NCAA Football 12 News Post

Fact or Fiction: NCAA Football 12 Outlook

12:57 PM - July 1, 2011 by ChaseB

Serving as the moderator for this edition of Fact or Fiction, I wanted to ask some questions that echoed some of the sentiments I had been reading on the site in regards to the NCAA Football 12 demo.

Dustin Toms and Christian McLeod were the two participants this time around, and they had the opportunity to answer those questions.

Read More: Fact or Fiction: NCAA Football 12 Outlook

Game: NCAA Football 12Reader Score: 7/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3 / Xbox 360Votes for game: 104 - View All

NCAA Football 12 Videos

Member Comments

# 41 edaddy @ 07/01/11 04:08 PM

I think that there is more than a minority that agree with Jaysons opinion..Secondly whenChristian and Dustin mention that Ea enhanced CPU AI I just dont get it..The CPU is playing exactly like it did in NCAA 11 the CPU still cant run the ball in spread and shotgun offenses..The CPU still blitzes too much on defense and leaves the middle of the field open like NCAA 11..The CPU still has terrible clock management like NCAA 11 ,and the throwing away immediately after the snap has actually been present for a while now..QB scrambling is random which I guess could be considered an improvement..Phsycic DB's and LB's who jump 50 inches are still a problem which again was present in NCAA 11...So if I am missing something please someone tell me what exactly has improved with the CPU AI...oh my bad forgot something the CPU RB no longer covers the ball up while running downfield anymore..hmmm great improvement...

# 42 khaliib @ 07/01/11 04:10 PM

Write-ups like this has really shed a light on how differ's in opinion and expression on OS has changed drastically from how things were done several years ago.

If your going to bring Jayson's comments up, only to break down his perspective to justify yours, at least give him the opportunity to refute your argument agaist his comments in this write-up.

Kind of Garbage to gang/team up against his write-up as though his statements were off base.

To me, a good write-up will have the views of both sides to contrast both levels of thinking instead of what seems to be a subtle attempt to attack a Majority of OS'rs that seemed to agree with Jayson write-up.

I get that some staff don't want to Rock-the-Boat with EA Developement Team, but be fair and allow the other side of the coin to be seen in this type of write-up.

Would've been nice instead of going this route, you could've did a write-up about the negatives expressed by "YOUR" community and the Ideas/Fixes that this community has Tested to be viable remedies to some of those negatives.

Gloating over "Some" of the positive things that the game has done, does not change the "Fact" that this game is not were it should be in 2012, period.

My facts to support this claim comes from this...
**The number of people that will need to Adjust Sliders/Tweak Player Ratings to improve out-of-the-box Gameplay in the same yearly noted areas.

I agree that there are postives as you've noted, and I personally will enjoy those positive aspects of the game in some fashion.
But I will/can not praise this write-up as "Good", because of the "One-Sided" perspective in which it was written.

# 43 BenGerman @ 07/01/11 04:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dochalladay32


	And the NFL is on CBS, FOX, ESPN, and NBC. NBA is on ABC, TNT, ESPN, etc... You can't cover everything.

I'm not sure what you're implying. My point was was that we have seen other games plug in multiple networks into their game. The same could be done in NCAA, and they (Tiburon) have even admitted to looking into it in the future.

Its definitely no gamebreaker, as I already said I have ways of working around the stale commentary. But it is something that would certainly add to the presentation and variety of a Dynasty mode. And by the way, ABC and ESPN have a partnership so I can't imagine it would be terribly difficult to get ABC in. CBS was in NCAA Basketball 10, so thats certainly possible as well.

