Madden NFL 11 News Post

Out of Bounds: The Billion Dollar Elephant in the Room

01:57 PM - August 11, 2010 by RaychelSnr

Tuesday marked the beginning of what many would consider a secular holiday. While there were no trees, candles, or even aluminum poles and feats of strengths, Tuesday marks the beginning of many long, wasted nights filled with cans of downed cokes, missed meals and social engagements. It's an event that has grown so large that economists now chart its impact, which has grown into the billions.

Let's be honest here, you're probably going to buy Madden 11 if you're a football fan -- assuming you haven't already purchased it. I know I'm going to buy Madden 11. It's a cultural moment. A time in which you know anyone and everyone who cares the smallest iota about sports video games will be playing the same game. All other sports games pale in comparison to the type of influence the little football-game-that-could has exerted over the years.

Read More - Out of Bounds: The Billion Dollar Elephant in the Room

Game: Madden NFL 11Reader Score: 6/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3 / Xbox 360Votes for game: 96 - View All

Madden NFL 11 Videos

Member Comments

# 41 Vikes1 @ 08/13/10 03:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spankdatazz22


	I have a hard time blaming the EA "suits".

Very solid post in it's entirety Spank. But I'll just focus on the above statement. And I agree with you.

Of course I know nothing of the inner workings of the Tiburon studio. But I just have a difficult time believing the "Suits" give two damns about what development decisions are made back on the shop floor. As they say...the crap rolls down hill, and imo anyway...I highly doubt the big sticks at EA could care less about "Gameflow" or "Vision cone". That's someone else's concern. The big dogs concern is about one thing...profit. And I'm pretty sure they really don't care what new features are added that may help fill the investors portfolios, and save their jobs.

I just can't imagine two executives having their $200 lunch, talking about how happy they are "Gameflow" was added this year.

# 42 PGaither84 @ 08/13/10 04:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vikes1


	Very solid post in it's entirety Spank. But I'll just focus on the above statement. And I agree with you. Of course I know nothing of the inner workings of the Tiburon studio. But I just have a difficult time believing the "Suits" give two damns about what development decisions are made back on the shop floor. As they say...the crap rolls down hill, and imo anyway...I highly doubt the big sticks at EA could care less about "Gameflow" or "Vision cone". That's someone else's concern. The big dogs concern is about one thing...profit. And I'm pretty sure they really don't care what new features are added that may help fill the investors portfolios, and save their jobs. I just can't imagine two executives having their $200 lunch, talking about how happy they are "Gameflow" was added this year.

And I am sure that when they have their board meetings they don't ask what the new big back of the box features are, and how they are coming along, and how the Community Day people thought of it and what the telemetry data from the demo was or anything like that.

I am also sure that when Ian or whom ever has to make Madden 12, that they didn't give the directors/suits a priorities list of what they are planning on doing all year. That and other things likely don't happen either.

# 43 Vikes1 @ 08/13/10 04:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PGaither84


	And I am sure that when they have their board meetings they don't ask what the new big back of the box features are, and how they are coming along, and how the Community Day people thought of it and what the telemetry data from the demo was or anything like that. I am also sure that when Ian or whom ever has to make Madden 12, that they didn't give the directors/suits a priorities list of what they are planning on doing all year. That and other things likely don't happen either.

Well PG, it seems as though we have a difference of opinion on this.

With you having been at the studio, maybe you have a much clearer view of whats what than I do. But again...I just have a tough time believing the executives are really involved with much of the design decisions. And for those that are unhappy about the direction of the game, I'm just not too sure the blame [if any] falls into the laps of the higher ups. JMO.

# 44 Other Guy @ 08/13/10 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vikes1


	Well PG, it seems as though we have a difference of opinion on this. With you having been at the studio, maybe you have a much clearer view of whats what than I do. But again...I just have a tough time believing the executives are really involved with much of the design decisions. And for those that are unhappy about the direction of the game, I'm just not too sure the blame [if any] falls into the laps of the higher ups. JMO.

I agree with you in this regard, and I think it backs up my point. EA's executives don’t have the slightest concern about specific game features. IMO, they are only worried about one thing, the bottom line.

I'd say the execs have two main concerns with Madden. Release on time, and stay under budget. The bottom line. This is what I mean when I say that the corporate office has done as much as anyone to impede the game's progression. They simply don't have any desire or interest in making the game better. They probably don't even care if the game is any good or not. So long as it's good enough that the sales meet their projections.

