Madden 09: The Passing Experiments
Every year, I end up picking up a copy of Madden. Each year, I go into practice mode, and put it through certain paces.
As of the last few years, Madden has fared very poorly at these tests.
Let's talk about this year's game, shall we?
These are not comprehensive tests, but preliminary once-offs I do to get an early idea as to some of the successes and failings of the passing game. Nothing can replace playing the game for weeks and seeing how certain things unfold in all of the various possible situations. These are just snapshots that try to isolate and observe some specific issues.
The *Legion* Fly Pattern Litmus Test
This is the single test that I apply to every football game. Most fail.
The concept is simple: with a WR running a fly/fade pattern down the sideline, covered by a CB who is slightly inside of him, a player-controlled QB should be able to lead the WR both ahead and to the outside of the receiver, placing the ball over the outside shoulder of the WR. The WR should turn his head to the outside, and reach for the ball over his outside shoulder, making the catch. This ball placement keeps the ball out of the CB's reach, as the CB cannot go through the WR to get to it. That is how a correctly thrown and caught fly pattern against good man coverage happens.
(A beaten CB will be a step behind a WR, and a QB throwing it sufficiently deep that only the WR can reach will do. A good CB will stay in a WR's hip pocket, but he can't simultaneously be both on the inside AND the outside of the WR. The kind of precision that separates the Tom Bradys from the Ty Detmers is the ability to drop that pass over the receiver's outside shoulder, allowing him to make the catch despite the CB's good coverage. Corners stay to the inside of the WR because that's a hard throw to make, with so little room between the WR and the sideline.)
When I tell people this, they respond, "oh, yeah, that happens in (insert game they're playing)." But closer inspection reveals that, almost always, it is not.
What I found, in practice mode with no defense interfering, is that while you can lead a deep sideline pass outside (somewhat clumsily), receivers would drift outside along with it, still attempting to be further outside the ball so that they can catch it facing the field instead of the sideline.
This, of course, ruins the whole point of throwing the ball to the outside like that, which is to have the WR keep his body between the CB (who is usually to the inside of him on such a route) and the area of space where the ball will come back down to earth and be reachable.
The slant test vs. man
This one I started as a result of the complaints that Madden and NCAA have received with regards to the difficulty pass defenders have against slants and drag routes.
One of the problems with Madden versus reality is that defenses react to a team that throws slants, and defenders will be more prepared to break on an inside route after they've had the slant thrown on them earlier (or, if they've studied the team's propensity to throw the slant route in film study). In Madden, corners react like it's the first time they've seen the play, never learning the tendency to throw inside, which they would be able to compensate for by "cheating" a step or so (or even just a smidgen) to the inside.
Still, a top-notch defender should be able to at least SOMETIMES make the good defensive play against an inside slant when lined heads-up on a WR.
THE TEST:
Jaguars vs. Broncos
Jags: I Pro Quick Slant
Broncos: 4-3 Normal 2 Man Under (for normal depth) or 2 Man Press (for press depth)
Difficulty: All Pro
The idea here was to match an elite NFL corner (Champ Bailey) on some average-to-decent NFL wide receivers (Jerry Porter, Reggie Williams).
WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN: A coverman like Bailey should either (a) be able to react quickly enough to the slant move (especially from a guy without elite speed, like Williams) and stay out in front of the route, or (b) be able to use his closing speed to recover from the inside move and get underneath the route.
In press coverage, Bailey should be able to use the jam to force the WR off his route. Since the inside break on a quick slant is inside the 5-yard bump area, Bailey should be able to make it incredibly difficult for the receiver to get into his break. He should disrupt the WR's attempt to make the inside move, forcing the WR to either go deeper before he can make a cut, or to cut underneath Bailey and "flatten out" the route (turn the slant into something more like a shallow drag). Either should throw the timing of the route off significantly.
WHAT DID HAPPEN: Bailey was beaten like a rug by every receiver I put him in front of. At no point did Bailey ever react in a timely manner to the inside move. Every time, Williams was able to come fully out of his break before Bailey even began to turn his hips. Worse, Bailey never used his speed to recover or get under the route - instead, he was happy to just get behind Williams and follow him, even though he has plenty of speed to catch up with Williams' horizontal position on the field. I tested this by holding onto the ball much longer than a "quick slant" deserves and watching what Bailey did. He was "beaten" throughout the entire route, never bothering to catch up to Williams, but just content to keep pace one step behind.
