NCAA Football 13 News Post

Five Things to Improve NCAA Football 13

11:50 AM - January 30, 2012 by RaychelSnr

For years, the NCAA Football series has sold well and enjoyed great reviews.

But this year, it feels like the tides of public opinion have shifted, and a series that once seemed immune to criticism is now subject to a growing wave of discontent. It doesn’t take more than 5 minutes in the OS forums to see that dedicated sports gamers have a whole laundry list of complaints and suggestions.

In this article, I discuss five things that the NCAA Football 13 team could do to restore gamers’ faith in the series.

Read More - Five Things for NCAA Football 13

Game: NCAA Football 13Reader Score: 7/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3 / Xbox 360Votes for game: 60 - View All

NCAA Football 13 Videos

Member Comments

# 161 blkrptnt819 @ 02/16/12 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheNumber35


	You're correct with the CoD development cycle...I just don't know how productive this would be because, in a sense, you would have a development studio starting from scratch while EA Tiburon has all this basis to create a working product. Personally, I think EA might be smart to release 13 and then...when the next season comes out (14) and we want new updated ratings for rosters, they could offer DLC at $5 a pop with rosters. Then release 15 and repeat. Still running on the 2 year cycle but not handicapping another studio's game (which would be much much worse than the game we're currently getting), plus we get roster and rating updates which is something we all want

Maybe EA Vancouver could be the other studio. I would think they would have little problem working with the system.

# 162 TheNumber35 @ 02/16/12 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blkrptnt819


	Maybe EA Vancouver could be the other studio. I would think they would have little problem working with the system.

That's true, I didn't think of them honestly...either way, a 2 year cycle may be the future of this game. It makes sense for them to do it that way until they can build a good enough product to release yearly with some slight tweaks

# 163 gogators @ 02/16/12 02:27 PM

I was mainly talking in regards to the excuse for us not getting 85 man rosters. If Mass Effect and Skyrim can fit on one disk then there has to be a way to get 85 man rosters on a disk... plus FCS teams. I wouldn't care if I had to download something to keep on my HD. JUST COME OUT WITH A GREAT NCAA GAME EA SPORTS!

# 164 CuseGirl @ 02/16/12 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheNumber35


	You're correct with the CoD development cycle...I just don't know how productive this would be because, in a sense, you would have a development studio starting from scratch while EA Tiburon has all this basis to create a working product. Personally, I think EA might be smart to release 13 and then...when the next season comes out (14) and we want new updated ratings for rosters, they could offer DLC at $5 a pop with rosters. Then release 15 and repeat. Still running on the 2 year cycle but not handicapping another studio's game (which would be much much worse than the game we're currently getting), plus we get roster and rating updates which is something we all want

That's good for us, it's not good for shareholders. Shareholders wanna hear that every year, a new Madden and NCAA is coming out.

In my opinion, I dont understand why the game comes out every single year when there aren't drastic changes made each year. They really only have what, 7 months to really work on the game? Asinine.

# 165 TheNumber35 @ 02/16/12 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CuseGirl


	That's good for us, it's not good for shareholders. Shareholders wanna hear that every year, a new Madden and NCAA is coming out. In my opinion, I dont understand why the game comes out every single year when there aren't drastic changes made each year. They really only have what, 7 months to really work on the game? Asinine.

100% agree with you...there aren't enough changes to warrant a release every single year (or 7 months, as you said above) and I think that while my suggestion is logical, it will never happen because of your point about shareholders and the profit EA is making by selling a flawed product. Hell, if I could sell someone a turd in a fancy box (granted this is a little extreme) for $60...I wouldn't change much either lol

# 166 akacesfan @ 02/17/12 03:01 AM

This is something small, but it would be nice if we could create, merge, and rename conferences. I'm scared to change the Pac-12 due to the name, and it would be nice if I could actually do that MWC-CUSA merger.

The only reason I'd want to create conferences is so I could do an FCS dynasty.

