**The Different Perspectives of Simulation**

[kingsofthevalley]

I've been a member of OS for many years now but I've never actually paid attention to the various perspectives coming from different personalities of what a "simulation" football game should be.

How are we getting opinions from half of the demographic who say great progress is being made and they're having a blast, while others are the complete opposite? How am I enjoying 23 in the same ways that I enjoyed the PS2 gold era while others are protesting?

I finally figured it out. If you were already aware, good on you, but allow me to lay out my perspective.

My vision of what a simulation football game is supposed to be, is primarily focused on the field play with a passing "wave top" interest of the technicalities of the NFL "politics", i.e. draft, why a player was traded, real world stats, price of hot dogs, etc. I've noticed that others vision of simulation appears to be embedded heavily into the real world numbers and said politics.

I've picked up through conversations or (posts) that some guys here are strictly focused on drafts and numbers almost as if Madden should be the equivalent of a text based simulation game (I'm not saying that this portion of Madden SHOULDN'T be that complex, but its just not). I'm not entirely sure if these guys actually even play the game itself, they appear to do the draft and simulate the games (while sometimes watching the games here and there). They'll simulate most if not ALL of the actual season to get to the next draft and do it all over again!

For me, its the complete opposite. I simulate the draft which I've found is actually shielding me from some of the more major bugs and I play every single game. While not the end all be all of simulation, earth like/real world physics on the field of play, rate at the very TOP of what I'm looking for. With what we have now, I could NEVER return to anything produced in the past decade (anything PS4, Xbox one, PS3, Xbox 360 will never be in my top five of football titles).

With that said, the draft and stats are still important to me, but it would have to be something extreme/egregious for me to be up in arms. I don't mind if multiple QBs have 5000 yard seasons for example (if it was multiple QBs with 8000 yards for example, it would raise a red flag in my world). The 5000 yard example I just chalk up to its the "Madden world" and go with it.

Should we expect Madden to be on the level of a text based simulation? The devs would have to be strictly focused on that portion of the game for that to be a reality. You probably would have to have two entirely different games (Similar to how we had the standalone 'NFL Head Coach' back in the day). Or maybe not, maybe the tech available now should be able to handle it all in one sweep (but do you have the quality of developer to do it?).

I think another reason why some enjoy the title more than others is age and experience with previous football titles. For someone who grew up playing 4th and inches and T.V. Sports football on the Commodore 64, or Mattel electronic football (with the small screen and red dots that were the "players") as well as some of the more recent classics (early 1990 maddens, NFL gamedays, etc), Madden 23 is most certainly the pinnacle. Back then, you got what you got, there wasn't any bug fixes, patches, nothing. Whatever came out, you played it, which means our tolerance level is WAY higher.

Current tech also has an influence. For those used to playing online and utilizing those assets, I can see why you would be aggravated. For those similar to myself, we couldn't care less about running multiple man leagues, its strictly single man franchise. Once again, the needs are very different.

I have a few other things in mind, however, I'm losing focus at the moment (that last paragraph is kind of janky imo lol, I'm running out of breath if you didn't notice) so I'll leave it here for now.

Please, add on. I'm interested to see your take and it'll also spark me back up to get back into the conversation. In the mean time, I'm going to get a game of 23 in. See you soon.

[Ghost Of The Year]

Re: **The Different Perspectives of Simulation**

I think there are a couple reasons why their are two drastic perspectives. One is some peopleare fortunate enough that the default sliders matches their video gamestick skills. Or tbey are lucky enough to get sliders adjusted to match their skills. On the other side of that coin is some peopleare simply too talented at video games and cant geteven the most difficult level to give them a good competitive game. I am among thelucky ones that my skills are not so great that I am able to ebjoy the game with either default sliders or adjusted. This goes for any sports game in my opinion.

[GoJags904]

Re: **The Different Perspectives of Simulation**

I've been a member of OS for many years now but I've never actually paid attention to the various perspectives coming from different personalities of what a "simulation" football game should be.



How are we getting opinions from half of the demographic who say great progress is being made and they're having a blast, while others are the complete opposite? How am I enjoying 23 in the same ways that I enjoyed the PS2 gold era while others are protesting?



I finally figured it out. If you were already aware, good on you, but allow me to lay out my perspective.