# 44 ChaseB @ 07/01/11 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by khaliib


	Write-ups like this has really shed a light on how differ's in opinion and expression on OS has changed drastically from how things were done several years ago. If your going to bring Jayson's comments up, only to break down his perspective to justify yours, at least give him the opportunity to refute your argument agaist his comments in this write-up. Kind of Garbage to gang/team up against his write-up as though his statements were off base. To me, a good write-up will have the views of both sides to contrast both levels of thinking instead of what seems to be a subtle attempt to attack a Majority of OS'rs that seemed to agree with Jayson write-up. I get that some staff don't want to Rock-the-Boat with EA Developement Team, but be fair and allow the other side of the coin to be seen in this type of write-up. Would've been nice instead of going this route, you could've did a write-up about the negatives expressed by "YOUR" community and the Ideas/Fixes that this community has Tested to be viable remedies to some of those negatives. Gloating over "Some" of the positive things that the game has done, does not change the "Fact" that this game is not were it should be in 2012, period. My facts to support this claim comes from this... **The number of people that will need to Adjust Sliders/Tweak Player Ratings to improve out-of-the-box Gameplay in the same yearly noted areas. I agree that there are postives as you've noted, and I personally will enjoy those positive aspects of the game in some fashion. But I will/can not praise this write-up as "Good", because of the "One-Sided" perspective in which it was written.

I don't think having a different opinion should be considered ganging up on him, plus we just had Jayson's comments (and many others) in the roundtable the other day. Jayson probably would have been involved with this fact or fiction as well, but he's working on the review for the new Backbreaker game.

There's not some sinister underlying motive here. If you don't agree with where the franchise is at this point, it's fine, but just keep it to that then -- don't try to make it out like someone is saying you can't have a particular opinion. Neither writer came at Jayson like he's stupid for having that opinion. Personally, I tend to side more with Jayson on the gameplay front and understand where he's coming from when comparing the technological side of the gameplay to other sports franchises -- I would agree NCAA is not up to snuff in that department. However, Christian and Dustin take the entirety of the game into consideration more than I do.

# 45 splff3000 @ 07/01/11 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rudyjuly2


	Well I disagree with you guys and I'm not a 2K fanboy that yearns for 2K5 to be renewed. I've been a long time NCAA guy and the demo did not feel that different to me from NCAA 11. I certainly expect NCAA 12 to be better but is it that much better to be called NCAA 12 rather than NCAA 11.5? Not in my mind. The cpu spread is still weak, I still see super leaping LBs, I still see a real lack of player momentum where the players are clearly video game players whose movements do not reflect reality. They ruined the r-stick juke move after ruining the truck move last year and the stiff arm hasn't really existed on the PS3. The only special RB move we have left is the unrealistic spin move. I don't think the new tackling/collision system is that much different. It's not revolutionary in any way. We still don't have a true physics engine. The OL/DL interaction is still a very black and white affair with way too many pancakes. The upgraded presentation with game track and entrances is nice but that is offset but the very stale commentary. To talk about the positives zone defences are better. I've read that cpu scrambles more in the retail version. I can only hope that the cpu can run the spread offence properly since it's such a huge part of college football. The super jumping LB is toned down but still exists. NCAA 11 was a good game and NCAA 12 is a more refined version of that but I don't see any revolutionary changes. To be fair I think you can say that for almost any sports game year to year. For this game to become a monster of success I believe we need new commentary, a smarter cpu that actually plays like a human, and a true physics engine with realistic player movement. Just my two cents. I will be buying this game day one and I expect to have fun with my Michigan dynasty. I also expect to stop playing it once college football season is over as I don't think the game will be good enough to carry it year round.

I agree 100% with this post. I loved NCAA 11, so being NCAA 11.5 doesn't mean it's bad. I've only played the demo, but just judging from the demo, I would agree that this feels like NCAA 11.5. The same plays that seemed like they were unstoppable in 11 are the same in this demo. I picked up the game and instantly started scoring and doing the same things I had been able to do in 11. On the flipside, it usually takes me about 5 or 6 games to get used to the "feel" of the new game. Now, the same thing may happen when the retail version is released, but right now that's my take. Like the quoted poster said, being NCAA 11.5 isn't a bad thing and I will definitely be getting the game. I just don't feel enough was done to call it NCAA 12.

# 46 Eski33 @ 07/01/11 05:37 PM

Nice write up but comparing a demo to a full retail release (NCAA 11) is somewhat slanted.

Yes, comparing gameplay maybe but where the NCAA series shines is with its dynasty modes especially online. I could care less if the game looks marginally better or the commentary is stale, the gameplay is fun and the online dynasty keeps many busy for months. I dont know how many forums and articles I have read, including this one, where people mentioned that they played NCAA 11 for months. With the improvements to RTG and a new TeamBuilder, along with the fantastic OD, NCAA 12 will hold its own.

The discussion of commentary gets a little old. I know it is part of the presentation package but no matter what game you play the commentary gets repetitive. Not to mention that NCAA 11 commentary was so so and people played the hell out of it.

