NCAA Football 13 - General Impressions Thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeffHCross

They have those. They just don't show enough. So, I'm not sure what you mean by "why can't they". Some of the statistics you cite may not be available within a game (thanks to system memory limits), but they do use ESPN-style stat overlays when, for example, records are broken.

---

Wouldn't know, haven't played dynasty enough since I'm still waiting for their store to actually open, so I can have the correct uniforms for Rutgers.

The whole Why Can't They, is just wondering why is EA lazy? They have the rights to use the ESPN broadcast style, but hardly use it to its full potential. The only times I see stat overlays are during The Gametrack cutscenes, and maybe 1-2 times with my HB and his stats.

I'd love to see a breakdown of the CPU passing attack, they used to have a graphic that would pop up showing the break down of short (L/M/R), intermediate (L/M/R) and deep (L/M/R) attempts, completions, yards, TDs.

I also remember there being stat overlays for rushing left/middle/right as well.

Or maybe this is all from NFL2k5? I can't remember.

I would say about the year to date statistics, about how they are available in MLB the Show, but that's on BluRay and has much more space to hold such things like that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeteyKirch

why is EA lazy?

---

They're not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeteyKirch

They have the rights to use the ESPN broadcast style

---

They have the license. Doesn't mean they have the assets directly from ESPN. Doesn't mean the PS3 or 360 are capable of doing the things we want without adversely affecting gameplay. I don't know the actual reasons, and I do wish that it would change, but it's not as simple as snapping one's fingers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeteyKirch

Or maybe this is all from NFL2k5? I can't remember.

---

That might be from 2k5. I don't recall ever seeing that in NCAA (though it may have been in Madden). Then again, I don't recall it from 2k either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeteyKirch

I would say about the year to date statistics, about how they are available in MLB the Show, but that's on BluRay and has much more space to hold such things like that.

---

The Show also has the full force of Sony San Diego behind it, and is a first-party title. Both of those are drastically different from NCAA's situation. Madden is much more fair to compare to The Show.

I would guess the Show has a smaller dev team than NCAA. NCAA sells a lot more copies and will sell more games solely on the PS3 than the Show does. I don't buy the memory limitations for stat demands when the game stores all those replays the whole game. I believe it's not an emphasis on this area. I think both NCAA and Madden need to work harder towards true TV style presentation and stats.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeffHCross

They're not.
They have the license. Doesn't mean they have the assets directly from ESPN. Doesn't mean the PS3 or 360 are capable of doing the things we want without adversely affecting gameplay. I don't know the actual reasons, and I do wish that it would change, but it's not as simple as snapping one's fingers.
That might be from 2k5. I don't recall ever seeing that in NCAA (though it may have been in Madden). Then again, I don't recall it from 2k either.
The Show also has the full force of Sony San Diego behind it, and is a first-party title. Both of those are drastically different from NCAA's situation. Madden is much more fair
to compare to The Show.

---

But EA is lazy....

Why is it that we haven't had features in this game, that we had in the last generation? Why do we have the same issues from installment to installment each year? I'd rather just have them come out, and say it's an issue with the engine, and it won't be fixed until the engine is overhauled. Now even if that was a lie, it'd just be nice to have EA give us a reason as to why things remain the way they do.

I think they just put their efforts in the wrong direction.

Like I said, the making of NCAA13 Show, it really showed me where they put their efforts. I don't want a silly one off Dove Men's Soap Stat Overlay, that doesn't give me immersion, you don't just see ONE STAT OVERLAY on Saturday, you see HUNDREDS. I wouldn't mind the Dove's Men overlay if they actually popped up with decent frequency.

Then again, reading the NCAA13 Facebook page when EA had the 2nd Patch drop, a lot of people were clamoring to get the Studio Updates removed because they slowed down the game, and they just wanted to play. I applaud EA for at least attempting that, maybe in the Next Gen we can get video to go along with Rece, but who knows.

It's just the things EA does to start makes the fans go gaga with excitement, Team Builder, CC, but then they remained untouched. The running joke with Team Builder you know it's updated when EA changes the color of background page. Then CC, I'll give them a pass on their first attempt, but Ben Haumiller lied straight faced to the fans about them fixing some of the known bugs, but they still exist from NCAA12 in 13. There are some small fixes in CC that could go a long way...the CPU logic is beyond awful, how about taking that out of the CPUs hands? Especially if you're the HC, why does the CPU get to decide who my OC/DC are? Why can't I select them? I never heard of a HC that isn't allowed to hire their own staff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeteyKirch

But EA is lazy....

---

It's one thing to say the game is bad and their going in the wrong direction and they need to take fan feedback more seriously and whatnot but calling the developers lazy will always be insulting. Laziness is not why things aren't the way we want them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by souljahbill

It's one thing to say the game is bad and their going in the wrong direction and they need to take fan feedback more seriously and whatnot but calling the developers lazy will always be insulting. Laziness is not why things aren't the way we want them.

---

But they are..... Explain how known problems never get fixed year to year? That's lazy to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeteyKirch

But they are..... Explain how known problems never get fixed year to year? That's lazy to me.

