Madden NFL 25 News Post

25 Days of Madden: The Vision Cone

04:29 PM - August 5, 2013 by RaychelSnr

Throughout the Madden franchises' history, there have been a lot of feature which were hotly debated.

Few generated quite the uproar that the vision cone did when it was implemented in Madden NFL 06. The 'QB Vision Control' feature was polarizing, with people on either side giving numerous reasons why the cone was or was not the game-changing feature the franchise required.

For those who don't remember, the vision cone featured a cone of light on the field of play which denoted the QB's vision of the field. Better QBs had a very wide cone, which covered most of the field. Worse QBs had very narrow cones, giving the better QBs a clear leg up in the game.

However, controlling the cone with the right stick while moving the QB with the left stick proved too much for some gamers. Others simply hated the look and/or implementation of the feature.

With such a polarizing presence, the vision cone was scrapped entirely with no attempts to revive it or anything similar within the series since it's disappearance.

Where did/do you stand on the vision cone debate? Should it make a reappearance as a required feature within the game?

Game: Madden NFL 25Reader Score: 5/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3 / PS4 / Xbox 360 / Xbox OneVotes for game: 54 - View All

Madden NFL 25 Videos

Member Comments

# 61 cream6 @ 08/06/13 10:00 PM

Hated it!!!

# 62 Iceman87GT @ 08/06/13 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big FN Deal


	I know different people have different opinions but the notion that anything for most of this gen was about realism, is so unfounded. People keep mentioning how "sim", ie realistic Vision Cone was in 2005, when after looking at Tiburon's whole body of next-gen work, it's evident that realism has never been their target for anything, outside of graphics and rhetoric. The list of these type features is long and consistent throughout this exclusive football gen, so I just don't understand why some skew this into something they want to see come back or as sim. Yes, I repeat yes, the concept of actual "QB Vision" in football is realistic but this feature wasn't and was likely only loosely based on any real life counterpart, if at all. Looking at just that feature alone, it's easy for anyone to mistakenly conclude that the feature had a sim premise but the implementation was off, I did so myself in the past, however looking at all the features this entire gen for context, shows a much different, clear picture. Same thing with "fight for the fumble" and "throw a receiver open", just to name a couple, if isolated they seem sim intended with implementation that went astray but no, they worked as intended, to maximize User control, not football realism. I don't expect or necessarily want everyone to despise what Tiburon has done with football video games this gen like I do but I do want people to at least call a spade a spade. Tiburon has admittedly consistently prioritized User control over realism this gen yet some people still give them "sim" credit, where none is due. I don't begrudge anyone for their opinion of the QB Vision feature but it's what I perceive as the blatant mischaracterization of the feature and next-gen Madden as a whole, as even a genuine attempt at "sim", that irks me.

The Cone was absolutely added to the game as a way to increase the realism of the game, that's how they billed it when it was released. In contrast to your statement the removal of it (not the implementation) was to increase the amount of user control.

Players wanted to run Vick out of the pocket and throw across the field to the wide open guy, that's why so many hated it and that's why it got removed.

They were very specific when they discussed this mode, they knew that unrealistic play was rampant, players would run backwards and all around and then throw to a spot on the field that no QB would actually throw to after making those kinds of moves (because they would be throwing blind). We get to play the game in "god mode" thanks to the camera angle, that's not realistic, the Cone limited this lack of realism, by forcing you to first set then move the cone to the area before you could throw the ball, or risk an awful pass that would float and likely land nowhere near the area.

# 63 garnettfan @ 08/07/13 07:04 AM

That crap didn't have a effect on the game I keep the light on my hot read and throw the ball anywhere with accuracy

# 64 carnalnirvana @ 08/07/13 09:24 AM

i think the cone showed EA that going for realism or adding a learning curve to the game was not going to be insanely profitable or well received.

it turned off the casuals and imo from that point they took madden in a different direction.

# 65 DirkJesusNowitzki @ 08/07/13 09:43 AM

Loved it. Made the game harder to play but made it more realistic. I loved throwing off good stick guys using it. Mix up the guys you leave the cone on and then pump fake or switch receivers and pump fake to throw them off and then R2 switch the cone to the real target and throw it.