I don't want to go too deep into this. I just think to improve Madden to where we'd all like to see it would cost some money. And I don't think the people who make the financial decisions are willing to spend it, for many, many reasons.

# 45 roadman @ 08/13/10 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vikes1


	Very solid post in it's entirety Spank. But I'll just focus on the above statement. And I agree with you. Of course I know nothing of the inner workings of the Tiburon studio. But I just have a difficult time believing the "Suits" give two damns about what development decisions are made back on the shop floor. As they say...the crap rolls down hill, and imo anyway...I highly doubt the big sticks at EA could care less about "Gameflow" or "Vision cone". That's someone else's concern. The big dogs concern is about one thing...profit. And I'm pretty sure they really don't care what new features are added that may help fill the investors portfolios, and save their jobs. I just can't imagine two executives having their $200 lunch, talking about how happy they are "Gameflow" was added this year.

Sorry Vikes, I need to respectfully disagree on this one and that means I don't agree with Spank, either.

Since Peter Moore arrived, he's talked about making the game more accessible to the general population and also has talked about DLC and sticking it to the consumer.

Maddens sales have been lagging for the past several years and EA stock price is real low at 16. They also laid off hundreds of people late last year.

I think Peter Moore is very much involved, along with marketing, on the decision making at Tibouran.

I don't know the inner workings, either, but the facts above are hard to deny.

# 46 joec63 @ 08/13/10 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roadman


	Sorry Vikes, I need to respectfully disagree on this one and that means I don't agree with Spank, either. Since Peter Moore arrived, he's talked about making the game more accessible to the general population and also has talked about DLC and sticking it to the consumer. Maddens sales have been lagging for the past several years and EA stock price is real low at 16. They also laid off hundreds of people late last year. I think Peter Moore is very much involved, along with marketing, on the decision making at Tibouran. I don't know the inner workings, either, but the facts above are hard to deny.

I could name a bunch of companies with a low stock price. I don't think it necessarily correlates to EA's stock price with Madden sales in this economy. New IP is what drives stock price which I don't see much coming from EA. While there have been some hits like Red Dead Redemption the market has been flat. Especially for games with yearly releases.

Edit:

Quote:


	Many analysts predicting another steep decline in July US game industry sales got a pleasant surprise today, when NPD reported that revenues were virtually flat year-over-year. For the period running from July 4 to July 31, combined US sales of non-PC game software, hardware, and accessories sank just 1 percent to $846.5 million. Meanwhile, software sales were down 8 percent to $403.3 million for July. NPD's top 10 was dominated by Electronic Arts' NCAA Football 11, which took first place on the 360 with 368,000 units and second on the PS3 with 298,800 units. The 360-exclusive Crackdown 2 came in third with 208,800 units, followed by returning Wii favorite Super Mario Galaxy 2 with 193,000 units. Rounding out the top five was Lego Harry Potter: Years 1-4 with 141,700 units. http://www.gamespot.com/news/6273307...es%3Btitle%3B3

# 47 mauro78 @ 08/13/10 11:58 AM

So the big question is coming next: can a possibly loss in sales + global crysis (employee layoff) + lawsuits bring to EA lost or not renew of the NFL license?

p.s
I'm not and EA ***** just like competition

# 48 joec63 @ 08/13/10 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mauro78


	So the big question is coming next: can a possibly loss in sales + global crysis (employee layoff) + lawsuits bring to EA lost or not renew of the NFL license? p.s I'm not and EA ***** just like competition

I think we as customers would be better off for it also, plus I usually bought both anyway. A win/win for both companies. It will come down to money as always, if the NFL believes they can make more with multiple licenses then they will do it. That hasn't been the case so far as they extended to 2013. Especially with EA guarenteeing millions upfront. The NFL wasn't thrilled with 2K selling their game for $20 as it undercut their brand.

# 49 mauro78 @ 08/13/10 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joec63


	Especially with EA guarenteeing millions upfront. The NFL wasn't thrilled with 2K selling their game for $20 as it undercut their brand.

yeah...IMHO a worst Marketing decison :-(

# 50 BezO @ 08/13/10 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mva5580


	I just think that it's time for the user base at sites like this to accept that they are the EXTREME minority, and if anything should be grateful that EA puts as much effort as they do into making the game as realistic as it currently is. Because let's face it, most people just don't care. I'll bet you right now that a good percentage of the people who play this game aren't even aware that sliders exist, let alone care about going in and messing around with them. They just want to buy the game, play it with updated rosters/uniforms/etc, and have what their definition of fun is. Because their's is obviously different from people like us on this site.