My vision of what a simulation football game is supposed to be, is primarily focused on the field play with a passing "wave top" interest of the technicalities of the NFL "politics", i.e. draft, why a player was traded, real world stats, price of hot dogs, etc. I've noticed that others vision of simulation appears to be embedded heavily into the real world numbers and said politics.



I've picked up through conversations or (posts) that some guys here are strictly focused on drafts and numbers almost as if Madden should be the equivalent of a text based simulation game (I'm not saying that this portion of Madden SHOULDN'T be that complex, but its just not). I'm not entirely sure if these guys actually even play the game itself, they appear to do the draft and simulate the games (while sometimes watching the games here and there). They'll simulate most if not ALL of the actual season to get to the next draft and do it all over again!



For me, its the complete opposite. I simulate the draft which I've found is actually shielding me from some of the more major bugs and I play every single game. While not the end all be all of simulation, earth like/real world physics on the field of play, rate at the very TOP of what I'm looking for. With what we have now, I could NEVER return to anything produced in the past decade (anything PS4, Xbox one, PS3, Xbox 360 will never be in my top five of football titles).



With that said, the draft and stats are still important to me, but it would have to be something extreme/egregious for me to be up in arms. I don't mind if multiple QBs have 5000 yard seasons for example (if it was multiple QBs with 8000 yards for example, it would raise a red flag in my world). The 5000 yard example I just chalk up to its the "Madden world" and go with it.



Should we expect Madden to be on the level of a text based simulation? The devs would have to be strictly focused on that portion of the game for that to be a reality. You probably would have to have two entirely different games (Similar to how we had the standalone 'NFL Head Coach' back in the day). Or maybe not, maybe the tech available now should be able to handle it all in one sweep (but do you have the quality of developer to do it?).



I think another reason why some enjoy the title more than others is age and experience with previous football titles. For someone who grew up playing 4th and inches and T.V. Sports football on the Commodore 64, or Mattel electronic football (with the small screen and red dots that were the "players") as well as some of the more recent classics (early 1990 maddens, NFL gamedays, etc), Madden 23 is most certainly the pinnacle. Back then, you got what you got, there wasn't any bug fixes, patches, nothing. Whatever came out, you played it, which means our tolerance level is WAY higher.



Current tech also has an influence. For those used to playing online and utilizing those assets, I can see why you would be aggravated. For those similar to myself, we couldn't care less about running multiple man leagues, its strictly single man franchise. Once again, the needs are very different.



I have a few other things in mind, however, I'm losing focus at the moment (that last paragraph is kind of janky imo lol, I'm running out of breath if you didn't notice) so I'll leave it here for now.



Please, add on. I'm interested to see your take and it'll also spark me back up to get back into the conversation. In the mean time, I'm going to get a game of 23 in. See you soon.

It's a rabbit hole honestly. While I'm not a stat guru of any sort, I do understand the frustration of the unrealistic stats madden produces. I also come from the gaming area of late 80s and early 90s so I have some tolerance myself.

It just seems it's complete opposite for me as far as single player goes. I do want a better and more real, true to life experience. I guess I've been exhausted with Madden ball and want something more NFL like instead. When blocking issues like instashed continue to happen, AI players acting braindead still while the ball is in play, FG kickers trying ridiculous field goals with no team field position awareness for misses.....it's frustrating. Add that to the bad offseason logic still as well as no true chess match but instead a madden ball user fest, it doesn't leave the same impression on me as it does you.

That is the point though, we all have similar origin stories with sports gaming but the issue is who is ok with madden ball and who is not. Some want more true to life overall and others are happy with one small step at a time even if it's one small step back as well. For me, I just play to play football at this point. Whether it even makes pop warner sense or not, it's all we got as a triple A title. Sucks but such is life at times. Don't hate the player, hate the game. That's what NFL gaming from EA is rn. Play their way or find another hobby because they are still getting paid good lol.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

[Dagan]

Re: **The Different Perspectives of Simulation**

To me, the short answer is that ratings, settings and sliders exactly exist for all of us to individually achieve our standards (fulfill our perspectives) for simulation style competition, and each year lately, there are glitches or code tunings that prevent that from happening until several weeks after launch.

[Madden08PCgmr]

Re: **The Different Perspectives of Simulation**

They want a 1-size-fits-all product.

They make a 1-size-fits-NONE product.

