there has got to be a way to fix that to make it never happen againQuote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
Printable View
there has got to be a way to fix that to make it never happen againQuote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
I've actually been thinking about it off and on all day, and I haven't come up with a good solution yet. Obviously I'm not a pro like the guys at Tiburon, but if I can't even conceptually come with an idea, that doesn't bode well imo. As far as I can tell, the problem stems from the fact that the blockers are told to find the closest threat and go to block that threat. In an open-field situation (as you guys have been talking above), that's exactly what we want to see (yet it doesn't always happen, strange). But in a close area like in my video, obviously, that doesn't work in our favor.Quote:
Originally Posted by baseballplyrmvp
The only thing I can think of is that the blockers should recognize when their block will cross the path of the ball-carrier. That would be a general rule of thumb for any blocker looking for someone to block ... don't impede the ball carrier in order to do it.
Otherwise the only thing I could think of is that they need to continue going north instead of turning around ... but there are situations where you want your blockers to clean up threats behind the ball carrier. So I'm at a loss for a "simple" solution, which means the solution is complex ... and those suck to code :D
I took Michigan into USC and won 21-13. Disappointing game really. USC chose to run the ball quite a bit. Their RBs had 16 carries to 8 pass attempts into the 3rd quarter (Barkley 3-4 with 4 sacks). The RBs were averaging around 5 ypc but Barkley and those two fantastic WRs should mean more passes in USC's pro style attack. I also saw them run the Wildcat at least three times although I don't know if that's what USC will be doing this year. I don't like the cpu playcalling.
Through 5 games I don't know if I've seen a single special move from the cpu RB other than to cover up the ball. They just don't spin, juke, stiff arm or truck. I'm not seeing any personality in this area.
I still get a little annoyed at the alignment issues in basic fronts. If I come out in an I-formation then I would expect a defense in a 4-3 to shift towards the strong side of the field. But I still see me line up with a strong side and only seeing 3 of the 7 defenders in the box lined up on the strong side of center. I just don't like seeing 4 defenders on the weak side in a running situation. The cpu may slant the DL but they should probably flip the defense or slide the LBs over. I will almost always slide the LBs over to create an even matchup. I honestly can't remember if I've ever seen the cpu shift their LBs over to make sure they are in a good position to defend the run on the strong side. I think EA should consider naming the OLBs Sam and Will. Maybe the corresponding logic would help them shift the LBs into proper positions.
I really, really hope EA gets a new broadcast team next year. I'd like a focus on true TV style presentation as well but Herbie has to go. He was once a part of a good video game crew 10 years ago but the commentary is so stale the game needs a major makeover next year. I'd love to see Gary Danielson as the analyst. I think Mike Patrick is a fantastic play by play guy as well. I think Nessler is great but a change might be in order just for change sake.
Herbie isn't exciting. His strength in real life is accurate analysis but we don't get that in the game. So his bland style doesn't work well. For the same reasons I'm concerned about how Phil Simms will be in Madden. I'm not sure those guys are the right fit for video games.
I'd like to see Brad teamed up with Todd Blackledge, as they are in real life, though I'm not totally sure it would translate to the game, as you discussed.
Which, unfortunately, would go right over the heads of the majority of their audience. Or at least a near-majority.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudy
they usually only run it against rival opponents like stanford, cal, ucla and notre dame.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudy
what i really hate though about user playcalling, is the complete lack of any kind of freedom. the standard packages can only do so much, and without any kind of play creator/editor, it hampers some ability to really have fun with the game.
i watched every USC game last year, and robert woods and marqise lee were used all over the field. there were plays, in which USC came out in what would be a shotgun split formation, with 3 te's lined up as the receivers, but both lee and woods lined up as the rb's. there would be other times, like on wr screen plays, where they'd have a tight end lined up in the slot receivers spot to help out on blocking. not having the quick sub feature available from the playcall screen takes away the ability to do this. there are just so many things that could be added to the game that would make this game lights out.
How about what they really are? Strong and Weak.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
This game is too spastic. Even on slow the player movement isn't smooth at all. It's herky-jerky with little momentum and I don't like it. I went back and played the Madden 12 demo and the player movement is so much better. It's smooth and with the slower passing speeds you feel you can actually make plays on defense. NCAA 13 feels like a beta version that needs to have things ironed out but doesn't. This series has lacked polish for quite a while.
Madden 12 was the worst game to ever grace the face of the earth. & No, I'm no exaggerating. However, I've found defense on NCAA 13. Now, I'm having fun.
Really? In terms of gameplay I thought it was the best football game EA has put out this gen.Quote:
Originally Posted by xMrHitStickx904
It was pretty bad. Online there was absolutely no defense whatsoever, probably less than even NCAA this year.
The worst. IOU is correct, the D on Madden 12 is worse than NCAA 13. & now that I've found out how to play defense, I totally agree. Literally you could throw two streaks & beat anybody. It was really bad, like really really bad.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudy
I think the above conversation is a good example of how broad the term "gameplay" is. Some people read "balanced competition" others read "smooth animations" and others read "fun". :D
D has been a problem for both series for years.
Not to mention offline vs. offline! As an offline gamer who struggles on offense I didn't have an issue with the defense in Madden.
Yes, the game has some issues but I am having a heck of a lot of fun right now. I am playing on heisman with my custom sliders and as the OC of RICE we are now 4-5 after a huge upset win over Southern Miss and a last minute drive to beat Tulane. I have never missed a bowl invite in the NCAA series and if I don't beat SMU and UTEP in my last two games I will not be bowl eligible. SMU is a powerhouse as compared to Rice and my chances of victory are slim. Even though the passing is a little on the easy side this year, I can live with it. What is driving me insane though is blocking!!! As an OL is it not your job to block??? Just sayin...
that blur effect thing was a dumb idea..it messes with other aspects of the game it appears and whats the point of it being active when the player is getting up from the ground after a tackle LOL
it might be the thing screwing up in-game replay saves ?
in game replay saves are herky jerky,dont function properly.
Whether you call it good or bad, players evade and bounce away from tackles all over the place at times.
+1 I also found the D is madden to be reasonable as the leaping LB's were turned way down and the DB's were not as psychic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudy
I don't think I played a single game of Madden '12 where someone didn't score 40. :D
since you brought up that vid, i started thinking about it too, and the only thing i can think of would be to implement a "field of vision" all players blocking. from my understanding over the years of discussing this game with everyone, there's a 2 dimensional circle surrounding the football player and he'll pick up any defender who comes into his circle. from the vid you posted though, the fullback reached the end of his route and went searching for someone who was unblocked. maybe it'd just be easier to extend the fullback's route farther upfield, idk, but if not, then thats where the field of vision thing would come into play. ideally, instead of the player using a full circle to find a player to block, it would use the 120-150 or so degrees in front of the player. this would make the player only block who he can see in front of him and would eliminate the bone-headed decision displayed in your vid on the previous page.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
ya, its always the exceptions that have to screw everything up. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
I haven't played Madden 12 in months & I could drop 40 on anybody lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn