First NCAA Football 12 Screenshot, Dreads Are Back - What Else Can You Spot?

[Solidice]

Quote: Originally Posted by Bama83

I'm not condemning it. I'm stating my personal preferences and stating that I find it pointless to add dreadlocks when they haven't even gotten OL/DL play correct.

so you want the art/feature team to sit on their hands until the gameplay team, in your opinion, catches up to the art/feature team?

that doesn't sound productive.

[da ThRONe]

Quote: Originally Posted by Bama83

Well, not to be overly argumentative, but I haven't made an assumption. I have made an inference based on prior historical evidence. With my language lesson out of the way -- Would you truly wager that there will be a significant alteration to the gameplay engine?

You already deemed this game trash and all we have is a handful of still pics. If that isn't assuming I don’t know what is.

Trust if 6weeks from now 3D grass is the best improvement I will be leading the charge.

[Bama83]

Quote: Originally Posted by sparkdawg777

It's funny how the argument to focus on gameplay and not graphics gets brought up every year. Honestly I want both, who wants to look at the same game as last year and it just play different? Or vice versa. I want both so EA keep spending money on both. I just wish EA would focus on the right things for gameplay.

I do too. I believe everyone does.

The problem is that right now the graphics are being layered on a broken engine. They can fix a few bugs, which will in turn might break something else, but overall the engine is buggered.

My point is that I wish they'd go back to square one - reboot the franchise with a new engine that isn't flawed and borked and then add graphics like crazy.

I also agree about your defense statement. It definitely needs improvement in the ability to call plays and chess match the offense.

I think your point on the presentation and feel of defense is sound too. I think the issue here is that there is no physics in the game. It's scripted, so you don't get that "OH SNAP!" moment. You don't feel the weight of your 250lb LB crushing that 205lb QB from the blindside.

Quote: Originally Posted by Dalsanto0026

You buy the game simply because there's no alternative, even though you think the gameplay has been "abhorrent" in recent years. Do you see the flawed logic here?

Ya, it's the tortured life of a college football fan.

I'm working on it though.

Quote: Originally Posted by bigturboweenie

Since all you folks don't care about graphics and just want real-time physics, well game breaker is YOUR game.

It's not just about physics, as I've stated. It's a very important aspect for a sport based on force and mass, but it's not the only part.

Football logic is part of gameplay to me. Right now, the game has AI, but not really well thought out AI in terms of football. Assignments and jobs aren't really there - it's just chaos.

Quote: Originally Posted by SynShadowzz

Right, ok... and where exactly do you see that the gameplay hasn't improved? You're assuming WAY too much from a screenshot.

The gameplay will certainly have some minor tweaks that they'll trumpet as game altering changes. But there haven't been any major, realistic additions to this series in a long time.

Even the heralded "pro-tak" was a way of faking gang tackles.

Quote: Originally Posted by ODogg

Quote 1) I do find it funny though how so many folks think that you have to choose one or the other. I wonder how you guys select your girlfriends, do you think "hmm...this time my girlfriend either has to be really hot and dumb as a bag of rocks or a genius with a face only a mother could love?" They are not, never have been, and never will be, mutually exclusive. Quote 2) Improving graphics and details does not mandate that game play has not improved. The bottom line is I'm sure EA has improved some things in game play and made some folks happy while improving some things in graphics & details and made some folks happy. Quote 3) Some of you guys are extremely clueless as to how games in general are developed and it's showing in this thread. Maybe visit a game company, read a magazine on game development or simply read more online about the process sometime.

Response 1) Well, to answer the important part, I prefer them really hot and dumb as rocks ... can't fall in love with that and they are fun in the important areas. What can I say, I'm shallow.

Response 2) I'm not inferring that this is the case. I am of the opinion that the gameplay engine can be virtually mastered through a variety of complete overhauls whereas graphical tweaks will always exist.

Basically, what I'm saying is if you get the engine right you never really have to do anything major to it except maintain it. All of the people that cry foul about the gameplay would be silenced (minus the crew of perfectionists that want real life enacted on a PS3) and then the crew is free to upgrade the graphics/presentation/etc until their eyes bleed.

The problem that I see now, and that I'm complaining about, is that there a GLARING holes in the gameplay. Holes that are completely ignored or band-aided in each iteration. It's not so much that they aren't doing anything for the gameplay, it's that they aren't addressing the fundamental flaws of their current system.

Response 3) Enlighten us then. If you're speaking to me, then I would disagree vehemently considering I manage development of IT software platforms.

Project Management is project management. Whether I build a building, manage development in IT, build a network, upgrade a factory or build a game. The concepts are the same.

