NCAA Football 11 Video: New Locomotion in Action

[jfsolo]

Real life broadcasts angles and replays are limited by cost, space, safety, and various other issues. Video games don't have don't those same problems so they can go "beyond" the real life broadcast, as it were.

Many people are upset with them for choosing not to exactly mimic actual broadcasts. They want the developers to artificially limit their camera coverage to parrot what is seen on T.V.. The irony is that I'm sure that real life producers are probably envious of what games can do, and would die to be able to have those other P.O.V.'s. that have got so many gamers up in arms.

I personally don't have a dog in this fight, but it is interesting to observe how Tiburon's choice to take advantage of what's available to them in the medium is perceived as cluelessness.

[khaliib]

I hear you Magic, it's just that under the cry of "REALISM", people are asking for something that's impossible at this point. I thought about going to school for gaming because I love sports video games, but after seeing how much code has to be written for one thing to react with another, I quickly decided to go with plan B. I just think that setting expectations so high for a video game is causing people to spend $60 only to deconstruct the game by looking for every negative that is said about the game vs enjoying it for where it is now.

I can find tons of so called unrealistic things, but for every unrealistic aspect of a game that I notice, there is a code that must be written. And the example code I saw, showed me it is easier said than done.

I rent the game and if I don't like, I'll keep my $60. But to spend $60 looking for all the things I/others don't like about it, is just plain "GOOFY".

[jdr4693]

Wow, all they added was a stupid ESPN wip? Presentation still looks dull and boring after each play.

[jello1717]

Quote: Originally Posted by jfsolo

Real life broadcasts angles and replays are limited by cost, space, safety, and various other issues. Video games don't have don't those same problems so they can go "beyond" the real life broadcast, as it were. Many people are upset with them for choosing not to exactly mimic actual broadcasts. They want the developers to artificially limit their camera coverage to parrot what is seen on T.V.. The irony is that I'm sure that real life producers are probably envious of what games can do, and would die to be able to have those other P.O.V.'s. that have got so many gamers up in arms. I personally don't have a dog in this fight, but it is interesting to observe how Tiburon's choice to take advantage of what's available to them in the medium is perceived as cluelessness.

Very well said and I agree 100%.

[moylan1234]

Quote: Originally Posted by jfsolo

Real life broadcasts angles and replays are limited by cost, space, safety, and various other issues. Video games don't have don't those same problems so they can go "beyond" the real life broadcast, as it were. Many people are upset with them for choosing not to exactly mimic actual broadcasts. They want the developers to artificially limit their camera coverage to parrot what is seen on T.V.. The irony is that I'm sure that real life producers are probably envious of what games can do, and would die to be able to have those other P.O.V.'s. that have got so many gamers up in arms. I personally don't have a dog in this fight, but it is interesting to observe how Tiburon's choice to take advantage of what's available to them in the medium is perceived as cluelessness.

You don't think ESPN has camera's that can zoom in that close? they have ability to do those things, but they don't for a reason.

[Rivals]

Said this in the other thread at the mention of non-broadcast angles for replays. That replay shown didn't look bad, but you could easily take it to an unrealistic extreme. Several of the camera pans of the stadiums in 2009 and 2010 are totally unrealistic. Some people may think they look cool, I don't. But I would sacrifice cool effects for immersion. I think the opening kickoff sequence looks cool, but is out of place because no camera in real life could shoot at such an angle. I'd much rather see kickoffs shown from the wire camera linked with a cut scene from the sidelines or the return man.

[SageInfinite]

Quote: Originally Posted by Rivals

Said this in the other thread at the mention of non-broadcast angles for replays. That replay shown didn't look bad, but you could easily take it to an unrealistic extreme. Several of the camera pans of the stadiums in 2009 and 2010 are totally unrealistic. Some people may think they look cool, I don't. But I would sacrifice cool effects for immersion. I think the opening kickoff sequence looks cool, but is out of place because no camera in real life could shoot at such an angle. I'd much rather see kickoffs shown from the wire camera linked with a cut scene from the sidelines or the return man.

[TheWatcher]

Quote: Originally Posted by SageInfinite

I agree. It's funny how they say they can get camera's better than a broadcast, but the game would look that much more realistic with the accurate camera angles. I love that they're trying, but they just don't seem to get it.

Sounds to me that they're aware that they could do it right, they just don't want to. What goes through their minds to refuse to do it right, we may never know. It all goes back to the "beyond broadcast" mentality. No one wants that, we just want broadcast.

Is this not one of the most absurd thought processes we've ever seen? It's become comical at this point