News Post

OS Debate: Real Time Physics or Authentic True to Life Presentation?

02:17 PM - June 19, 2012 by RaychelSnr

This is the first feature we've done like this, but I'm quite excited to see how it works out. I'm going to raise a point of debate and you guys will have at it and we'll post another feature tomorrow with the very best responses from each end and declare a winner of sorts.

So today's debate is this: Which of these is more important for authenticity. You can't say both, you have to decide: Would having real time physics or a completely authentic true to life presentation be a bigger boost to a game's feeling of realism?

Let's hear it!

Member Comments

# 21 adub88 @ 06/19/12 04:47 PM

It's very simple, no need to ramble on here. It's RTP that's the most important. Gameplay takes priority over any other feature in a video game. Are we watching and listening to the game or are we more focused and how it plays and how closely it replicates the sport.

# 22 504WhoDatGuy @ 06/19/12 05:01 PM

Presentation done right! EA don't do there's right.....2k5 gameplay wasn't top notch at all.....controls sucked,but when u have a whole episode of Sportscenter just like u see on t.v of your game scores and other game highlightsu have greatness & the reason people gripe ova madden to this very day. I never skipped a episode of Chris Bermams sportscenter recap...he comentated the highlights folks!!!!! WHUP!!! it was done right yall to the t.

# 23 triniplayaz1 @ 06/19/12 05:28 PM

I believe that Real Time Physics AND authentic presentation go hand in hand. Imagine playing a full madden game with great game play and a realistic as can be "feel", yet through out the game, commentary lags and the game is presented horribly. That would just take away from the overall value of the experience. Then look at it the other way, horrible game play yet, great presentation. I believe the consumer would only be able to put up with that until a matter of time. You can always see the presentation but the MEAT of all GAMES, is GAMEplay. I think GREAT gameplay with physics implemented is much more valuable then world class presentation when it comes to video games. However, this is a growing and demanding market so its better if BOTH r in a game, that would only enhance each other.

# 24 Feldman011teen @ 06/19/12 05:49 PM

Hey how bout both, why is it so hard?

# 25 StL_RamZ @ 06/19/12 06:15 PM

I choose RTP I still play Backbreaker till this very day and backbreaker has just the PA announcer

I hate madden cuz when u enter an animation if sucks you and takes away momentum..

All I'm saying is if backbreaker had maddens camera wooooooo

# 26 kingsofthevalley @ 06/19/12 06:26 PM

Physics. Done deal.

# 27 tommyboii2008 @ 06/19/12 07:48 PM

GAMEPLAY is ALWAYS more important than how a game looks. Speaking from experience, after a few games, most people tend to just repeatedly press A (On Xbox) or X (PS3) to bypass most of the replays, halftime reports and other presentation aspects just to get back to the action.. For that Reason I would have to say REAL TIME PHYSICs > Presentation

# 28 Cod @ 06/19/12 08:17 PM

Physics. Even if its not done 100% perfect, we get hilarious animations (see FIFA 12). Crappy presentations mean I have to turn on music or upload tunes, which requires effort.

# 29 johnnyg713 @ 06/19/12 08:51 PM

real time physics hand down. This shouldn't even be a debate. If 2 editions of madden 13 came out which one would you buy, the one with RTP or the one with authentic presentation? Yup RTP

# 30 shadia147 @ 06/19/12 08:54 PM

Hard choice... And it depends to what extreme ends of the spectrum we're talking about.
For instance if by Physics, we're talking about a basketball player being able to leap 100 feet into the air... Or by Presentation, are we talking about going back to NES?
I guess I'd have to say that the Physics would have to be right first. You can't have a game looking like it's being played on the Moon.
But being a CPU vs CPU guy, Presentation is everything to me. I watch the games like I'm watching a live game on TV.

# 31 statum71 @ 06/19/12 10:47 PM

Most gamers won't admit it. But the reason NFL 2K5 is so legendary is because the presentation was the best of any football game to date.

NFL 2K5's gameplay was pretty good. But not awesome.

# 32 mikemck09 @ 06/19/12 11:36 PM

Real Time Physics... That is the solid base to any successful game... You could have True to life Presentation on a Lego Game, would all of the TLP fans go and buy that game? I think not, having physics implemented in a full contact sport is amazing. If you want Presentation go play golf or some sport where human on human physics arent really important...

