Tuesday, April 10, 2012
Unfortunately that won't happen, because if it did you wouldn't have these topics to talk about!
- Best Buy CEO Steps Down
- Goggle Wins...Again
- The Ongoing Tale of Sacramento Kings' Fate
- Jeez Ozzie, That Didn't Take Long
- Zombies Have Guns in the New Resident Evil
- Can You Hack a System? The Military Wants You
QotD: Where will the Sacramento Kings be playing next season?
Happy Birthday to the following OS'ers!
ezevthokie9, tonybologna (41), airjoca, smurface (28), herdfan (27), jimbo410 (24)
Monday, April 9, 2012
- In Case You Haven't Heard: Bubba Won the Masters
- 33 Things You Don't Know About Toy Story
- One of OS' Very Own, OGSports, Will Get an Early Look at NBA Live 13
- Kotaku: The PAX Roundup
- Odom, Mavs Part Ways (Finally)
- Did You Know Golfers Could Rap?
- Five Sports Fans Who Ruined Sports
QotD: Does MVP Baseball 05 deserve the title at OS of "The Greatest Sports Game of All-Time?"
Happy Birthday to the following OS'ers!
breathofj (36), Dalsanto0026 (36), sdf4977 (35), DarkManX1 (25), hardcor2 (24), RevTNeff (24), MarcoRVD (23)
Saturday, April 7, 2012
April 7, 2012
By Steven Bartlett
BOSTON - On Friday I was able to attend a discussion from game industry publication editors and writers on their approach to reviewing games at PAX East 2012. It was broken into a few segments to analyze. The writers who carrie the discussion were Dennis Scimeca of G4, The Escapist, and Gamasutra; Chris Dahlen of Kill Screen and Susan Arendt, Managing Editor at The Escapist among a few others.
First, are game reviews product reviews or critiques? It’s a fundamental question and is the basis for which a publication must ask itself. Should we be writing these games based on the value it provides at $60, or critique its flaws, or both?
From my experience, I have leaned towards the critique-oriented review. This allows me to break down what I like, what I don’t like, and explain why I feel this way about elements to a game. If I applied a product review approach, the review in my estimation would become vague and gloss over subtle details that keep gamers coming back to the game, or inevitably leave it to collect dust. Criticism serves as a vital role in the game industry.
Once I begin critiquing a game, another issue can arise. Where do you remain objective, and when do you inject your opinion? To me, reviews can never be objective for these are our own opinions; our own interpretations of the game at what it means. I play and then I illustrate why this game play feels authentic or natural, and why the game is fun. My reviews are drawn on my own past experiences with games in the genre and games outside the genre that I’ve had great experiences with. A sports gamer like me may have played an incredible title in Heavy Rain, and I draw on all these game experiences subconsciously when drafting my review up.
And it doesn’t end at my own experiences just in gaming. I draw on life experiences I’ve had working in the sports industry, and being close to watch some of the best athletes to ever play their sports from ten yards away. I use all of it: movies, art, entertainment and apply it to the reviews. A lot of the big sports fans in the OS community harp on adding emotions to the game. To me, that would be one of the ultimate features of realism. My love for sports is built on the excitement and emotion in the sports that I once played. Recapturing that hyped emotion is rare in sports gaming, but it can be found. It’s embedded in the competitiveness in me, and seeking out that next win. And that’s why I play the games.
So where should I be objective? I think the most important element in game journalism is leaving out all outside information, and reviewing the game for that game at that specific moment in time. This is our approach at Operation Sports. There is a new iteration of a title every season and so we remain objective by avoiding rating a game with comparisons with its predecessors. I think if we leave the comparisons for the critique segments of the review, it will serve the overall direction of the reviews for the better.
Setting the Stage
At Operation Sports, we all review the games differently. It’s important to set the stage for our readers as to why they should read one of our authors. What makes this writer’s opinion more valued than an Espn.com game review, or an IGN.com reviewer? What are the expectations heading into this review for the reader? The panel discussed making the site’s overall direction fall in line with the audience. This means the reviews should hit on key baseline points that all our readers expect out of a title. I think we do a good job at OS of providing details and presenting critiques without getting a super technical and jargon filled review.
Which leads us to our next question: Do sports game reviews limit a writer’s creativity? I think in some ways I have fallen into this trap, reviewing a game, sticking strictly to the basic principles of Gameplay, Graphics, Presentation, Modes, and Online. Is there room to go off and review the art direction, or a great experience in a franchise where I rebuilt a team from the ground up? I think that we are somewhat limited in sports game reviews, which is why I decided to review Fight Night Champion as if I were in the film producer’s chair. (That game is incredible by the way). I think one of my best reviews was EA MMA where I trained in MMA and created a diary, and applied my experiences to the game. So I do think there is room to grow from a artistic standpoint, but I am also guilty of writing that standard baseline review hitting on your typical points.
What are your thoughts? Let me know.
Anyways, click, read, watch and then discuss.
- Some solid, last-minute Easter Egg ideas
- Video: Mass Effect Indoctrination Explained (SPOILERS)
- Linsanity back for the postseason?
- Halo 4: Cortana's new look
- Best Transformer costume I've ever seen
- Top 10 ways to speed up your cooking
- Tim Tebow's Easter plans
QotD: What are your plans for Easter Sunday?
Happy Birthday to the following OS'ers!
Chairman7w (46), Rback21 (39), MarcusHeel (36), moose1619 (36), yopis (32)
Friday, April 6, 2012
So without further adieu, click on any of these links if they interest you and then talk about them.
- PAX East Kicks Off Today: Watch Live Panels!
- OS' Steven Bartlett is Covering PAX - Follow Him on Twitter for Info!
- Have You Voted for the Madden Cover Yet?
- Top Ten Most Inspirational Movie Montages
- Lexington's Police Scanner After Kentucky Beat Kansas for the National Title
- The REAL Guide on Using Lightsabers
- These Two Just Bought A U.S. City
QotD: Now that Knight's rosters have released, which team are you representing in MLB: The Show?
Happy Birthday to the following OS'ers!
twthomas (46), modernlord (41), Ltrain44 (31), FreeMayk (30), GrayWolf323, Cahill (24), BlueNGold
A superman punch lands sending your sworn enemy into the stun state. Your controller rumbles with each connecting rock to the face. The cameras flash, and the victor emerges, the referee raising your hand to the sky. A win in UFC Undisputed 3 can be exhilarating. And it is all the more gratifying in a tacitly fought match.
When Greg Jackson talks about the decision tree, he is referring to giving your fighter a myriad of options to execute moves from certain positions. It involves chess-player’s mentality to always have multiple escape routes. The same goes for your controls. When stand-up striking in UFC Undisputed 3, be conscious of the combos your fighter can throw. Some moves have stronger tendencies to cut eyebrows or split open cheeks that will deplete enemy stamina fast; but throw them at your own risk. Certain signature power kicks and punches take longer to execute, and can be interrupted more easily by opponents. Know when to throw your power punches (after an opponent leaves himself open on his own missed power punch or kick.)
The decision tree can also work to your advantage on defense. Learning your fighter’s strengths and full list of animations allows you to call up counters on the fly. Learning which strikes your fighters possess, the power ratings they pack, and which strikes can counter your opponents moves sets will earn you a victory in the stand up game. For example, GSP’s spinning heel kick has the reach and power to interrupt a superman punch or a vicious Jon Jones spinning elbow. Be conscious of what the opponent likes to do, and which power animations can extend their reach beyond the normal throws. Some signature animations will expand a fighter’s reach in comparison to the uniform punch and kick animations assigned to every fighter.
Playing along with a Street Fighter theme, let’s talk framerate. Each animation can take multiple frames to execute, and this applies to UFC 3 as well. In SF, linking animations together requires a strong feel for how long a strike takes to play out, and at what precise moment you can branch out of the animation to start your next move. UFC 3 applies very technical punch animations. The punches execute with full extension; firing off combos of the same punch is difficult, but can be utilized with the quicker throws of jabs and crosses. These are easy. It becomes more difficult when you try to go high-low, jab, kick.
