Let's talk about player movement!
 

I want to go over something I noticed after witnessing the gameplay vids from the podcast yesterday with Rex and company.

Players are still accelerating WAY TOO QUICKLY. I timed several of those plays by counting the frames to when a play starts to when a WR on the LOS runs 10 yards downfield and several of them came in at under 1.10 seconds.

That is very unrealistic. The record time from a sprinter's stance by any NFL player at a combine or pro day for their 10 yard split is 1.40 seconds (Chris Johnson, et al.) That means that the players are accelerating a full three tenths faster from a standing position than the quickest players have tested from a sprinter's stance.

I want you all to see how much slower a player is from starting in a two point stance. Chad Johnson did this for Sports Science. They were testing to see how quickly he could "stop on a dime". It starts around the 5:30 mark.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dN3nSuvUM0Q

They had him run a 10 yard sprint and timed it at 1.80 seconds. At the combine in 2001, his best split time from a starter's stance was 1.57 seconds. Keep in mind that he is NOT wearing pads in the video above, but is in shorts and a t-shirt. The video was uploaded in 2007, so we can assume he was tested no later than 2007, meaning he should not have slowed that much in that time-span from when he was a rookie. This means that he is .23 seconds slower because of the change in his stance and the situation (possibly). This is a 14.6% decrease. If the same rate is applied to the fastest 10 yard split from a starter's stance, that means that the fastest players should get to 10 yards in only 1.605 seconds.

Given this data, feel free to discuss.

Re: Let's talk about player movement!
 

Just curious how playing on slow or very slow changes this

Re: Let's talk about player movement!
 

Like wordtobigbird said above, slow and very slow are more indicative of real life timing, anything normal and above are made faster


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: Let's talk about player movement!
 

It doesn't bother me. I would have never noticed it if not for the post. There's a point, regardless of the fact that it's 2014, where you're just looking for things to be critical of. Don't over think the game, just play it and try to have fun. How many other games do you time with a stop watch? How many Call of Duty missions do you find plausible in real life situations?

I enjoyed last years. And some of the upgrades I wanted to see in this year, and posted as such last year on here, they have been put in. So this is the most I'm looking forward to the game in a while. Probably since the first game on last gens. Fingers crossed hoping for a better outcome. Football is probably the hardest sport to sim. With each position needing it's own unique animations and moves. It took huge steps last year, and IMO, surpassed 2K's next gen offering. But it's got a way to go to eclipse The Show.

Re: Let's talk about player movement!
 

I assume the game was being played on normal speed; means it may have to be dropped to slow speed, which still is sad, because normal speed should be as close to spot on as possible, and I do not think getting speed and acceleration correct is that difficult a task.

I am very interested on seeing whatever ratings are being released on Monday; Unless internal changes have been made in regards to how ratings are calculated I expect much of the same horrors....

I just watched a CPU v CPU game, as I was doing some other chores; Raiders v. Texans...and I had forgot that I had my "Tester" roster file loaded, which has all the Raider players rated at 99 across ALL attributes...The Raiders won, but, and I should have recorded the starts, but the game was not a blow out as would be expected...

Sliders, whoever they work and the actual play called make the biggest difference....Player ratings are there for fluff....I'm gonna CPU v CPU another Raider game against the Jaguars, worst rated team, and ill post some results for the heck of it.

Re: Let's talk about player movement!
 

I was curious as to how this is currently working in Madden 25 on PS4, so I ran a test in practice mode. I'm playing as the Cowboys using DCEBB's roster re-rates, and I've set up some guys to run fly routes side-by-side in a trips formation. All-Pro difficulty, default sliders, Normal game speed, default speed threshold, etc. etc. Everything is default except the player ratings.

Also, for the hell of it, I added Steelers' rookie RB Dri Archer - the only guy in FBGratings with SPD 99, as far as I know - to the Cowboys roster and lined him up at WR.

I timed Dez Bryant (SPD 80, ACC 86) and Archer (SPD 99, ACC 92) running side-by-side and recorded that video. I then pulled the video into iTunes to edit the video stop time to the moment the player reaches the designated distance (since Apple apparently doesn't have a millisecond or frame count display in iTunes, Quicktime, or iMovie... -_-)

For purposes of this test, my timer starts the moment the receiver makes any move after my having pressed the X button to snap the ball (0.03 seconds) and ends when the receiver's shoulders breaks the line to gain (the initial ball position had the receivers' shoulders at the 50 yard line).

10-yard split from WR stance:
Archer: 1.39 seconds
Bryant: 1.44 seconds

40-yard time from WR stance:
Archer: 4.30 seconds
Bryant: 4.55 seconds

Using archived versions of the Sports Xchange website (it appears CBS Sports has now butchered the original site), which I believe is one of the sources FBGratings uses for data points to interpret into ratings, here are Archer and Bryant's times:

10-yard split
Archer: 1.47
Bryant: 1.53

40-yard time
Archer: 4.18
Bryant: 4.52

This actually strikes me as mostly reasonable, if a hair fast on the initial burst. Granted, a tenth of a second can mean a lot, but I'm not seeing sub-1.1s here by any means, even with one of the fastest players in the game on the field.

I've uploaded the video I timed to YouTube here so you all can take a look at it and potentially time it better yourself: http://youtu.be/XLYcDyz3UZQ Also feel free to rip apart how I went about doing this, perhaps there's a better way to test what DCEBB is looking for for purposes of this thread. :-)

Re: Let's talk about player movement!
 