# 47 roadman @ 07/01/11 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by splff3000


	I agree 100% with this post. I loved NCAA 11, so being NCAA 11.5 doesn't mean it's bad. I've only played the demo, but just judging from the demo, I would agree that this feels like NCAA 11.5. The same plays that seemed like they were unstoppable in 11 are the same in this demo. I picked up the game and instantly started scoring and doing the same things I had been able to do in 11. On the flipside, it usually takes me about 5 or 6 games to get used to the "feel" of the new game. Now, the same thing may happen when the retail version is released, but right now that's my take. Like the quoted poster said, being NCAA 11.5 isn't a bad thing and I will definitely be getting the game. I just don't feel enough was done to call it NCAA 12.

Question for you?

How can you evaluate NCAA 11 vs 12 with all the patches and tuner sets vs not having the game yet?

I don't think it's a fair evaluation at this point? I think a more fairer evaluation will be when all the tuning and patches are released for 12 vs 11.

That's my take, that's why I can't justify with a demo build(someone said it was a build before the E3 build)vs the full game build. To me, it's similar comparing apples to oranges.

# 48 demon19000 @ 07/01/11 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChaseB


	I don't think having a different opinion should be considered ganging up on him, plus we just had Jayson's comments (and many others) in the roundtable the other day. Jayson probably would have been involved with this fact or fiction as well, but he's working on the review for the new Backbreaker game. There's not some sinister underlying motive here. If you don't agree with where the franchise is at this point, it's fine, but just keep it to that then -- don't try to make it out like someone is saying you can't have a particular opinion. Neither writer came at Jayson like he's stupid for having that opinion. Personally, I tend to side more with Jayson on the gameplay front and understand where he's coming from when comparing the technological side of the gameplay to other sports franchises -- I would agree NCAA is not up to snuff in that department. However, Christian and Dustin take the entirety of the game into consideration more than I do.

Thank you. I'm sick of the accusations of "sheep" or "EA is just pumping you money!" I loved the demo and think NCAA 12 will be great. That's my opinion, not a fact. I feel like sometimes we should hand out crosses to some (not all) of these people.

Anyways, good write up. Actually expressed many opinions that I had.

# 49 splff3000 @ 07/01/11 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roadman


	Question for you? How can you evaluate NCAA 11 vs 12 with all the patches and tuner sets vs not having the game yet? I don't think it's a fair evaluation at this point? I think a more fairer evaluation will be when all the tuning and patches are released for 12 vs 11. That's my take, that's why I can't justify with a demo build(someone said it was a build before the E3 build)vs the full game build. To me, it's similar comparing apples to oranges.

Well I wouldn't say it's comparing apples to oranges. It's more like comparing red apples to green apples lol, but you're right. That's why I said things may change once the retail version is released. Anyway, they're comparing a demo to retail in the article so that's why I was doing it.

So question for you:

Why is it ok for them to compare the demo to 11, but not for me?

EDIT: I never responded about the article itself. I thought the article SEEMED a bit bias, but I liked it. It would have been nice to have another person up there that wasn't as excited about 12, but the article was ok as it was. I understand how some people can be excited for 12 depending on what their expectations for 12 were.

# 50 Eski33 @ 07/01/11 05:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BenGerman


	I'm not sure what you're implying. My point was was that we have seen other games plug in multiple networks into their game. The same could be done in NCAA, and they (Tiburon) have even admitted to looking into it in the future. Its definitely no gamebreaker, as I already said I have ways of working around the stale commentary. But it is something that would certainly add to the presentation and variety of a Dynasty mode. And by the way, ABC and ESPN have a partnership so I can't imagine it would be terribly difficult to get ABC in. CBS was in NCAA Basketball 10, so thats certainly possible as well.

What other games, there has only been one. I would love to see multiple commentary teams but let's be realistic. Brad Nessler and Kirk Herbstreit arent doing this for free. Throw inone or two more commentary teams and there is additional cost.

# 51 splff3000 @ 07/01/11 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eski33


	I would love to see multiple commentary teams but let's be realistic. Brad Nessler and Kirk Herbstreit arent doing this for free.