Think about it from a real fighter’s perspective: the jab, cross combinations are the most natural because of the hip action on each punch. The natural torque for one punch creates a wind-up for the off-hand to follow. It works the same in the game. Going from left to right with your strike combos will increase your speed, albeit minutely. But, each frame is vital before your opponent can put his gloves up so it will help you to land a few extra shots to try and pop out that mouth guard of his.
Since many fighters have the same basic strikes, all you have to do is get a feel for the fighter’s speed and positioning. A strike that glances off an opponent’s brow can be combined with another strike much faster. Conversely, a strike that fully connects, illustrates a slightly longer animation. Get comfortable on your fighter’s own toes and learn the length and accuracy of punches and you will be able to piece together combos more seamless. I like to top off a quick strike combo with a power strike at the end. Hopefully these tips help drop your adversaries to the cold, unforgiving canvas.
As Sun Tzu said, "If you know the enemy and know yourself you need not fear the results of a hundred battles."
Monday, March 5, 2012
While we don’t have as many choices as we did in the early part of the 2000s, there are still some decisions to be made when it comes to buying a baseball game. If you are just jumping into the fray, here is some basic information and buying recommendations for the budding baseball enthusiasts.
PS3
While the Playstation 3 has more baseball choices than the 360, it also has the annual favorite here at OS. With all of its gameplay enhancements and the interesting Diamond Dynasty mode, MLB 12: The Show should really be the game of choice for PS3 owners.
Other Options:If you haven’t tried the MLB 2K series lately, you may want to give MLB 2K12 a whirl, especially if you’ve grown tired of The Show’s admittedly stale presentation. Despite what you may hear, there is a lot to like in the 2K series, especially the pitching mechanic and MLB Today features.
Also of note is Pro Yakyuu Spirits, which is an excellent simulation of the Japanese game, if you have the patience to translate everything and the funds to import it from Japan.
Xbox 360
There’s only one current option on the 360, and that is MLB 2K12. The series has been up and down, possibly peaking in 2010. But, as stated above, it has come a long way from its debut on the platform six years ago.
If you’ve been sticking with the series, you should look forward to gameplay enhancements and improvements to the stellar MLB Today.
Other Options:If you haven’t tried out [i]MLB Bobblehead Pros[/b] on the Marketplace, it’s a great update to the popular MLB Power Pros, a cartoony but solid Wii/PS2 baseball simulation.
Also, if you want to dig a little deeper, visit (or revist) The Bigs 2. This arcade game featured a number of innovative and interesting mechanics. In essence, it stripped a game of baseball down to its most exciting plays, without sacrificing strategy.
PC
If you can only buy one baseball game for your PC, it should definitely be Out of the Park 13. This award-winning text sim is tackling a number of issues that should make it easier and more enjoyable to get into, especially for newcomers. If you are at all interesting in setting lineups and making trades, this is the game for you.
Other Options: MLB 2K12 is releasing on PC, so if you want a more action-oriented game, give it a try. Also, there is a strong community committed to updating the classic MVP 2005, from rosters to graphical overlays, if you can find a copy.
Wii
If anyone is still gaming on this platform, I’d really suggest you find a copy of the aforementioned MLB Power Pros. Despite the heavily stylized players, this game plays a very good game of baseball. It is pretty difficult to update the rosters, so you won’t be able to stay on top of the current season without some tinkering. Still, it is a great game to add to your collection.
Other options: MLB 2K12 is releasing on the platform, surprisingly, but this version has been a shell of its “big brother” in past seasons; this trend may not hold true this year, but "buyer beware." Also worth mentioning is Mario Super Sluggers, a unique take on arcade baseball.
This is only one humble writer’s opinion; be sure to visit our forums for a wider range of user advice. That said, what game will you be buying this baseball season, and for what platform?
Friday, February 17, 2012
Hello, big fan of your series here. I am an avid soccer gamer who has played every one of your releases since ISS 98. However, lately there is something that’s been bugging me about your franchise. No, not the graphics, not the audio (I mean, who are we kidding, we’ve long given up hope for that one), and really, not about the game at all. What I’m concerned with is your marketing department, or more specifically, whoever wrote the blurb for your Amazon page. As I was comparing it to that of your competition's it’s hard not to notice that somehow you’ve managed to make the game sound utterly uninspiring while they made it sound like it’s the best thing since, well, FIFA 11. And FIFA 11, if I interpreted that marketing blurb correctly, was the best thing since FIFA 10. And on and on it goes.
Yes, I understand that you’re still selling strong in Japan and parts of Europe. But boy did you get your asses handed to you here in America this year. I understand that, unlike EA, you do not have the money to buy ads for Premier League broadcasts — hell, you probably don’t even have money to buy ads for Europa League broadcasts — I really do understand. But that’s not my point. My point is that in reading your Amazon feature blurb, you’ve managed to put anybody who isn’t a diehard soccer fan to sleep, what with your honesty and modesty.
I believe the problem lies with your cringeworthy humility — “give it to them straight, and the customers will decide.” Now, I understand you’re Japanese, and that may be how things work over there. But listen, around these parts, humility in marketing just doesn’t fly. We like our burgers supersized, our movies 3D and our advertisements brash, loud, and most of the time exaggerated beyond belief. Remember, you’re trying to sell things to people who made the Shamwow guy rich. Humility? That’s for suckers, or people who sell orange towels that can wipe things.
I can’t believe I’m saying this, but you should try to be more like FIFA. Or at least poach FIFA's writer, who most likely holds an MBA in marketing, to write your blurbs. Instead of a dull, geeky, phrase like “improved teammate AI”, why not try for a more action oriented one, like “Battle Improved AI Intelligence”? Okay, maybe not verbatim since I cribbed that right off the FIFA 12 page. But you can see what I’m getting at, can’t you? Battle! So what if nobody really knows how a computer game’s AI can be “battle improved” (and curiously, not battle tested)? Who cares? We get amped up by war references wherever we can find them, even if it’s from a video game with twenty-two guys kicking around a soccer ball. It’s war to us, man.
Remember, it’s all in the name. Instead of telling us what you did, give it a name. The names can be vague, and they can be obtuse, but they must contain words that will increase a gamer's heart rate, tingle his spine and most importantly eradicate any memories of last year's shortcomings — and try to keep them under three words. Like, oh I don’t know, “Precision Dribbling,” “Pro Player Intelligence” or my personal favorite, “Impact Engine.” Again, more proof that whoever thought this up must’ve had an MBA in marketing: he/she used the word impact … for impact. How meta of them.
And speaking as a game reviewer, think of it from my point of view. Would I rather use the phrase “overhauled collision detection” (nine syllables) multiple times in my article than “impact engine” (four syllables)? I think the answer is pretty clear. Especially after I received my seventh memo in a month from our editors emphasizing the importance of brevity, which for this letter I’m conveniently ignoring. Also I get distracted by shiny things and catchy phrases, so there’s another reason why I like Impact Engine a lot better.
I’m not kidding about this honesty thing. Reading over your blurb, I’ve found many instances of “more” — more control, more true to life — and even worse, the dreaded word "improve." You know what those words imply? It implies that your previous version had less control, was less true to life, and needed improving upon. Even if it’s true, you just can’t admit to stuff like this! Now the FIFA marketing team, they’re smart and savvy, and you’ll never catch them using those dreaded terms. Instead they use the word “redesigned”. See? Last year wasn’t necessarily worse, it was just different.
It would also be nice if you took another page out of EA’s marketing playbook and used some absolute terms — like "infinite" variety or “true” injuries. Yes, true injuries in a video game. Who cares if, again, nobody knows what the bloody hell that means? The point is it lets your potential customers know your game is the most realistic one out there, and not, according to the PES page, a “game that truly represents the key attributes of the game and (sic) it’s players.”
Look, you may still think this sort of thing doesn’t matter. You’re saying, “this is just a soccer game, what does it matter how I describe it when people will play it and see for themselves?” I appreciate your tragically misguided idealism. But let’s be honest, years of sitting in front of the TV has conditioned us to get excited about whichever product that screams the loudest. When we play FIFA and two players run into each other, even in a manner which violate all three of Newton’s, and about twenty-seven states' sexual harassment, laws, we think “cool, Impact Engine at work.” Why? Because EA’s marketing department told us so. But when we play PES and two players collide, we sigh and go “Jesus, those damn scripting doo-hickeys again.” Why? Because we don't know how else to explain it.
