07:23 AM - May 21, 2010 by wickedbadman
The Backbreaker demo is now available on the Marketplace. Post your impressions here.
|
|||||||||
|
Backbreaker News Post
07:23 AM - May 21, 2010 by wickedbadmanThe Backbreaker demo is now available on the Marketplace. Post your impressions here.
Backbreaker Videos
Member Comments
# 701
TracerBullet @ 05/23/10 06:00 PM
I wish there was a way to look backwards when you're running.
|
|||||||||||||
|
. If they were to change the camera I think it should be to an actual forst person like in 2k5. That would be so fun when your in the trenches
|
|||||||||||||
|
Here are the results...
INDY SPARTANS:
33 OFFENSIVE POINTS (3 TD'S)
PASSING:
38 ATTEMPTS
29 COMPLETE
76.3 COMPLETION %
428 YDS
5 INT
5 SACK
1 QB FUMBLE
RUSHING:
28 RUSH ATTEMPTS
65 YARDS
2.32 AVG YARDS PER RUSH
0 FUMBLES
So the devs claim that INDY has an excellent offense, should pass the ball well and dominate teams in the lower league is accurate. They had some really nice drives and some plays were killer to watch. In the last play of a game they threw to the Tight End who bowled over 2 defenders until finally getting tackled (51 yards later) on the 2 yard line with no time left on the clock. In another game they went for 4th and 1 on my 15 yard line. The running back came right at me but did a nice spin move and scampered in for the TD. It wasn't all pretty though, overall it's some pretty funky, clunky football but sometimes I'm left amazed and in awe of what I just witnesses. The potential of this game is unreal!
As for me and the sad sack Colonels...on offense I mostly ran running plays so I could get the ball back in the hands of INDY. I also wanted to test outside runs so 2/3 of my calls were east/west. I played QB and let the CPU do the running. Here are the results...
47 ATTEMPTS
54 YARDS
1.15 AVG YARDS PER RUSH
That is a major weakness of this game - too many east/west runs getting stuffed for neg yardage! I did burn the CPU for a 22 yard play action pass, and the next play I called a pitch. All 4 of the LB's froze which was a good sign, hopfully keeping the "D" honest in that way will help. I did see way too many plays where the DL's busted through too fast though. Again, I'm playing with a bad team so maybe OL rating adjustments will also help.
So in conclusion INT'S are confirmed (at least to me) to be too high. A top offense vs a poor team should not have 5 INT's. I think this can be fixed relatively easy though...
1. DL and LB hands ratings should be toned down. In one case a pass was deflected off a helmet and intercepted by a DL. His reaction was too fast and he would had to have hands of a wide receiver to catch the ball. It should've been muffed, I mean in real life DL's and LB's drop balls that come right at them all the time.
2. LB's and DB's need to be programmed to go for a swat or bone jarring hit (rather than a catch) more often.
3. In real life deflections are much harder to catch than a spiral pass. Is it possible to program less successfull catches on deflections?
Sacks are also too high. In the demo guide it stated "getting to Indy's Qb would be difficult." I expected less sacks from my Defense.
The good news is that ratings can be adjusted to boost an offense. Also, INDY's offense is only rated a 74. What will happen if you creat a team with a 100 rated offense? I just hope the running issue can be fixed through rating adjustments but I doubt it, it seems more like a programming issue.
Also, NM for Christs sakes please pick up the phone and call 2K! They have YEARS of top notch presentation and AI programming sitting there not being used, what a waste. And what a knock-out combo you guys would make with a collaboration/partnership.
I'm liking this game alot in every aspect other than computer offensive A.I.They are getting occasional good drives for touchdowns but the int's are the major concern.Hopefully there is a remedy and I think things would be a good bit better.
# 705
mgoblue678 @ 05/23/10 06:23 PM
Hmm, weird just played Indy as the Pioneers who have a decent defense on pro hard.
Their qb went 7/8 for 132 and 2 tds and 0 ints. He was making good reads for a change and their o-line was picking up the blitz for the most part on the handful I called. I played as either a linebacker blitzing or a linebacker covering the rb, so I couldn't really skew the results.
Very strange, completely the opposite of what I had been seeing from the CPU QB for the most part.
Their qb went 7/8 for 132 and 2 tds and 0 ints. He was making good reads for a change and their o-line was picking up the blitz for the most part on the handful I called. I played as either a linebacker blitzing or a linebacker covering the rb, so I couldn't really skew the results.