Judging by how long the commentary has been virtually unchanged, I'd say Brad Nessler and Kirk herbstreit aren't doing anything as far as the commentary goes lol.

I'm sure EA could add one or 2 generic teams just to change things up every once in a while. Hell, me and a couple of my boys would do it for free lol. They could then have Brad and Kirk doing the big games and bowl games and it wouldn't get so repetitive.

# 52 canes21 @ 07/01/11 06:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by splff3000


	Judging by how long the commentary has been virtually unchanged, I'd say Brad Nessler and Kirk herbstreit aren't doing anything as far as the commentary goes lol. I'm sure EA could add one or 2 generic teams just to change things up every once in a while. Hell, me and a couple of my boys would do it for free lol. They could then have Brad and Kirk doing the big games and bowl games and it wouldn't get so repetitive.

Ever play NCAA Basketball 10? It had two commentary teams and was not worth it in my opinion. It was cool seeing different broadcast themes, but the commentary was terrible. After playing one or two games per network, you pretty much heard every single commentary line in the game.

Commentary takes up a lot of space on the disc. We already are all tired of the repetition we hear now. Adding more teams to commentary would only lead to each commentary team having less lines than the one we have now does. Do you really want to have multiple broadcast teams, but each one only has 1/4 the lines the current team has?

I wouldn't like that. Yes, it would be great to have a game on ESPN, then your next game a local made up network, and ABC for your bowl games. But it would get old quickly once you heard every single line 5 times throughout your first 3 games of the season.

I am more in favor of new tech like Madden is getting than more teams. More teams is not the answer, new ways implementing and controlling commentary are. Maybe if next generation all consoles have Blu-ray, then I'll be right there with you asking for multiple broadcast networks and commentary teams. But for now, I have to disagree with you.

# 53 rudyjuly2 @ 07/01/11 06:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roadman


	Question for you? How can you evaluate NCAA 11 vs 12 with all the patches and tuner sets vs not having the game yet? I don't think it's a fair evaluation at this point? I think a more fairer evaluation will be when all the tuning and patches are released for 12 vs 11. That's my take, that's why I can't justify with a demo build(someone said it was a build before the E3 build)vs the full game build. To me, it's similar comparing apples to oranges.

The article was about the NCAA Football 12 outlook and they are basically asking us to speculate about it. We have nothing more to go on other than the NCAA 12 demo and a handful of impressions out there.

I agree that it's hard to completely judge how NCAA 12 will be based on the demo because I usually find the default difficulty settings to be poor for an EA Football game. I'm a big slider guy which is why I would love to see sliders available in the demo although MLB the Show is the only dev team that allows this to my knowledge. We'll find out in two weeks how we really feel about NCAA 12.

# 54 DustinT @ 07/01/11 06:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PJ33


	CPU throwing the ball away? I had 8 sacks in my game on Heisman and not once did they throw it away. Camera angles are very stale. I have yet to see any broadcast angle where a camera circles a stadium constantly. I did like the collisions though, much improved there.

Really? Hell, the CPU completes more passes to the sidelines than his receivers in my experiences. That's kind of interesting if you ask me. Makes me wonder what triggers it.

# 55 splff3000 @ 07/01/11 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by canes21


	Ever play NCAA Basketball 10? It had two commentary teams and was not worth it in my opinion. It was cool seeing different broadcast themes, but the commentary was terrible. After playing one or two games per network, you pretty much heard every single commentary line in the game. Commentary takes up a lot of space on the disc. We already are all tired of the repetition we hear now. Adding more teams to commentary would only lead to each commentary team having less lines than the one we have now does. Do you really want to have multiple broadcast teams, but each one only has 1/4 the lines the current team has? I wouldn't like that. Yes, it would be great to have a game on ESPN, then your next game a local made up network, and ABC for your bowl games. But it would get old quickly once you heard every single line 5 times throughout your first 3 games of the season. I am more in favor of new tech like Madden is getting than more teams. More teams is not the answer, new ways implementing and controlling commentary are. Maybe if next generation all consoles have Blu-ray, then I'll be right there with you asking for multiple broadcast networks and commentary teams. But for now, I have to disagree with you.

I was not considering disc space and was more or less just replying to the previous poster about the cost of additional broadcast teams and things to avoid those costs.