So let me assure you that words do matter. Haven’t you heard that you have to sell the sizzle and not the steak? Who cares if the sizzle is mostly artificial scents and, in some cases, don’t really have anything to do with the actual steak itself? If you want to gain a foothold here in America, you better do things our way. So please, for the love of God, if PES wants to stage a dramatic fight back, check your humility at the door and start exaggerating your claims to the point of hyperbole, but stopping just short before it becomes a legitimate cause for a class action suit. Because, well, we also love those here too.
Yours truly,
Kelvin Mak
Writer, Operation Sports
Writer, letters to random people
Thursday, February 16, 2012
03:48 AM - February 16, 2012. Written by Wiggy
It's kind of baffling to me why MLB: The Show has always struggled in the area of online play. For such a standout franchise, it seems almost inconceivable that the developers at SCE San Diego can't get this last piece of the baseball puzzle right. There's no question that the gameplay is fantastic in the series, and the audio/visual presentation is always extremely good. The online space actually has some pretty good features (on paper), with weekly challenges, buddy lists, co-op mode and online leagues. The rub comes from the fact that all of this is for nought when the actual online play is a laggy, stuttering mess.
This chronic issue in MLB: The Show is all the more worrisome because it shows no signs of improving. It's difficult enough to cultivate online communities for most games, but it's doubly so when a game is sabotaged by latency issues that will drive away users faster than the price of garlic fries at most stadiums.
How can this be such a problem to create functional online play? MVP Baseball 2005 had a near-perfect online experience back in 2004-05, with only a minor change in flow when playing online as compared to offline. With a sport that requires such critical timing, you'd think that online play wouldn't even be entertained unless it could actually be executed properly. In fact, even the casual MLB Bobblehead Pros has online play that operates smoother than MLB: The Show, even though it's not perfect either.
The crazier thing is that the developers are even aware of the issue and have commented on it when talking up previous iterations of the game. Take this quote from developer Chris Cutliff back in December 2009, in reference to the 2010 version of The Show, as reported on ESPN:
“We're fully aware of the complaints,” admits Cutliff. “ ... but we've made online playability a priority area for us this year to make sure the timing of everything from the release points to the swings and check swings finally look and feel right. The online game will be going through much more extensive testing than we've ever put it through before."
Strong words, but unfortunately the only improvement to online playability that the 2009 and 2010 versions of the game had compared to previous versions was the inclusion of a connection quality indicator. However, that indicator really meant nothing, as even under ideal conditions a game could still be marred by delayed timing on swinging and pitching, teleporting baseballs and generally laggy gameplay.
Of course, I'm not naive to the technical challenges that developers face, especially in the fast-paced genre of sports. The fact that most games use a peer-to-peer connection means that not only are results possibly going to be compromised by drop-outs and modem manipulation, but the connection between two players relies heavily on their proximity to one another and the quality of their service provider. Many of the team modes in EA Sports titles leverage dedicated servers, allowing for more players and smoother connections — generally speaking, anyway. However, in light of many peer-to-peer games in the past and present that provide a relatively smooth online experience, one has to wonder if the developers at SCE San Diego simply don't really have that skill set and are just paying lip service to their fans.
Then again, it's not just videogame baseball that has this issue, as tennis games also seem to suffer from similar latency issues. It's no coincidence that four-player doubles play is all but extinct in virtual tennis, as clearly the realities of peer-to-peer make that a difficult proposition. Even singles play has stability issues, depending on the developer. At this point, most sports games are expected to provide a robust online experience, no matter what resources a given developer actually has to execute said experience. Unfortunately, I think a lack of resources and experience in the online space might be the reality for The Show franchise.
I truly hope that this can change in the near future, as I'm all about the competitive aspects of online sports games. Many different sports are already represented well, with fairly smooth renditions of hockey, soccer, football and golf, but MLB: The Show has been sorely lacking from that company. Hopefully the 2012 version of this long-running franchise will finally get it right.
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
Is it really going to happen again? Is Nintendo going to get their product out first only to fail in the long run?
The simple and short answer is yes.
With the Playstation Vita launching today, the Nintendo 3DS is about to sit six feet under. With a lack luster lineup, an insane price tag and a main feature that is hardly ever featured, Nintendo’s newest handheld is about to bite the dust. And here’s why.
The 3D Technology
When I first popped Madden into my 3DS, I was pretty impressed. Not with the rushed gameplay of Madden, but the no-glasses-needed 3D. It was awesome; it was beautiful; my neck cramped. As most of you have heard, you need to hold the system in its “sweet spot” in order to view the awesomeness. After a while I just simply turned the 3D off so I could enjoy the games without seeing a chiropractor.
But then I realized something this morning when I started playing some more Mario Kart. The 3D was still off. I’ve played a handful of games on this system including Madden, PES, Ridge Racer, Starfox and Zelda. I forgot to turn on the 3D. Does that make me stupid? No, it makes Nintendo stupid. They failed to utilize this insanely awesome technology. Why do people like 3D? Because it looks sweet when someone shoots an arrow at you or when you’re falling from the sky. Some people call them gimmicks, but those are the reasons 3D is so impressive. Nintendo just banked on everyone thinking it looked cool.
I may be playing the wrong games, and if so please tell me what I should pick up.
The Game Lineup
This plagues every single Nintendo system. It has all the hype of a new, epic feature, but it doesn’t have the lineup to give it any backing. The best game on the 3DS as of now is The Legend of Zelda: The Ocarina of Time – a game that was released on the Nintendo 64, then rereleased on the Gamecube, then rereleased on the Wii. So you’re telling me the best game on a system is one that has been released four times? No wonder Nintendo can’t get over the hump.
The best sports game so far: PES, hands down. It was actually a very enjoyable game of soccer. It was part of the system’s release, along with Madden and Ridge Racer. As I said, PES was great, but the other two were simply mediocre.
Now for the Vita’s sports lineup: FIFA, Hot Shots Golf, Wipeout 2048, Virtua Tennis, Modnation Racers, Ridge Racer, Supremacy MMA, F1 2011 and Asphalt Injection. That’s not even including MLB: The Show 12, which comes out two weeks after, or all of the mainstream games such as Uncharted and Marvel vs. Capcom.
Support and Faith in the System
I’m not talking about how you see all the Internet ragers going off on how much they hate the 3DS, I’m talking about how often Nintendo talks up the system themselves. They don’t.
How can we have faith in a system when the company that made it has as little as we do?
Sony has been constantly talking about what the Vita can and will do once it’s released. They haven’t let up. Not once. My hype is higher than it has ever been for any system. Why? Because Sony wants it to be. I’ll probably get my hopes up, but for now I’m itching to get my hands on this new handheld.
From what I have seen, heard and read, the 3DS killed itself, and now the Vita is about to come in and sweep the season series. Sony made a handheld that has damn good games and graphics; no 3D gimmick, no promise of a new X-feature. They’re simply taking what they already have and making it better.
Sunday, January 8, 2012
I'm heading out to meet with THQ developers for a hands-on preview to UFC Undisputed 3 this Friday 1/13. I am eager to hear your thoughts and initial impressions of this game. Compared with EA MMA, how do you think UFC 2010 stacked up? I believe EA MMA had great originality in control schemes, progressing the genre's fighting mechanics in unique and innovative ways - would you agree? Can UFC and THQ achieve the same sense of balance of strategy, pace, stamina, strength, fighting styles, and speed?
One thing I am looking for is fluidity in striking - I haven't seen any MMA titles create a natural strike engine. All strikes seem to require long loads, and combos are just very robotic in motion. Are there some fight engines you would rec. the dev team should have analyzed and incorporated into their own at THQ's studios?
What else are you looking forward to most? I know that the ground game's feedback and notification system was severely flawed in comparison to EA MMA - do you think this new visual aid, adopted from EA's title will be worth the wait and the $ for this updated version of the game?