They need to piece this thing out. Make an arcade game (online and MUT) for everyone. Make a franchise mode game. Make another great coach/gm game. I don't know if they can make a retro game thanks to the Jim Brown ruling, but I'd love to see it.

If the franchise and coach game weren't subject to the annual release, they might be able to make those modes worth playing.

[Dagan]

Re: **The Different Perspectives of Simulation**

They want a 1-size-fits-all product.

They make a 1-size-fits-NONE product.

They need to piece this thing out. Make an arcade game (online and MUT) for everyone. Make a franchise mode game. Make another great coach/gm game. I don't know if they can make a retro game thanks to the Jim Brown ruling, but I'd love to see it.

If the franchise and coach game weren't subject to the annual release, they might be able to make those modes worth playing.

Kind of. More like they keep trying to make a multi-tool, but we just want a screwdriver.

Okay, yeah, you added more to your post - same thinking.

[TarHeelPhenom]

Re: **The Different Perspectives of Simulation**

I've been a member of OS for many years now but I've never actually paid attention to the various perspectives coming from different personalities of what a "simulation" football game should be.

How are we getting opinions from half of the demographic who say great progress is being made and they're having a blast, while others are the complete opposite? How am I enjoying 23 in the same ways that I enjoyed the PS2 gold era while others are protesting?

I finally figured it out. If you were already aware, good on you, but allow me to lay out my perspective.

My vision of what a simulation football game is supposed to be, is primarily focused on the field play with a passing "wave top" interest of the technicalities of the NFL "politics", i.e. draft, why a player was traded, real world stats, price of hot dogs, etc. I've noticed that others vision of simulation appears to be embedded heavily into the real world numbers and said politics.

I've picked up through conversations or (posts) that some guys here are strictly focused on drafts and numbers almost as if Madden should be the equivalent of a text based simulation game (I'm not saying that this portion of Madden SHOULDN'T be that complex, but its just not). I'm not entirely sure if these guys actually even play the game itself, they appear to do the draft and simulate the games (while sometimes watching the games here and there). They'll simulate most if not ALL of the actual season to get to the next draft and do it all over again!

For me, its the complete opposite. I simulate the draft which I've found is actually shielding me from some of the more major bugs and I play every single game. While not the end all be all of simulation, earth like/real world physics on the field of play, rate at the very TOP of what I'm looking for. With what we have now, I could NEVER return to anything produced in the past decade (anything PS4, Xbox one, PS3, Xbox 360 will never be in my top five of football titles).

With that said, the draft and stats are still important to me, but it would have to be something extreme/egregious for me to be up in arms. I don't mind if multiple QBs have 5000 yard seasons for example (if it was multiple QBs with 8000 yards for example, it would raise a red flag in my world). The 5000 yard example I just chalk up to its the "Madden world" and go with it.

Should we expect Madden to be on the level of a text based simulation? The devs would have to be strictly focused on that portion of the game for that to be a reality. You probably would have to have two entirely different games (Similar to how we had the standalone 'NFL Head Coach' back in the day). Or maybe not, maybe the tech available now should be able to handle it all in one sweep (but do you have the quality of developer to do it?).

I think another reason why some enjoy the title more than others is age and experience with previous football titles. For someone who grew up playing 4th and inches and T.V. Sports football on the Commodore 64, or Mattel electronic football (with the small screen and red dots that were the "players") as well as some of the more recent classics (early 1990 maddens, NFL gamedays, etc), Madden 23 is most certainly the pinnacle. Back then, you got what you got, there wasn't any bug fixes, patches, nothing. Whatever came out, you played it, which means our tolerance level is WAY higher.

Current tech also has an influence. For those used to playing online and utilizing those assets, I can see why you would be aggravated. For those similar to myself, we couldn't care less about running multiple man leagues, its strictly single man franchise. Once again, the needs are very different.

I have a few other things in mind, however, I'm losing focus at the moment (that last paragraph is kind of janky imo lol, I'm running out of breath if you didn't notice) so I'll leave it here for now.

Please, add on. I'm interested to see your take and it'll also spark me back up to get back into the conversation. In the mean time, I'm going to get a game of 23 in. See you soon.

