The Gaming Tailgate: NCAA Football 12 Preview

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jayrah

Omgoodness you're right! I knew there was just something off. Like the field seemed too small or something. But it's simply that more steps per yard need to be added. This would also speed up the legs of players, making them look faster, and make cutting animations that much more sick! One of the reasons spin moves have never looked tight enough is for this very reason!

---

EXACTLY! there are other issues that this causes too, but this is definitely the reason the devs. slowed the game down b4 launch last year. during the demo, the gameplay to me felt pretty realistic, in that players were moving fast. however, a lot of people complained that the game was too fast. this wasn't because people were moving too fast, but their long strides multiplied by the stride/second made them cover ground in an unrealistic manner. now, players run pretty accurate 40 times but thats actually because they have ridiculously long strides. but to compensate, the alternating of their legs is drastically lowered. (probably 5% difference, but that feels like and is a lot)

aside from that, here are a couple benefits that realistic running motions would offer.
1.) more control: by having shorter strides, you have greater ability to change direction after your foot lands. with a longer stride, you have to wait a little longer b4 you are able to change direction. this can all the difference when trying to cut around/ cut back/ change direction when running through a hole.

2.)if youre in the open field and you see a guy 10 yds in front of you, with shorter strides you have more time and greater ability to actually set your guy up and try to get by him. as it is now, using the left stick is the best way to maneuver around defenders. i think that shortening strides would allow more time to use the set up moves (DUAL ANALOG CONTROL) and actually take advantage of the right stick. i dont like simply flicking my right stick right and watching a predetermined juke get by a guy. i wanna set him up and run by him, using my own skills. shortened strides would help immensely

3.)as you said, this would open up the game. it feels soooo compact now, and would just make everything feel more wide open. (which college football is) isn't the spread offense about well, spreading the field??? I don't want players who have really long strides because it makes covering the ground way too easy. i want to feel the open space in college football and put my athletic players in the open. i want to run my now deceased rich rod offense with denard robinson (custom playbooks) to perfection.

4.) finally, having shorter strides would help truly reflect speed, acceleration, and agility ratings. with essentially more space to roam, athletic player ratings would truly come alive, and the effects would be noticed immediately.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jayrah

Omgoodness you're right! I knew there was just something off. Like the field seemed too small or something. But it's simply that more steps per yard need to be added. This would also speed up the legs of players, making them look faster, and make cutting animations that much more sick! One of the reasons spin moves have never looked tight enough is for this very reason!

---

Yeah, the players just don't look natural. It's something that looks worse when you aren't actually playing and just watching a video. Whenever they did one of those EA moments in a real game and showed NCAA 11 last year it looked bad because of it.

I think this is my new #1 request for 2013. It would speed up the players (animations and movements become shorter and quicker to compensate for the loss of yards per stride) but SLOW DOWN THE GAME! With more control you would not need as much space to make a move as wolverine was saying. Actually the space would probably move from 10 yards away from a defender to 6 or 7 with the same amount of strides remaining to have to decide on a move. A late kickout block would allow you to still cut up inside andnot get stuck on your lineman. Etc.

It also would alleviate the slide effect in the game imo. Defenders turning and covering so much ground in coverage (as the oregon safety does in the new gameplay video for 12) would not happen, giving a perfect balance to defenders in the new zone and man coverages. A hole in the defense would be easier to see but not abusable. Defenders would basically react in a more timely fashion. Wrs would also benefit in this effect by running routes in a more natural fashion, especially during cuts, where sometimes the player is turning before they are planted.

Line play would be condensed and quicker moves defensively combined with smaller/shorter strides offensively would give rushers a chance around the edge! Make that first 1 or 2 steps at least "seem" more explosive. Pocket would collapse a split second sooner as well i would think just because of spacing issues.

Just an overall game changer really.

Would making the field bigger do the same thing? It would probably be easier as opposed to mo-capping shorter run strides.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jayrah

I think this is my new #1 request for 2013. It would speed up the players (animations and movements become shorter and quicker to compensate for the loss of yards per stride) but SLOW DOWN THE GAME! With more control you would not need as much space to make a move as wolverine was saying. Actually the space would probably move from 10 yards away from a defender to 6 or 7 with the same amount of strides remaining to have to decide on a move. A late kickout block would allow you to still cut up inside andnot get stuck on your lineman. Etc.