I hope to bring some of my own muay thai knowledge from my studies to the striking game presented to me by the developers.
Follow me on @Hurricane414 for my updates, and check back here on OS.
Strength and Honor,
Steven Bartlett
Operation Sports Staff Writer
Wednesday, December 14, 2011
Yup, we'll probably see a lot of this online. What do you guys think about the deal?
Sunday, October 30, 2011
Thursday, October 13, 2011
01:02 AM - October 13, 2011. Written by JohnDoe8865
Ask most people what the most important element of sports gaming is, and they'll tell you that it's gameplay. It's a popular opinion and one that I shared for a long time. As I've grown older and began to examine what is missing from this generation of sports games, I've come to appreciate another element of sports gaming as much, if not more-so, than gameplay. It's hard to put into just a few words because it encompasses so much. And when it's missing, you notice immediately. It's the feeling you get from competing with an intelligent computer opponent. It's also the sights, the sounds and the emotion of the game. It's the suspension of disbelief, it's something you "feel" in a great sports game. The key to a great sports gaming experience is immersion.Immersion, especially in sports games, can be very subjective. My definition would be "a feeling you get when you're totally absorbed in the virtual environment in which the game resides". Going forward, immersion is going to separate the wheat from the chaff. It's going to separate the sports games that define the next generation and the ones that are filling up bargain bins and sitting on shelves in droves at your local game shop. The ability to "lose yourself" in a game has been sorely missing in this generation of consoles. Whether it's poor audio presentation, missing visuals, animations that destroy the illusion or poor AI, all of these things and more can absolutely kill immersion. And once the immersion is gone, you've lost the gamer.
There are two ways to address immersion in sports games. One is to try and recreate what you see, hear and feel as a player. I'm going to focus on football games here, because NBA 2K does a much better job of on the court immersion in it's My Player mode than either football game in their career modes. In Road to Glory or Superstar mode, little things like hearing the grunts, the crack of pads upon collision and the constant yapping of players on the other team would be great additions. Hearing the quarterback calling out the mike linebacker, hearing the linebackers calling out pre-snap adjustments and actually seeing the players communicating (pointing, adjusting position) would really add to immersion as well. These are some small additions that would make a big difference.
The other way to address immersion is by trying to recreate what you see on a television broadcast. This is the most common way that fans get immersed in their favorite sport, so it's really important to nail this. Again, we'll look at football. Madden 12 made great strides this year by adding actual NFL films camera locations and the authentic entrances are a nice touch too. But something that has plagued this generation of sports games has been the idea that immersion and authenticity end after the opening ceremonies. It's great that we get authentic entrances and key players to begin the game but we have to go much, much further.
However, the most egregious offender is NCAA 12. There are some cool moments, like my head coach yelling at me when I fumble or the 'Gametrack' cut-ins. The sterile environment is a real bummer, though. When you watch a college football game and then go play NCAA 12, the difference is staggering. I know we're working within certain limitations, but allow me to make some observations.
The dull roar of the crowd in NCAA 12 is not even close to what you hear on Saturday. Recording a real live crowd of various sizes and then having the crowd noise react intelligently to the play on the field would make an enormous difference. Addressing the crowds should be very high on the priority list for NCAA 13. Include more shots of the crowd like we get at the beginning, showing traditional chants and fan rituals. The only times we see the crowd after the entrances in NCAA 12 is after scores and at the end of the game. 'White outs' are another notable omission of something that is very common in real football, all the way down to the high school level.
Another problem is publishers under-utilizing the assets it owns. EA Sports has the ESPN license. For some reason it seems like they refuse to use it to it's full potential. In both Madden and NCAA, we should be seeing a complete ESPN presentation package customized to how each sport is broadcast on our TVs. NCAA 12 has begun the process but NCAA 13 has got to take it to the next level of full integration. Simply take what is seen on Saturday on ESPN, and make sure all of it happens in NCAA 13. Saturdays are an experience for the schools who play high level football, not just a game. Madden 13 should mimic Monday Night Football, with authentic wipes, ongoing stat overlays and competent commentary. Get it in place and build on it in the future. The blueprint is in plain sight.
A great example of broadcast immersion, even without a license, is NBA 2K. This game had a believable audio package (including the best commentary in sports gaming), the proper visual touches and animation and AI that allowed gamers to get wrapped up in the feel of NBA basketball on television. But even NBA 2K falls far short of what immersion can and should be in sports gaming. It has the all of the pieces in place, but hasn't completely put them together yet.
It's very clear that sports games still have some pretty significant strides that can be made for a more complete immersion experience. Active player 'personalities', coaches that feel alive (with dynamic decision making based on real data), crowds that finally react appropriately to what is happening, and the "little things" that demand their own threads ever year. These are a few more additions that are vital to help create immersion.
As we move forward, developers and publishers face the daunting task of immersing gamers who are jaded by a generation of sports games that have fallen well below expectations and are hungry for someone to step up and fill the void. When we gamers turn on a sports game, it should feel like a natural extension of the sport that is represented. It should so closely represent the sport, that it inadvertently acts as a great advertising and marketing tool. An NFL game needs to drip National Football League from the on-field visuals to the presentation and post-game fall out. An NBA game should make you feel like you have control of the best basketball players in the world while "expert" analysts pick your strategy apart. Any game representing collegiate athletics must be bursting with school pride and pageantry; the experience that makes college sports so distinguishable from professional sports.
I hope that sports game developers are up to the task. As sports gamers, we will demand greater immersion in our games. We all deserve better. More than any other single element, immersion will be the defining factor in what sports games thrive, and what sports games merely exist.
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
GMS: Every day of the year. Working from home has its advantages. That plus I am a night owl who doesn’t sleep a lot, so probably 8 to 10 hours a day on most days.
PM: Believe it or not I've been working on Historic Rosters for NCAA 11 for well over a year now....It's not that it takes a year but more because I like to really make sure each player is edited properly and teams are well put together. My biggest downfall with these types of rosters is my own drive for perfection.
What happened in NCAA 08/NCAA 09? How is that style of gameplay still impacting the game today?
GMS: In NCAA 08 a good number of people complained the defense was too hard. So with 09 and since then, the series has been offense heavy with wide open game play. That is probably why you see so many players with crazy high speed in the upper 90s.
What level do you tweak and test on in NCAA Football? Varsity, AA, Heisman? Why?
GMS: All 3, because if you don’t you can’t determine whether or not there is a clear visible pattern of the rating itself doing it or just the difficulty level.
PM: Varsity IMO gives the best results for testing ratings and seeing how they work on the field. I just feel as though that level in NCAA Football over the past few years has the been a very underrated level to play on. It gives the game an organic feel in which you tend to not feel cheated in any way by the CPU.....I don't sense the human or CPU players have any hidden speed boost or anything.
Slider tweaks vs Ratings changes? Your thoughts?
GMS: I am a ratings type of guy. Most people don’t care for it because it takes a while to edit everybody in the game. The thing I don’t like about sliders is that it is too general. Instead of actually fixing the problem, it just makes one thing more over powered then the other.
Take pass rush. You raise that and everybody can get through the line not just DEs. Where as ratings are more personal and individual. In NCAA 11 these were more responsive. NCAA 12 you have to max out some ratings just to get it to work.
PM: I'm a very hands on guy so really I enjoy the task of altering both sliders and ratings......I love to tweak sliders in order to get the stats i desire for a NCAA or NFL game. I tweak the ratings in order to capture the player tendencies on the field. So really i have to use both in order to enjoy the games each year.
Thoughts on using coaching profiles to enhance your tweaks
GMS: Coach profiles was a great addition. Surprised Madden doesn’t have them. But once you get the ratings working CORRECTLY, I then like to go in and tweak the coach profiles to make a team either run more or pass more. Or how aggressive or passive they are on offense and defense. I must say they work pretty good.
How has Coach Mode helped you to test your changes?
GMS: Coach mode has been a HUGE help. Watching it from broadcast cam, you get to see more of the field. Plus being that you not controlling anybody far as movement goes, you get to see exactly how the CPU AI behaves.