IMO, EA should be greatful for the business.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mva5580


	And then you have to consider how far do you go with "Realistic?" For example say you're the Lions and you're playing against the Saints. Should you lose that game 99% of the time? ALWAYS, no matter what difficulty level the game is on, no matter how good you personally are at the game, etc? Because so often I hear people complain about "robo QB," defenders always batting balls down, too many injuries, and whatever else. Ok so if that stuff is actually set on a realistic level, we'd all be losing A LOT more than we do. If you really want the CPU AI to play you as the actual NFL team would play you, then you're not going 15-1, 14-2, 13-3 with very many teams in the game. If ever. And you'd rarely ever win the Super Bowl, as that's obviously REALLY hard to do. So are you ok with that? Or do you want it realistic, but realistic to the point of always being able to win? Where does it stop? And who defines where it stops?

If I pick an inferior team, I'm doing it knowing it's a bigger challenge, so yes, I want it as realistic as they can get it.

But also, IMO, difficulty & realism are 2 separate things. One has nothing to do with the other. To me, realism is about how players move, what they key on, how they react, team identies, ect. These are animation & AI elements.

Inferior teams beat better teams all the time. There are upsets every week. When an inferior team beats a better team, it's usually because they were better prepared, played harder, made more plays, made less mistakes, and the "better" team did the opposite. Difficulty settings should effect those elements. So, for example, easier difficulty settings should weaken the CPU's gameplan, lower their effort, miss more big plays, make more mistakes, while the user controlled team does the opposite. IMO, there's nothing unrealistic about that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mva5580


	It's impossible to navigate. It just is. And those people who some of us call "casuals" are probably going to get the most attention because they are the majority. Always will be. I just think that for how much people harp on demanding the game to be absolutely as realistic as possible, a lot of those same people would have a problem with how difficult the game was if it truly was that realistic.

Casual fans would enjoy a realistic game. It's what they see every Sunday. But again, realism & difficulty SHOULDN'T be related IMO. Casual fans only use unrealistic elements like dropping back 15 yards because they give the gamer an advantage. If EA made it more advantageous to stay in the pocket, they'd do that. The same way casuals & tournament style players find unrealistic ways to gain advantages, they'd find realistic ways if the game was made that way. They even have a perfect example on Sundays. I actually think it takes more work to COME UP with unrealistic strategy.

Realism is not how easy/hard it is to pass, for example. Just like some QBs have an easier time than others, so will gamers. Realism is how the d/o-line interact, how WRs run routes, how DBs/LBs cover, how the players move & react, ect.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RaiderKtulu


	The sad thing here is that the moment EA tries to do something innovative, they get blasted for it. Vision cone anyone?

Of course it's a matter of opinion, but to me, innovation in a sports game should make it more like the real thing. Though the vision cone did duplicate scanning the field and differentiated QBs, there was a flashlight on the field. And once you realized that all you had to do was hold R2(?) and double tap the pass button, the feature became useless.

For several years I suggested a similar feature. Replace the flashlight with QB head/shoulder movement, and only give icons to WRs in the QB's line of sight. Now you're adding a realistic football element without the arcadey intrusion on the visuals.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jerry161


	I for one find this thread very disturbing. For a site supposed to be about hard core sports fan gamers I find it very disappointing that all you guys seem to want to talk about is the lack of game modes or changes. I as a sports fan want them to work on the fundamentals of the game to get back to what the game of football is actually like and get away from all these gimmicks and video game footballl modes. Personally you can keep your new crap like vision cones and superstar mode. Please get the fundamentals of the game on the field fixed!!! The national media has also geared itself toward complaining about missing features. Give me a break! This Madden has made more progress than any next gen Madden!

!!!!!!!

I could live without another "feature" until they get the players to move, interact, think & react like NFL players.

# 51 Vikes1 @ 08/13/10 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roadman


	Sorry Vikes, I need to respectfully disagree on this one and that means I don't agree with Spank, either. Since Peter Moore arrived, he's talked about making the game more accessible to the general population and also has talked about DLC and sticking it to the consumer. Maddens sales have been lagging for the past several years and EA stock price is real low at 16. They also laid off hundreds of people late last year. I think Peter Moore is very much involved, along with marketing, on the decision making at Tibouran. I don't know the inner workings, either, but the facts above are hard to deny.