I'm going to try not to be all over the place with this; but I'll start by saying that we are from the same era. I grew up playing the Atari 2600 football game where if a running back broke out for a long run, the game would allow you as the defender to run out the opposite side of the screen to get back in the play. So, needless to say I've seen video game football come a longggggggggg way.

As far as "Simulation" goes, just saying that word will have different gamers defining it differently. I've posted this before, but when I bought Out Of The Park Baseball for the first time a few years back, I went over to the OOTP forum. I saw where they were having a discussion about this very thing. Basically to a man, the PC gamers stated that any game that requires input from the user is not considered sim, but arcade. So, in their minds, OOTP Baseball was a true sim and MLB The Show was an arcade game. That was the first time I had ever heard that argument and it definitely didn't/still doesn't fit my own definition of what sim is.

My personal definition of whether a game is sim or not is if it replicates what I see in real life on the field, the court, or the diamond. As far as Madden 23 is concerned, I'd definitely say yes...interceptions included lol(joke). It can be argued how well it plays out...that's up to each individual to determine that for themselves.

My gaming experience has changed over the years. When I was younger and up until about 10 years ago, I valued the User v. User/AI experience. I wanted to be hands on and play every game. But, since then I'm mostly a AI v. AI guy preferring to make gameplanning decisions before the game and then letting the game play out while spectating. And even when I do play User games, I only control one player for an entire play no matter offense or defense so that my input is limited. I've found that to be more rewarding, and more sim for my taste in gaming at this stage of my gaming life.

I've observed, for myself, that playing this way shields me, for lack of better words, from a lot of issues that rear their heads in User dominant controlled games. So, for my personal experience, Madden 23 does a doggone good job of simming what I see on Sundays. It's a beautiful game...especially from the Broadcast Camera. The gameplay can be tweaked through editing, as tedious as it is without a global editor, to my liking; and I haven't touched another football game since it released in August. I use to play older games for my football fixes, but as of now, I don't feel the need to go back to those games unless I just have the urge to play them for fun. Madden 23 is enough for how I enjoy video game football now. It also doesn't hurt thta it gives me a glimpse into what the college game will be like next summer.

[Kramer5150]

Re: **The Different Perspectives of Simulation**

Simulation? when I think of simulation that SHOULD mean simulating what we see on any given Sunday.

Madden as it stands right now (imo) is FAR from being a "simulation product" and therefore shouldn't be marketed as such....the gameplay on the field is very mediocre and stagnate, I understand that the game needs to appeal to a wide audience, but EA is in FAR to deep with this product to do that.

When I say the game should reflect what we see on Sunday's....I want ALL the NFL penalties, I want to see botched snaps, I want the ability to import custom soundtracks into my stadium (Acrisure) for atmosphere and the list could go on and on.

Again, the only thing this game has going for it is the exclusive license.....take away the shield and all the uni's and names and this game is an after thought, there is no way in hell the gameplay is good enough to stand on it's own...

The little Johnny's out there probably have no idea who John Madden was, so the name recognition factor goes right out the window....all they probably care about is usering their favorite player and throw for 10,000 yards and put up 20 td's a game.

So to that I say....simulation SHOULD be what we see on Sunday's....we have different modes in the game that are SUPPOSED to help with this, but like many areas in this game they fail to live up to expectations.

[NoleFan]

Re: **The Different Perspectives of Simulation**

I'm going to try not to be all over the place with this; but I'll start by saying that we are from the same era. I grew up playing the Atari 2600 football game where if a running back broke out for a long run, the game would allow you as the defender to run out the opposite side of the screen to get back in the play. So, needless to say I've seen video game football come a longggggggggg way.

As far as "Simulation" goes, just saying that word will have different gamers defining it differently. I've posted this before, but when I bought Out Of The Park Baseball for the first time a few years back, I went over to the OOTP forum. I saw where they were having a discussion about this very thing. Basically to a man, the PC gamers stated that any game that requires input from the user is not considered sim, but arcade. So, in their minds, OOTP Baseball was a true sim and MLB The Show was an arcade game. That was the first time I had ever heard that argument and it definitely didn't/still doesn't fit my own definition of what sim is.

My personal definition of whether a game is sim or not is if it replicates what I see in real life on the field, the court, or the diamond. As far as Madden 23 is concerned, I'd definitely say yes...interceptions included lol(joke). It can be argued how well it plays out...that's up to each individual to determine that for themselves.

My gaming experience has changed over the years. When I was younger and up until about 10 years ago, I valued the User v. User/AI experience. I wanted to be hands on and play every game. But, since then I'm mostly a AI v. AI guy preferring to make gameplanning decisions before the game and then letting the game play out while spectating. And even when I do play User games, I only control one player for an entire play no matter offense or defense so that my input is limited. I've found that to be more rewarding, and more sim for my taste in gaming at this stage of my gaming life.

I've observed, for myself, that playing this way shields me, for lack of better words, from a lot of issues that rear their heads in User dominant controlled games. So, for my personal experience, Madden 23 does a doggone good job of simming what I see on Sundays. It's a beautiful game...especially from the Broadcast Camera. The gameplay can be tweaked through editing, as tedious as it is without a global editor, to my liking; and I haven't touched another football game since it released in August. I use to play older games for my football fixes, but as of now, I don't feel the need to go back to those games unless I just have the urge to play them for fun. Madden 23 is enough for how I enjoy video game football now. It also doesn't hurt thta it gives me a glimpse into what the college game will be like next summer.

Very well stated!!

[jmch1990]

Re: **The Different Perspectives of Simulation**

I'm going to try not to be all over the place with this; but I'll start by saying that we are from the same era. I grew up playing the Atari 2600 football game where if a running back broke out for a long run, the game would allow you as the defender to run out the opposite side of the screen to get back in the play. So, needless to say I've seen video game football come a longggggggggg way.

As far as "Simulation" goes, just saying that word will have different gamers defining it differently. I've posted this before, but when I bought Out Of The Park Baseball for the first time a few years back, I went over to the OOTP forum. I saw where they were having a discussion about this very thing. Basically to a man, the PC gamers stated that any game that requires input from the user is not considered sim, but arcade. So, in their minds, OOTP Baseball was a true sim and MLB The Show was an arcade game. That was the first time I had ever heard that argument and it definitely didn't/still doesn't fit my own definition of what sim is.

My personal definition of whether a game is sim or not is if it replicates what I see in real life on the field, the court, or the diamond. As far as Madden 23 is concerned, I'd definitely say yes...interceptions included lol(joke). It can be argued how well it plays out...that's up to each individual to determine that for themselves.

My gaming experience has changed over the years. When I was younger and up until about 10 years ago, I valued the User v. User/AI experience. I wanted to be hands on and play every game. But, since then I'm mostly a AI v. AI guy preferring to make gameplanning decisions before the game and then letting the game play out while spectating. And even when I do play User games, I only control one player for an entire play no matter offense or defense so that my input is limited. I've found that to be more rewarding, and more sim for my taste in gaming at this stage of my gaming life.

I've observed, for myself, that playing this way shields me, for lack of better words, from a lot of issues that rear their heads in User dominant controlled games. So, for my personal experience, Madden 23 does a doggone good job of simming what I see on Sundays. It's a beautiful game...especially from the Broadcast Camera. The gameplay can be tweaked through editing, as tedious as it is without a global editor, to my liking; and I haven't touched another football game since it released in August. I use to play older games for my football fixes, but as of now, I don't feel the need to go back to those games unless I just have the urge to play them for fun. Madden 23 is enough for how I enjoy video game football now. It also doesn't hurt thta it gives me a glimpse into what the college game will be like next summer.

I am the same way. For me the joy comes in building a franchise from the ground up. I enjoy watching the team that I have built play and grow over multiple years, make decisions about who to keep and who to lose, and scout stars in the draft. I don't need to play it directly (and plus that frees me up to focus on other things), I almost would prefer not to, so the skill is about how well I've built my team rather than my stick skills. So to me simulation is sort of all of the things OP described: the game playing as close to real football as possible, but also the league and teams developing over years with realistic stats & player ratings, the draft allowing for booms & busts beyond just the first few picks (the draft and scouting process is the main thing Madden has over 2K right now; 2K is so stale and basic).