All projects, unless funded by the government, have a budget, a time constraint and a plan/schedule.

Game development is a large scale project.

So unless you want to tell me that EA has given zero fiscal oversight to their football department, do not have a shelf date for each of their projects and willy-nilly decide what to implement ... then I think I have a pretty good guesstimation on the life-cycle of game development.

[AuburnAlumni]

Quote: Originally Posted by Bama83

I'm not condemning it. I'm stating my personal preferences and stating that I find it pointless to add dreadlocks when they haven't even gotten OL/DL play correct.

No one cares about your preferences. Even more so after you've spent so much time whining after one freaking photograph.

Quote:

Possibly true, but at least we don't lead the world in most NCAA infractions ... don't worry though, you'll always be the people's champion to me! All in, baby.

Nope. You guys just set the record for biggest illegal action for one overweight lineman and being on probation 3 times since 1993.

Wrong forum for this by the way but as clueless as you are about NCAA 12... Starting a Flame war would be par for the course.

Oh. And we're your current CFB National Champion as well as your people's champ. Enjoy your day.

[SynShadowzz]

Quote: Originally Posted by Bama83

The gameplay will certainly have some minor tweaks that they'll trumpet as game altering changes. But there haven't been any major, realistic additions to this series in a long time. Even the heralded "pro-tak" was a way of faking gang tackles.

See, the problem here is you're trying to state this as a fact, when it's not.. yet. This could very well be the case, but YOU DON'T KNOW and you won't know until you play the game.

Your opinion is as valid as everyone else's, but you're trying to play the "I'm right and you're wrong" game here without any facts to back you up. Keep your mind open man, or just don't buy the game if you're going to whine about it after 1 (I repeat, ONE) screenshot.

[coogrfan]

Quote: Originally Posted by Bama83

So unless you want to tell me that EA has given zero fiscal oversight to their football department, do not have a shelf date for each of their projects and willy-nilly decide what to implement ... then I think I have a pretty good guesstimation on the life-cycle of game development.

And yet...you seem to think that there is a chance that the suits at EA would sign off on trashing an NCAA game engine that has moved 3 million + units every year in order to start over from scratch and "do it right".


NCAA dev: Boss, we want to scrap our current engine in favor of a physics based system.

Suit: Why?

NCAA dev: It will make the game better.

Suit: Will it cost more than continuing to develop our current engine?

NCAA dev: Oh, yeah.

Suit: Will it result in more sales?

NCAA dev: Umm...probably not, in fact we would need to take a year off from releasing a game in order to do it right.

Suit: Get out of my office.

[mrMagic91]

Quote: Originally Posted by SynShadowzz

See, the problem here is you're trying to state this as a fact, when it's not.. yet. This could very well be the case, but YOU DON'T KNOW and you won't know until you play the game. Your opinion is as valid as everyone else's, but you're trying to play the "I'm right and you're wrong" game here without any facts to back you up. Keep your mind open man, or just don't buy the game if you're going to whine about it after 1 (I repeat, ONE) screenshot.

^^ Thank you. @Bama83, you have been complaining since the pic came out yesterday. Stop jumping to conclusions and such. Im sure it'll get better

[Bama83]

Quote: Originally Posted by Solidice

so you want the art/feature team to sit on their hands until the gameplay team, in your opinion, catches up to the art/feature team?

Actually, I believe I stated what I would like to happen repeatedly.

In a perfect world there would be parallel projects - the new football engine for 2013 and the current development of football titles. Given that EA would see that as development without return, I'd be surprised to see this happen from a business standpoint.

In terms of yearly development of NCAA, yes, I would. There are always concurrent development projects that the art team could sink their hours into.

With that said, there would be plenty of overlap in development and the art team would be busy designing new models for the game.

Quote: Originally Posted by da ThRONe

You already deemed this game trash and all we have is a handful of still pics. If that isn't assuming I don’t know what is.

Well, from a purely language standpoint, you stand correct: "you don't know what it is".

Assumptions are presuppositions based on beliefs and inferences are conclusions drawn on assumptions.

Situation: I heard a scraping across boiler pipes. I ran away from Freddy Krueger.
Inference: I was unsafe and must run away
Assumption: My belief that only Fred Krueger could scratch pipes.

So, in this case:
Situation: EA releases same zoomed in gameplay photo as in prior years
Inference: Gameplay will continue to be broken.
Assumption: EA is following same trend as prior years and neglects gameplay.

My inference is that gameplay will be broken based on the assumption of what they are doing.

It's an entirely semantic thing and me just being a jackass.