliders/Tweak Player Ratings to improve out-of-the-box Gameplay in the same yearly noted areas. I agree that there are postives as you've noted, and I personally will enjoy those positive aspects of the game in some fashion. But I will/can not praise this write-up as "Good", because of the "One-Sided" perspective in which it was written.

I don't think having a different opinion should be considered ganging up on him, plus we just had Jayson's comments (and many others) in the roundtable the other day. Jayson probably would have been involved with this fact or fiction as well, but he's working on the review for the new Backbreaker game.

There's not some sinister underlying motive here. If you don't agree with where the franchise is at this point, it's fine, but just keep it to that then -- don't try to make it out like someone is saying you can't have a particular opinion. Neither writer came at Jayson like he's stupid for having that opinion. Personally, I tend to side more with Jayson on the gameplay front and understand where he's coming from when comparing the technological side of the gameplay to other sports franchises -- I would agree NCAA is not up to snuff in that department. However, Christian and Dustin take the entirety of the game into consideration more than I do.

[splff3000]

Quote: Originally Posted by rudyjuly2

Well I disagree with you guys and I'm not a 2K fanboy that yearns for 2K5 to be renewed. I've been a long time NCAA guy and the demo did not feel that different to me from NCAA 11. I certainly expect NCAA 12 to be better but is it that much better to be called NCAA 12 rather than NCAA 11.5? Not in my mind. The cpu spread is still weak, I still see super leaping LBs, I still see a real lack of player momentum where the players are clearly video game players whose movements do not reflect reality. They ruined the r-stick juke move after ruining the truck move last year and the stiff arm hasn't really existed on the PS3. The only special RB move we have left is the unrealistic spin move. I don't think the new tackling/collision system is that much different. It's not revolutionary in any way. We still don't have a true physics engine. The OL/DL interaction is still a very black and white affair with way too many pancakes. The upgraded presentation with game track and entrances is nice but that is offset but the very stale commentary. To talk about the positives zone defences are better. I've read that cpu scrambles more in the retail version. I can only hope that the cpu can run the spread offence properly since it's such a huge part of college football. The super jumping LB is toned down but still exists. NCAA 11 was a good game and NCAA 12 is a more refined version of that but I don't see any revolutionary changes. To be fair I think you can say that for almost any sports game year to year. For this game to become a monster of success I believe we need new commentary, a smarter cpu that actually plays like a human, and a true physics engine with realistic player movement. Just my two cents. I will be buying this game day one and I expect to have fun with my Michigan dynasty. I also expect to stop playing it once college football season is over as I don't think the game will be good enough to carry it year round.

I agree 100% with this post. I loved NCAA 11, so being NCAA 11.5 doesn't mean it's bad. I've only played the demo, but just judging from the demo, I would agree that this feels like NCAA 11.5. The same plays that seemed like they were unstoppable in 11 are the same in this demo. I picked up the game and instantly started scoring and doing the same things I had been able to do in 11. On the flipside, it usually takes me about 5 or 6 games to get used to the "feel" of the new game. Now, the same thing may happen when the retail version is released, but right now that's my take. Like the quoted poster said, being NCAA 11.5 isn't a bad thing and I will definitely be getting the game. I just don't feel enough was done to call it NCAA 12.

[Eski33]

Nice write up but comparing a demo to a full retail release (NCAA 11) is somewhat slanted.

Yes, comparing gameplay maybe but where the NCAA series shines is with its dynasty modes especially online. I could care less if the game looks marginally better or the commentary is stale, the gameplay is fun and the online dynasty keeps many busy for months. I dont know how many forums and articles I have read, including this one, where people mentioned that they played NCAA 11 for months. With the improvements to RTG and a new TeamBuilder, along with the fantastic OD, NCAA 12 will hold its own.

The discussion of commentary gets a little old. I know it is part of the presentation package but no matter what game you play the commentary gets repetitive. Not to mention that NCAA 11 commentary was so so and people played the hell out of it.

