I've got a question for the folks at EA

[YoungVito]

With all this talk about the "Second Title Update" (A.K.A. Patch) there's has been mention of trivial things like "Uniforms getting dirty", but yet no mention of things that really matter involving gameplay.

I mean...what's the point of my uniform getting dirty if there's NEVER any weather for online play? Oooooh my uniform's dirty! Hope the CPU is impressed.

[Nevada_Ballin]

With all this talk about the "Second Title Update" (A.K.A. Patch) there's has been mention of trivial things like "Uniforms getting dirty", but yet no mention of things that really matter involving gameplay.

I mean...what's the point of my uniform getting dirty if there's NEVER any weather for online play? Oooooh my uniform's dirty! Hope the CPU is impressed.

Lemme get this straight, you don't know everything about the update but you want to complain about it anyway? lol


.

[GAV]

Lemme get this straight, you don't know everything about the update but you want to complain about it anyway? lol


.
He knows enough NB.

Madden and NCAA are notorious at ignoring glaring problems while adding frilliness that isn't necessary.

[YoungVito]

Lemme get this straight, you don't know everything about the update but you want to complain about it anyway? lol


.

Once again NB...you and your lil' fanboy Micura read what you want to read instead of what's actually written.

I SAID....I have heard mention of things like "uniform deterioration" but did not hear anything about gameplay. To let you FURTHER know that I read the SAME pastapadre page you did...I can say that I read that they would make much needed changes to online play as well.

Now...back to my point. If EA is going to go so far as to mention what "improvements" they're going to make to online play, while at the SAME time saying that they're showing the wear and tear on the uniforms then it would only make sense that one of these online "improvements" should be to ACTUALLY HAVE WEATHER when you play online. I mean hell...what's the point of have The Weather Channel sponsor your "Live Weather" if most people aren't even going to see it?

And yes...at the end of the day. These issues come in a DISTANT second to the problems with gameplay itself. (I.E. Man-to-Man Supercoverage)

Was that clear enough for you NB? Not to be an a**, but you and your little "friend" have a habit of making personal attacks and its getting a bit tired. I can understand Michura doing this, but a "SuperModerator" such as yourself should be better than this. Just simply answer the question and keep it professional.

And lastly...if anyone hears anything concerning the issues I've asked about, please share.

Signed...A Grown Up.

[BostonsFinest]

Once again NB...you and your lil' fanboy Micura read what you want to read instead of what's actually written.

I SAID....I have heard mention of things like "uniform deterioration" but did not hear anything about gameplay. To let you FURTHER know that I read the SAME pastapadre page you did...I can say that I read that they would make much needed changes to online play as well.

Now...back to my point. If EA is going to go so far as to mention what "improvements" they're going to make to online play, while at the SAME time saying that they're showing the wear and tear on the uniforms then it would only make sense that one of these online "improvements" should be to ACTUALLY HAVE WEATHER when you play online. I mean hell...what's the point of have The Weather Channel sponsor your "Live Weather" if most people aren't even going to see it?

And yes...at the end of the day. These issues come in a DISTANT second to the problems with gameplay itself. (I.E. Man-to-Man Supercoverage)

Was that clear enough for you NB? Not to be an a**, but you and your little "friend" have a habit of making personal attacks and its getting a bit tired. I can understand Michura doing this, but a "SuperModerator" such as yourself should be better than this. Just simply answer the question and keep it professional.

And lastly...if anyone hears anything concerning the issues I've asked about, please share.

Signed...A Grown Up.

If you don't like the game, then don't play it... Man to man isn't THAT over-powered. If you run som sort of bunch/tight set and have some drags and corner routes, BOOM someone is open....

P.S. You sound like an arrogant a-hole when you sign "A Grown Up".

[YoungVito]

If you don't like the game, then don't play it... Man to man isn't THAT over-powered. If you run som sort of bunch/tight set and have some drags and corner routes, BOOM someone is open....

P.S. You sound like an arrogant a-hole when you sign "A Grown Up".

Not my intention to sound arrogant. If you knew the history behind the comment then you'd understand where I was coming from.

Now as far as the Man-to-Man issue. Its been well documented that sure, there are some "unbumpable" plays you can run to combat this. That's not the point. The point is that we should have to resort to "glitches in the Matrix" when simple football strategy and Matchups should suffice. I.E. Sure...Antonio Gates isn't gonna beat Derell Rivas on a deep route, but you let Gates run a curl route while Rivas is playing him "off" and the only option for Rivas is to either let him catch, or get called for interference.

Not sure if you've played the Madden Demo yet, but the way that the DB play the Receiver is MUCH more realistic than the way its being run on NCAA. No one can argue the fact that NCAA's DB almost seem telepathic when playing Man-to-Man.

Once again...concerning the "Grown Up" comment. It was not directed at the general populace. It was directed at "certain individuals" who choose to reduce this site to nothing more than a gripe session instead of what its truly meant for. A place for Football Video Game Nerds (don't front...embrace it) to come together and HOPEFULLY get our ideas heard to improve the game.

[Nevada_Ballin]

Once again NB...you and your lil' fanboy Micura read what you want to read instead of what's actually written.

I SAID....I have heard mention of things like "uniform deterioration" but did not hear anything about gameplay. To let you FURTHER know that I read the SAME pastapadre page you did...I can say that I read that they would make much needed changes to online play as well.

Now...back to my point. If EA is going to go so far as to mention what "improvements" they're going to make to online play, while at the SAME time saying that they're showing the wear and tear on the uniforms then it would only make sense that one of these online "improvements" should be to ACTUALLY HAVE WEATHER when you play online. I mean hell...what's the point of have The Weather Channel sponsor your "Live Weather" if most people aren't even going to see it?