# 33 TheTodd84 @ 06/19/12 11:37 PM

Without a doubt, it has to be real-time physics for authenticity. Think about it, you can have all the ESPN overlays on earth, but when you get into the game, and real football plays do not happen because of a lack of physics, it largely ruins the game. When superhuman LBs emerge out of nowhere costing your team a 3rd and long to a wide-open receiver, or when the same five tackle animations are repeated over and over again and the juke moves are unstoppable, it takes away from the authenticity.

IMO, true authenticity is to have all of the gameplay working. For example... what is more authentic, Rece Davis doing studio updates, which will be recycled over and over again? Or... running Oregon or Wisconsin's offenses the way Oregon and Wisconsin run it with dynamic physics so no two plays or tackles are the same? I think most would admit it would be the latter for authenticity.

What is interesting is how RTP has so far trumped presentation almost 3 to 1 on here for what we would prefer, yet EA refuses to implement it, and continues to just work on presentation for their football games. Look at what rave reviews FIFA 12 got and the hype surrounding FIFA 13 and FIFA 12 was not much like a TV broadcast, but it had great gameplay, and so therefore most people loved it. Why don't they to within their own company for what authenticity means?

And like many of you said, NBA 2K can have great presentation, but year after year, the gameplay is recycled, and it gets old. Look at MLB: The Show... the presentation is largely recycled and the commentary is rarely new from year to year, but it is so great because the gameplay is awesome and Sony continues to try and make the game resemble real-life baseball with different ball physics and hit variety, and the game continues to sell like crazy, and people can handle the lack of presentation because they can turn the volume off.

You cannot turn off the lack of physics, or crappy gameplay.

Just my .02, but I think EA should look at the other games in sports, and the ones that are excellent, and even to other games within their company like FIFA and NHL to see how gamers flock to GAMEPLAY over presentation.

RTP FTW! It's about damn time.

# 34 TheTodd84 @ 06/19/12 11:39 PM

***Why don't they LOOK to within**** (sorry)

# 35 TheTodd84 @ 06/19/12 11:45 PM

Oh, and some of you said on here that it's harder to implement real-time physics... well, what a sorry excuse. So what? It's SUPPOSED to be hard, that's why we fork over sixty hard-earned dollars every year, for them to do something great and because we expect a great game. Saying it's harder to implement gameplay is so sorry to me. It's just a joke. So what if it's hard? Boo Hoo. It's really hard to run the table in College Football, so should teams just stop trying? No, that's still the goal for every team coming in.

Ok, sorry. But that stuff just bothers me. Implement physics, people on here want it 3 to 1, we don't care if it's hard. They get paid to make the best game they possibly can, and clearly the people on here think the best way to create a great game is to implement RTP, so do it. Stop making excuses.

# 36 jersez @ 06/20/12 01:09 AM

I'll have to go with RTP because it can really bring a new aspect of gameplay to madden. Gameplay is what makes a game a classic. Nobody cares about the presentation if the gameplay is terrible. Graphics at the end of the day don't really matter, it's the gameplay that draws us back in. We can all think of a game that isn't graphically pleasing now, but the gameplay is so amazing we play it to this day.

# 37 MattIntellect @ 06/20/12 01:55 AM

I'm a person that would always say "both" because many things in life are two-fold. However, Madden is a football game, and because football is the core of the game, anything that benefits the experience on the field is of most importance. Madden could have the best presentation in all of sports games, but what will separate Madden the most from other games, will be how well it portrays the sport of football. Of course with things being two-fold, an argument could be made in favor of presentation. I chose real-time physics because it is something essential to the core of the game.

# 38 K0ZZ @ 06/20/12 02:13 AM

Physics.

Might as well just watch TV if the gameplay isn't there. Physics are absolutely huge to the replayability of contact sports games.

# 39 seanyboy116 @ 06/20/12 06:04 AM

Not Only Should Both Be An Option It Should Be The ONLY Option. Madden Has Been A Joke For 7 Years Now

# 40 iLLosophy @ 06/20/12 08:26 AM

Not a fair comparison. If this is truly RTP (and not just a large library of fluid animations grouped together), then you'll rarely see the same sequence happen more than once during the course of the game's lifetime. However, I'm pretty sure you will hear the announcers repeat the same thing dozens of times. Same replay angles, same celebrations, etc. Definitely RTP.....

Now if they Presentation as dynamic as RTP.....

« Previous 123 Next »

More Links

OS Debate: Real Time Physics or Authentic True to Life Presentation?