It also provided a much, much more realistic separation between average QB's and the elite guys.

# 66 nosaints26 @ 08/07/13 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iceman87GT


	The Cone was absolutely added to the game as a way to increase the realism of the game, that's how they billed it when it was released. In contrast to your statement the removal of it (not the implementation) was to increase the amount of user control. Players wanted to run Vick out of the pocket and throw across the field to the wide open guy, that's why so many hated it and that's why it got removed. They were very specific when they discussed this mode, they knew that unrealistic play was rampant, players would run backwards and all around and then throw to a spot on the field that no QB would actually throw to after making those kinds of moves (because they would be throwing blind). We get to play the game in "god mode" thanks to the camera angle, that's not realistic, the Cone limited this lack of realism, by forcing you to first set then move the cone to the area before you could throw the ball, or risk an awful pass that would float and likely land nowhere near the area.

This sums up my feelings.

Passing is now and will always be the most dry and boring part of gameplay in Madden for me.

The "improved" directional passing and better trajectories helps, but nothing parallels the effect of the vision cone and the extra depth and richness it added to the game on both sides of the ball.

Logically, people who wanted real, strategic football (win or lose) being replicated in Madden really enjoyed this feature.

People who just wanted to win at all costs and continue their mastery of the mediocre passing gameplay hated it.

# 67 dallain22 @ 08/07/13 11:26 AM

Thought the passing cone was one of the better features Madden came up with. Something to really differentiate the better QBs from the rest. Don't know why they don't keep simple things like this in the game - it could always be turned off for players that don't like it.

# 68 Benz87 @ 08/07/13 01:33 PM

I really enjoyed this feature and was excited to see it implemented, I was just as disappointed when it was removed. One of my gripes I�ve had with Madden for years, just like many others is the lack of impact players ratings have. I felt this feature did an excellent job differentiating between elite, average and below average quarterbacks. It would be nice if they brought it back with a user option.

# 69 KBLover @ 08/07/13 02:34 PM

I didn't like the vision cone because it doesn't really represent the difference in QBs. I.e. Brady doesn't "see more of the field" than Boller or Jamarcus Russell. Brady isn't better at throwing without looking, nor can he throw without looking to more of the field, etc. To me, it's not more realistic; it's just a different kind of unrealism.

It's reading coverages and making adjustments on the fly that's different. It's switching reads and looking around the field (not ability to see the field) that's different. Guys like Brady know where to look for their targets and are mentally quick in doing it and thinking on the fly as well as staying composed when the play breaks down.

That could be represented by doing away with the button-throwing and going back to the old Tecmo Bowl select-and-throw. Then make AWR how fast the QB changes targets. Or use tap once to "look" then again to throw (so to throw to my "Circle WR" it's tap circle, then using circle to throw the pass. If I wanted to instead throw to X, then I'd tap Circle, then tap X (looking off from Circle), and then quickly X to throw before the defense adjusts. AWR would still be the speed the QB switches targets so doing all of that sort of stuff would be easier with P. Manning because of his sky high AWR and a chore (and requiring a better OL) with someone like Tyrod Taylor.

AWR could also be a modifier to accuracy when switching targets. It wouldn't "override" or whatever other game term S/M/DAC, but accuracy when standing and throwing to one target without changing focus and doing it after looking around and seeing the new position of the target (since everyone is in motion most of the time as they run their routes and exploit what the DBs are trying to do) is different. So instead of yet another rating, use AWR as a modifier as well as the distance between targets. High enough would be small "penalty" low would make it inconsistent. Lower AWR could look from sideline to nearside numbers better than sideline to far numbers or the other sideline, etc.

Then, you could get the actual "half-field" QBs, guys who need to make only a half field read because they don't handle looking from one sideline to the other quickly and accurately enough.

The composure and such is/can be/should be handled by DPP. Sense Pressure, Tuck and Run, and Force Passes.

Vision cone didn't handle that. It made one QB see 2/3 of the field and another see a tiny slice. That's just not realistic and it doesn't add the split the field in half sort of reads because anyone could "swivel" to the other sideline without issue on top of the fact the bad QBs got more out of looking off because of defenders honing in on the cone. A wide cone meant not one really "got fooled" because they're all in the cone.