Very strange, completely the opposite of what I had been seeing from the CPU QB for the most part.
|
|||||||||||||
|
We really need to find out about ratings per position and the overall affect of form.If there are only those 4 basic ratings without sliders.......
I thought the demo was great, Definitely not buying Madden. Backbreaker's done on the first try what Madden has never done before.
|
|||||||||||||
|
# 709
eagskerfan @ 05/23/10 06:35 PM
I thought it was a lot of fun. I like the new controls, makes it feel more like a sim than a game. I think the camera angle is cool, but it would be better if that was a close camera mode, and if you wanted, you could still play with a zoomed out camera mode.
I hope they have spread playbooks and such, as I want to make my league high school teams.
I hope they have spread playbooks and such, as I want to make my league high school teams.
|
|||||||||||||
|
If you can't see the logic in why it is more realistic to not see every player on the field and simply hit a button to get them the ball then you must have never played any kind of sport in your life before. To fire off insults on my logic and say it is "the worst" just shows you are either horrible at this game and lashing out, or do not understand what the BB game is about.
they need to add different cameras.. I like the engine and the game itself but is imposible to me to play that close to the player. It`s not fun.
While I can see why people don't like the camera,I personally do.
At least everyone should understand the concept that when you play football you are one player out of 11 on your side of the ball.You have to depend on the other 10 players to do their job while you just do yours.Switching players is probably the worst thing.I like locking on to one.
This is all assuming that the defensive side of the ball is what almost everybody is having issues with.It's saying that you prefer a football videogame friendly view to a more realistic one.
At least everyone should understand the concept that when you play football you are one player out of 11 on your side of the ball.You have to depend on the other 10 players to do their job while you just do yours.Switching players is probably the worst thing.I like locking on to one.
This is all assuming that the defensive side of the ball is what almost everybody is having issues with.It's saying that you prefer a football videogame friendly view to a more realistic one.
# 714
mgoblue678 @ 05/23/10 07:07 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
I don't find it to be impossible at all. Could it be tweaked somewhat to make it better, absolutely but I don't find it impossible. On defense I love the camera and as long as you lay off RT and don't switch players every 2 seconds it works perfectly fine. They could make a few tweaks to it on offense, but I am starting to get the hang of running the ball even on outside runs where the camera could be better.
Just because it is not fun for you, doesn't mean it isn't for some other people.
I agree though, adding another camera angle for those who don't like the current wouldn't hurt and they should think about doing it.
Well one thing is clear, if hard-core football gamers don't like the camera then what do you think casual & younger players will think? Especially being that some of the issues in the game is excessive INT's, sacks and runs that get stuffed for negative yards (I like to call them gags.)
They are already disoriented, confused and feel partially blind from the camera, so once these "gags" start happening it's gonna be "Heck with this!" The only way to keep a casual player interested is if the ball moves forward, keeping the user interested and the game fun. In it's current state I sense there will be too much frustration.
More camera angles should've been put in the game - plain and simple!
They are already disoriented, confused and feel partially blind from the camera, so once these "gags" start happening it's gonna be "Heck with this!" The only way to keep a casual player interested is if the ball moves forward, keeping the user interested and the game fun. In it's current state I sense there will be too much frustration.
More camera angles should've been put in the game - plain and simple!
If you add another cam, then everyone would use that online and take away the point of the game. With the zoomed out cam, you have an advantage when you can see the entire field including the pass rush as QB and who is in your blind spots when running the ball.
I personally think if a game is fun and cooll, a casual gamer will enter practice mode and figure out how to play the game. Not being able to practice yet is a major reason why people are not comfortable with the view. I also would like to have a game where casuals and kids are not saturating it. That means less glitchers and cheesers.
While it is not realistic to see yourself , it is more realistic the way the cam is now because you can only really see what is in front of you and not to the sides and behind. That makes the game a lot tougher.
I am sure they can continue to tighten up the cam and make it faster and better. I just beat Indy as CHI with a last second 61 yard bomb. It was pretty awesome. I established a run game with them and it opened up the pass. The single back HB dive is a nice run play to try. Outside runs are not as easy, and that is ok. They usually are easier to cover unless the D is set up to not expect it. It's harder to get blockers to pull wide as opposed to run blocking up the gut.
