Would you buy this game if all they worked on was gameplay?

[jcern23]

I would at this point in this series. I think that the visual aspect of this game is fine and the gameplay is the main thing that has fallen behind the past 5-7 years. I used to love EAs football games but the decline in effort in the gameplay is so evident it is just frustrating especially since Ive been purchasing for 15 years on release date. The same common sense issues they dont fix. Example... if I have a tight end or slot WR constanty getting open over the middle of the field that is a better option than my ALL American Wide Reciever I will take this game back so fast. Please if anything I hope they worked on gameplay.

[MacDiiddy]

Quote: Originally Posted by PowerofRed25

You realize you're asking a question about a situation that cannot possibly exist, right? You cannot have gameplay improvements independent of all these other things, it is not technically possible. Gameplay improvements, graphics improvements, player improvements, game mode improvements and on down the line are all tied together in the various game modes. Gameplay does not exist in a vacuum, I don't know where this fallacy of thought got started. We'd all LOVE gameplay to be vastly improved every year, but you're asking for something that just cannot exist independent of all these things you want to throw away. Interaction can't improve without updated player models, updated player models can't come without updated graphics engines, updated graphics engines come from improvements in presentation, improvements in presentation come from increased attention to the various game modes, the various game modes allow you to get on the field in the first place. None of us want a play now only game. I agree that the presentation stuff has gone overboard and I've been on here for a while asking EA for 3 or 4 different modes based on what you want. Something like broadcast (announcing, screen wipes, studio updates, etc), field (none of that, just gameplay and stadium sounds), hybrid (cutscenes, replays, etc but crowd and field mics turned up) and coach mode (press box view, no TV style presentation, light field sounds and maybe some headset chatter would be nice). But again, all of these things are dependent on improvements to all the other areas. I cannot possibly answer your question because it cannot possibly exist in the current game model. Now come next generation when everything is scrapped and they're starting over, I'm hoping gameplay is the center of the NCAA universe and everything branches out off of it.

Quote: Originally Posted by Cardot

I know that it is popular to same gameplay is the only thing that matters. But I wonder how far people are willing to take it. I define gameplay as the core on field mechanics. So things like stats, stadiums, announcers, licensed schools, logos and bowls etc are not "gameplay". If they created a game with perfect physics, perfect AI and everything on the field was great....but was like an old Atari game where you had a red team vs a blue team, I wouldn't be interested.

See I think you can put game play in a vacuum. All though i would love the most perfect of player models in order to obtain every bending of the finger and the most insane programming, I believe someone could make a game that plays amazing with Minecraft type graphics.

Although I would be happy if they worked with what the player models they have now and not go that drastic haha

To take OL-DL interaction alone (cuz that is arguably the weakest point of gameplay for a while..arguably). When the Dline fires off the ball he shoots his hands out creating seperation, aiming for the V of the neck, takes a power step to interpret what is happeing, sees it is run, pushes with the outside arm, pulls with the inside, dips, rips and replaces the man to make a play in the backfield....instead of

having the OL just stand there, or they engage, dont move off the ball and the Dline magically disengages.


^this is something that can be done with the most basic of player models or like i said the ones we had last year.

Mind-blowing programming would be involved, but that is where I think this makes an interesting idea. Get rid of all your art people for a year, replace them with programmers and get to code writing.

[Matt10]

Quote: Originally Posted by CHooe

Dead wrong. Making a video game is actually pretty damn hard, making a good video game is even harder. It's more than programming - it's design, vision, gameplay direction, art direction, art asset creation, sound design, sound direction, sound effect creation, content pipeline, QA, playtesting, and so forth. If making video games were easy, we'd all be making video games.

Blah blah - I know it's hard as hell, man. I said they get paid for it. But even if it's hard - at least make the effort to go that direction, and not bring up useless revolution focused features that honestly noone cares about.

Sometimes the guys who think it hard are the ones that are thinking about

vision, gameplay, direction, art direction art asset creation, sound design, sound direction, sound effect creation, content pipeline, QA, playtesting, and so forth

as you say...

instead of

JUST FREAKING DOING IT - and stop talking about doing it.

Because if they truly focused on all that junk - then they wouldn't even fathom the chance of something not "Making" it in the final build.

So don't give me the it's hard routine - I don't care, 90% of their consumers don't care - we just want what we want - and those 90% of consumers are the same ones who only care about the name Madden on each version and whether or not they have updated rosters so I can play with my favorite football team.

Get back to basics - don't make plans to make more plans - only to go way off base and forget about the gameplay of football - it's common sense; and I honestly don't know why so many of us have to explain what that should look like.

[Colt45]

Quote: Originally Posted by Cardot

I know that it is popular to same gameplay is the only thing that matters. But I wonder how far people are willing to take it. I define gameplay as the core on field mechanics. So things like stats, stadiums, announcers, licensed schools, logos and bowls etc are not "gameplay". If they created a game with perfect physics, perfect AI and everything on the field was great....but was like an old Atari game where you had a red team vs a blue team, I wouldn't be interested.