Having watched more than a few seasons of of AI vs AI games, I can tell you that the game plays almost nearly perfectly for me, or as well as I could expect for a sim game. The issues IMO are:

-Obviously interceptions is a big one. I do not think I need to explain.
-Another is tackles. Almost every season I have the top 4-5 players in assisted tackles.
-Weirdly I have found that DT's don't get a lot of sacks if you watch AI vs AI. it may be my scheme (I run 3-4 so they are double covered a lot), but I had a 99 rated DT who would get like 4-6 sacks a season, and when I let him go he set the NFL record with 28 the next year and had 10-20 in the following years. I've noticed this with other DTs as well. I also think my LBs get more tackles than my DT/DEs in a way that feels unrealistic, but that's minor.
-Penalties are lower than real life but this goes for both teams so honestly it's a better experience, and it's not like they're gone forever.
-Momentum can really mess with the flow of the game.

[Instant C1a55ic]

Re: **The Different Perspectives of Simulation**

They want a 1-size-fits-all product.

They make a 1-size-fits-NONE product.

They need to piece this thing out. Make an arcade game (online and MUT) for everyone. Make a franchise mode game. Make another great coach/gm game. I don't know if they can make a retro game thanks to the Jim Brown ruling, but I'd love to see it.

If the franchise and coach game weren't subject to the annual release, they might be able to make those modes worth playing.

I wouldn't say size fits none.

The game is built for 3-5 minute quarters, and big plays. That's all the MUT community wants, and they get priority. If any of things that are hurting franchise was hurting MUT, we wouldn't be here debating in this thread.

Sent from my SM-F916U using Operation Sports mobile app

[Funkycorm]

Re: **The Different Perspectives of Simulation**

I am going to offer a dissenting, unpopular opinion here. So be forewarned.

The word simulation is thrown around sports games but has varying definitions based on the person saying it or even as a setting in a video game.

All of the sports games replicate their given sport to a varying degree on the field and off the field. This experience will differ from player to player.

Simply put, my opinion is that there is no sports game that is simulation. As a PC gamer as well, the word simulation does not register to any sports game out there.

The sports game replicate the game to varying degrees as I said but to me, no sports game is considered simulation.

And like I said above, the word simulation means different things to different people. Fact is that there is not a single definition of simulation and that has already been shown in this thread.

In the past year plus, I have embraced the gaming philosophy of chase fun, not stats.

Now I know this will be disagreed with as some think that simulation's definition is if we see it on Sunday, the diamond, hardwood, ice, or whatever, that is the only definition of simulation.

I respect their views on the subject as simulation is all perspective based.

But for me, sports games are about chasing fun, not stats.

[jfsolo]

Re: **The Different Perspectives of Simulation**

How large a deviation from one's perception of how the NFL actually is can a person accept. A large percentage of OS has a very low tolerance for too much of a difference and that leads to a lot of unhappiness around here. This is just about the design and implementation of gameplay and Franchise features; the bugs are a separate issue entirely of course.

By some intentionally and inadvertently by others, the Simulation descriptor is definitely used as a cudgel to drive home their belief that how various aspects of the game are tuned is simply, "bad".

[GoodyBucs]

Re: **The Different Perspectives of Simulation**

As a gamer since the Atari and Intellivison I can sum up my feelings very easily-

After I finish a game do I believe that could happen on Sunday?

[Cory Levy]

Re: **The Different Perspectives of Simulation**

Honestly, I'm glad you (and anybody else for that matter) enjoy(s) the game but your spiel sounds like hand waving away things that a lot of the fanbase wants. You seem to be pushing the opinion that we want to much out of Madden and should just accept it for what it is: a cartoony, not realistic, non-simulation copy of the real NFL. The problem is that EA is the only company in the world that can make a "simulation" NFL game so therein lies my major gripe with Madden. They don't strive to be a good simulation of the NFL but no one else can even try!

We're also not really being that hard on the game for wanting more things in it. I don't think that because I want comp picks or undrafted free agency or better AI team management or a better progression system or restricted free agency or more league control or more realistic immersion doesn't mean I unfairly want Madden to be as deep as a text based program. I just want more. More deeper and more better.

Finally, I really, really struggle to grasp your idea that M23 is the "pinnacle" of football gaming just because you survived an era of gaming that consisted of dots as players. M23 is a pretty enough game (player models are very weird to me and they all still have those dumb *** horse legs) but lots of things deeper franchise fans clamor for are things that were in the game a decade and a half ago! So, to say things have just been on an upward incline is very bullish. Not to mention the fact that not only did we used to have a deeper franchise, it was also stable enough to play for more than one to five seasons.