[roadman]

Quote: Originally Posted by splff3000

I agree 100% with this post. I loved NCAA 11, so being NCAA 11.5 doesn't mean it's bad. I've only played the demo, but just judging from the demo, I would agree that this feels like NCAA 11.5. The same plays that seemed like they were unstoppable in 11 are the same in this demo. I picked up the game and instantly started scoring and doing the same things I had been able to do in 11. On the flipside, it usually takes me about 5 or 6 games to get used to the "feel" of the new game. Now, the same thing may happen when the retail version is released, but right now that's my take. Like the quoted poster said, being NCAA 11.5 isn't a bad thing and I will definitely be getting the game. I just don't feel enough was done to call it NCAA 12.

Question for you?

How can you evaluate NCAA 11 vs 12 with all the patches and tuner sets vs not having the game yet?

I don't think it's a fair evaluation at this point? I think a more fairer evaluation will be when all the tuning and patches are released for 12 vs 11.

That's my take, that's why I can't justify with a demo build(someone said it was a build before the E3 build)vs the full game build. To me, it's similar comparing apples to oranges.

[demon19000]

Quote: Originally Posted by ChaseB

I don't think having a different opinion should be considered ganging up on him, plus we just had Jayson's comments (and many others) in the roundtable the other day. Jayson probably would have been involved with this fact or fiction as well, but he's working on the review for the new Backbreaker game. There's not some sinister underlying motive here. If you don't agree with where the franchise is at this point, it's fine, but just keep it to that then -- don't try to make it out like someone is saying you can't have a particular opinion. Neither writer came at Jayson like he's stupid for having that opinion. Personally, I tend to side more with Jayson on the gameplay front and understand where he's coming from when comparing the technological side of the gameplay to other sports franchises -- I would agree NCAA is not up to snuff in that department. However, Christian and Dustin take the entirety of the game into consideration more than I do.

Thank you. I'm sick of the accusations of "sheep" or "EA is just pumping you money!" I loved the demo and think NCAA 12 will be great. That's my opinion, not a fact. I feel like sometimes we should hand out crosses to some (not all) of these people.

Anyways, good write up. Actually expressed many opinions that I had.

[splff3000]

Quote: Originally Posted by roadman

Question for you? How can you evaluate NCAA 11 vs 12 with all the patches and tuner sets vs not having the game yet? I don't think it's a fair evaluation at this point? I think a more fairer evaluation will be when all the tuning and patches are released for 12 vs 11. That's my take, that's why I can't justify with a demo build(someone said it was a build before the E3 build)vs the full game build. To me, it's similar comparing apples to oranges.

Well I wouldn't say it's comparing apples to oranges. It's more like comparing red apples to green apples lol, but you're right. That's why I said things may change once the retail version is released. Anyway, they're comparing a demo to retail in the article so that's why I was doing it.

So question for you:

Why is it ok for them to compare the demo to 11, but not for me?

EDIT: I never responded about the article itself. I thought the article SEEMED a bit bias, but I liked it. It would have been nice to have another person up there that wasn't as excited about 12, but the article was ok as it was. I understand how some people can be excited for 12 depending on what their expectations for 12 were.

[Eski33]

Quote: Originally Posted by BenGerman

I'm not sure what you're implying. My point was was that we have seen other games plug in multiple networks into their game. The same could be done in NCAA, and they (Tiburon) have even admitted to looking into it in the future. Its definitely no gamebreaker, as I already said I have ways of working around the stale commentary. But it is something that would certainly add to the presentation and variety of a Dynasty mode. And by the way, ABC and ESPN have a partnership so I can't imagine it would be terribly difficult to get ABC in. CBS was in NCAA Basketball 10, so thats certainly possible as well.

What other games, there has only been one. I would love to see multiple commentary teams but let's be realistic. Brad Nessler and Kirk Herbstreit arent doing this for free. Throw inone or two more commentary teams and there is additional cost.

[splff3000]

Quote: Originally Posted by Eski33

I would love to see multiple commentary teams but let's be realistic. Brad Nessler and Kirk Herbstreit arent doing this for free.

Judging by how long the commentary has been virtually unchanged, I'd say Brad Nessler and Kirk herbstreit aren't doing anything as far as the commentary goes lol.

I'm sure EA could add one or 2 generic teams just to change things up every once in a while. Hell, me and a couple of my boys would do it for free lol. They could then have Brad and Kirk doing the big games and bowl games and it wouldn't get so repetitive.