Do we take the word "sim" too far?

[I Peench]

I'm a sim guy like most of you all, however, I sometimes think we take that definition too far. I'm sitting here watching a replay of the USC vs. PSU Rose Bowl, and have witnessed many things most of us would deem "cheese" in just watching about 10 minutes of this game. First of all, I've seen about three QB sneaks from Sanchez on 3rd and short situations nowhere near the goal line. I saw another sneak that Sanchez ran while they were up 31-7 in the 3rd quarter on 4th and 1 just inside PSU territory. I for one would be irate if I had someone run this on me given the situation.

Additionally, I would have to say a majority of throws made by both QBs that I've seen have been on the run. Lastly, I've seen a ton of screens in the little I've watched of the game. I know when people run too many slip screens or wr screens in NCAA 09 people tend to get heated...

So what do you guys think? Do we take "SIM" too far?

[MtneerManiac]

Re: Do we take the word "sim" too far?

No.

Look at NFL 2K5. How can a game almost 5 years old have better gameplay than current games? It shouldn't. Pure lazyness and bad decisions on EA's part for using a garbage engine and putting even less work in making the play even better. (Up until this year, hopefully )

[sportzbro]

Re: Do we take the word "sim" too far?

The difference is in order to do those things in NCAA it appears to be exploiting the system because it has been set up poorly in the first place. Now if the engine ran correctly, and animations were more life like I'd be fine with those types of plays. This is what I'm expecting M10 to solve..

You can't truly have a realistic football experience if the game isn't set up to play like realistic football..

[sportzbro]

Re: Do we take the word "sim" too far?

No.

Look at NFL 2K5. How can a game almost 5 years old have better gameplay than current games? It shouldn't. Pure lazyness and bad decisions on EA's part for using a garbage engine and putting even less work in making the play even better. (Up until this year, hopefully )

Dont even start the 2K5 s*** talk...

I think Peench brought up a good point.

[I Peench]

Re: Do we take the word "sim" too far?

The difference is in order to do those things in NCAA it appears to be exploiting the system because it has been set up poorly in the first place. Now if the engine ran correctly, and animations were more life like I'd be fine with those types of plays. This is what I'm expecting M10 to solve..

You can't truly have a realistic football experience if the game isn't set up to play like realistic football..

Well said.

[floridagatorfan]

Re: Do we take the word "sim" too far?

I get so annoyed when people overuse the term sim and cheese. I do not like players that go for it constantly on 4th down and chuck it deep everytime but as long as the game is designed so that I have a counter for these plays I can get over it. Problem is the past years in NCAA there hasnt necessarily been counters.

However, if someone is constantly using exploits that were not designed for use this is what I deem as cheese and a lot of the time, not necessarily here, people use the term cheese when someone is doing something stupid like chucking it deep everytime and getting lucky.

I prefer to play somewhat sim as if I am running the ball constantly and cannot be stopped, I will not throw in pass plays too to try and keep it sim, just like a coach wouldn't stop running it if the other team didnt show that they could stop it.

[Special27K]

Re: Do we take the word "sim" too far?

I would call myself a "Sim" or "Straight" player also

3rd and short you should keep it simple and probably run the ball or QB sneak if its just a yard if you're coaching an actual game. I'm completely ok with both of those things if it's say 3rd and 2 or less. I see how people can get mad about it because a QB sneak is hard, almost impossible, to stuff.

Throwing on the run is just fine with me too, as long as you don't throw across the body to the complete otherside of the field. My general rule of thumb is you run past a hash the ball should be thrown to a reciever on the same side of said hash unless you set your feet.

As for going for it on 4th in 1 up 24 points in the 4th, while in opposing territory is unsportsman like. You don't try and run up the score unless you're a snake like Spurrier or Meyer or even like Stoops last year.

You run what works whether it's screens or whatever but, typically it's out there to run the same play more than 2 or 3 times in a single drive. That means to me you can run different screens on me all you want as long as you mix them up. WR screens, HB screens, Middle screens. Besides if you pay attention on defense screens aren't terribly hard to read or bust up.

[da ThRONe]

Re: Do we take the word "sim" too far?

I remember when Tim Couch 1st came into the league and they interviewed him. He said they only ran 9-12 plays the entire season!

My problem isnt with anybody that exploit the system its with the system being able to be exploited! There is no way a CB should be able to play DE no way. Rating didnt mean **** on NCAA that is the devs. problem. You cant tell me they didnt notices that 75% or more of the ratings they had meant nothing my point is why were they there if they did nothing? And my question is what the hell are they doing if you game is that incomplete? Imagine buying a brandnew car with a cd player that doesnt really work ,seltbelts that dont work, seats with no cushion , windshield wipers that dont work. and rear and side view mirrors with the mirrors missing? At some point you gotta ask why are they on the damn car in the 1st place if they never worked to begin with!