It also would alleviate the slide effect in the game imo. Defenders turning and covering so much ground in coverage (as the oregon safety does in the new gameplay video for 12) would not happen, giving a perfect balance to defenders in the new zone and man coverages. A hole in the defense would be easier to see but not abusable. Defenders would basically react in a more timely fashion. Wrs would also benefit in this effect by running routes in a more natural fashion, especially during cuts, where sometimes the player is turning before they are planted.

Line play would be condensed and quicker moves defensively combined with smaller/shorter strides offensively would give rushers a chance around the edge! Make that first 1 or 2 steps at least "seem" more explosive. Pocket would collapse a split second sooner as well i would think just because of spacing issues.

Just an overall game changer really.

---

I do think this is why many like the way the PS2 players moved. It seemed more natural. I'm still going to push for a momentum option for NCAA 12. Next Gen (normal) and Classic (like PS2)! Everybody wins!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rudy

I do think this is why many like the way the PS2 players moved. It seemed more natural. I'm still going to push for a momentum option for NCAA 12. Next Gen (normal) and Classic (like PS2)! Everybody wins!

---

the ps2 players may have looked smoother but they also moved way too fast. It was much more video-gamey.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by souljahbill

Would making the field bigger do the same thing? It would probably be easier as opposed to mo-capping shorter run strides.

---

Assuming that the field/stadium size is currently scaled to the player models, making the field bigger could have other unintended consequences.

This maybe very wishful thinking, but on TD celebrations, did you guys see any celebrations like this below?

http://www4.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/C..._c6TICtSkl.jpg

;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VWEBBJR

This maybe very wishful thinking, but on TD celebrations, did you guys see any celebrations like this below?

;)

---

I did not, but I may not have played (or scored a TD) with a team that has those gloves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cdj

I did not, but I may not have played (or scored a TD) with a team that has those gloves.

---

OK, thanks CDJ, that would be sweet if those actually made it in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cdj

I did not, but I may not have played (or scored a TD) with a team that has those gloves.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VWEBBJR

OK, thanks CDJ, that would be sweet if those actually made it in.

---

I don't remember playing as a team with those glove styles in my time with the game; that said, hard to know whether NCAA regulations allow such a celebration. If you remember from this past year's Michigan-Ohio State game:

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/footbal...n=ncaaf-289645

Quote:

---

Nike was obviously very proud of the retro "Pro Combat" look it dreamed up for Ohio State to wear in today's rivalry match with Michigan, in honor of the Buckeyes' 1942 national championship team. Part of that look included lightweight "Vapor Jet" gloves featuring "premium Magnigrip CL technology" and custom art specifically designed to display a block 'O' when the palms are brought together. Nike has put a similar design on the gloves for every team in the Pro Combat line, including a script 'A' for Alabama in last year's BCS Championship Game.

The only problem? When Ohio State receiver DeVier Posey brought the gloves together to form the 'O' after taking in a touchdown pass from Terrelle Pryor to put the Buckeyes up 24-7 in the second quarter, he was hit with a 15-yard unsportsmanlike penalty. OSU was subsequently forced to kick off to the Wolverines from its own 15-yard line instead of its own 30. Later, when offensive lineman Mike Adams flashed the 'O' to the crowd to celebrate a 32-yard touchdown run by Boom Herron that extended the OSU lead to 31-7 in the third quarter, he was flagged for an unsportsmanlike penalty, too.

---

If these are against the rules of play, would have to imagine that the NCAA might have asked the development team not to have that kind of celebration in NCAA Football 12; even though Nike went out of their way to design the uniforms that way in the Pro Combat series.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Paakaa10

I don't remember playing as a team with those glove styles in my time with the game; that said, hard to know whether NCAA regulations allow such a celebration. If you remember from this past year's Michigan-Ohio State game:

---

That had nothing to do with NCAA regulations. That had to do with officials that thought it was a gang sign.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeffHCross

That had nothing to do with NCAA regulations. That had to do with officials that thought it was a gang sign.