And yes...at the end of the day. These issues come in a DISTANT second to the problems with gameplay itself. (I.E. Man-to-Man Supercoverage)

Was that clear enough for you NB? Not to be an a**, but you and your little "friend" have a habit of making personal attacks and its getting a bit tired. I can understand Michura doing this, but a "SuperModerator" such as yourself should be better than this. Just simply answer the question and keep it professional.

And lastly...if anyone hears anything concerning the issues I've asked about, please share.

Signed...A Grown Up.

I didn't read what I wanted to read, I read what you wrote. Which was "I've heard mention of things..." Let's complain about hearsay and what others say before seeing for ourselves what actually gets done - if anything.

A "grown up" would wait until they had the update in-hand to complain instead of jumping to conclusions. Sign that. :)

.

.

[Nevada_Ballin]

He knows enough NB.

Madden and NCAA are notorious at ignoring glaring problems while adding frilliness that isn't necessary.

Day 1 patch killed the QB Walk and other things that were in the demo. It's just a little absurd to assume one knows everything before they even see it. But I get it, there will always be lovers and haters. The haters are just the loudest in every crowd.

The people complaining about the man coverage want the game eased up (or dumbed down, take your pick) to make it easy for themselves. If the game is too hard, move it down to Varsity mode. No, wait, that would be too much for the ego to take - just dumb down Heisman level instead... lol

.

[Nevada_Ballin]

Once again...concerning the "Grown Up" comment. It was not directed at the general populace. It was directed at "certain individuals" who choose to reduce this site to nothing more than a gripe session instead of what its truly meant for. A place for Football Video Game Nerds (don't front...embrace it) to come together and HOPEFULLY get our ideas heard to improve the game.

**looks at this and laughs at the hypocrisy of the same person's "gripe" session in this thread**


.

[PSUEagle]

The people complaining about the man coverage want the game eased up (or dumbed down, take your pick) to make it easy for themselves. If the game is too hard, move it down to Varsity mode. No, wait, that would be too much for the ego to take - just dumb down Heisman level instead... lol

Stop it. Just stop.

I don't want man coverage toned down because I want it "easy" (LOL at that ****: it's already crazy easy to move the ball). I want it toned down because it completely detracts from any sort of realism in this game. When you can show me film of corners running slants three steps ahead of a wide receiver in real life I'll stop complaining.

And spare me with whole deal about expecting too much: If EA gave us the ability to shade our corners manually we wouldn't have this problem. That's not too much to ask. Unfortunately, they're more interested in giving us purty colors and tunnel entrances:rolleyes:

If you enjoy the game that's cool. Just don't assume ****. I'll bet if you played me you would find that I'm actually pretty good. Same with HCopenhagen, I suspect. We're just tired of this series being stuck in quicksand. I want to play something realistic, not NCAA Street 2011.

[Nevada_Ballin]

Stop it. Just stop.

I don't want man coverage toned down because I want it "easy" (LOL at that ****: it's already crazy easy to move the ball). I want it toned down because it completely detracts from any sort of realism in this game. When you can show me film of corners running slants three steps ahead of a wide receiver in real life I'll stop complaining.

And spare me with whole deal about expecting too much: If EA gave us the ability to shade our corners manually we wouldn't have this problem. That's not too much to ask. Unfortunately, they're more interested in giving us purty colors and tunnel entrances:rolleyes:

If you enjoy the game that's cool. Just don't assume ****. I'll bet if you played me you would find that I'm actually pretty good. Same with HCopenhagen, I suspect. We're just tired of this series being stuck in quicksand. I want to play something realistic, not NCAA Street 2011.

Ah yes, I forgot, the quick slant is 100% indefensible and should never be covered. If I had a searchable library of NFL or college film I'd show you dozens of intercepted slants because the CB read the tendency or the QB's 3 step drop.

:45 second mark "learn the tendencies" > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7mwZRHNGvgM&feature=PlayList&p=D5C5666F32E9A2F1&playnext=1&index=15

And this is a video game - you're never going to have 22 player real life game play. Learn where to draw the line between real and fantasy. No one said the game is perfect but I'll tell you what, if I'm playing someone who is throwing a slant every other play, I would expect my CBs to latch on to that eventually and jump the route.

.

[PSUEagle]

GTFO with the Expert Village ****. They're the master of Captain Obvious crap. Gee, you think it's a great idea to shade inside if it's a slant? Really? What else, the sky is blue?

The point is that there is absolutely no degree of realism. If the corner jumps inside, that should leave him considerably more vulnerable to the quick out/fade. It's simple physics. Now, try throwing a fade in this game. Picked off (unless you resort to the Jet-Pack stuff, which is horse**** in its own right). I can kill man with several different things. I just don't like seeing basic football plays being completely useless. Hell, I've said nothing about the deep comeback (THE hardest route in football to defend) being screwed up for over a decade.

Besides, if you've played cornerback at all you would understand how hard it is to defend the slant if the receiver's big and positions himself well.

What I've asked for isn't that much. Read the last post I made in my NCAA sucks thread: I gave three very workable solutions. If they implemented them you might actually see some realism in the passing game (along with completely removing user catching, which I also support).

[Nevada_Ballin]

GTFO with the Expert Village ****. They're the master of Captain Obvious crap. Gee, you think it's a great idea to shade inside if it's a slant? Really? What else, the sky is blue?

The point is that there is absolutely no degree of realism. If the corner jumps inside, that should leave him considerably more vulnerable to the quick out/fade. It's simple physics. Now, try throwing a fade in this game. Picked off (unless you resort to the Jet-Pack stuff, which is horse**** in its own right). I can kill man with several different things. I just don't like seeing basic football plays being completely useless. Hell, I've said nothing about the deep comeback (THE hardest route in football to defend) being screwed up for over a decade.