# 167 gogators @ 02/17/12 09:43 AM

I really don't want to hear about the one year cycle either. MLB The Show, NBA 2K are and have been great. Fifa and NHL turned their series around with one year cylces. EA had no problem letting NBA Live go when it was going to get released with tons of bugs.

It can be done and EA and the NCAA team just refuse bc people still buy because there is nothing else.

# 168 bmike08 @ 02/17/12 06:07 PM

Great article!! Also It would be great if they updated dynasty mode, if they add a couple of the PS2 features like player infractions/ NCAA violations. Also it would be great if they made conference prestige static, allowing teams to make the conference.

# 169 WipeOut464 @ 02/18/12 01:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bmike08


	Great article!! Also It would be great if they updated dynasty mode, if they add a couple of the PS2 features like player infractions/ NCAA violations. Also it would be great if they made conference prestige static, allowing teams to make the conference.

I'm all for adding PS2 features like spring practice, soundtracks, and camera shake, but EA's already said that player violations aren't coming back - apparently the NCAA put the kibosh on it because it reflects poorly on the actual athletes or some such nonsense.

And I think you mean dynamic instead of static for conference prestige.

# 170 Potatoes002 @ 02/18/12 01:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WipeOut464


	I'm all for adding PS2 features like spring practice, soundtracks, and camera shake, but EA's already said that player violations aren't coming back - apparently the NCAA put the kibosh on it because it reflects poorly on the actual athletes or some such nonsense. And I think you mean dynamic instead of static for conference prestige.

Link to where they said this?

I doubt this is really the case. PS2 versions of the game still had the feature in the game up until they stopped making it. If the NCAA was actually mad about such a feature, it would have been removed from that game, too.

# 171 TreyDobbs @ 02/18/12 03:07 AM

One HUGE thing I can tell the developers that needs an improvement is the animation for the receiviers. It's like the receivers expect the ball to just fall into their hands. They ALWAYS lower their hands to around their waist while the DBs covering them always have their hands up in the air ready to either A) Bat the ball down or B) Intercept the ball. Why can DBs have their hands up in the air ready to pick a pass off, but the WRs can't?

# 172 blkrptnt819 @ 02/18/12 06:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Potatoes002


	Link to where they said this? I doubt this is really the case. PS2 versions of the game still had the feature in the game up until they stopped making it. If the NCAA was actually mad about such a feature, it would have been removed from that game, too.

That was said a looooooong time ago. Search for it on the web and it should come up.

# 173 blkrptnt819 @ 02/18/12 06:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TreyDobbs


	One HUGE thing I can tell the developers that needs an improvement is the animation for the receiviers. It's like the receivers expect the ball to just fall into their hands. They ALWAYS lower their hands to around their waist while the DBs covering them always have their hands up in the air ready to either A) Bat the ball down or B) Intercept the ball. Why can DBs have their hands up in the air ready to pick a pass off, but the WRs can't?

The passing game needs some work. Have you ever noticed that any vertical pass is ALWAYS behind the receiver? They ALWAYS have to turn around to catch it.

# 174 CuseGirl @ 02/18/12 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blkrptnt819


	The passing game needs some work. Have you ever noticed that any vertical pass is ALWAYS behind the receiver? They ALWAYS have to turn around to catch it.

well that's because the timing on those throws is all wrong. The man coverage in this game is all whacked. Either a player is completely BLANKETED with no chance to throw to him or he's wide open. When the DBs go into press coverage, you only have 2 results, either the receiver is completely removed from the play (defensive win) or the receiver gets this magical BOOST to shoot him upfield (offensive win) but by the time the QB can see the receiver upfield, the safety has already reacted, you throw the pass and it's not like the reciever EVER gets behind a safety, so the pass is behind the play. At least that's what I've seen in my games :shrugs:

Only one time I've had my receiver get past the defense and when I threw the pass, I held up on the left stick and that doesn't actually put the pass AHEAD of the receiver, it just puts it HIGHER in the air. And it made the receiver jump forward, catch the ball but fall on the ground. He was wide open, the pass was perfect, he should have caught it in stride and walked into the end zone.