# 70 KBLover @ 08/07/13 02:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nosaints26


	Logically, people who wanted real, strategic football (win or lose) being replicated in Madden really enjoyed this feature. People who just wanted to win at all costs and continue their mastery of the mediocre passing gameplay hated it.

I want more strategy and realism in Madden and thought the feature came up short because it really didn't capture the realistic differences in QBs.

I can see just as much of the field as Brady, yet in the game, I'd have a miniscule cone and Brady can "see the whole field". The difference between us isn't that I'm blind and he isn't, yet that's what the cone portrayed while doing nothing of the real differences such as ability to sight and switch targets and doing so while under pressure.

With the cone, me looking from sideline to sideline is just as fast a Brady. The difference in the cone is that I'd have to look and Brady wouldn't. The real difference is that I wouldn't have the instincts/muscle memory, knowledge of the play to know where to look quickly let alone making the quick read and throw. Brady could do it like it was a simple hand off.

To me, it's not capturing the strategic and realistic differences in QB play.

I don't like the current passing system either. I don't like being able to mutate routes at will and would like to see an actual route-based passing system so I can throw outs and such properly.

The fact I'm all in on the vision cone does not mean I do not want strategy and realism in Madden - that does not follow logically.

# 71 thagrandson @ 08/07/13 03:03 PM

I liked the cone, but it was a lot to deal with..

# 72 bwright25 @ 08/07/13 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KBLover


	I didn't like the vision cone because it doesn't really represent the difference in QBs. I.e. Brady doesn't "see more of the field" than Boller or Jamarcus Russell. Brady isn't better at throwing without looking, nor can he throw without looking to more of the field, etc. To me, it's not more realistic; it's just a different kind of unrealism. It's reading coverages and making adjustments on the fly that's different. It's switching reads and looking around the field (not ability to see the field) that's different. Guys like Brady know where to look for their targets and are mentally quick in doing it and thinking on the fly as well as staying composed when the play breaks down. That could be represented by doing away with the button-throwing and going back to the old Tecmo Bowl select-and-throw. Then make AWR how fast the QB changes targets. Or use tap once to "look" then again to throw (so to throw to my "Circle WR" it's tap circle, then using circle to throw the pass. If I wanted to instead throw to X, then I'd tap Circle, then tap X (looking off from Circle), and then quickly X to throw before the defense adjusts. AWR would still be the speed the QB switches targets so doing all of that sort of stuff would be easier with P. Manning because of his sky high AWR and a chore (and requiring a better OL) with someone like Tyrod Taylor. AWR could also be a modifier to accuracy when switching targets. It wouldn't "override" or whatever other game term S/M/DAC, but accuracy when standing and throwing to one target without changing focus and doing it after looking around and seeing the new position of the target (since everyone is in motion most of the time as they run their routes and exploit what the DBs are trying to do) is different. So instead of yet another rating, use AWR as a modifier as well as the distance between targets. High enough would be small "penalty" low would make it inconsistent. Lower AWR could look from sideline to nearside numbers better than sideline to far numbers or the other sideline, etc. Then, you could get the actual "half-field" QBs, guys who need to make only a half field read because they don't handle looking from one sideline to the other quickly and accurately enough. The composure and such is/can be/should be handled by DPP. Sense Pressure, Tuck and Run, and Force Passes. Vision cone didn't handle that. It made one QB see 2/3 of the field and another see a tiny slice. That's just not realistic and it doesn't add the split the field in half sort of reads because anyone could "swivel" to the other sideline without issue on top of the fact the bad QBs got more out of looking off because of defenders honing in on the cone. A wide cone meant not one really "got fooled" because they're all in the cone.

You obviously never played QB in real Life. Being able to see the field is probably second most important ability next to being able to actually throw the ball.

# 73 jagsrock95 @ 08/07/13 04:05 PM

Anyone remember "read and Lead" from nfl fever. I thought that was probably the best implementation of this type of feature. It took a little getting used to but it was less intrusive and more accurate.