Besides, if you've played cornerback at all you would understand how hard it is to defend the slant if the receiver's big and positions himself well.

What I've asked for isn't that much. Read the last post I made in my NCAA sucks thread: I gave three very workable solutions. If they implemented them you might actually see some realism in the passing game (along with completely removing user catching, which I also support).

And you make it sound like you are God's expert on football... lol. You aren't the only person here who has had their hand in the game nor are you the only person to ever coach some kids.

And give up trying to convince people that the man coverage is so intense that it can't be beat - even with slants - cuz it can. Not realistic at times? No kidding. It's a $60 video game, not a $14 billion dollar NASA simulator.


.

[PSUEagle]

Relax man. I just don't think much of Expert Village. If you want to learn about the game and proper technique, etc. go visit coachhuey, or a million different blogs out there.

And I realize we're going to disagree on this issue. That's fine. I'm not personally attacking you. Just stop with the intellectual demagoguery. I'm not asking for a NASA simulator, as you call it. I'm asking for simple add ons. If FIFA and NHL can come close to getting their product (in sports that are far more variable and fluid than football) then EA can get the NFL/NCAA correct, or at least come closer than they have.

Just so I'm clear on the last point: I say football is less variable because in real life, all players are governed by rules in a given scheme. EA can absolutely program indivdual players to perform certain functions based on what their counterpart does. If FIFA can do it (and trust me, soccer is far more fluid and less regimented than football) then so can Madden.

[Indecline]

game isn't gonna change, get over it and stop complaining.

if you wanted to play perfectly real ball, maybe you should of worked harder on those friday nights.

[Nevada_Ballin]

Relax man. I just don't think much of Expert Village. If you want to learn about the game and proper technique, etc. go visit coachhuey, or a million different blogs out there.

And I realize we're going to disagree on this issue. That's fine. I'm not personally attacking you. Just stop with the intellectual demagoguery. I'm not asking for a NASA simulator, as you call it. I'm asking for simple add ons. If FIFA and NHL can come close to getting their product (in sports that are far more variable and fluid than football) then EA can get the NFL/NCAA correct, or at least come closer than they have.

Just so I'm clear on the last point: I say football is less variable because in real life, all players are governed by rules in a given scheme. EA can absolutely program indivdual players to perform certain functions based on what their counterpart does. If FIFA can do it (and trust me, soccer is far more fluid and less regimented than football) then so can Madden.

And we can agree to disagree, that's all good. For the record, I coached high school football for a few years so I'm not talking blind - and you are on point when you talk about real football. Yes, the quick slant is a hard cover for a CB. But if he's thinking it's coming, he can defend it.

I'm not too knowledgeble on actual video game programming but I have to guess that in this game, EA's version of "CB anticipation" of the the slant is the CB running ahead of the route. I've noticed that if you run it a few times, the CBs will start doing running the route like everyone says. But when they do, you can still beat them by throwing the ball high to the WR's outside shoulder, away from the CB. >>> http://www.easports.com/media/play/video/27500451

Here were two slants that I ran before the one above. These two are what made the CPU anticipate it (imo) > http://www.easports.com/media/play/video/27500367

Wish I had the other angle for this one > http://www.easports.com/media/play/video/27500281

As a QB, you need to read the defense post-snap - if they are guarding the slant you have 2 choices, throw to the outside shoulder like I did in the first video or progress to your next receiver and not force a throw.

btw, i didn't mean to sound like an asz, re-reading my posts I wish tone of voice was there... lol

.

[thegame11]

If you don't like the game, then don't play it... Man to man isn't THAT over-powered. If you run som sort of bunch/tight set and have some drags and corner routes, BOOM someone is open....

P.S. You sound like an arrogant a-hole when you sign "A Grown Up".From one Pats fan to another man to man is sickening and we shouldn't have to find things to beat the super pumped up man coverage maybe if they looked at previous versions football video games i.e.(2k5 and others) maybe they can produce quality game instead of the quick fixes that produce more problems. JUst like the strategic stick why r u changing the controls so there won't be any nano's how about fixing the blocking with no more suction blocks that they claim aren't in the game anymore. Oh thats right they will put the controls back to oldschool, but thats when football season starts if its gonna take that long u might as well let it be and fix the other issue's u have every single year.

[PSUEagle]

And we can agree to disagree, that's all good. For the record, I coached high school football for a few years so I'm not talking blind - and you are on point when you talk about real football. Yes, the quick slant is a hard cover for a CB. But if he's thinking it's coming, he can defend it.

I'm not too knowledgeble on actual video game programming but I have to guess that in this game, EA's version of "CB anticipation" of the the slant is the CB running ahead of the route. I've noticed that if you run it a few times, the CBs will start doing running the route like everyone says. But when they do, you can still beat them by throwing the ball high to the WR's outside shoulder, away from the CB. >>> http://www.easports.com/media/play/video/27500451

Here were two slants that I ran before the one above. These two are what made the CPU anticipate it (imo) > http://www.easports.com/media/play/video/27500367

Wish I had the other angle for this one > http://www.easports.com/media/play/video/27500281

As a QB, you need to read the defense post-snap - if they are guarding the slant you have 2 choices, throw to the outside shoulder like I did in the first video or progress to your next receiver and not force a throw.

btw, i didn't mean to sound like an asz, re-reading my posts I wish tone of voice was there... lol

.

No we're cool. I know from reading your posts that you are a knowledgable guy when it comes to a lot of stuff.

I agree about reading pre/post snap. I don't expect the slant to be there every play (like NCAA 10). I do expect it to be there over 50% of the time if it's loose coverage.


game isn't gonna change, get over it and stop complaining.

if you wanted to play perfectly real ball, maybe you should of worked harder on those friday nights.

