[Bama83]

Quote: Originally Posted by ODogg

Oh and one other thing, for all you people saying "who cares about dreads", were you also the same people who thought it was just fine when all the players wore #88 on the field and were white? Were you also cool with there being no commentary and just beeps and boops because after all, commentary doesn't affect game play.

Yes, as I matter of fact I wouldn't really care. (Partly because when I was in the game, I was #83 and a white guy ... 83 looked pretty close to 88 on my ancient CRT. So I was happy).

Seriously though, think of the process as a reverse onion. The core of the onion is the gameplay and engine. From there, you can layer on details until you have a massive freaking onion, but you can't do it the other way starting with nice, shiny graphics and work in.

So, for me, until they fix the gameplay, I'd be fine with a bunch of stick figures on the screen with generic 16-bit sound. Once they get the gameplay mechanics and AI schemes right, then layer on the graphics, sounds, commentary, etc.

Quote:

And for those of you crying about how dreads and long hair "took away from fixing the real issues", news flash for you - THE ART TEAM DOES NOT WORK ON GAME PLAY ISSUES!!!!!!!!!!. EA has come in here and said it time and time again but you people either bury your heads in the and and keep up with your ridiculous arguments or else you simply only poke your heads in here to whine and moan about some new flaw you found.

Yawn, and people that buy that nonsense are the same simpletons that don't understand budgets and constraints.

Fundamentally that statement is correct. In application, it's incorrect and downright misleading.

Projects are managed on a resource basis. The resources in this scenario aren't people, but cash and time. The project department will allocate a certain amount of money for the project and give a deliverable date.

So, while the the graphics team doesn't work on the core engine and vice versa - the dollars to pay for each one come from the same pool.

If we simplified the project to a simple spend equation based on funding two departments from the pool of funds we would see:
[$POOL] = [$GRAPHICS] + [$GAMEPLAY]

What does this tell you? It tells you that the amount you can spend on gameplay is directly impacted by the spend on graphics. The proof is done using ridiculously basic algebra:
[$GAMEPLAY] = [$POOL] - [$GRAPHICS]

So, while the teams may not be cross-functional - the resources spent on the project are defined and are the constraint that dictates the amount of attention the rest of the project gets.

Go ahead and bold it, capitalize it and put a dozen exclamation points next to it if it makes you happy - it only shows how ignorant you are of the budgeting process (albeit that lack of understanding might make you a sure-fire winner in congressional elections).

Quote:

Also, for those of you who seem indifferent, I think you'll see when you get the game just how much it can really serve to make the game look less like a clone factory, as it does now, and more like a real NCAA game.

As was stated so eloquently earlier in this thread - people PLAY football, they don't LOOK football.