---

It's only lazy if it's easily fixable, won't break another part of the game, and they choose not to do it. Unless it fits that criteria, it's unfair to call people who spend the night at the office to make a game for other people lazy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by souljahbill

It's only lazy if it's easily fixable, won't break another part of the game, and they choose not to do it. Unless it fits that criteria, it's unfair to call people who spend the night at the office to make a game for other people lazy.

---

I can look the other way for something's, but others nope. Especially awful CPU depth chart logic. How hard would it be to have play book specific depth charts. Something that minor would add a lot.

Like I said I'd rather have them lie to us and say something doesn't work due to the engine than stay mum on the subject.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by souljahbill

It's only lazy if it's easily fixable, won't break another part of the game, and they choose not to do it. Unless it fits that criteria, it's unfair to call people who spend the night at the office to make a game for other people SO THEY CAN MAKE A LOT OF MONEY FOR A BIG COMPANY lazy.

---

Well I think lazy works for that definition. Like the super long FG attempts on Heisman. That has to be a fairly easy fix that they just choose to ignore. Why? Probably because the bean counters say that only a small percentage of gamers play on Heisman so don't waste your time there. I see all kind of stupid decisions done at my workplace because a number counting process dictates we work on X,Y,Z when A and B may be bigger problems. But someone's bonus doesn't get padded if we work on what we should rather than what a lousy bean counting process says we should do. Often X,Y and Z are easy but useless fixes that pad numbers/bonuses while significant issues are left unaddressed. That's not necessarily lazy because people are still working but it's dishonest or at the very least wrong.

The same approach applies to EA in many areas. There are many legacy problems, some easy and some big. Petey is simply frustrated that EA has turned a blind eye to known problems for many years in a row now. Why exactly we don't know but I'm fed up with the excuses. I don't care if it's lazy or something else, I just refuse to buy the end product if I'm not happy. Something is wrong with the way EA decides what to work on imo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rudy

I would guess the Show has a smaller dev team than NCAA. NCAA sells a lot more copies and will sell more games solely on the PS3 than the Show does.

---

I wouldn't. MLB is a flagship title for that studio. NCAA isn't. Perhaps if you include the gameplay guys that work both Madden and NCAA, then NCAA has more, but in terms of people solely focused on NCAA, I think NCAA is smaller. Wish stuff like that was readily available though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rudy

I don't buy the memory limitations for stat demands when the game stores all those replays the whole game.

---

:dunno: Was just a guess. I just know that it's not plug-and-play.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeteyKirch

Now even if that was a lie, it'd just be nice to have EA give us a reason as to why things remain the way they do.

I think they just put their efforts in the wrong direction.

---

Lack of communication and efforts in a different direction than we'd like. I can agree with both of those. Big time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeteyKirch

maybe in the Next Gen we can get video to go along with Rece, but who knows.

---

I would have agreed with you before this release. But given that I've seen more people bashing the Studio Updates than enjoying them, I don't see them changing going forward. I hope otherwise though (plus the option to skip them if you want).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeteyKirch

why does the CPU get to decide who my OC/DC are? Why can't I select them? I never heard of a HC that isn't allowed to hire their own staff.

---

Okay, yes, it doesn't fit reality. But you make it sound like it's a simple choice between "CPU Control" and "Human Control". There's a lot involved with giving you that "choice". Maybe not if you're the 6-star school and you get to pick between established coaches with great histories at OC/DC. But when you get down at the 1-star level, now you're picking between newly generated coaches. "Picking" being the key-word. That requires a lot of additional back-end stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeteyKirch

But they are..... Explain how known problems never get fixed year to year? That's lazy to me.

---

Easy: Cost vs Effect. Risk vs Reward. Prioritization. There are tons of "legacy" issues in the products that I work on. The ones that are extremely important and could cause mission critical issues obviously get fixed immediately. The ones that are just a nuisance? They might get fixed. Eventually. We have to justify time spent on issues, same as any other software company. My team is fortunate in that we have direct control over what we choose to have fixed (though we're not the ones coding the fixes, which sometimes means we don't get the fix we asked for and have to pull it out). Not every software team has that control. Sometimes it's decided for them, way up higher in the pecking order. Especially when you have to take a product to market and compete against other companies.

We're also fortunate in that we have relatively flexible deadlines. Makes a big difference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rudy

Well I think lazy works for that definition.

---

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

You've got to be kidding me Rudy. My employer makes a ton of money. Our CEO make more money in a single year than I'll see in my lifetime. A decent amount of profit (relative to, say, my salary) comes straight from the contract I work on. Do you think my program doesn't have to jump through a ton of hoops, just to hire one additional college graduate? Or answer to the higher-ups if we want to try something risky that will cost profit, but could make us more money in the long run? Do you think we see any benefit (besides continued employment) from that profit? Not a chance. Apples and oranges.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rudy

That's not necessarily lazy because people are still working but it's dishonest or at the very least wrong.

---

And sometimes completely beyond the control of the people that actually do the work (and are being called lazy).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rudy

Something is wrong with the way EA decides what to work on imo.