You know nothing about me. I don't play college ball because I know my own athletic limitations. That's why I want to coach.

Seriously, you contribute nothing to the forums other than sarcastic one liners (which aren't even funny). Enjoy running your five play bum offense. I'll bet having a great online record makes you feel real good.

[Nevada_Ballin]

No we're cool. I know from reading your posts that you are a knowledgable guy when it comes to a lot of stuff.

I agree about reading pre/post snap. I don't expect the slant to be there every play (like NCAA 10). I do expect it to be there over 50% of the time if it's loose coverage.



It seems to be there for me about 75% of the time. But I don't run slants a lot either, especially early in a game. I'm pretty methodical with my play calling. I'll run things that I expect will set up other stuff much later in the game, i.e., pound a HB dives outta I-Form for the first half and maybe a couple times in the 3rd quarter to make sure i have defensive commitment to it and then do a Fake FB HB Toss in hopes of a big play. Or throwing some out patterns to set up slants and curls to set up a streak downfield, etc.

I love to bait my opponent. I'm not someone who discovers 3 or 4 money plays and then does nothing but that. I think we probably have the same approach on that.


.

[Indecline]

You know nothing about me. I don't play college ball because I know my own athletic limitations. That's why I want to coach.

Seriously, you contribute nothing to the forums other than sarcastic one liners (which aren't even funny). Enjoy running your five play bum offense. I'll bet having a great online record makes you feel real good.

Your asking for the game to be perfectly realistic, when the only way your gonna get a perfectly real game is by playing in real life.

EA is never gonna make anything perfect, 2K will never make anything completely perfect either.

Stop complaining on here, its not gonna help.

crying about how unathletic you are and how you need to complain about a video game must make you feel real good too.

[Nevada_Ballin]

Your asking for the game to be perfectly realistic, when the only way your gonna get a perfectly real game is by playing in real life.

EA is never gonna make anything perfect, 2K will never make anything completely perfect either.

Stop complaining on here, its not gonna help.

crying about how unathletic you are and how you need to complain about a video game must make you feel real good too.

This part of the conversation can calm down guys.

Thanks :)

.

[GAV]

First off, I'm really enjoying the game. I'm having fun every game. This game has alot right about it.

Still, I see that there were quick fixes. The meetings at EA are very cut-and-dry. The brass-heads want solutions, not discussion - so in lieu of realistic, applicable solutions - they go with unrealistic "fixes." The resulting NCAA 11's man coverage was an unrealistic, but immediately applicable fix. In addition, defenders should not know the receiver routes. They should have a plan in place - and stick to it unless directed otherwise. Blockers morphing into defenders have bolstered the run game, but it's being accomplished in an unrealistic manner. I would always prefer the right fix rather than the quick fix, but Madden and NCAA always go for a flawed solution over a time consuming one - in fear that a solution won't be found at all. They won't wait for answers. They're always about the now.

...and don't tell me I'm complaining because man is giving me trouble. It isn't. I've labbed alot in online ranked games, but I've aso beaten some of the best players around this year when I've buckled down.

[djwill13]

First off, I'm really enjoying the game. I'm having fun every game. This game has alot right about it.

Still, I see that there were quick fixes. The meetings at EA are very cut-and-dry. The brass-heads want solutions, not discussion - so in lieu of realistic, applicable solutions - they go with unrealistic "fixes." The resulting NCAA 11's man coverage was an unrealistic, but immediately applicable fix. In addition, defenders should not know the receiver routes. They should have a plan in place - and stick to it unless directed otherwise. Blockers morphing into defenders have bolstered the run game, but it's being accomplished in an unrealistic manner. I would always prefer the right fix rather than the quick fix, but Madden and NCAA always go for a flawed solution over a time consuming one - in fear that a solution won't be found at all. They won't wait for answers. They're always about the now.

...and don't tell me I'm complaining because man is giving me trouble. It isn't. I've labbed alot in online ranked games, but I've aso beaten some of the best players around this year when I've buckled down.

I think you have very sound logic in your argument, but I'd like to present something to add to it. If the game goes virtually unchanged, minus whatever "new" feature they decide to add in each year, then why are some of the same isues in this game from the very first year it was released on NG?

I could see if they were having issues with something and didn't find out about it til late in developement. I could stand for a "quick fix" there. However, you would think that the issue would be ironed out by a patch, or at the very least, the next years game. Expecting people to pay $70 (with the added crap to play online) to play what's essentially a broken game is utter garbage. But yet, year in and year out we get the wool pulled over our eyes with the promise of "new helmets, writsbands, cleats, dirty jerseys...etc". The list goes on and on, and it's garbage.

[HcopenhagenH]

I didn't read what I wanted to read, I read what you wrote. Which was "I've heard mention of things..." Let's complain about hearsay and what others say before seeing for ourselves what actually gets done - if anything.

A "grown up" would wait until they had the update in-hand to complain instead of jumping to conclusions. Sign that. :)

.

.

With the history of EA constantly LYING? Come on man. There is a pattern they have developed and the general football gamer believes all there BS.

Here is what is going to happen. The patch will be implemented and nothing to little is going to take place in it. I will put it this way, the "Dirt on the Jerseys" may be the only thing you will even notice. How do I know this? It is typical EA BS they feed you every year. We are going to do this, this, and this. We are going to fix this, this, and this. They do very little because they are afraid to break the game. The lie to the public to keep them arm distance away from storming Orlando with pitchforks.

Oh... and Vito... LIVE WEATHER HAS NEVER WORKED ON NCAA. EVER!!!!

