• EASPORTS: NCAA Football 14 Dynasty Mode Trailer


    EASPORTS has released their Dynasty Mode Trailer for NCAA Football 14. In the trailer, David Pollack tells you about the new recruiting mechanic that uses points rather than time and also touches on being locked out from a recruit. Additionally we learn that coaches now have skills that they earn through an RPG element. Continue after the break to see the video.



    ***

    Keep up on all the latest NCAA Football 14 news & media heading into the July 9 release date with our NCAA 14 News & Info Central page. We'll provide all the best & latest information regarding improvements to Gameplay & Infinity Engine 2, Dynasty Mode, Presentation, and new features such as NCAA Football Ultimate Team & Play a Season.

    NCAA Football 14 News & Information Central: http://tgt.pw/ncaa14info
    Comments 19 Comments
    1. SCClassof93's Avatar
      SCClassof93 -
      But will it work is the question I have???? I will wait on your review this year, Tommy
    1. gschwendt's Avatar
      gschwendt -
      I grabbed a bunch of screenshots from the trailer
      http://www.flickr.com/photos/thegami...th/8862859850/
    1. jaymo76's Avatar
      jaymo76 -
      Honestly, I am a bit disappointed. I thought there would be a lot more after all of the Madden stuff.
    1. JSmith03's Avatar
      JSmith03 -
      Quote Originally Posted by jaymo76 View Post
      Honestly, I am a bit disappointed. I thought there would be a lot more after all of the Madden stuff.
      Maybe it's just me, but it seems like the blogs are a lot more in-depth than the trailers. To me, the trailers are just the selling points (or those bullet points or the "back-of-the-box" stuff).

      Also, maybe it's just with the addition of the IE2, but the USC RB's movement looked more natural/fluid than I remember NCAA 13's player movement.
    1. MC1's Avatar
      MC1 -
      After taking a closer look at the UCLA/USC stills from the vid, the players look pasty, almost 2D like, not full bodied like NC13's. Hopefully that was from an early build
    1. Big Blue's Avatar
      Big Blue -
      Quote Originally Posted by JSmith03 View Post
      Maybe it's just me, but it seems like the blogs are a lot more in-depth than the trailers. To me, the trailers are just the selling points (or those bullet points or the "back-of-the-box" stuff).

      Also, maybe it's just with the addition of the IE2, but the USC RB's movement looked more natural/fluid than I remember NCAA 13's player movement.
      Also, look at the receiver blocking the db. Looks like a new animation or maybe even actual physics.
    1. OSUCowboyofMD's Avatar
      OSUCowboyofMD -
      That's it?!?! No effin way...I'm disappointed
    1. CLW's Avatar
      CLW -
      Quote Originally Posted by OSUCowboyofMD View Post
      That's it?!?! No effin way...I'm disappointed
      Yeah if you were expecting something "big" in any department this year you will probably be disappointed. EA has clearly shifted its focus to PS4/XB1 and hopefully there will be some "major" improvements/changes in 2015.
    1. Jayrah's Avatar
      Jayrah -
      I'm a bit disappointed too... HOWEVER, I might pay attention to the Season blog now. Hoping that some stuff was moved there that I was looking for here. For example, thought there would be more info on how announcing has been upgraded and how the season is more dynamic. I figured that would be in dynasty but apparently/hopefully the season blog will be more than I was anticipating
    1. JeffHCross's Avatar
      JeffHCross -
      Well, I'm conflicted. The coach skills is something that I wanted, to separate Steve Spurrier, Ron Zook and Urban Meyer as Florida Coach. But the skills were my least favorite aspect of Head Coach 09, so I'm not sure that's the model I would have wanted to see.

      The recruiting changes look interesting, though I'll have to wait and try it out. It seems like the system will be easy to dominate as top schools, which I'm not in favor of. But definitely going to need to get hands on to say for sure.
    1. Jayrah's Avatar
      Jayrah -
      Quote Originally Posted by JeffHCross View Post
      Well, I'm conflicted. The coach skills is something that I wanted, to separate Steve Spurrier, Ron Zook and Urban Meyer as Florida Coach. But the skills were my least favorite aspect of Head Coach 09, so I'm not sure that's the model I would have wanted to see.

      The recruiting changes look interesting, though I'll have to wait and try it out. It seems like the system will be easy to dominate as top schools, which I'm not in favor of. But definitely going to need to get hands on to say for sure.
      I am hoping there is more of a balance in different aspects of the pitches and cpu AI when going after players (especially the upper tier programs recruiting against you). If there is enough balance there, you won't necessarily be able to dominate the entire field. As the coach of a lower tier school it sounds like it will be more challenging to build, but as an upper tier school I see a potential for even less competition. When you think about it, that's kinda real life though too.
    1. souljahbill's Avatar
      souljahbill -
      Quote Originally Posted by JeffHCross View Post
      The recruiting changes look interesting, though I'll have to wait and try it out. It seems like the system will be easy to dominate as top schools, which I'm not in favor of. .
      Doesn't this get rid of the yearly complaints of "UTEP just won the National Title over FIU! This game isn't realistic!" Don't we want Alabama, LSU, Ohio St. etc., to pretty much dominate recruiting while everyone else picks up scraps?
    1. beartide06's Avatar
      beartide06 -
      Quote Originally Posted by souljahbill View Post
      Doesn't this get rid of the yearly complaints of "UTEP just won the National Title over FIU! This game isn't realistic!" Don't we want Alabama, LSU, Ohio St. etc., to pretty much dominate recruiting while everyone else picks up scraps?
      I agree. Essentially, in order for it to be realistic, the top schools should dominate. Now, I don't want it to be impossible for me to bring up a low rated team, but I want it to be challenging. In NCAA Football 13, I was able to take , on Heisman difficulty and Heisman recruiting, and turn them into a top five powerhouse team by year three.
    1. TIMB0B's Avatar
      TIMB0B -
      Here's a universal dealbreaker they need to add: non-BCS school.

      If they're a prospect, a non-BCS school recruiting them is a dealbreaker, unless the prospect is a JUCO or he's from the same state as that school. Even then, it's still a dealbreaker, but one that can only be busted by 'A' "proximity to home" with 'A+' "coach prestige."

      If they're a prospect, a non-BCS school is still a dealbreaker, but a 'B' or above "proximity to home" and 'B' or above "coach prestige" can overcome it.

      Looking back at the last 5 years of recruiting, non-BCS schools hauled in a whopping 36 recruits and 2 recruits (both JUCOs). Since giant-killer Boise State upset Oklahoma in the 2006-07 season, they have amassed a record of 71-8, becoming the first FBS school to win 50 games in a 4-year span, yet landed a grand total of 3 recruits in that 6-year span, two of which were JUCOs. What do BCS schools have that non-BCS schools don't? TV contracts and conference prestige.

      I'd say they need to cap non-BCS school program prestiges at as well. With that, make it damn near impossible to crack the top 2 in the BCS rankings.

      *Recruiting services differ...but Scout, which is where these are from, is actually more generous when handing out grades.
    1. Jayrah's Avatar
      Jayrah -
      Quote Originally Posted by TIMB0B View Post
      Here's a universal dealbreaker they need to add: non-BCS school.

      If they're a prospect, a non-BCS school recruiting them is a dealbreaker, unless the prospect is a JUCO or he's from the same state as that school. Even then, it's still a dealbreaker, but one that can only be busted by 'A' "proximity to home" with 'A+' "coach prestige."

      If they're a prospect, a non-BCS school is still a dealbreaker, but a 'B' or above "proximity to home" and 'B' or above "coach prestige" can overcome it.

      Looking back at the last 5 years of recruiting, non-BCS schools hauled in a whopping 36 recruits and 2 recruits (both JUCOs). Since giant-killer Boise State upset Oklahoma in the 2006-07 season, they have amassed a record of 71-8, becoming the first FBS school to win 50 games in a 4-year span, yet landed a grand total of 3 recruits in that 6-year span, two of which were JUCOs. What do BCS schools have that non-BCS schools don't? TV contracts and conference prestige.

      I'd say they need to cap non-BCS school program prestiges at as well. With that, make it damn near impossible to crack the top 2 in the BCS rankings.

