Madden NFL 25 - Sideline & Back of Endzone Interceptions Are In (UPDATED)

[Big FN Deal]

Quote: Originally Posted by tfctillidie

I get it, but it's not realistic to expect EA to narrow their market by forcing the game into a style...especially considering the state of their organization. (CEO's leaving, 10% of workforce axed, executives selling stocks, etc) There's no perspective for the whole picture when you argue for having a customized/forced game to your own desire. It's not going to happen, so why not give me what is possible?

You know how LT gets down (meaning uncompromising, there is no halfway right, it's either right or wrong) but I agree with his general premise. Basically what you are saying is, have realism but make it optional. However with that starting point, what do they do when there isn't time for the option? Well in Tiburon's case that has meant make it "fun"/arcade/unrealistic first, then maybe at some point, add a way to make it more realistic, which again is backwards in a sim game.

As far as the "bottom line", there are other sports sims that put realism first that sell, so that's not a good excuse. Something Sage posted recently, Kane was been alluding to and that many have speculated about in the past, is far more likely the reason, arcade/fun/unrealistic is easier, cheaper and more simple to implement than realism, so Tiburon has chosen the path of least resistance for this console gen.

It's going to be interesting to see, if on the new consoles Kolbe and company are actual able to make Madden on par with and/or surpass the realism of other sports sims, how those making these claims of "realism is bad for business" defend that, then.

[MaddenSaints]

Is the picture in the original post from Madden 25?

[Only1LT]

Quote: Originally Posted by tfctillidie

I want to touch on the sim vs arcade "catering", as it's long gotten out of hand and you highlight why. EA tries to implement a feature in a simulation fashion, it breaks in certain ways causing for unrealistic results. Gamers claim they are made an arcade game and lied to them. A broken sim feature is does not make it an arcade one, it merely is a broken sim feature. When the ability to run at sharper angles was introduced into Madden, was that "ARCADE" or "SIM"? I think it's easy to say being able to run in more directions is more alike real life than being more limited, yes? Yet, this new ability was the birth of the dreadful arcade like "swerve running". So again, is this directional running upgrade now an "ARCADE" feature because it didn't hit the mark? Or is it an attempt at being more of a simulation of real life...but is simply broken? As for the rest of the debate I don't think it's unrealistic that on next gen, multiple AI sets are impossible to have which would address your example. I think the current gen hardware limits the AI more than people think, when I see other development studios discuss the PS4 capability and how the PS3 is always running 100% on their current games. Time will tell I guess.

Run at sharper angles is more like real life? I'm not sure what you mean. If you are referring to the ability to change direction at the drop of a hat, not lose speed, not break momentum, and not lose balance is a broken sim feature, then I would say absolutely not. That is a 100% arcade feature. The feature was put in because the tourney players want to be in control of their player at all times, and because Tiburon is against realistic movement in general, and longer animations that can't be broken out of, in particular, which are necessary to convey, slowing down, loss of momentum, and loss of balance.

There is no way to make a game whose BASIS is unrealism, be realistic through the use of options. Options are looked upon as the champion of equality, but when the options are tied to how realistic a feature is or isn't, it becomes the bane of a simulation's existence.

There are no broken sim features in Madden. What is broken is the idea that they can make simulation out of a game with an arcade base, and think that it can be made more sim via options.

[Only1LT]

Quote: Originally Posted by tfctillidie

FIFA lost it's competitor for quite some time. The Show's competition is literally slapping on 12 on top off 11, now 13 on top of 12. NHL has none. You can't just pass judgement stating "it's because they are trying to be more sim" as the explanation behind it all.

All those titles you mentioned ran their competition out of business AFTER they made the concerted effort to rethink their practice.

FIFA was second fiddle to PES. NHL was behind 2K's NHL game. The Show is a Sony exclusive that has eradicated a 3rd party title. Battlefield 3 has made the FPS genre a two horse race with Call of Duty and I predict that B4 will make even further inroads. Live is a kids game that was forced into exile by the realistic NBA2K.

You are only proving my point.

[tfctillidie]

Quote: Originally Posted by Only1LT

Run at sharper angles is more like real life? I'm not sure what you mean. If you are referring to the ability to change direction at the drop of a hat, not lose speed, not break momentum, and not lose balance is a broken sim feature, then I would say absolutely not. That is a 100% arcade feature. The feature was put in because the tourney players want to be in control of their player at all times, and because Tiburon is against realistic movement in general, and longer animations that can't be broken out of, in particular, which are necessary to convey, slowing down, loss of momentum, and loss of balance. There is no way to make a game whose BASIS is unrealism, be realistic through the use of options. Options are looked upon as the champion of equality, but when the options are tied to how realistic a feature is or isn't, it becomes the bane of a simulation's existence. There are no broken sim features in Madden. What is broken is the idea that they can make simulation out of a game with an arcade base, and think that it can be made more sim via options.