So from playing this mode, I could easily see how the QB scrambles up the middle of the field 99% of the time and never outside of the offensive tackles. Nor do they roll out from pressure. Everything the QB does is in a straight line north, west, or east. There is no northwest, northeast, southwest or southeast movement. QBs don’t spin away from pressure like QBs do in real life.
Just watching RBs run, they are the same way. They run straight forward with no use of their special moves at all. Many games I find myself yelling at the TV screen saying to myself if he would just stiff arm, juke or spin he would have went all the way.
On special teams, far as punts go, you can see how fast the gunners get down the field and how the returner runs straight forward. Instead of cutting it back to the opposite side of the field. I really wish EA would watch Travis Benjamin of Miami return punts this year. That way they will know they don’t just run straight forward.
If EA just play ONE game on coach mode, they could see with their own eyes how flawed the CPU AI is when it comes to executing plays. How bad they are when it comes to blocking on option plays, WR/HB screens, toss sweeps. How bad they are in blocking on kick off returns and punt returns.
They will also see how the CPU defense cheats on all running plays. They don’t respect formations at all. Coach mode can tell you a lot because your eyes and mind are free to just WATCH.
When you are playing the game, your eyes and brain is just focused on your player and what you are trying to do. You miss a whole lot that way. Which is why if somebody is standing behind you watching you play, they can say hey you didn’t see that wide open guy over there, he was wide open.
Playing the game yourself, you get tunnel vision. With coach mode, you get to see the ENTIRE picture.
Explain the issues with EA's "Real Assignment AI". How did you find the fixes?
GMS: The issue with real assignment AI was in order for it to work, offensive linemen needed a certain awareness level in order to perform, along with a certain acceleration rating. I found the fix by reading the Real Assignment AI blog Mike Scantlebury wrote on EA’s website over and over again. However they took that blog down.
But with any blocking or any function period in the game, awareness level has always been key. So I knew from the beginning awareness was part of the problem. Then after watching instant replay of running plays over and over, changing the angle, I said to myself hmm, if they just had a better burst, they will make it to the hole before the RB.
PM: This was real simple make the players smarter on the field....I've been stressing awareness increases for years in NCAA Football. It's hard for players to execute assignments if they are running around on the field with awareness in the 40's, 50's or 60's for that matter. Awareness is the heart and soul of gameplay for those who choose to play against a competent CPU opponent.
Your thoughts on Awareness? QBs and Awareness?
GMS: Being that awareness is the CPU brain, it is the cornerstone of every position. Awareness have always been the brains of the player. The higher it is, the better they perform at their position. Seen it with my own eyes testing things out for the past many years I have been doing it.
When it comes to QBs, I have noticed any QB with an awareness below 80, they can’t perform and run their offense at all. They basically are dumb and clueless when it is below 80. Same thing with offensive linemen. Awareness makes up the bulk of any player overall rating.
PM: Both games are just so much better when players have high awareness on the field. You can actually give a player avg physical ability in Madden and NCAA Football and they will still produce if they have very good awareness. We created a thread in NCAA 11 regarding how awareness effects Option QBs in NCAA Football...their decision making is just so much better with the football when they have a high awareness. It makes them more alert to their surroundings such as when to pitch the ball and when to keep it and run. I've never understood how EA expects an Option QB to operate an Option Offense with awareness in the 60's......I mean they wrote the code for the QBs they should know how awareness effects a QB's ability to read the defense and find the open man. Well why would it be any different for QBs running the Option attack it ties into their ability to read the defense?
What does THP and THA really do in the game?
GMS: Throw power has a direct effect on what passes the QB will attempt. Low throw power QBs will not throw over the middle a lot, instead they will look for outside passing plays more. Also low throw power passes the ball tend to have more an arc and hang in the air too long on long pass plays. Which results in more jump balls on streaks and deep outs, instead of catching it in stride.
Throw accuracy effects passing percentages during games you play and the likelihood of a pass being picked off.
Can you help explain why the CPU holds the ball and takes a sack so often, instead of throwing it away?
GMS: Awareness rating being too low more times than not will cause them to hold on to the ball. Over all though this games lacks a true throw the ball or force passes rating like Madden 12 has.
PM: Most likely because the Pass Coverage slider is too high and the QB doesn't have high enough awareness to locate the open WR before the pocket collapse. I don't think ever used a pass coverage slider above 50 in Madden or NCAA because the CPU AI QB's struggle to read the defense all to often. Until both games find away to make QB AI logic better it's always IMO better to lower the pass coverage and give the CPU a chance to read the defense.
What is fundamentally broken with the option game? Blocking, decision making, etc?
GMS: WRs, TEs, FBs don’t block well enough. Then the guards take too long to get out in front of the ball carrier. But the WRs and TEs not blocking really kills any running play to the outside. The outside must be sealed off in order for it to work.
Then combine that with LBs and CBs reacting TOO FAST to the play. Anybody can see this. Call a running play to the outside. Watch the instant replay and look at the CB and LB on the side the play is going. They take off IMMEDIATELY to the ball carrier BEFORE they even get the ball.
Shouldn’t be like that. Defenders need to react AFTER a ball carrier gets the ball. In NCAA 12 and Madden 12 they react as soon as the ball is snapped.
CPU defenders don’t respect formations. You can call a fake punt run and the CPU defense will come out in a nickel defense. You can call a 5 wide QB blast play and the CPU will clog up the middle pre-snap LEAVING WRs UNCOVERED. You can hot route any player in the game and you watch that person defending him AUTOMATICALLY reposition themselves to cover that new route you just hot routed to!
PM: Poor AI awareness, poor run blocking logic not only from the the OL but from the skill players too.
Screen plays and WR blocking, why are the ratings not working out of the box?
GMS: Guards and Centers acceleration rating is too low and awareness is too low. Then WRs run block strength and run block footwork is too low. In order for WRs to block, they need at least a 75 rating in those two ratings.
PM: It's pretty simple because WRs are rated too poorly in blocking overall.
Talk about OL/DL interaction. What can be done to improve it?
GMS: OL/DL interaction seems to be too scripted. Way too much mirroring goes on to the point you always see 2 or 3 players on the line performing the same animation at the same time. Des need to generate a push rush and get up the field way better. With default rosters in both NCAA 12 and Madden 12, the DTs get more sacks then the Des. This is backwards. And also more agile DEs need to cut to the inside of the Offensive tackle sometimes. As it stands now, they always take an outside shoulder approach, when in real life, they take an inside shoulder approach sometimes too just to throw the OT off balance and not be so predictable with their pass rushing technique.
What EA needs to do is motion capture a full 11 on 11 game, running different passing plays and running plays. That way everything would have a more natural look and flow to it. Being the studio is located in the heart of Florida, I am pretty sure they have no shortage of willing ex college football players or even pro players that wouldn’t mind giving up a week of their time to help improve the game that most of them grew up playing.
PM: I really don't know since I'm not a game programmer.....but I think what would help is for them to develop a engine that takes away suction blocking entirely. Even if things are more animation controlled I could live with that being a replication of better OL vs DL interaction. You know, more animations of players pushing and shoving back and forth with each other as opposed to being suctioned right into a block it looks like a struggle to disengage most of the time.
Agility and Speed ratings, why do they matter so much for OL, especially on pulling plays?
GMS: Well you left out the most important rating for OL, which is acceleration. Guards and centers need high acceleration in order to get out in front of the ball carrier. That was the main problem with the running game on default rosters.
You really seen it on option plays, toss sweeps, runs from the shotgun and HB screens. Guards got out so slow, it made the play take too long to develop, which resulted in it being blown up most of the time when the CPU tried to run it.
People need to realize, most OL linemen had acceleration in the 70s and 80s. Compared to DL having it in the 80s and 90s. So you tell me who is going to get there 1st. Common sense really, cause and effect.
PM: Actually within that first 5 yards for the OL the acceleration rating is crucial it helps them to get up to max speed quicker. So when they are lead blocking or pulling you want them to be able to get out in space as an escort for the RB's. The agility is nice because it allows them to adjust or cut or turn more efficiently to pick up defenders....One thing i would like for EA is to do is to spend more time utilizing these ratings as opposed to the strength ratings especially for the Option teams and Service Academy teams....you know make the OL rely more on finesse style blocking instead of brute force. Strength is good, but strength doesn't help the footwork of pulling linemen.