# 175 blkrptnt819 @ 02/18/12 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CuseGirl


	well that's because the timing on those throws is all wrong. The man coverage in this game is all whacked. Either a player is completely BLANKETED with no chance to throw to him or he's wide open. When the DBs go into press coverage, you only have 2 results, either the receiver is completely removed from the play (defensive win) or the receiver gets this magical BOOST to shoot him upfield (offensive win) but by the time the QB can see the receiver upfield, the safety has already reacted, you throw the pass and it's not like the reciever EVER gets behind a safety, so the pass is behind the play. At least that's what I've seen in my games :shrugs: Only one time I've had my receiver get past the defense and when I threw the pass, I held up on the left stick and that doesn't actually put the pass AHEAD of the receiver, it just puts it HIGHER in the air. And it made the receiver jump forward, catch the ball but fall on the ground. He was wide open, the pass was perfect, he should have caught it in stride and walked into the end zone.

And on 0 blitzes your WR NEVER get off press coverage. It's insane the way this game is programmed.

# 176 khaliib @ 02/20/12 03:17 PM

A Global Ratings Editor.
97% of Offline gamers utilize adjusted player ratings.

Thanks to guys like GotMadskillzson, Playmaker and countless others, we've learned that by adjusting some ratings to certain levels, we can get the game to perform much better and in-line with what the community has been asking for since being on Next-Gen.

It's simply a CONTROL thing why we don't have the ability still today.
They need the game to be less customizable as it allows them to add tidbits every year to resale a product that has had NO Major advancement as the only college game.

Think we will be given customizable camera's or playable Broadcast camera (esp since their pushing Broadcast TV Presentation), don't hold your breath!

Remember, less custimization allows injections to be sold in the next years release as "New addition, we're listening to the community" sales pitch.

Second thing it needs after Gameplay Fixes is More Gamer Customization beyond visuals (uniforms, logo's etc...).

Get your popcorn ready and enjoy the show when they hit the pinnicle of their marketing push, it's going to be entertaining!!!

# 177 mestevo @ 02/20/12 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by khaliib


	97% of Offline gamers utilize adjusted player ratings.

Um... what?

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

# 178 khaliib @ 02/20/12 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mestevo


	Um... what? Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

Most Offline gamers use rosters that have had some type of ratings tweeking if they've downloaded.

Outside of Fairdale and one or two others that only do named rosters, most others have had some type of tweeking done, whether the downloader knows it or not.

Ther's always the infamous SPEED debate every year about players on the default roster that opens the editing gate.

Neather here nor there, the crux of my post was that after 5 releases, this game is built giving the gamer the LEAST customization of all sports games in the genre, this includes Madden.

And that it's done that way on purpose.
Still waiting on a Playable Broadcast Cam or different cam's at that (doubt in will be in '13)

That's all I'm saying.
Greater gamer customization beyond visuals!!!

# 179 CuseGirl @ 02/20/12 09:52 PM

97%? where did that number come from?

# 180 khaliib @ 02/20/12 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CuseGirl


	97%? where did that number come from?

Well because there is no actual database keeping tabs of any of how many gamers download rosters on OS and other sites, it's just an assumption based on what I've seen from offline roster download request over the years on various sites, not just OS.

Not meant to be exact (which doesn't really matter as we all post assumptions on these forums), but close enough to the fact that every year the "this player should be rated this and/or this player should be this fast" etc... causes most gamers to do themselves or download some type of an edited roster.

But most important is that it doesn"t take away from my main premise.

That this game has the Least Customization (exclude visuals) of all sports games in the genre today.

I might not have worded it correctly for some folk to tie it into my statement, but believe it's on point as something that's needed.

« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8910 11 Next »

More Links

Five Things to Improve NCAA Football 13