[HcopenhagenH]

The people complaining about the man coverage want the game eased up (or dumbed down, take your pick) to make it easy for themselves. If the game is too hard, move it down to Varsity mode. No, wait, that would be too much for the ego to take - just dumb down Heisman level instead... lol

.

LOL... Further from the truth. People want the man coverage fixed because it is garbage. It is programmed for the AI to cheat because the game is programmed so poorly. It takes in NO consideration of player ratings. Heck, it isn't even football.

We want the defense to be realistic. If a WR plays against a DB from Florida it will be much different than that WR going against a DB from North Texas. You dig? But, the game doesn't show that all because player ratings do or mean very very little in this game. Instead, we get this generic piss poor programmed defense from EVERY TEAM.

I don't want to stick to 3 or 4 plays that beat man. I want to be able to mix and match my playbook. If player rating meant anything then I would be able to open my playbook because then I am not playing against a cheating AI that knows my play. At that point I am concerned with player ratings and not AI. I then have to choose if I am going to throw against Bama's #1 DB or check down to a third or fourth option. The CPU AI does not give you this. You just have to know if in man throw here and if in zone throw here. IT IS BORING THAT WAY.

[HcopenhagenH]

I think you have very sound logic in your argument, but I'd like to present something to add to it. If the game goes virtually unchanged, minus whatever "new" feature they decide to add in each year, then why are some of the same isues in this game from the very first year it was released on NG?

I could see if they were having issues with something and didn't find out about it til late in developement. I could stand for a "quick fix" there. However, you would think that the issue would be ironed out by a patch, or at the very least, the next years game. Expecting people to pay $70 (with the added crap to play online) to play what's essentially a broken game is utter garbage. But yet, year in and year out we get the wool pulled over our eyes with the promise of "new helmets, writsbands, cleats, dirty jerseys...etc". The list goes on and on, and it's garbage.

I am HcopenhagenH. And I approve this message.

[YoungVito]

Ya know..."Super Moderator"...I've never been the type of guy to say "I told you so", but...

Look. Its one thing to have Man to Man be harder, but its a WHOLE different story to have the DB anticipate darn near every route you run. I saw that someone mentioned the Deep Comeback Route. Well...if you've labbed this play, you would notice that the DB doesn't go for any of the fakes that the WR puts on, they just make a beeline for the sideline.

Now you find me ANY corner in Football who's not in the Hall of Fame who would know to do that?

Like I said on another thread...if you think I'm "jiving" you so much, do me a solid and lab the Man to Man Coverage in Practice Mode. See for yourself.

"SuperModerator"...GTFOH.

[HcopenhagenH]

Ya know..."Super Moderator"...I've never been the type of guy to say "I told you so", but...

Look. Its one thing to have Man to Man be harder, but its a WHOLE different story to have the DB anticipate darn near every route you run. I saw that someone mentioned the Deep Comeback Route. Well...if you've labbed this play, you would notice that the DB doesn't go for any of the fakes that the WR puts on, they just make a beeline for the sideline.

Now you find me ANY corner in Football who's not in the Hall of Fame who would know to do that?

Like I said on another thread...if you think I'm "jiving" you so much, do me a solid and lab the Man to Man Coverage in Practice Mode. See for yourself.

"SuperModerator"...GTFOH.

Let's face it. If you want to play this game and be good at it you have to lab. You have to find the routes that will beat man and routes that beat zone. Since this game was invented certain routes have NEVER worked. A deep comeback being one of them. Certain routes have had there years. One year a square in is money, another a slant is money, another an out is money, and another year a button hook is money. You will never have more than one in a year though.

Kind of gay when you think about it.

[Nevada_Ballin]

LOL... Further from the truth. People want the man coverage fixed because it is garbage. It is programmed for the AI to cheat because the game is programmed so poorly. It takes in NO consideration of player ratings. Heck, it isn't even football.

We want the defense to be realistic. If a WR plays against a DB from Florida it will be much different than that WR going against a DB from North Texas. You dig? But, the game doesn't show that all because player ratings do or mean very very little in this game. Instead, we get this generic piss poor programmed defense from EVERY TEAM.

I don't want to stick to 3 or 4 plays that beat man. I want to be able to mix and match my playbook. If player rating meant anything then I would be able to open my playbook because then I am not playing against a cheating AI that knows my play. At that point I am concerned with player ratings and not AI. I then have to choose if I am going to throw against Bama's #1 DB or check down to a third or fourth option. The CPU AI does not give you this. You just have to know if in man throw here and if in zone throw here. IT IS BORING THAT WAY.

lol.. i dunno what to tell you bro. I posted some highlight videos of me beating man coverage on simple slant calls and with one of them I also showed how to beat it when the defense is running the route with the receiver (which it does not always do, contrary to popular belief).

But the arguments are always seem to be the same and contradict at times:

Man is too hard to beat / Man is easy to beat

The CPU defense knows what play I called / I called a run play out of SG Trips and the defense was in a Nickel Zone

The CPU kicks my asz all of the time / I just won the national chip with 4 star, C+ rated Nevada in offline franchise the 3rd year in.

etc, etc, etc.

Again, I think a lot of people are letting perfect be the enemy of good here. Everyone agrees the game isn't perfect and still needs some work. But that doesn't make it unplayable or not fun.

[Nevada_Ballin]

Ya know..."Super Moderator"...I've never been the type of guy to say "I told you so", but...

Look. Its one thing to have Man to Man be harder, but its a WHOLE different story to have the DB anticipate darn near every route you run. I saw that someone mentioned the Deep Comeback Route. Well...if you've labbed this play, you would notice that the DB doesn't go for any of the fakes that the WR puts on, they just make a beeline for the sideline.

Now you find me ANY corner in Football who's not in the Hall of Fame who would know to do that?

Like I said on another thread...if you think I'm "jiving" you so much, do me a solid and lab the Man to Man Coverage in Practice Mode. See for yourself.