---

Huh... just went through the 2009-2010 NCAA rule book for football and couldn't find anything related to the glove celebrations. The only glove-related material was as follows:

Quote:

---

If worn, gloves or hand pads must be gray in color on the back, including the backs of the fingers. It is strongly recommended that the palms also be gray; however, black on the palms is acceptable. The recommended shades of gray are Pantone Cool Gray 8C, Cool Gray 9C, 423C and 430C.

---

I would assume that the rules have changed in the last few years given the Nike design for the palms of gloves in the Pro Combat uniform line, but I can't find a more recent version of the rules.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Paakaa10

I would assume that the rules have changed in the last few years given the Nike design for the palms of gloves in the Pro Combat uniform line, but I can't find a more recent version of the rules.

---

Not necessarily. Those rules allow for designs on the palms. And besides ... the version of the rules you found was only a year ago. ;)

But besides the point ... that "celebration" isn't illegal ... except in Michigan-Ohio State. Plenty of other teams had similar designs, did similar things, and went unpenalized. Mark Ingram's celebration with the Alabama glove design was used in SportsCenter's intro video for month.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by souljahbill

Would making the field bigger do the same thing? It would probably be easier as opposed to mo-capping shorter run strides.

---

No it wouldn't I don't think. They'd have to redo everything around the stadium, including fans and signage and boards and everything. I thought this way too, but after reading on everything that goes into creating a stadium, and the amount of time it takes to just do "simple" things around the stadium, I realized that this is not the best solution.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rudy

I do think this is why many like the way the PS2 players moved. It seemed more natural. I'm still going to push for a momentum option for NCAA 12. Next Gen (normal) and Classic (like PS2)! Everybody wins!

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ram29jackson

the ps2 players may have looked smoother but they also moved way too fast. It was much more video-gamey.

---

What do you mean by "moved too fast"? Because that is the point. Everything would move "faster", but the game would slow down from a decision aspect and players would take more steps to get from point A to B. But they wouldn't get there any slower during sprint because the times are already in place to be "realistic".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeffHCross

Assuming that the field/stadium size is currently scaled to the player models, making the field bigger could have other unintended consequences.

---

This. The players look right on the field as far as size goes, but movements are spread out in sprint mode.

Actually after playing in practice mode a little bit, slower players take fewer shorter strides in the game. This is only somewhat the case IRL. But faster players actually don't move a whole lot longer in striding (assuming players are same height), but rather, the legs move faster. Lighter, faster players have lighter and faster feet. I'm not sure how to explain that correctly, but the ncaa series has always depicted faster and slower by length of stride, while the length of the stride is not always the case. Another thing to consider is that this is only in "sprinting" mode. The sliding effect (which should be less prevalent again, but may not be perfect) and overly quick player turning ability accounts for the other huge makeup of ground in the game that looks "unnatural".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jayrah

No it wouldn't I don't think. They'd have to redo everything around the stadium, including fans and signage and boards and everything. I thought this way too, but after reading on everything that goes into creating a stadium, and the amount of time it takes to just do "simple" things around the stadium, I realized that this is not the best solution.

This.



What do you mean by "moved too fast"? Because that is the point. Everything would move "faster", but the game would slow down from a decision aspect and players would take more steps to get from point A to B. But they wouldn't get there any slower during sprint because the times are already in place to be "realistic".


This. The players look right on the field as far as size goes, but movements are spread out in sprint mode.


Actually after playing in practice mode a little bit, slower players take fewer shorter strides in the game. This is only somewhat the case IRL. But faster players actually don't move a whole lot longer in striding (assuming players are same height), but rather, the legs move faster. Lighter, faster players have lighter and faster feet. I'm not sure how to explain that correctly, but the ncaa series has always depicted faster and slower by length of stride, while the length of the stride is not always the case. Another thing to consider is that this is only in "sprinting" mode. The sliding effect (which should be less prevalent again, but may not be perfect) and overly quick player turning ability accounts for the other huge makeup of ground in the game that looks "unnatural".