      *Recruiting services differ...but Scout, which is where these are from, is actually more generous when handing out grades.
    1. Jayrah's Avatar
      Jayrah -
      Quote Originally Posted by souljahbill View Post
      Doesn't this get rid of the yearly complaints of "UTEP just won the National Title over FIU! This game isn't realistic!" Don't we want Alabama, LSU, Ohio St. etc., to pretty much dominate recruiting while everyone else picks up scraps?
      You still shouldn't necessarily be able to "dominate" the entire NCAA though. I think Jeff is saying if you take a top school you'll completely dominate the field, which shouldn't be the case. The other "top" schools should still compete with you.
    1. KIDZER0918's Avatar
      KIDZER0918 -
      Don't mean to be bitter but it seems that all ncaa is getting this year is madden's old gameplay engine leftovers and a bunch of menu screens o and don't forget the card game. I think that is why the marketing is not so strong. No blogs nothing in depth. no game play vids, all shots of people scrolling thru menus. what happened to the good old days when ign would post a whole 30 min vid and it taking 4 hours to download! I wish we could at least get the upgraded product we got on last gen. They keep on looking towards the future but they are forgetting things from the past....
    1. souljahbill's Avatar
      souljahbill -
      Quote Originally Posted by Jayrah View Post
      You still shouldn't necessarily be able to "dominate" the entire NCAA though. I think Jeff is saying if you take a top school you'll completely dominate the field, which shouldn't be the case. The other "top" schools should still compete with you.
      That's always been the case though. It's hard to make recruiting level amongst the top schools without players feeling cheated. I know when In recruiting in '13 and everyone on my board wants to go somewhere else when In hammering all those high point pitches AND negative recruiting, it feels like there's some type of conspiracy with the numbers.
    1. JSmith03's Avatar
      JSmith03 -
      Quote Originally Posted by Jayrah View Post
      You still shouldn't necessarily be able to "dominate" the entire NCAA though. I think Jeff is saying if you take a top school you'll completely dominate the field, which shouldn't be the case. The other "top" schools should still compete with you.
      Here's my take on it: I'm not sure how balanced it is in past titles, but I don't think a user OR CPU should be able to pull in 5+ recruits on an annual basis. It should be balanced like this: TOP-10: Generally more 4-star recruits than 3-star recruits, with a couple 5-stars; 11-20: Generally an even number of 4 and 3 star recruits, maybe 1-2 5 stars; the rest: Generally a lot of 3-star recruits with some 4-stars, of course as you get lower, teams have more 2-stars and 1-stars. But you get where I'm going.

      Anyway, I'd also have to say that top teams like Bama SHOULD dominate the nation in recruiting in general (again, they shouldn't be pulling in 5+ 5-star recruits though). Here are the rankings from the past 5 years:

      RIVALS
      2013: 1. Bama, 2. Ohio St., 3. ND, 4. Florida, 5. Michigan, 6. LSU, 7. Ole Miss, 8. UCLA/Auburn, 10. Florida St.

      2012: 1. Bama, 2. Texas, 3. Florida, 4. Ohio St., 5. Stanford, 6. Florida St., 7. Michigan, 8. USC, 9. Miami, 10. Auburn

      2011: 1. Bama, 2. Florida St., 3. Texas, 4. USC, 5. Georgia, 6. LSU, 7. Auburn, 8. Clemson, 9. Oregon, 10. ND (11. Ohio State)

      2010: 1. USC, 2. Florida, 3. Texas, 4. Auburn, 5. Bama, 6. LSU, 7. Oklahoma, 8. UCLA, 9. Tennessee, 10. Florida St.

      2009: 1. Bama, 2. LSU, 3. Ohio St., 4. USC, 5. Texas, 6. Georgia, 7. Florida St., 8. Michigan, 9. North Carolina, 10. Tennessee

      It's clear that the top teams (Bama, Ohio St., Florida St., etc.) are always in or around the top 10 each year. Some teams rise up, some teams fall off, but if a person is picking one of those top teams it's no reason why they shouldn't be up there unless they can't recruit or they aren't winning games. Sure other teams need to compete (which is what the difficulty is for) but if I pick Bama or Ohio St., I should expect to get my guys regularly unless I'm not producing.