# 56 khaliib @ 07/01/11 06:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChaseB


	There's not some sinister underlying motive here. If you don't agree with where the franchise is at this point, it's fine, but just keep it to that then -- don't try to make it out like someone is saying you can't have a particular opinion. Neither writer came at Jayson like he's stupid for having that opinion.

As I stated things here at OS has changed from how it was several years ago.

Not that there was a sinister motive by these writers in particular, but there seems to be a sinister attitude towards those that have a view that might not be as positive about the game.
(Just read some of the replies)

When the writer starts off by saying "It's people like this..." because the veiw was different, kind of seems like the whole purpose of the write-up was to say those that don't see the game on the same manner, simply are lacking something to have such a view.
(I wouldn't or did not say Stupid)

I wouldn't say that a Gamers can't have an opinion, but I've watched how none-positive notations about EA games have been met with sinister replies that seem to be given more leeway in expression.

In a nutshell, I replied because I wondered if those that agreed with Jayson's write-up (not as positve), if such a person would be given the same leeway to do a Fact or Fiction write-up to counter such gloating perspectives that the writers present?

Would it be Deleted?
Would they be warned or Banned?

I could care less one way or another and take no side, it's a video game.
I've got likes and dislikes, but still will buy and find a way to enjoy it.

This is the Best Gaming Forum in my opinion and I just don't want it to lose it's balance.

# 57 splff3000 @ 07/01/11 06:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DustinT


	Really? Hell, the CPU completes more passes to the sidelines than his receivers in my expeiences. That's kind of interesting if you ask me. Makes me wonder what triggers it.

I agree. I've seem them throw it away and there wasn't even that much pressure. I think some are just really bad passes lol.

# 58 jeremym480 @ 07/01/11 06:40 PM

Good article. Will read again.

Quote:

Originally Posted by roadman


	Question for you? How can you evaluate NCAA 11 vs 12 with all the patches and tuner sets vs not having the game yet? I don't think it's a fair evaluation at this point? I think a more fairer evaluation will be when all the tuning and patches are released for 12 vs 11. That's my take, that's why I can't justify with a demo build(someone said it was a build before the E3 build)vs the full game build. To me, it's similar comparing apples to oranges.

I think the only way you can compare the two at this point is to go back and play the 11 demo. If people can't see the differences between those two they're really not trying to see.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DustinT


	Really? Hell, the CPU completes more passes to the sidelines than his receivers in my expeiences. That's kind of interesting if you ask me. Makes me wonder what triggers it.

In my 5 or 6 games, I've seen a lot of the QB throwing the ball away on AA. Possibly too much.

# 59 roadman @ 07/01/11 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by splff3000


	Well I wouldn't say it's comparing apples to oranges. It's more like comparing red apples to green apples lol, but you're right. That's why I said things may change once the retail version is released. Anyway, they're comparing a demo to retail in the article so that's why I was doing it. So question for you: Why is it ok for them to compare the demo to 11, but not for me? EDIT: I never responded about the article itself. I thought the article SEEMED a bit bias, but I liked it. It would have been nice to have another person up there that wasn't as excited about 12, but the article was ok as it was. I understand how some people can be excited for 12 depending on what their expectations for 12 were.

That's a fair question and to answer that one, no offense, but I'll take someone who has experience with the E3 build vs someone who doesn't, which includes myself in that equation.

I just took it as Jayson stirred the hornet's up a bit and two others responded to it. Point-Counterpoint.

# 60 He1nousOne1 @ 07/01/11 07:10 PM

Well I for one appreciate all the tough critics. Keep that fire lit underneath their heels. With pretty much a monopoly, without such voices there would be no market mechanism pushing them to not be lazy at making the college game.

With that said though I am not one of those folks and for me this game is delivering what I wanted to see added on to NCAA 11. I love that game, got so many hours of enjoyment out of it that I do not see how an NCAA 11.5 is a bad thing anyways. If the .5 is all the things we have seen added on and fixed in the game then that is one hell of a .5. I'm all in for that. Its good to see some positive voices being raised so that the developers know they are on the right track. It can be easy to get caught up in negativity over things that still need work.

The year they make the perfect college football game is the year that makes the next year of the game unsellable. Come on guys...this is EA.

« Previous 1 234 5 6 Next »

More Links

Fact or Fiction: NCAA Football 12 Outlook