"SuperModerator"...GTFOH.

First, lose the attitude with the "super moderator" crap - it's not needed.

Second, this game expects you to set things up. If you want to run that deep comeback route you may have to complete a deep route a couple of times - give the DB something to be faked with first. I don't know if you are thinking that everything you do should always work or what .... maybe you can elaborate on that a little.

.

[djwill13]

lol.. i dunno what to tell you bro. I posted some highlight videos of me beating man coverage on simple slant calls and with one of them I also showed how to beat it when the defense is running the route with the receiver (which it does not always do, contrary to popular belief).

But the arguments are always seem to be the same and contradict at times:

Man is too hard to beat / Man is easy to beat

The CPU defense knows what play I called / I called a run play out of SG Trips and the defense was in a Nickel Zone

The CPU kicks my asz all of the time / I just won the national chip with 4 star, C+ rated Nevada in offline franchise the 3rd year in.

etc, etc, etc.

Again, I think a lot of people are letting perfect be the enemy of good here. Everyone agrees the game isn't perfect and still needs some work. But that doesn't make it unplayable or not fun.

I think what everyone is trying to get at is that they want EA to be held accountable. You, me, and everyone else knows that EA hasn't exactly been trying to push the envelope with innovation ever since acquiring the exclusive license. No a whole heck of a lot has changed throughout the years on next gen, especially not when you compare to yesteryears madden/ncaa franchises. Look at the jump from 2000 to the 2001 year, or 03 to 04. EA's more than capable of delivering a quality game....when pushed. What I don't understand is, rather than fix an issue, EA will either abort it all together (see fanning out your dline as an example), or cover it up as much as possible. 2k5 had the ability to shade your corners, but we're STILL waiting on seeing it from an EA title. That was 6 YEARS AGO. You mean to tell me that LG technology is better than CG? I, and from what I'm gathering from the hard core community want the ability to do that. But what do we get instead? New facemasks and hometowns to choose from, or some other BS.

EA gets this blame because of the exclusivity deal. Hate it or love it, without anything to compare it to, all we can compare NCAA and Madden to are themselves, and earlier versions of the game. Like I said.......not a whole lot has changed since 07...

[HcopenhagenH]

I think what everyone is trying to get at is that they want EA to be held accountable. You, me, and everyone else knows that EA hasn't exactly been trying to push the envelope with innovation ever since acquiring the exclusive license. No a whole heck of a lot has changed throughout the years on next gen, especially not when you compare to yesteryears madden/ncaa franchises. Look at the jump from 2000 to the 2001 year, or 03 to 04. EA's more than capable of delivering a quality game....when pushed. What I don't understand is, rather than fix an issue, EA will either abort it all together (see fanning out your dline as an example), or cover it up as much as possible. 2k5 had the ability to shade your corners, but we're STILL waiting on seeing it from an EA title. That was 6 YEARS AGO. You mean to tell me that LG technology is better than CG? I, and from what I'm gathering from the hard core community want the ability to do that. But what do we get instead? New facemasks and hometowns to choose from, or some other BS.

EA gets this blame because of the exclusivity deal. Hate it or love it, without anything to compare it to, all we can compare NCAA and Madden to are themselves, and earlier versions of the game. Like I said.......not a whole lot has changed since 07...

And you know what's sad? You take away the fumble fest 2008 was and that is a better game that what we have today.

NB, I am sure people have fun with the game. It would probably give me 10 minutes of fun as well. I want a game that will give me 60 hours of enjoyment. The problem is NCAA has become stagnant. To me it seems they are just trying to stay status qua to make sure they earn a profit not matter how small it is.

Look at it like this. The Wii has more people playing that console than PS3 or 360 does put together. The 360 and PS3 are more known to be the hardcore gamer rather than the occasional arcade gamer Wii owners are. EA hasn't even tapped into the Wii crowd. NCAA and Madden for that matter on these consoles is what should be out there for the Wii owners. Make it a casual game for people that don't want realism. Make it a game where you can get all 5 star recruits and win the MNC by 100 points. The funny thing is I really believe EA thinks that in the back of their minds they have a Sim Game on the PS3 and 360... LMAO

Make the PS3 and 360 a game that means something. You can' tell me that you don't want to play a game where if you know you have a 93 rated CB for Nevada that you don't really care what happens on that side of the field. You can't tell me that you don't want to worry that when you have a 99 rated LT that you will be sacked from that side of the field. Right now the game is just about having a fight with the crappy AI. Why can't EA make the ratings mean something? Right now it doesn't matter if you have a 93 rated CB or 65 rated CB because they play the same. It doesn't matter if you have a 99 rated LT or a 72 rated LT because they play the same. The player ratings don't mean anything. This game is Tecmo Bowl with player ratings that don't mean anything and a bad AI. If I wanted Tecmo Bowl I would go play Tecmo Bowl. And the sad part, the really sad part is that Tecmo is an overall more fun game.

[Nevada_Ballin]

I think what everyone is trying to get at is that they want EA to be held accountable. You, me, and everyone else knows that EA hasn't exactly been trying to push the envelope with innovation ever since acquiring the exclusive license. No a whole heck of a lot has changed throughout the years on next gen, especially not when you compare to yesteryears madden/ncaa franchises. Look at the jump from 2000 to the 2001 year, or 03 to 04. EA's more than capable of delivering a quality game....when pushed. What I don't understand is, rather than fix an issue, EA will either abort it all together (see fanning out your dline as an example), or cover it up as much as possible. 2k5 had the ability to shade your corners, but we're STILL waiting on seeing it from an EA title. That was 6 YEARS AGO. You mean to tell me that LG technology is better than CG? I, and from what I'm gathering from the hard core community want the ability to do that. But what do we get instead? New facemasks and hometowns to choose from, or some other BS.