Block footwork vs Block strength? Impact Blocking?
GMS: Footwork determines how much push they get. Strength determines how well they can hold that block. Impact block is kind of a blocking awareness in the open field. As in they will block the CORRECT guy.
How did you come to the idea of reducing OTs strength to Fix DE pass rush? What tweaks allow the CPU DEs to use "special moves" (swims, etc)?
GMS: Well the strength rating of Pass block strength and run block strength always determined how long that blocker can HOLD their block. To me that was always the problem with offensive tackles in NCAA and Madden.
Couple of years ago EA developers programmed the game to form the perfect pocket. The problem with that was it was AUTOMATIC. It never did take in account the defenders rating at all. By lowering it to the low 20s, it prevented that automatic pocket from forming all the day, that long drawn animation of the 2 players pushing off against each other in a semi circle around the QB playing patty cake.
That patty cake animation always drove me nuts. I have always been about the X’s and O’s. I watch a lot of instant replays, watching all aspects of the game. I always noticed with high pass block strength, that even if the DE was way faster and initially ran passed by the OT, they would get turned around and sucked back into the OT just for that perfect pocket animation to play out.
Far as special moves for DE, the only one that works when the CPU is controlling them is power moves. Finesse moves rating doesn’t work at all when the CPU is controlling the person. All that DE will do is spin back and forth, but never WIN against the OT. That in itself is totally unrealistic.
PM: I personally don't reduce strength down that much because I think you can utilize sliders to get a good pass rush. I like to edit pass rushing DEs and OLBs to have high Finesse move ratings. Then when you combine those adjusted ratings with the pass rush slider being set high it triggers more of the finesse moves you might not see during gameplay when the slider itself is set to default.
You see in NCAA and Madden there are ratings that you don't get to fully see on display unless you modify some sliders. I would love to see a EA football game perform entirely on ratings. But the truth of the matter is both Madden and NCAA football have ratings that aren't useful unless sliders are utilized.
Talk about the pursuit ratings in NCAA 11/12 and what they really do? Many people aren't aware that they affect OFFENSE as well as defense.
GMS: Pursuit rating is more of a hustle rating then anything. On offense if given to an offensive lineman or WR that player will make blocks all the way down the field.
On defense, if you lower it to the 30s, you will notice that defender can’t change directions as fast and actually slow down, slipping and overall don’t give a 100% effort to make a play. Give it to a RB, that runner runs harder and smarter.
PM: Pursuit is self explanatory it's the players ability to pursue the ball....the problem is lots of guys have great pursuit and that tends to take away the ability of the human or CPU players to pull off those Barry Sanders types of runs where you can reverse field occasionally.
Also, for those who tend to see a lot of turnovers turn into TDs, that is directly tied into offensive player pursuit.....you see most people tend to think the pursuit rating only effects defenders but it effects the offensive players ability to pursue the ball after a turnover.
How different/similar are ratings like pursuit in NCAA/Madden?
GMS: Ratings in Madden and sliders too are way more effective and responsive. Even though in Madden 12 their ratings aren’t as responsive like it was in Madden 11, but it is still more responsive then NCAA 12.
Over the years in the NCAA series one had to raise a rating pretty high or pretty low just to see a visual difference. Same way with the sliders.
General thoughts on ratings in NCAA Football and any differences in Madden?
GMS: General ratings need to be more way more responsive and trigger certain animations and AI run path logic.
For example:
40 to 49 – You stick to the designed run path of the play as it is drawn
50-59 – You attempt to try something but do it at the last minute
60 -69 – You attempt one thing differently, like change the running lane but pick the wrong one.
70-79 – You attempt two things differently, use your best move to beat the defender
80-89 – You are aware of your surroundings, you attempt many things differently throughout the run that gives you the best chance of getting into the end zone
90-99 – You become a legend and master of your skill set. You use your whole arsenal of skills to break down the defender and get around him. The whole field is your playground.
The biggest difference between Madden and NCAA is the running game. Ball carriers in Madden run with a purpose. They are more fluid, use their special moves and always trying to get a TD on every play.
Ball carriers in NCAA run too stiff and too upright. They have no sense of urgency and concede to the tackle way too much. They don’t know how to beat beat a defender during 1 on 1 situations.
How far would you ideally stretch ratings (if you would) if you were in charge?
GMS: I would stretch it as far as the horizon, seriously. Football videogame players, the casuals anyway always complain it being too many ratings, it would over complicate things. However to that answer, I will always counter with look at the NBA 2K model.
Before NBA 2K stretched their ratings, it use to play just like the Madden and NCAA series. Everybody played the same, there was no visual differences between players and positions. Every team basically played the same.
But look at how many ratings NBA 2K has now. They have every aspect of every type of player movement rated. They even broke it down to how often a player uses a certain move, which side he likes to drive to whether it is left or right, how well he can dribble with his off hand, how many touches he gets, etc.
And now that game plays more like the real thing. You can’t put a center at PG and try to do crossovers and stuff with him, his ball handling rating is so low he will lose the ball.
Madden and NCAA need to be like that. Currently there is no visual difference between players. An offensive linemen or defensive linemen can catch the ball as good as a WR. A linebacker can run just as good as a RB. Heck even a RB has the same throwing animation as a QB.
What are your feelings on player styles and traits (Balanced, Scrambler, Run Stopper, Pass Rusher)? How would you expand/tweak it (if you would)?
GMS: Overall I like them if they PLAY to what they say they are. I would expand upon it like Madden 12 has and [do] even more.
Like the following:
Outside runner/Inside runner
Senses Pressure
Block punts/FGs – This would be a coach’s trait with a scale 0 to 100
Uses HB/WR screens – Another coach’s trait
Zones/Man – Another coach’s trait
Fights for extra yards
Fights for Catches
Consistency
Morale
Make sideline catches
Clutch
Then over all I would add different running animations for different positions, different throwing animations, QB stances, different ball carrying animation, different catch animation.
PM: Let me go on record and state that I love the new DPP installed in Madden 12......it's not perfect but i can tell players actually have more realistic tendencies now. In NCAA Football to be honest it doesn't really matter if player is labeled as a scrambler or Run Stopper because even though the tendency might reflect what type of player he is the actual ratings dictate his style of play. But the problem is all to often EA's default ratings don't seem to make much sense out of the box....
For example a small speedy WR can often be found with strength ratings that might equal or surpass that of a big physical possession type of WR. It is not uncommon to see smaller players with big players attributes mainly because I think the ratings in NCAA Football are often just random ratings kicked out by the engine and it doesn't really take height or weight into consideration much at all.
Your thoughts on the speed ratings in NCAA 11/12 and Madden
GMS: For years speed has always been over blown in NCAA and Madden. Sure it might look cool to the casual crowd to see their favorite player with 99 speed, but it is total unrealistic. This problem is magnified by 100 because in the NCAA series, way too many players have speed in the high 90s. Makes the game look like you playing with a bunch of track stars.
Speed need to be more common sense and logical according to their weight, position, player style. Makes no sense to be seeing a 250 pound power back with 90 speed. Nor does it make sense to be seeing almost every WR and CB with 96 speed.
Speed rating to be more spread out by position.
For example:
WR and CBs – 84 to 93
Offensive/defensive linemen – 50 to 77, with DEs having the higher end of the scale
Running backs and Full Backs – 70 to 93, with speed backs having the higher end
TEs and Safeties – 70 to 93
QBs – 60 to 93
PM: [Speed is] OVERRATED OVERRATED OVERRATED!
I was telling another forum member here at OS about a week ago that when Marion Barber was 1st rated in Madden 06 his speed, acceleration and agility ratings were all 87 overall. By Madden 09 the same Marion Barber had maxed out at 92, 95 and 94 overall in those same 3 ratings and that is just one example of why I said EA's speed ratings are way OVERRATED!
Which one should mean more, speed or acceleration? Where does agility come in regarding SPD/ACC?
GMS: Acceleration hands down. There is a difference between being FAST and being QUICK. Barry Sanders wasn’t fast, he was quick. Same thing with Mike Vick, he really isn’t fast, he is just quick.