# 74 The JareBear @ 08/07/13 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by infemous


	THANK YOU. All we need is a meter, or a gauge, that can be toggled on and off with set standards and trajectories for every minute element on the gauge. The ratings affect each end result and it is up to the user to adapt and make very accurate throws... DEPENDING on the rating. With regards the vision cone, I never played 06 (was happy with 03 until 2010) and therefore can't comment but its such an eye sore... if it was implemented with a hiding of the buttons for the receivers downfield until you manually looked at them, or clicked onto them, and came with the QB actually moving his head, I'd embrace it.

Yeah, I agree one thousand percent.

Again, it just needs one of the other. Throwing meter, vision cone, something that accurately reflects how a QB operates. Of course, make it an option so people can disable it, but it's the only way to be "sim"

# 75 The JareBear @ 08/07/13 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jagsrock95


	Anyone remember "read and Lead" from nfl fever. I thought that was probably the best implementation of this type of feature. It took a little getting used to but it was less intrusive and more accurate.

That is actually pretty cool

# 76 jyoung @ 08/07/13 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KBLover


	Or use tap once to "look" then again to throw (so to throw to my "Circle WR" it's tap circle, then using circle to throw the pass. If I wanted to instead throw to X, then I'd tap Circle, then tap X (looking off from Circle), and then quickly X to throw before the defense adjusts.

That's exactly how the vision cone worked in Madden if you used the triggers and face buttons to control it instead of the right joystick.

Sadly, many people never played with the feature long enough to realize that the alternate control method existed.

# 77 Cubfan @ 08/07/13 05:52 PM

I remember trying it for a few games and not liking it. I turned it off and I'm glad it has not been brought back.

# 78 infemous @ 08/07/13 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The JareBear


	Yeah, I agree one thousand percent. Again, it just needs one of the other. Throwing meter, vision cone, something that accurately reflects how a QB operates. Of course, make it an option so people can disable it, but it's the only way to be "sim"

Thank you.

I look at it as right now, it's not necessarily broken, but it sure as hell isn't good.

I wanna firstly untether the ball from the WR. When that is done, passing can finally open up. We can finally see throws fly into the dirt, sail out of bounds or actually REALISTICALLY lead a WR to a specific spot. The difference is that the WR will need to be able to see th ball to make a play on it. It will also mean that the pass will need to be thrown in such a way that the WR will be able to do so. You can't always bullet pass because it may fly beyond your target. Using touch and placement will be the key. Which now throws up the real issue of how the ball actually comes out of the QBs hands.

Just pressing a button, either hard or tapping it does not offer any realistic representation of passing.

A gauge, like the passing gauges in FIFA can be used to help determine what sort of pass comes out. As I mentioned in the original post, it is dependent on the route, the QBs rating and a small amount of the human Player's skill.

Once these mechanics are established I think that something akin to the cone, such as a hidden cone that requires you to cycle through your targets before you 'pull the trigger' which the speed of the cycling between targets is determined by the players' awareness rating, will be more successful and less of a contentious issue.

I think the disagreements we have over the cone stem from just how fundamentally easy it is to pass once you have determined where the ball is going. It doesn't matter if you use the cone or not, because if you can throw the ball accurately with every QB, ad there is no differentiation between each QB in this regard, we will still know that the passing system in Madden sucks.

The QB cone is the painkiller for the migraine caused by a concussion (or something - excuse the analogy lol). A holistic approach is required, putting things that appear sim over a fundamentally unsim passing mechanic will still frustrate sim heads while additionally frustrating the pick up and play crowds, which as we all know is something EA refuse to allow to happen.

# 79 burter @ 08/07/13 10:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jagsrock95


	Anyone remember "read and Lead" from nfl fever. I thought that was probably the best implementation of this type of feature. It took a little getting used to but it was less intrusive and more accurate.

That is freaking awesome! Wow. Like imagine if that was worked on from than till now.

# 80 KBLover @ 08/08/13 12:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bwright25


	You obviously never played QB in real Life. Being able to see the field is probably second most important ability next to being able to actually throw the ball.

How does one QB see more of the field than the other?

How does the vision cone represent this ability?

It's not literal vision (no QB sees only such a sliver of the field). It's knowing where the receivers are at any point in time.

The vision cone didn't represent that. It just made the bad QBs blind. That's not realistic.

« Previous 1 2 345 Next »

More Links

25 Days of Madden: The Vision Cone