EA gets this blame because of the exclusivity deal. Hate it or love it, without anything to compare it to, all we can compare NCAA and Madden to are themselves, and earlier versions of the game. Like I said.......not a whole lot has changed since 07...

Yea, i understand the accountability thing and I agree. I'm just saying that personally, I'm having fun with it. I'm not saying it doesn't needs improvement - if I can beat the crap out of Alabama with Nevada consistently then there are some problems... lol

As for the exclusivity and no competition thing, I don't know if that was done the same way as the NFL one was. That was a deal the NFL wanted, not one that EA sought.

If the same is true with the NCAA then I think it's noteworthy to hold THEM accountable as well. If they are the ones who said, "Ok, we only want to allow one company to have the rights to make a video game with our licensing, bidding is now open to all comers.", then they are the ones who created the non-competitive position.

Back to the game itself. It seems like a lot of people are caught up in comparatives - "in '06 it was like this, in '07 it they had this, in '08 this was going on" etc. I took a bit of a hiatus from NCAA for a few years, until last year when I got back into it so that's not something I concern myself with too much. I look at this year's game compared to last year's and I see a better effort. I wouldn't give it an A+ but I wouldn't give it a "D" either - more like a "B-". I can live with that.

Of course, this is all subjective to everyone's personal like/dislike in different areas of the game. I'm not going to flat out say that everyone who disagrees with me are "wrong" because that in itself is wrong and vice versa. The old saying "You can't please all of the people all of the time" rings true moreso in sports games than anything else I know besides politics... lol.

There's supposed to be another title patch coming, it will be interesting to see what it does. Maybe we see some of that accountability :) (yea, I'm optimistic, so what? lol)


.

[PSUEagle]

Your asking for the game to be perfectly realistic, when the only way your gonna get a perfectly real game is by playing in real life.

EA is never gonna make anything perfect, 2K will never make anything completely perfect either.

Stop complaining on here, its not gonna help.

crying about how unathletic you are and how you need to complain about a video game must make you feel real good too.

Out of respect for Nevada I won't comment after this.

If you don't like what we have to say, don't comment. No one's forcing you to read my stuff.

And I say I'm unathletic in a football sense. I've played soccer for years (and still do intramurally) as well as track. I'm not some slug who hangs out in front of his computer all day.

Rant over.

[PSUEagle]

I agree with what others are basically saying: EA's series has basically failed to generate adequate progress.

When features like DB shade, as DJWill mentioned, were on last gen but not next gen, that's not acceptable. When the same routes are broken every year and the same issues with zone are present, that's not acceptable. And when every year we get at least crippling flaw gameplay wise, that's not acceptable.

The reality is that if you want to be good on offense you have to lab stuff. It took me one week to find a ton of ways to beat man in my playbook. That's not the point. All I want is a game where I have confidence that all of my routes work correctly. Is that too much to ask?

[Nevada_Ballin]

Out of respect for Nevada I won't comment after this.

If you don't like what we have to say, don't comment. No one's forcing you to read my stuff.

And I say I'm unathletic in a football sense. I've played soccer for years (and still do intramurally) as well as track. I'm not some slug who hangs out in front of his computer all day.

Rant over.

Thank you! :)


.

[Nevada_Ballin]

The reality is that if you want to be good on offense you have to lab stuff. It took me one week to find a ton of ways to beat man in my playbook. That's not the point. All I want is a game where I have confidence that all of my routes work correctly. Is that too much to ask?

Wouldn't we have to lab stuff even if the game was perfect?


.

[PSUEagle]

Wouldn't we have to lab stuff even if the game was perfect?


.

No question. Any coach (or wannabe:)) will tell you the value of practice. I just don't like it when I can find a few routes that work every time while everything else sucks. I want something in the middle. Somthing where ratings matter.

In a game like I want only the best DB's can play press, and only above average DB's can cover man to man. And on offense, if I play with a bad team and you play with Alabama, I have to use bunch sets to get my guys free from the man coverage. That's a chess match. Right now though, I can run certain plays with freaking Tulane and move the ball at will against any defense.

And that's really the issue: in Madden/NCAA you can be a three play chump and be dominant. I have too much pride to play that way, but I could be near the top of the leaderboard easily running three plays all game. That's a big time problem, IMO.

[Nevada_Ballin]

No question. Any coach (or wannabe:)) will tell you the value of practice. I just don't like it when I can find a few routes that work every time while everything else sucks. I want something in the middle. Somthing where ratings matter.

In a game like I want only the best DB's can play press, and only above average DB's can cover man to man. And on offense, if I play with a bad team and you play with Alabama, I have to use bunch sets to get my guys free from the man coverage. That's a chess match. Right now though, I can run certain plays with freaking Tulane and move the ball at will against any defense.

And that's really the issue: in Madden/NCAA you can be a three play chump and be dominant. I have too much pride to play that way, but I could be near the top of the leaderboard easily running three plays all game. That's a big time problem, IMO.

Understood.... fortunately there are a few people out there like you and me who go deep into the playbooks instead of being one trick ponies :)

.

[GAV]

I think you have very sound logic in your argument, but I'd like to present something to add to it. If the game goes virtually unchanged, minus whatever "new" feature they decide to add in each year, then why are some of the same isues in this game from the very first year it was released on NG?

I could see if they were having issues with something and didn't find out about it til late in developement. I could stand for a "quick fix" there. However, you would think that the issue would be ironed out by a patch, or at the very least, the next years game. Expecting people to pay $70 (with the added crap to play online) to play what's essentially a broken game is utter garbage. But yet, year in and year out we get the wool pulled over our eyes with the promise of "new helmets, writsbands, cleats, dirty jerseys...etc". The list goes on and on, and it's garbage.