Thank you Roadman for the respectful response.

And you do make some very good points...that yes, are hard to deny.

# 52 spankdatazz22 @ 08/13/10 04:17 PM

I have no doubt that the "suits" have influence into what content goes into Madden/NCAA. But I would think that's the case with any of their games. I used to wonder years ago back in my Maddenmania days whether EA's marketing department held more sway than the Tiburon team itself did based on what content was going into the game. But ultimately I feel the programming reflects on Tiburon more than anything else.

This generation we've seen everything receive blame. First, it was the need for time to learn the new hardware. Then it was David Ortiz's fault Madden's in the state it's in. Then it was the suits. Then it was the yearly development schedule. Blaming everything except the one constant and the most obvious, Tiburon itself. They've made many foolish programming decisions collectively. Last gen Madden and NCAA had two huge issues they were behind in the competition - player interaction and presentation. They always had ultra-deep franchise modes, game options, etc. Graphics were too cartoonish compared to other games at the time but ultimately it was a matter of taste. From a gameplay standpoint most people wanted improvement, but accepted what the game was as the standard. Fast forward six years and the game still has player interaction and presentation problems, and have added franchise depth and game modes as additional issues. The one area they've clearly improved upon is graphics.

I'm the last person to defend EA management because I hate how they've gone about doing business. But it would seem they helped place Tiburon in an ideal situation by purchasing NFL/NCAA exclusivity, where's there's NO competition. I'd liken it to a guy being placed on an island full of women where they have no other options - and you still have problems pulling them. At some point they have to look into the mirror. Pro-Tak, individual running back styles, the game that adapts to you, etc., all short-sighted one year and done features that weren't expanded on. And each flawed in it's concept and implementation. There are more, but the pattern is the same.

# 53 AndyP @ 08/13/10 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PGaither84


	And I am sure that when they have their board meetings they don't ask what the new big back of the box features are, and how they are coming along, and how the Community Day people thought of it and what the telemetry data from the demo was or anything like that. I am also sure that when Ian or whom ever has to make Madden 12, that they didn't give the directors/suits a priorities list of what they are planning on doing all year. That and other things likely don't happen either.

I disagree. I bet all design decisions are run past the Tiburon studio execs. Guys like Jeremy Strauser who himself used to be a Madden producer... in fact, I remember talking to somebody back at one of the community day events several years back about plans 2-3 years down the road. I got the distinct impression that a road map was laid out several years in advance.

# 54 MATRIXakaCHAMP @ 08/14/10 10:37 AM

i am a maddenholic and with that being said until they get all the bugs out of madden the ncaa football is a much much better game this year

# 55 PGaither84 @ 08/14/10 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndyP


	I disagree. I bet all design decisions are run past the Tiburon studio execs. Guys like Jeremy Strauser who himself used to be a Madden producer... in fact, I remember talking to somebody back at one of the community day events several years back about plans 2-3 years down the road. I got the distinct impression that a road map was laid out several years in advance.

ZOOM! The sarcasm went right over your head.

Also, I want to 2ed everything BezO said.

# 56 blklightning @ 08/15/10 06:18 AM

^^^ yup. lol.

# 57 db56 @ 08/15/10 11:36 AM

I couldnt agree more the original poster, its obvious the folks at EA know what quota they have to hit to consider their 11 product a success and they dont give a damn about anything else. I'm not talking about the Ian and Phils of the project either, these types of decisions come from the suits.

although the game is ok and I'm happy to have the game and legitimate rosters, a part of me is still @!ssed.

# 58 dolfanfrank @ 08/15/10 04:24 PM

Couple questions guys, much has been said regarding EA implamenting a different engine and not having time to do that.

Could it be expalined why that would be a problam,I understand they have a 12 month schedule,however many times I have read that almost like real football and the draft once madden launches ea is into the next years game.

Why couldnt they simply start work on the engine change over early then once the last version of the old engine ships they can pick up work for the next years game with the "new engine"....supposedly this years madden has a more physics based feel how where they able to implament that change with the tight schedule they have?

Other games from EA NBA most notably are as I understand it changing the engine completely.

EA's reluctance to go to a pure physics(dare I say euphoria) seems to me more about money than producing the best football experiece,I'd almost bet that if one sat down with John Madden and showed him how arcady EA's game is and then show him how it could be with a physics engine he'd be a bit disappointed that EA is not doing its best to make the game more real).