Yet they had time for cheerleaders ,stupid endzones dances(which should be a penalty) ,and mascout games.

[da ThRONe]

Re: Do we take the word "sim" too far?

I get so annoyed when people overuse the term sim and cheese. I do not like players that go for it constantly on 4th down and chuck it deep everytime but as long as the game is designed so that I have a counter for these plays I can get over it. Problem is the past years in NCAA there hasnt necessarily been counters.

You should have to counter those plays they shouldnt work in the 1st place thats the problem!

[TrevJo]

Re: Do we take the word "sim" too far?

I'm sitting here watching a replay of the USC vs. PSU Rose Bowl, and have witnessed many things most of us would deem "cheese" in just watching about 10 minutes of this game. First of all, I've seen about three QB sneaks from Sanchez on 3rd and short situations nowhere near the goal line. I saw another sneak that Sanchez ran while they were up 31-7 in the 3rd quarter on 4th and 1 just inside PSU territory. I for one would be irate if I had someone run this on me given the situation.

I voted for "much too far". There is nothing wrong with the sneaks you described Those situations are exactly what sneaks are in the playbook for!

I hate the term "sim" as applied to play styles to begin with. To me it makes sense to describe a game as a simulation vs arcade. It doesn't make sense to call a play style "sim". I guess it's the accepted term and I just have to live with it. Maybe if most people who complained about "sim" issues had a clue about what constitues cheese and what makes sense to implement in a video game, the term wouldn't bother me as much.

[stylee]

Re: Do we take the word "sim" too far?

I remember when Tim Couch 1st came into the league and they interviewed him. He said they only ran 9-12 plays the entire season!

.

Yep...Hal Mumme/Mike Leach's Airraid is based on a few core plays repeated endlessly.

You can look at it like Paul Johnson's option attack, or June Jone's (/Mouse Davis'/Tiger Ellison's/etc.) Run and Shoot. It's systematic simplicity, with a precise set of answers to what a defense can do.

[Solidice]

Re: Do we take the word "sim" too far?

Yep...Hal Mumme/Mike Leach's Airraid is based on a few core plays repeated endlessly.

You can look at it like Paul Johnson's option attack, or June Jone's (/Mouse Davis'/Tiger Ellison's/etc.) Run and Shoot. It's systematic simplicity, with a precise set of answers to what a defense can do.

yup. Leach keeps the plays he wants to call on a small piece of paper. like this.

[UnderRatedCoast]

Re: Do we take the word "sim" too far?

I'm a sim guy like most of you all, however, I sometimes think we take that definition too far. I'm sitting here watching a replay of the USC vs. PSU Rose Bowl, and have witnessed many things most of us would deem "cheese" in just watching about 10 minutes of this game. First of all, I've seen about three QB sneaks from Sanchez on 3rd and short situations nowhere near the goal line. I saw another sneak that Sanchez ran while they were up 31-7 in the 3rd quarter on 4th and 1 just inside PSU territory. I for one would be irate if I had someone run this on me given the situation.

Additionally, I would have to say a majority of throws made by both QBs that I've seen have been on the run. Lastly, I've seen a ton of screens in the little I've watched of the game. I know when people run too many slip screens or wr screens in NCAA 09 people tend to get heated...

So what do you guys think? Do we take "SIM" too far?

Here's the difference: When a QB throws on the run it's either a called rollout and there is a blocking scheme for it, or he's being pursued out of the pocket and doesn't do it every single play. And there are ways to gameplan against this in real life using normal, functional defense. In the game you can try and have fast DEs and pick QB contain, but a smart cheezer will read this and when the DEs flair out, they can sit in the pocket all day with 5 blockers against a 2 man pass rush. The other thing is that QB accuracy takes a big hit in real life when a QB is on the run, and most QBs have a drop off in QB rating while throwing from outside the pocket. I'd bet if they could split the stats between in the pocket and out of the pocket throws in the game, outside the pocket throws would have a better rating. But there are some teams and players, like Oregon with Masoli and OSU with Pryor who give the QB one or two reads and have them take off running if nothing is open. Except in the game it happens with every fast QB and every user controlled team.

[limewirethief]

Re: Do we take the word "sim" too far?

Strong skewing of the questions where there are two yes options and only one "no" option, jackass...

[stylee]

Re: Do we take the word "sim" too far?

But there are some teams and players, like Oregon with Masoli and OSU with Pryor who give the QB one or two reads and have them take off running if nothing is open.

That's what App State does too. It's really interesting.

The play call is normal, so everyone runs routes, but they pick him a WR to look at based on what the defense is showing. If that guy isn't there, GO!