And for the non-football followers, I will use some NBA examples.
Derrick Rose, Iverson, Chris Paul… they aren’t fast, they are just quick.
Quick people have a great initial burst of movement when it comes to changing direction. Their quickness is what makes them able to fake people out and blow by them when they change directions.
People who are fast on the other hand, have what I call cheetah speed. They run fast in a straight line. For those who don’t know, cheetahs can’t run fast when they change directions, which is why their prey runs in a zig zag. Fast people are the same way, in a straight line they are deadly, ask them to change directions, not so much.
Agility should be more of a balance rating then anything. In the sense if you aren’t agile, you have to slow down and really lean into your turns. Where as a high agility player can change directions at top speed.
PM: Everyone loves speed so naturally most people will say speed is more important. A guy like Jerry Rice didn't rely on speed so I'd say acceleration can be just as deadly. I love the idea i read on one of EA's most recent blogs where Acceleration should be tied into awareness to help duplicate the speed of the game for high IQ players compared to low IQ players. You know a LB with great Play Recognition skills and high awareness should react to the play and ball quicker than a guy with low awareness. Acceleration could be modified much better using that approach. It doesn't mean a fast LB can't still make plays it just means if his awareness isn't high he doesn't react to plays as quickly.
Getting the CPU ball carrier to use special moves, jukes, spins, etc? Why don't they use the whole field?
GMS: That is a good question. In reality they should. Remember the vision cone? The higher the awareness the more of field of view that QB saw. So a QB like Tom Brady, vision cone took up the whole field from one sideline to the next. Ball carrier vision should be the same way just like vision cone, only without the visual cone of course. For some reason in NCAA 12 CPU ball carriers don’t use their special moves. It is a crying shame honestly.
Talk about how the break tackle, juke, elusiveness, truck, stiff-arm, ball carrier vision, etc are all related, and how they differ in NCAA 11/12? How do they work together?
GMS: When the CPU is controlling the runner – break tackle, elusiveness, truck serves as the same function. And that function is that they can break tackles AND truck over you. I put break tackle and truck at 0 and had elusiveness at 99 and this 180 pound RB ran directly over this 260 pound linebacker that had 92 tackle and 94 hit power.
As far as juke, stiff arm and spin…… when it comes to NCAA 12, the CPU don’t use those moves at all. Which results in all ball carriers looking the same and running the same. They don’t ever try to juke anybody, spin on anybody or stiff arm anybody. Last year in NCAA 11, if you rated it high enough, what ever was highest, the CPU RB would use it.
Ball carrier division simply makes the ball carrier go to the hole where the play suppose to be run to. Even this is flawed because ball carriers don’t see the entire field. Instead they only see half of the field and that half is the side where they receive the ball on and the direction the play was designed to run.
When in reality high ball carrier vision SHOULD have meant they see the entire field and run to the open space where there are no defenders blocking your path. But this year the CPU RB is hell bent on trying to run over everybody as though they are Jim Brown.
Shouldn’t be this way at all. Ball carriers should play more to their style, whether it is power back or speed back. Some examples:
Power back – Should use their stiff arm move A LOT, run straight ahead and try to run people over.
Speed back – Should be way more shifty. Should use their spin, juke moves a lot. If their ball carrier vision is high enough, be more prone to cut back to the opposite side of the field.
Over all this game and Madden lacks what the ball carrier should do on a 1 on 1 situation. They are clueless and simply run directly into the tackler. When in reality they should be trying to break down that defender and try to GET AROUND HIM, not THROUGH HIM.
Which brings me to the elusiveness rating. Elusive means to avoid. However the way it works in NCAA and Madden, they don’t ever try to avoid defenders. That in itself is seriously flawed. A runner with high elusiveness rating should be running like Barry Sanders, bouncing around and changing directions constantly because they are trying to AVOID being tackled by defenders.
PM: Because of the issues with NCAA 12 this year I haven't really dived into those ratings as much. But in NCAA 11 i felt those ratings all worked pretty darn good if you were willing to use them to create different tendencies amongst the RBs. The Break Tackle rating really wasn't important during actual gameplay....the Trucking and Elusiveness rating determined for the most part a players ability or likelihood to break a tackle during gameplay. The Stiff arm effectiveness is kinda tied into a players strength rating basically a guy can have 90 stiff arm and only 60 strength and he won't get much success out of that move. Ball carrier vision is IMO the #1 rating in NCAA Football for a CPU controlled RB.....most people think it's speed and acceleration but I've created hundreds of RBs who have very avg speed and acceleration yet their ball carrier vision rating allows them to produce because they can read the openings created by their OL for running lanes.
Talk about using ratings to trigger rarely seen animations.
GMS: Lowering route running, you will see the WR stumble a lot more when they come off a DB jam. And in bad weather, they are more prone to slipping on sharp cuts. Pretty cool to see.
Lowering the hit power for CBs also result in more take out the legs type of tackles instead of the over blown tackle up high tackles. Raising special catch rating you will see more 1 handed catches, toe dragging type of catches.
PM: Well there seems to be a point between 89-90 where some ratings will trigger animations during gameplay right out the box while others will be virtually non existent unless you boost up a specific slider. A guy with 90 SPC rating can be seen making some fantastic catches right out of the box where as a guy with 60 SPC rating won't tend to use that rating as much unless you start increasing the WR catch slider. Now i have also noticed that if you lower the QB slider making the QB actually throw more passes off target you'll see WR Catch animations trigger that way as well.
CBs, LBs, and Safeties, how have you been able to use ratings changes to reduce the "psychic ability" and stop them from cutting and warping to cover the field?
GMS: Simply by lowering their acceleration rating 5 points lower than their speed rating. Lowering their agility rating to as low as it could go without changing their tendency. And finally lowering their pursuit rating to the 80-85.
More importantly, I lowered the extremely high play recognition rating. Once that rating gets in the high 90s, bad things happen.
PM: Agility, Agility and Agility.....that's the one rating which reduces the warping effect big time. A lower agility means that a player actually has to take steps to get to a certain spot on the field. DBs and LBs with high agility tend to glide or skate as some might call it to the ball that is because they aren't required to take actual steps on the field to reach point A from point B. Interesting enough when i used to do extensive player edits on EA's NBA Live series the agility ratings worked basically the same way as you see in their football games.
Not to get off topic but when you lowered a players agility rating in the basketball games you would actually see that player dribble and take steps while in the dribbling motion. Somehow a lower agility rating makes it appear that players are grounded more often and weight seems to be more of a factor.
Regarding DB mirroring; how does Play Recognition and Man/Zone ratings apply here?
GMS: PRC basically cause them to run your route as though they are the WR. Once PRC is over 90 they stay step for step with you. Man coverage rating does the same thing.
How do you view "Super LBs", especially jumping?
GMS: Well last year their jump rating was too high. But over all I view it more as the ball trajectory on short to medium length passes are too flat and come across more as a straight direct line.
PM: This is only a problem out of the box......I don't really have a problem with Super LBs once I lower their jump ratings. Believe it or not that is really all you have to do is lower the jump ratings down. If you wanted to get rid of the problem entirely you could just create a scale in which no LB would exceed a jump rating higher than 40
How does the press/release ratings affect big plays?
GMS: By default, press rating was too low for too many defenders. Which resulted in too many WRs running unchecked full speed down the field. Basically meant too many WRs got open a little bit too quickly, too often.
Talk about the problems with Special Teams? Can it be fixed? How?
GMS: Special teams have always been a huge problem with NCAA and Madden series. Several problems with it to be honest. I will break down each one.
1. They don’t block for the returner. Whether it be on kick offs or punts.
2. FGs and Punts are automatic. CPU don’t ever block a punt or FG attempt. Heck they don’t ever really try to. Totally unrealistic for a football game to make it through a whole season and not have 1 punt or FG blocked, ESPECIALLY in college. Every weekend in real life there always around 5 or 6 blocks that Saturday.
3. On returns, the returner himself runs straight ahead in a straight line. They don’t ever use their special moves to try to get around defenders, instead they run directly into the tacklers. They also don’t ever cut back across the field to the open side.