Its a bit frustrating that the game seems to have stagnated at this point when the technology is available to continue to make Madden a fantastic game.

# 59 KBLover @ 08/15/10 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mva5580


	And then you have to consider how far do you go with "Realistic?" For example say you're the Lions and you're playing against the Saints. Should you lose that game 99% of the time? ALWAYS, no matter what difficulty level the game is on, no matter how good you personally are at the game, etc?

Let's see - I pick a team that went 0-16 two years ago and I'm going to complain about getting beat? Really?

I fantasy draft a team full of rookies and weak veterans - I go up a team that's got its stuff together. Yeah. I'm going to lose in all likelihood.

Lions vs Saints SHOULD be tough on default settings. If people want to make it so the Lions win 100% of the time - go tweak, put it on rookie, whatever. But the out of the box settings (default All-Pro) should make that battle a VERY hard match up and playing well might not be enough - because you're not the whole team.

I think people forget football is a team sport and just focus on the one guy with the circle under him and how he should be able to win the game by just his own effort, even if the other 52 guys on the roster suck because the user has stick skills or whatever.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mva5580


	Because so often I hear people complain about "robo QB," defenders always batting balls down, too many injuries, and whatever else. Ok so if that stuff is actually set on a realistic level, we'd all be losing A LOT more than we do. If you really want the CPU AI to play you as the actual NFL team would play you, then you're not going 15-1, 14-2, 13-3 with very many teams in the game. If ever. And you'd rarely ever win the Super Bowl, as that's obviously REALLY hard to do. So are you ok with that?

YES, PLEASE GOD YES

I DON'T want to win the Super Bowl all the time. I WANT to scrap and claw and have to play nearly flawless to win 13+ games and even then, crap happens, stars make a mistake, etc, and I might lose. I WANT a game like the Ravens had last year where they sucked the first half of the game, came storming back in the 4th against the Vikings...only to miss the FG and lose.

I WANT games where nothing seems to go right and everything is effort. I WANT the game to be a war of attrition of sorts, because the real NFL certainly is (depth, anyone?) I WANT to have to rest my HB and not run him 30 times every game, shattering Larry Johnson's carries in a season record time and time again.

So YES PLEASE GOD YES give me that game that makes me think like a NFL coach, the makes me care about my players, that makes me look at their injury history, that makes me care about how my playbook is set up, not just if they have 99 SPD or I can stick skill my way to 16-0.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mva5580


	Or do you want it realistic, but realistic to the point of always being able to win? Where does it stop? And who defines where it stops?

Real life dictates where it stops. If I play sucker teams with an elite one - I should have a high chance of winning. If they have a good day and or I suck that day, then I could lose. You know, like what really happens when elite teams play suckers in the NFL.

If real life NFL backs can rush for 5 ypc on average, then that's what the game should be set to. The average rush is 4 - then so be it, average backs should be at that. If I have the Saints, it should be hard to stop me through the air. If I'm the Ravens, my defense should be hard to attack on the ground, but weak against the pass.

If I have Revis - he should be lights out good. He shouldn't struggle in coverage because his SPD is 93 and he's going against a 97 SPD WR who can't run a route to save his life. I couldn't use Ray Rice like in real life because either screens were too good (so I'd just run over them with them) while the running game was ridiculously unrealistic with the "jump off being totally engaged because your hit box got near mine - nevermind that I was totally locked up" tackling by the DL.

That's what realism is about - every player playing to his skills as close to his real life counterpart as possible. However that plays out will determine the outcome of games.

It's not about win percentages - it's about making teams play like their NFL counterparts which will bring in more strategies, varied gameplay, and more things you have to account for instead of all the teams basically playing the same way.

# 60 KBLover @ 08/15/10 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BezO


	For several years I suggested a similar feature. Replace the flashlight with QB head/shoulder movement, and only give icons to WRs in the QB's line of sight. Now you're adding a realistic football element without the arcadey intrusion on the visuals.

Yes. Please make a football game

Seriously, this is the kind of stuff that would be great.

I thought about the Tecmo Bowl style, except instead of an arrow, have the receiver's icon show up and the speed with which the icons change targets when you hit the "change receiver" button is based on QB's AWR.

« Previous 1 23Next »

More Links

Out of Bounds: The Billion Dollar Elephant in the Room