---

Don't disagree there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeffHCross

You've got to be kidding me Rudy. My employer makes a ton of money. Our CEO make more money in a single year than I'll see in my lifetime. A decent amount of profit (relative to, say, my salary) comes straight from the contract I work on. Do you think my program doesn't have to jump through a ton of hoops, just to hire one additional college graduate? Or answer to the higher-ups if we want to try something risky that will cost profit, but could make us more money in the long run? Do you think we see any benefit (besides continued employment) from that profit? Not a chance. Apples and oranges.

And sometimes completely beyond the control of the people that actually do the work (and are being called lazy).
Don't disagree there.

---

1) I just added that bold part in myself because I felt soulja's original comment implied that we should be grateful that someone makes a football video game for us rather than realize they are making it for a profit. There is a motive here. Same goes for TV shows and movies. While we want to be entertained and informed the primary goal of these things is to make someone money. It's a two way street.

2) I do agree that it's tough to call guys lazy when they might want to fix something but are told to work on something else. But people want to blame someone when they are mad and frustrated even if it's the wrong guy. That's why I don't think people on the site should get so upset when people throw out the lazy word. It's often out of frustration and aimed at the process rather than a specific individual.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rudy

1) I just added that bold part in myself because I felt soulja's original comment implied that we should be grateful that someone makes a football video game for us rather than realize they are making it for a profit. There is a motive here. Same goes for TV shows and movies. While we want to be entertained and informed the primary goal of these things is to make someone money. It's a two way street.

---

No, I wasn't saying we should bend over and take it and be grateful that EA is making this product for us out of the goodness of their own hearts. What I was saying was that people, real live flesh and blood who just happen to work a EA, are missing quality times with their wives/husbands/children/friends/etc. to work LOOONG hours, sometimes even sleeping at work, to put out the best product they can for us, the consumer, and I find calling them lazy is an insult to the time real people put into their work. I have ZERO issues with complaining about the game and raising a stink but I do have a problem calling people lazy as if the developers don't want to put out a quality product and choose to ignore stuff for no other reason then they just don't feel like it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rudy

That's why I don't think people on the site should get so upset when people throw out the lazy word. It's often out of frustration and aimed at the process rather than a specific individual.

---

To make a pun ... calling them "lazy" is ... well, the lazy way out.

I agree that people have every right to be frustrated at the process. I've been there myself, big time. But I won't call them lazy, and I'd prefer others didn't either.

Don't misunderstand, I'm not calling for people to temper down their criticism or anything like that. If you're pissed off, be pissed off. But you and Petey have both said that you're frustrated by what they choose to fix, what direction they go, what's communicated versus what's not, etc, etc, etc. I agree with all of those. Fully agree. And none -- none -- of those can be chalked up as "lazy".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeffHCross

To make a pun ... calling them "lazy" is ... well, the lazy way out.

I agree that people have every right to be frustrated at the process. I've been there myself, big time. But I won't call them lazy, and I'd prefer others didn't either.

Don't misunderstand, I'm not calling for people to temper down their criticism or anything like that. If you're pissed off, be pissed off. But you and Petey have both said that you're frustrated by what they choose to fix, what direction they go, what's communicated versus what's not, etc, etc, etc. I agree with all of those. Fully agree. And none -- none -- of those can be chalked up as "lazy".

---

I think refusing to notice problems is being lazy.

It's not like the community, i.e Game Changers haven't brought these issues to EA. At least come out and say if it was attempted to be fixed, it would completely break the game, or just feed us lies telling us that it's an engine issue, and won't be fixed until it's overhauled. Being told a reason why, even if it's completely false is better than holding out false hope that EA knows, and is attempting a fix.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeteyKirch

It's not like the community, i.e Game Changers haven't brought these issues to EA.

---

Then, obviously, they have been noticed and are known, yes? Not exactly "refusing to notice".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeteyKirch

At least come out and say if it was attempted to be fixed, it would completely break the game, or just feed us lies telling us that it's an engine issue, and won't be fixed until it's overhauled. Being told a reason why, even if it's completely false is better than holding out false hope that EA knows, and is attempting a fix.

---

I don't disagree. But notice that they don't "come out and say" practically anything, especially about issues. That's a policy (in my eyes). Not lazy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeffHCross

Then, obviously, they have been noticed and are known, yes? Not exactly "refusing to notice".
I don't disagree. But notice that they don't "come out and say" practically anything, especially about issues. That's a policy (in my eyes). Not lazy.

---

Maybe refusing to notice is wrong for this year, but for issues that plagued the series for the last installments, that's refusing to notice, and correcting their ways.

Agreed.

Does anyone know if playing time helps improve players? If I put a freshman in in the 4th quarter to do mop up is that going to make him any better?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jknaegle

Does anyone know if playing time helps improve players? If I put a freshman in in the 4th quarter to do mop up is that going to make him any better?

---

It should but I dont believe it does

I've seen it believed that playing time has some (but limited) influence on progression. It's by no means the primary factor, but it's not a non-factor either, from the discussions I've seen.