In real life how many times have we all seen Travis Benjamin, Marquis Haze, etc, anybody with high speed cut all the way across to the open side of the field ? They do it all the time.
Blocking can be fixed, because as you are aware of, I fixed it simply by raising the blocking skills of everybody on the return team. Works very well on kick offs.
On punt returns however, there is another problem. That problem is that both gunners on the end make it down the field way too fast REGARDLESS of their speed rating. Seems to be automatic programmed into the game the gunners get down there fast or something. Also one of the linemen on the kicking team on the edge, ALWAYS come off the line unblocked.
Therefore every time the punter receives the ball, he has 3 tacklers within 5 yards of him.
PM: To their credit this year it is possible to block FGs and Punts in both games now. In fact I've had much better success this year than any other in returning kicks as well. But if I were to improve one thing it would be the blocking ratings of the special teams players. From studying EA's ratings over the years they tend to assign blocking ratings anywhere from 15 to 40 for most players who you would see playing on special teams. Well those low ratings actually hurt the return game because players can't sustain blocks long enough for the return man to make a play or get upfield.
The IMPACT BLOCK RATING is also tied into a players ability to make open field blocks.
I would like to see EA either increase the blocking ratings across the boards for special teams players or include a separate set of sliders that focus on other aspects of special teams play like Run Blocking.
This year people seem to have taken more notice of your changes, but you've been doing this for a while. Why do you think folks are so slow to recognize the changes that are possible and unwilling to implement them?
GMS: Human nature, people hate change and more importantly people don’t like to work for things. Just the sheer size of 120 teams instantly turn people off. They say OMG I don’t have that kind of time. When in reality we all waited 2 months for the patch did we not ? Grant it I been doing it personally since the Playstation One days in the 1990s. Been sharing it online with GameFaqs since 2000, even shared it on EA’s own forums from 1998-2011.
Matter of fact, I 1st came up with my screen name Gotmadskillzson on EA’s own forum back in 1998. Last few years though OS has been my primary home. Been sharing my ideas on OS for the past few years.
But you know people kind of look at my screen name and say who is this kid and what makes him think he knows what stuff do more than the developers do. That in itself I find funny because I am 32 years old.
I think what made it different this year was Ben Haumiuler saying my screen name 3 times during a UStream event back in April and mentioning me forever talking about the lack of scrambling QBs in NCAA games.
So that kind of put my name out there and made people pay attention to what I write more and WILLING to try it out. And like anything else in life, all it takes is one person to like it and the word of mouth travels.
PM: I will admit editing ratings is a pain and depending on how many teams/players your willing to commit to it could takes weeks or even a few months. That is why i don't think you'll find very many people willing to take on that task. The problem is if you wait for EA to fix some issues with gameplay that ratings could resolve, you'll probably have to wait until the next version of the game is released.
Skillz, talk a little about your recent discovery of the Break Tackle, Elusiveness, and Truck rating for CPU Running Backs? Spin, Stiff Arm, Juke too? You say that the RB AI has changed from NCAA 11 and NCAA 12. How?
GMS: When it comes to the CPU RB – break tackle, elusiveness and trucking mean the same thing and causes the same animation logic to trigger. Which is if any one of the 3 is high they will try to run you over and truck you.
In NCAA 11, even though they didn’t use their special moves effectively most of the time, they still juked, spun and stiff armed. In NCAA 12 they don’t. They all run like mindless robots straight forward directly into tacklers.
Playmakers, can you speak a little about your work on the "Alumni" Rosters for NCAA/Madden?
PM: I'm a huge fan of old school football players from the 90's.....Guys like Rocket Ismail, Desmond Howard, Charles Woodson, Tommie Frazier etc. I love to recreate them in NCAA Football every year. This year I'm actually expanding my Classic Rosters to the Madden series for the 1st time. I think the new DPP/Player traits is really what got me excited to finally create All-Teams in Madden.
Imagine watching Randall Cunningham run around on the field resembling the real life tendencies of Randall Cunningham. I didn't think any of the previous versions of Madden allowed that type of player detail. Madden 12 finally gives me the Ratings tools to recreate hundreds of legends the way they should be represented on the field in signature style play.
Anything else that either of you would like to expand on, or talk about?
GMS: Many things, thanks for asking. EA need to motion capture 11 on 11 football play inside of their massive studio. If they do that, things will look more natural. They need to mo-cap 3 different players at the following positions:
Scramblers
Pocket QBs
Balance QBs
Speed backs
Balance backs
Power backs
This way it will be more variety of running styles and passing styles animations.
Special teams kicking need to be not so automatic. There need to be blocked punts and blocked FGs. Should be some bad snaps on punts and shotgun formations. Some bad holds on FG attempts.
Pass interference need to be CALLED for offense and defense. Big hits need to be toned down in Madden and NCAA. The development team overdosed on big hits this year. Not EVERY tackle need to be a big hit. Big hits are RARE in real life.
Commentary needs a HUGE over haul. It needs to be more personal and more relevant to what is actually going on during the game. And if you playing dynasty mode, they should be talking about how good or bad you and a star player has been playing this year. There should be a pre-game show, halftime show and post game show. If you are the head coach, you should be able to hire and fire your coordinators.
Uniforms need to be getting more dirty then they are, heck white uniforms don’t get dirty at all. WRs need to FIGHT for the ball and ATTACK the ball when it is up in the air. They are way too passive.
Players themselves need to show more emotions and they need to TALK. Like say something like come on man I can’t believe you missed that block, I’m getting creamed back here. Players need to get tired more too. Players rarely ever get tired in this game. That in itself takes away the purpose of pounding the rock all game long.
EA development wise, need an assistant producer whose sole purpose is to make sure the CPU AI behaves correctly. They need to be playing nothing but coach mode for they can see all the flaws in the CPU AI logic. Making sure all aspects of game play is working properly. Which includes making all the different offenses WORK. Such as spread, option, air raid, pistol, pro, one back.
I mean honestly as a "techie" I am sad to see the option offense and spread attack perform so badly in the NCAA series. Playing against Oregon or Georgia Tech is gut wrenching. In real life both of those are high powered offenses. Georgia Tech is putting up massive running yards and points this year. Now tell me, in NCAA 12 do they do that? Not even close.
What this game lacks is a 1 on 1 try to break down the defender program. When the CPU AI gets on a 1 on 1 situation, they don't know how to react. Now this may sound "techie" and go over some you all heads, but I am a "techie" so bare with me with my philosophy.
In a 1 on 1 situation, the CPU ball carrier should do the following:
- Check their speed/acceleration rating and that of the defender in front of them.
- IF they are faster, they should cut to the inside of the field or cut to the outside OR cut clearly across the field to the opposite sideline.
- IF they are around the same speed, check their stiff arm, juke and spin rating.
- Defender coming from an angle from their side, attempt a stiff arm or spin move, which ever has the highest rating.
- Defender coming directly from the front, juke or spin, which ever rating is higher. Unless they are a power back, then they should just lower their shoulder and try to truck them.
QUARTERBACKS SHOULD DO THE FOLLOWING:
- Look at the primary WR, then secondary, then look to the flats for a HB or FB to pass to.
- Pressure coming from the left, roll to the right.
- Pressure from the right, roll to the left.
- Pressure from up the middle SPIN AWAY THEN scramble to the left or right OUTSIDE of that side Offensive Tackle.
CPU OFFENSE MUST DO THE FOLLOWING:
- Get the ball to their PLAYMAKERS and All Americans. The offense need to flow through them. Makes no sense how the playmaker of the team get no passes thrown his way but the scrub of the team does.
- Adjust to blitzes and the same defense being called over and over.
- Use motion to determine what kind of defense the defense is in.
- Adjust their strategy and play calling to WHO IS ON THE FIELD.
- If the star RB isn't in the game, CPU offense shouldn't be still calling 90% running plays with a scrub RB!
PM: Nope just wish EA would get their act together and fix my beloved NBA Live series.....believe it or not before i started working on their football game ratings I used to spend countless hours altering their basketball gameplay through ratings!
Blogs 
Working...