...because if a fix is needed, but few complain about it directly - than it goes mostly ignored.

[GAV]

Understood.... fortunately there are a few people out there like you and me who go deep into the playbooks instead of being one trick ponies :)

.
I took a picture of my reaction. Here it is.

[Nevada_Ballin]

I took a picture of my reaction. Here it is.

Damn, you're very photogenic!


:D


.

[Indecline]

Out of respect for Nevada I won't comment after this.

If you don't like what we have to say, don't comment. No one's forcing you to read my stuff.

And I say I'm unathletic in a football sense. I've played soccer for years (and still do intramurally) as well as track. I'm not some slug who hangs out in front of his computer all day.

Rant over.

Yeah, your right. I dont know you, I shouldn't be acting like I do.

I just dont understand why your so negative about the game, if you dont like it dont play it, you dont need to write a book on how bad it is.

[Iamczar]

I agree with most here. I honestly really enjoy the game but as someone just said some things should have been improved or added years ago. Period!!! Another thing, if I pay my hard earned money for something I should have the right to complain about it. I'm not talking about itching, I'm talking about real constructive complaints.

I'm not a bum but I'm not great either so miss me with the "you just want to make easier nonsense". When I play offline or lab it's on Heisman. I'm a solid player and always trying to get better thanks to peeps here (NB, Mich, PSU, Knockboot, Mello, GAV) and the many others but if the game has flaws the game has flaws. Just because you've found a way around the flaw doesn't lessen the flaw it lessens other parts of the game because you have to go around these flaws.

[YoungVito]

Like I've said before. This flaw can be easily tested for by just going into the Practice Mode and going up against the Worst DB's of the game. (Western Kentucky is pretty disgusting btw) All you have to do is run ANY Pass play against either a Cover 1 or Cover 2 Man defense...NOT PRESS. You'll notice that at times the Corners will "play off" of the receiver, but it doesn't matter. Not even the OBVIOUS slant pattern that SHOULD be open is available, because the Corner will jump that route 99% of the time.

If that doesn't convince ya...nothing will. In which case there's really no point of trying anymore. I'm sure the folks at EA have heard the message and will address this in the next "Patch".

[Nevada_Ballin]

Like I've said before. This flaw can be easily tested for by just going into the Practice Mode and going up against the Worst DB's of the game. (Western Kentucky is pretty disgusting btw) All you have to do is run ANY Pass play against either a Cover 1 or Cover 2 Man defense...NOT PRESS. You'll notice that at times the Corners will "play off" of the receiver, but it doesn't matter. Not even the OBVIOUS slant pattern that SHOULD be open is available, because the Corner will jump that route 99% of the time.

If that doesn't convince ya...nothing will. In which case there's really no point of trying anymore. I'm sure the folks at EA have heard the message and will address this in the next "Patch".

Sorry man, but that is simply not true. Yea there are problems with this game but let's be honest about them.... 99% of the time they jump the route when they are playing off? Absolutely not.





.

[YoungVito]

Sorry man, but that is simply not true. Yea there are problems with this game but let's be honest about them.... 99% of the time they jump the route when they are playing off? Absolutely not.
.

Once again...let me say that I'm NOT trying to start a fight with you, but the fact of the matter is there are more people saying what I'm saying than not.

At the end of the day. EA will settle this debate.

[HcopenhagenH]

At the end of the day. EA will settle this debate.

To be honest, I highly doubt they will. It has been EA's track record not to mess with game play in patches.

[djwill13]

To be honest, I highly doubt they will. It has been EA's track record not to mess with game play in patches.

Maybe, maybe not. There was the qb sneak issue from goal line they fixed....that's the ONLY one that comes to mind though.

[Nevada_Ballin]

Once again...let me say that I'm NOT trying to start a fight with you, but the fact of the matter is there are more people saying what I'm saying than not.

At the end of the day. EA will settle this debate.

There is no fight.

"Not even the OBVIOUS slant pattern that SHOULD be open is available, because the Corner will jump that route 99% of the time."

That statement is simply wrong. It's not like I don't have the game and don't play. It's fine if you want to talk facts of the matter, I'm just saying let's be honest about the facts you are presenting.


.

.

[YoungVito]

There is no fight.

"Not even the OBVIOUS slant pattern that SHOULD be open is available, because the Corner will jump that route 99% of the time."

That statement is simply wrong. It's not like I don't have the game and don't play. It's fine if you want to talk facts of the matter, I'm just saying let's be honest about the facts you are presenting.
.

I am being honest. And lets face it, there are many people who say they have seen what I've seen as opposed to saying what you are saying. I'm not looking to get into a "I'm right and you're wrong debate", but at the end of the day...ALL of us CAN'T be wrong.

[HcopenhagenH]

I have seen video and Young Vito is correct. You can make slants work, but like I said, it is making it work. The throw is not the same read or throw you would make in a real football environment.

[Nevada_Ballin]

I can post 100 highlight videos where I'm hitting slants and it's never going to be enough. I don't care what "other people" say - I play the game, i have my own experience to go by.

Some people just want that play to be open all day long i guess cuz the perception I'm getting is that it should never be covered, even if you throw it 5 times in a row. :rolleyes:

.

[YoungVito]

I can post 100 highlight videos where I'm hitting slants and it's never going to be enough. I don't care what "other people" say - I play the game, i have my own experience to go by.

Some people just want that play to be open all day long i guess cuz the perception I'm getting is that it should never be covered, even if you throw it 5 times in a row. :rolleyes:

.

Dude...you are the ONLY one saying what you are saying. Take a step back and consider that there MIGHT be some truth to what we're saying.