I didn't think it was that hard to understand. I can't recall the specific last gen Madden, perhaps 03? 04? 05? One of them introduced the ability to run at a larger variety of angles than the previous editions.

In real life, we as human beings can cut and run into any angle we determine.

Thus, by adding the additional angles to run at, they are making the game more like "real life".

Simple conclusion, simple to understand.

Yet this ability to run in more directions, can be exploited by players with swerve running.

So again, is this addition now "arcade" because despite giving more realistic option in where you can move your player, it can be exploited as it's not perfect?

Are you trying to say EA put new directions in running, realized in testing they could "swerve" around and thought....yes, this is what we want! You really think "swerve" running is by design? That EA wanted players running S patterns up and down the field?

Quote: Originally Posted by Only1LT

All those titles you mentioned ran their competition out of business AFTER they made the concerted effort to rethink their practice. FIFA was second fiddle to PES. NHL was behind 2K's NHL game. The Show is a Sony exclusive that has eradicated a 3rd party title. Battlefield 3 has made the FPS genre a two horse race with Call of Duty and I predict that B4 will make even further inroads. Live is a kids game that was forced into exile by the realistic NBA2K. You are only proving my point.

I'm not proving your point because you aren't proving anything.

PES failed in developing this generation. This isn't about FIFA's "simness", they failed all by themselves with a very poor game and made FIFA the only option until just recently finding their legs. This doesn't conclude "FIFA being more sim = more sales". The more obvious point is "PES has been crap." There's many other conclusions that can be drawn, you merely take the one that fits and claim victory. Whatever.

NHL is the only option as 2K folded a couple years back, thus if you want hockey, you need to play NHL. This doesn't conclude "NHL being more sim = more sales".

etc.



/inb4 you twist the scenarios into something that fits your argument.

[Only1LT]

Quote: Originally Posted by tfctillidie

I didn't think it was that hard to understand. I can't recall the specific last gen Madden, perhaps 03? 04? 05? One of them introduced the ability to run at a larger variety of angles than the previous editions. In real life, we as human beings can cut and run into any angle we determine. Thus, by adding the additional angles to run at, they are making the game more like "real life". Simple conclusion, simple to understand. Yet this ability to run in more directions, can be exploited by players with swerve running. So again, is this addition now "arcade" because despite giving more realistic option in where you can move your player, it can be exploited as it's not perfect? Are you trying to say EA put new directions in running, realized in testing they could "swerve" around and thought....yes, this is what we want! You really think "swerve" running is by design? That EA wanted players running S patterns up and down the field? I'm not proving your point because you aren't proving anything. PES failed in developing this generation. This isn't about FIFA's "simness", they failed all by themselves with a very poor game and made FIFA the only option until just recently finding their legs. This doesn't conclude "FIFA being more sim = more sales". The more obvious point is "PES has been crap." Period. NHL is the only option as 2K folded a couple years back, thus if you want hockey, you need to play NHL. This doesn't conclude "NHL being more sim = more sales". etc. /inb4 you twist the scenarios into something that fits your argument.

8-way running is NOT what makes the running in Madden unrealistic, nor is it responsible for swerve running. What is responsible for those two things is the fact that there is no footplanting, no slowing down to change direction, no loss of momentum, and no loss of balance.

Every game known to man has at least 8-way running in this day and age, from the sim to the arcade. That is a wholly separate issue from what makes Madden's running unrealistic.

De Nile is not just a river. You want to think that the shift in focus of those games has nothing to do with their position in the current landscape or of the demise of their competition... ok. Either way, you prove my argument.

You are saying that the reason that those games have sold more is because they have no comp and it doesn't matter what they do in terms of realism? Ok, Madden has no comp either, so making an ultra realistic game will, likewise, not negatively impact sales, because there is nothing else to buy. So again, where is the downside to making a realistic game?

You can't have it both ways. Either a realistic Madden will sell despite being too realistic because there's no comp, or a realistic Madden will sell BECAUSE it is realistic. Either way, make the game realistic. Period.

[speedy9386]

lol I don't understand this argument as you both seem to be talking about how unrealistic the running is.

[hanzsomehanz]

This thread does not do your arguments justice:

Create a "sim vs arcade: debate" thread and let us espouse there.

I would love to jostle with you guys but not here.

Sent from my SGH-I727R using Tapatalk 2