That's not what the question is, though. At least not how I read it. Everything non-on-field related is more than acceptable as is right now. If they did not touch anything off-field, and only fixed on-field things, this game would be so much better.

[PowerofRed25]

Quote: Originally Posted by MacDiiddy

See I think you can put game play in a vacuum. All though i would love the most perfect of player models in order to obtain every bending of the finger and the most insane programming, I believe someone could make a game that plays amazing with Minecraft type graphics. Although I would be happy if they worked with what the player models they have now and not go that drastic haha To take OL-DL interaction alone (cuz that is arguably the weakest point of gameplay for a while..arguably). When the Dline fires off the ball he shoots his hands out creating seperation, aiming for the V of the neck, takes a power step to interpret what is happeing, sees it is run, pushes with the outside arm, pulls with the inside, dips, rips and replaces the man to make a play in the backfield....instead of having the OL just stand there, or they engage, dont move off the ball and the Dline magically disengages. ^this is something that can be done with the most basic of player models or like i said the ones we had last year. Mind-blowing programming would be involved, but that is where I think this makes an interesting idea. Get rid of all your art people for a year, replace them with programmers and get to code writing.

I see what you're getting at and it does make sense. Double your efforts on one specific (and weaker) part of the game and perfect it, but it is a lot more involved than that.

I think where you run into trouble is that on the field gameplay is the last real step. You can get programmers to write all the code you want, but that's all it is, code. You need art to render and texturize the environment that code operates in. You need code to even get to your code. It is a lot more complex than just focus on gameplay when in reality, gameplay is the result of all those other things, not the cause.

All those OL/DL interactions with jostling arms and all of that have to operate together and it all has to be animated. You can't just code "Player X needs to use his hands to strike Player Y in his chest" because first, Player X has to be animated by the art department to even be able to do that.

It is just a lot more interconnected than simply focusing on gameplay. And even if it wasn't and you could leave every single thing along and focus solely on gameplay, I think you'd have a pretty annoyed customer base.

[Scrapps]

Quote: Originally Posted by CHooe

Dead wrong. Making a video game is actually pretty damn hard, making a good video game is even harder. It's more than programming - it's design, vision, gameplay direction, art direction, art asset creation, sound design, sound direction, sound effect creation, content pipeline, QA, playtesting, and so forth. If making video games were easy, we'd all be making video games.

I'm sure it is complex. But, it is also their profession. They went to school to do what they do. They get paid to do what they do. Why are Fifa and MLB the show, so good? Why was gameplay on last gen consoles superior? How can the cpu not run anything resembling the option? Why does OL/DL interaction suck so bad? These are issues that have plagued the game for years. I don't care how difficult programming is. My job can be difficult. However, if I submitted the same crap work time and time again, I'd be out of a job. Why are we making excuses for these people?

[Schwart]

Quote: Originally Posted by PowerofRed25

You realize you're asking a question about a situation that cannot possibly exist, right? You cannot have gameplay improvements independent of all these other things, it is not technically possible. Gameplay improvements, graphics improvements, player improvements, game mode improvements and on down the line are all tied together in the various game modes.

It might be hard to separate gameplay from graphics and animations, but it's not hard to separate gameplay from all the presentation fluff, and that is clearly what Mac is talking about.

[lsutygurfan]

I'm not a game designer, but I do have some common sense.

I have an overly-simplistic hypothetical that might help some of the guys that defend how hard it is to create a game.

Noone is denying that it is hard. I think alot of the complaints come when they spend HEAPS and heaps of time on useless features, and wasted space.

Hypothetical:

2006- Game Company introduces next gen NCAA football game with basic features. Game community was expecting more says, ok thanks for the effort, but gameplay needs work for next year, please work on gameplay.

2007- Game Company releases next years version. VERY similar gameplay with almost exact same way the game plays, OH, and we are introducing 2 new features that most of you wont play or rarely. Ok, game community says, we were expecting more with the year you had to work on it. Please work on gameplay, put the useless added features away, and work on gameplay.

2008- Game Company releases this years version. Almost exactly the same as the year before with two new useless features. Game community begin to wonder if Game company is even listening, then begins to get a bit more critical of Game Company. Please work on gameplay, it is the most important feature. GC responds to community, and says "sorry, we couldnt get that in this year" Game community says, ok, great...thanks we'll look for it in 2009.

2009- Game company releases this years version. Exact same gameplay as year before, minus the 2007 features, and adds 2 new useless features, and online play. Game Community says, wait, you told us in 2008 that "THIS" would be fixed added. WHere are the upgraded / enhanced gameplay features you promised lat year? Game company responds by saying, "we have got some EXCITING new features coming next year, Get Ready!!"

rinse and repat for 2010, 2011, and 2012.

The gaming community is getting tired of the same song and dance, the same exact gameplay for 7 years (going on 8). We have had our fill of heisman features and other crud they feed the community.

For all the time they spent on Heisman mode, and instead put all of that effort into, say, a Physics engine, then maybe the community wouldnt be as angry as it is. Just use some common sense.