Sometimes I hit RT too late and it sends me into the hurry up which sucks. It also takes a little while to throw the bomb, and I am still getting that timing down.
I have not played a demo this much before. It is really something. It is also a demo and I am sure they will make some patches and really support this game. Hopefully there are a lot of playbooks in the final version.
Making a tackle is so satisfying on D.
So far I enjoy this football game more then the others. One reason is that it is fast. A half takes no time, and I would imagine 5 min quarters would be around 30-35 minutes. It just moves quickly and gets to the point.
Running the ball for a first down..converting a 3rd with a pass to your TE, getting the D to bite on play action...all those types of things really feel great in this game.
I personally think if a game is fun and cooll, a casual gamer will enter practice mode and figure out how to play the game. Not being able to practice yet is a major reason why people are not comfortable with the view. I also would like to have a game where casuals and kids are not saturating it. That means less glitchers and cheesers.
While it is not realistic to see yourself , it is more realistic the way the cam is now because you can only really see what is in front of you and not to the sides and behind. That makes the game a lot tougher.
I am sure they can continue to tighten up the cam and make it faster and better. I just beat Indy as CHI with a last second 61 yard bomb. It was pretty awesome. I established a run game with them and it opened up the pass. The single back HB dive is a nice run play to try. Outside runs are not as easy, and that is ok. They usually are easier to cover unless the D is set up to not expect it. It's harder to get blockers to pull wide as opposed to run blocking up the gut.
Sometimes I hit RT too late and it sends me into the hurry up which sucks. It also takes a little while to throw the bomb, and I am still getting that timing down.
I have not played a demo this much before. It is really something. It is also a demo and I am sure they will make some patches and really support this game. Hopefully there are a lot of playbooks in the final version.
Making a tackle is so satisfying on D.
So far I enjoy this football game more then the others. One reason is that it is fast. A half takes no time, and I would imagine 5 min quarters would be around 30-35 minutes. It just moves quickly and gets to the point.
Running the ball for a first down..converting a 3rd with a pass to your TE, getting the D to bite on play action...all those types of things really feel great in this game.
# 717
spankdatazz22 @ 05/23/10 07:43 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
# 718
TheWatcher @ 05/23/10 07:45 PM
The average gamer is bound to be frustrated by the camera. I like the camera, some others don't mind it, but I just see no way this is going to go over well with the masses.
If anyone remembers, there have been public outcries for multiple and adjustable cams in other football games that didn't have the type of view BB has. People complained about the view in those games... so what do you think they will do with BB? I just have a strong feeling that AI issues had a lot to do with it if not the main reason, but I'll be more inclined to conclude on whether that's true or not, based on the full game. If the full game doesn't have adjustable replay angles, I think I'll have my answer as to what they were thinking.
The foundation is really solid, but the uphill battle for acceptance is going to be even tougher than I originally thought.
If anyone remembers, there have been public outcries for multiple and adjustable cams in other football games that didn't have the type of view BB has. People complained about the view in those games... so what do you think they will do with BB? I just have a strong feeling that AI issues had a lot to do with it if not the main reason, but I'll be more inclined to conclude on whether that's true or not, based on the full game. If the full game doesn't have adjustable replay angles, I think I'll have my answer as to what they were thinking.
The foundation is really solid, but the uphill battle for acceptance is going to be even tougher than I originally thought.
# 719
spankdatazz22 @ 05/23/10 08:01 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
I wanted to take my time with the demo before rushing to judgment, but I can sum up my thoughts in 3 words:
Move Over Madden.
I've played at least 100 games in the demo of BackBreaker, and while there are certainly the flaws, rough edges and gaps of a first-generation product, it already plays a better game of Football than Madden. For comparison, I played the Madden 10 demo again, and it's just night and day. Madden feels like it has for over a decade, just a step up from the vibrating table form of football where everything is floaty and loosely in your control. Everyone's in the right spot in Madden, so it 'looks' like football, but there's a layer of abstraction that ensures it never feels like football.
BackBreaker feels like football. If using a physics engine was just a gimmick, call me a sucker, because it makes a world of difference. The hits in Madden are laughable compared to the complex variety of animations and player interactions in backbreaker. Guys fighting on the line look and feel like guys fighting on the line, every step feels like a step, and you can see how each foot being placed down equals motion, not the ice-skating of so many games - we're talking 1:1 between what you see and the physical movement in the game.