Does Call of Duty call itself a army simulation? Madden says they are/want to be a nfl sim. So, why judge them like you would an arcade over the top game like call of duty. No one is using a stop watch with NFL blitz. If they say they want sim then that should be the standard

Re: Let's talk about player movement!
 

I am going to submit a few things in regards to your findings, so bear with me as I list them out:

1. Archer was officially timed at 1.47, 2.34, 4.16. Bryant was timed at 1.53, 2.51, 4.52. Just want to make sure we get this straight.

2. NFLDS' old site is still fully functional.
http://www.nfldraftscout.com/members/index.php

3. I LOVE your video test. THAT is the type of research we need around here! Verifiable data and evidence!

4. The biggest point of the post was that if Chad Johnson was 14.6% slower from a 2-point stance, shouldn't all of the players be? Shouldn't that 1.47 that Archer cleared in the first 10 yards be more like 1.68?

5. I counted the frames of your video to get the actual times. Since both receivers started where their waistlines are right on the 50 yard line, this is the point of reference. The frame rate is 29 FPS. Here are the results:

<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="212"><colgroup><col style="width:48pt" span="2" width="64"> <col style="mso-width-source:userset;mso-width-alt:3072;width:63pt" width="84"> </colgroup><tbody><tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td style="height:15.0pt;width:48pt" height="20" width="64">Archer</td> <td style="width:48pt" width="64">
</td> <td class="xl63" style="width:63pt" width="84">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td style="height:15.0pt" height="20">Frames</td> <td>Yds</td> <td class="xl63">Seconds</td> </tr> <tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td style="height:15.0pt" align="right" height="20">0</td> <td align="right">0</td> <td class="xl63" align="right">0.00</td> </tr> <tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td style="height:15.0pt" align="right" height="20">26</td> <td align="right">5</td> <td class="xl63" align="right">0.90</td> </tr> <tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td style="height:15.0pt" align="right" height="20">42</td> <td align="right">10</td> <td class="xl63" align="right">1.45</td> </tr> <tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td style="height:15.0pt" align="right" height="20">58</td> <td align="right">15</td> <td class="xl63" align="right">2.00</td> </tr> <tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td style="height:15.0pt" align="right" height="20">73</td> <td align="right">20</td> <td class="xl63" align="right">2.52</td> </tr> <tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td style="height:15.0pt" align="right" height="20">87</td> <td align="right">25</td> <td class="xl63" align="right">3.00</td> </tr> <tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td style="height:15.0pt" align="right" height="20">101</td> <td align="right">30</td> <td class="xl63" align="right">3.48</td> </tr> <tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td style="height:15.0pt" align="right" height="20">116</td> <td align="right">35</td> <td class="xl63" align="right">4.00</td> </tr> <tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td style="height:15.0pt" align="right" height="20">129</td> <td align="right">40</td> <td class="xl63" align="right">4.45</td> </tr> </tbody></table>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="212"><colgroup><col style="width:48pt" span="2" width="64"> <col style="mso-width-source:userset;mso-width-alt:3072;width:63pt" width="84"> </colgroup><tbody><tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td style="height:15.0pt;width:48pt" height="20" width="64">Bryant</td> <td style="width:48pt" width="64">
</td> <td class="xl65" style="width:63pt" width="84">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td style="height:15.0pt" height="20">Frames</td> <td>Yds</td> <td class="xl65">Seconds</td> </tr> <tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td style="height:15.0pt" align="right" height="20">0</td> <td align="right">0</td> <td class="xl65" align="right">0.00</td> </tr> <tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td style="height:15.0pt" align="right" height="20">26</td> <td align="right">5</td> <td class="xl65" align="right">0.90</td> </tr> <tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td style="height:15.0pt" align="right" height="20">44</td> <td align="right">10</td> <td class="xl65" align="right">1.52</td> </tr> <tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td style="height:15.0pt" align="right" height="20">61</td> <td align="right">15</td> <td class="xl65" align="right">2.10</td> </tr> <tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td style="height:15.0pt" align="right" height="20">77</td> <td align="right">20</td> <td class="xl65" align="right">2.66</td> </tr> <tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td style="height:15.0pt" align="right" height="20">92</td> <td align="right">25</td> <td class="xl65" align="right">3.17</td> </tr> <tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td style="height:15.0pt" align="right" height="20">107</td> <td align="right">30</td> <td class="xl65" align="right">3.69</td> </tr> <tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td style="height:15.0pt" align="right" height="20">122</td> <td align="right">35</td> <td class="xl65" align="right">4.21</td> </tr> <tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td style="height:15.0pt" align="right" height="20">137</td> <td align="right">40</td> <td class="xl65" align="right">4.72</td> </tr> </tbody></table>



I must say I was completely surprised by this. Players were accelerating pretty close to what they ran at the 10 yard mark, but were not as fast over the long haul. Keep in mind about the 14.6% slower from the OP, though. Perhaps the over-acceleration is tied into the ratings more than I originally thought. If that is the case, the FBG ratings, at least when it comes to ACC, seems to be pretty realistic in the splits, not considering the hypothetical slower times from being in a 2 point stance. I wonder why type of tweaking I can do to get the split times as accurate as possible by adjusting the SPD and ACC ratings. I may be able to actually get the players' real 40 times into the game with this information!

Thank you again CM Hope - expect a PM from me sometime soon about this.