---

Well, it is true that game would and should move faster, but players on the ps2/xbox game ran something like 3.9 second 40's. this was actually mentioned by a dev. i think a few years ago; not gonna try to find where it was said. but anyone can test this too. so maybe players did move a little bit faster than real life, but definitely a big improvement over now. also, part of the 3.9 40 time may be because players running down the sideline didn't actually have to begin from 0 acceleration, as they were already in stride. so maybe it was completely realistic.

i actually feel that players might be a tad big compared to the field; not sure though. but its def. not uncommon for sports games to feature players that are too big for their environment. mlb 2k7-2k8 had enormous models. i think until nba 2k9 models were too big, and in fact the devs recognized this and made a point to show their new (and properly proportioned to the field player models) models and compare it with the old ones.


as a comparison, check out this video:
http://www.gametrailers.com/video/gt...football/11298
doesnt that gameplay look silky smooth?! damn. seriously though, player strides were shorter and more realistic. but also look at the procedural leaning and lack of robotic movement in general. but whats truly awesome about that locomotion system is that it was believable. players respected the physics of the game, and nothing came across as cheap. look at the players in the video run by defenders without any animations playing out. i feel on next gen that to make a move to get by a defender, i have to flick my right stick left to play out a juke animation where the defender gets his ankles broken as well. in last gen, it seemed animations were entirely separate. i could juke/ even move around a player while the defender would just change his direction instead of playing out an animation himself. watch how jukes did not dictate what the defender did at all; if defender got beat, nothing he can do about it but change direction. no canned animation plays out. this is because players respected momentum, agility, speed, acceleration, etc. that is why the game felt so much more organic.

also, idk but do player models on the older games seem smaller to the field than players on 360? it seems that way maybe a little to me, but not quite sure.

ive got a whole other rant about qb accuracy comparisons from last gen to this gen, where throwing was way more dynamic too, but thats another topic lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolverines05

http://www.gametrailers.com/video/gt...football/11298
doesnt that gameplay look silky smooth?! damn. seriously though, player strides were shorter and more realistic. but also look at the procedural leaning and lack of robotic movement in general. but whats truly awesome about that locomotion system is that it was believable. players respected the physics of the game, and nothing came across as cheap. look at the players in the video run by defenders without any animations playing out. i feel on next gen that to make a move to get by a defender, i have to flick my right stick left to play out a juke animation where the defender gets his ankles broken as well. in last gen, it seemed animations were entirely separate. i could juke/ even move around a player while the defender would just change his direction instead of playing out an animation himself. watch how jukes did not dictate what the defender did at all; if defender got beat, nothing he can do about it but change direction. no canned animation plays out. this is because players respected momentum, agility, speed, acceleration, etc. that is why the game felt so much more organic.

---

It's the twitchiness and ease of change of direction on next gen that has bothered me more than some of the animations. The lack of player momentum has made it too easy to turn on a dime. Guys can spam the l-stick back and forth without much penalty. It's what makes it so much harder to actually play defence on next gen. Offensive players have a huge advantage because they make a cut and lose no speed as they leave the defender in the dust. It's made playing pass defence too hard.

Take a look at this old NCAA 07 video. Watch every RB and kick return, particularly the kick return of 2:10. The player tries to cut back a bit but there is no quick movement and the player slows down. There is never an instance where the user could spam the stick left or right to get around someone. Player weight/momentum was much heavier. The graphics are also a lot worse lol.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdVxKfFQHQQ

Here is an NCAA 11 video. Check the kick return at 3:20. The returner can make a quick move without any speed slowdown or natural arc to that move. There is very little weight shown in the player movement and it also makes it look unnatural. Lateral movement is still too easy to pull off.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsfIt6IAak0&feature=related

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cdj

I saw it alluded to on Twitter, but never followed up. What is this ankle brace issue exactly?

---

I believe it has to do with the player degradation, before the 1st patch last year players did not get dirty and the ankle brace will stay black on grass surface. After the 1st patch when they added the player degradation, the brace would get progressively lighter and lighter until it turned completely white.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rudy

There is never an instance where the user could spam the stick left or right to get around someone. Player weight/momentum was much heavier. The graphics are also a lot worse lol.[/video]

---

So true Rudy. Play next gen and then go back to 06/07. Trying to move bigger/slower players was impossible. Next gen has made it too easy to move players and the thing is that it was purposeful... EA bragged that players could move on a dime, which is entriely unrealistic.

Just like to say thank you for answering my earlier questions and being so open with the rest of the fans and community! You guys rock and I'll be checking your site daily! I should've stayed more active here I joined last year.