The passing game, while difficult, is a breath of fresh air. It takes a while to become decent, but once you do it's just a ton of fun. If you practice the progressions pre-snap it make it easier to know what you have to do after the hike. Focusing in as a player makes his cut and hitting him with the pass at just the right time is fun, and the low-level camera makes you feel like you're in the eyes of the quarterback. You have very little time to make a decision, because you will get blind-side sacked if you delay. There's also a clear talent difference between the good offensive lines and QB's in the game, and the bad ones.
The running game is light years beyond Madden. The controls are easy to pull off, and the 'in the RB role' view is great for finding the seams. But the best part is that this is where the physics really shines; glancing hits are shaken off, jukes can leave guys in the dust, and the eventual take-down is unique and appropriate to the circumstance. A perfect example is that in Madden, you might get stuffed on the 1st down as soon as the RB meets the defender, regardless of whether his forward motion or the specific way in which offensive/defensive players collided would have kept him moving forward. In BB, you'll pick up the extra yard if the hit is off to your side, but you'll get pushed back if you were moving more laterally than forward at impact. The diversity and realism of hits is just sweet, and an utter embarrassment to Madden.
Downsides? The player models are not diverse, and the 'on-the-field' presentation, while great, just doesn't have the polish of Madden. Online offerings seem pretty limited (just exhibitions, no leagues), and the play books are not as diverse as they could be.
Mostly, it will just take a lot of adjustment for you to get used to the view, controls, feel, and 'method' of this game, but if you take the time to figure it out (be sure to play on Pro and not arcade by pushing right on that menu item) you will be rewarded by a solid foundation, fun to play game that is also a glimpse into the future of football sims.
Maybe I'm over-selling it, but I'm very impressed and have decided to get this and likely skip Madden this year.
Move Over Madden.
I've played at least 100 games in the demo of BackBreaker, and while there are certainly the flaws, rough edges and gaps of a first-generation product, it already plays a better game of Football than Madden. For comparison, I played the Madden 10 demo again, and it's just night and day. Madden feels like it has for over a decade, just a step up from the vibrating table form of football where everything is floaty and loosely in your control. Everyone's in the right spot in Madden, so it 'looks' like football, but there's a layer of abstraction that ensures it never feels like football.
BackBreaker feels like football. If using a physics engine was just a gimmick, call me a sucker, because it makes a world of difference. The hits in Madden are laughable compared to the complex variety of animations and player interactions in backbreaker. Guys fighting on the line look and feel like guys fighting on the line, every step feels like a step, and you can see how each foot being placed down equals motion, not the ice-skating of so many games - we're talking 1:1 between what you see and the physical movement in the game.
The passing game, while difficult, is a breath of fresh air. It takes a while to become decent, but once you do it's just a ton of fun. If you practice the progressions pre-snap it make it easier to know what you have to do after the hike. Focusing in as a player makes his cut and hitting him with the pass at just the right time is fun, and the low-level camera makes you feel like you're in the eyes of the quarterback. You have very little time to make a decision, because you will get blind-side sacked if you delay. There's also a clear talent difference between the good offensive lines and QB's in the game, and the bad ones.
The running game is light years beyond Madden. The controls are easy to pull off, and the 'in the RB role' view is great for finding the seams. But the best part is that this is where the physics really shines; glancing hits are shaken off, jukes can leave guys in the dust, and the eventual take-down is unique and appropriate to the circumstance. A perfect example is that in Madden, you might get stuffed on the 1st down as soon as the RB meets the defender, regardless of whether his forward motion or the specific way in which offensive/defensive players collided would have kept him moving forward. In BB, you'll pick up the extra yard if the hit is off to your side, but you'll get pushed back if you were moving more laterally than forward at impact. The diversity and realism of hits is just sweet, and an utter embarrassment to Madden.
Downsides? The player models are not diverse, and the 'on-the-field' presentation, while great, just doesn't have the polish of Madden. Online offerings seem pretty limited (just exhibitions, no leagues), and the play books are not as diverse as they could be.
Mostly, it will just take a lot of adjustment for you to get used to the view, controls, feel, and 'method' of this game, but if you take the time to figure it out (be sure to play on Pro and not arcade by pushing right on that menu item) you will be rewarded by a solid foundation, fun to play game that is also a glimpse into the future of football sims.
Maybe I'm over-selling it, but I'm very impressed and have decided to get this and likely skip Madden this year.
Post A Comment
Working...