The only time Bailey ever made any kind of move underneath the route was when the ball was in the air and nearly to the receiver. But because he never even tried to close the gap with Williams, he would always be a step behind.
To REALLY kick it up a notch, I tried putting a 6'8" 265 pound TE, Greg Estandia, into the WR spot that Bailey lined up over, to see if a drastic reduction in receiver speed (Estandia at 74 was the slowest pass-catcher on the Jags roster) would make any difference. The answer: very little. Estandia still got inside of Bailey, and while Bailey followed Estandia closer than he did Williams, the passes would still simply be complete every time. Bailey would come closer to reaching in for a swat when the ball arrived. But still failed. And we're talking about Bailey covering a guy with the speed and size of a defensive end.
Changing the play from I Pro Quick Slants to Strong I Slants had a subtle effect on the outcome. Bailey was beaten a tad less badly. Obviously, taking a look at all of the various slants and inside routes would yield a much more complete picture, but it's quite telling that my first off-the-cuff test jived very much with the standing complaints people have had with these recent EA football games.
WHEN I TRIED IT IN PRESS COVERAGE: ... things got even worse! Drastically worse! Bailey never, ever was able to force the WR to flatten out or to run to a deeper depth. Bailey essentially just put his hands on the WR at the line, and then stepped aside and got the hell out of the way. Receivers got even more separation from Bailey when he was up close to jam. I understood Bailey's inability to jam Estandia - if there's one thing Estandia should be able to do to Champ Bailey, it's outmuscle him. And since all of the main Jag receivers are big, strong guys, I subbed in the one who isn't: Dennis Northcutt. With a strength rating of 45, the 175 lb Northcutt is by far the weakest Jag receiver. Champ Bailey isn't the world's biggest or most physical CB, but he has a good size and strength advantage over the skinny Northcutt.
Guess what happened? The wimpy Northcutt still pushed through Bailey's jam attempts like he was a cardboard cutout, gained the separation, and made the grab.
I will need to formulate a slant test vs. zone. I have noticed that zone coverage is far more successful at defending these inside routes. The idea there, obviously, is that the pass should be defended if the WR is within the coverage area of a zone defender, and be completed if a passer deftly theads the ball between the practical range of any nearby zone defenders, finding a "hole" in the zone coverage. What remains to be seen is how well the zone defenders react to the pass, and if they are covering the amount of ground that they reasonably should be.
More tests to come, if I can drum up enough personal interest to do them... after these results, my interest is, as you might expect, waning...
You should follow me on Twitter: @legion
Steam: *Legion* | Xbox Live: Legion SB | PSN: Legion_SB | Origin: LegionSB
I won't argue with you there. As someone who, in previous years, sucked, sucked, sucked, sucked at passing (as in considering going 13-31 for 181 yards, 1 TD and 2 INTs a "good game"), i'm flinging the ball around with reckless abandon in Madden 09 and succeeding. Corners just do not seem capable of covering most routes in Man. I tried your slant test against the Cowboys and...
...sure, Eli's got a ring now. And yes, Plaxico is a fine WR. But it shouldn't be money. At least, not THAT money. I went 9-10 on it, and arguably, the miss was down to me throwing it early. In the games i've played, the whole "RoboQB" thing should go for both teams, because the pass defense AI has a hard time stopping anything but the dumbest passes. If you can do a basic progression, you can throw for 70% easily.
That and Vince Young is ridiculously overrated. I mean Jesus is the hype machine in overdrive there.
I wonder, could part (only part) of the problem be that so many players are rated so well, there doesn't feel a huge difference between some? Would a ratings overhaul help?
EDIT: Seems this also applies to deep posts. It's not awful on out patterns, but anytime your WR is making a angled break, easy money.
Quote:
XBL Tag: Prederick
Playing On Semi-Pro
If the slant against man coverage is as consistent as it appears to be... it means that man coverage is flat-out broken.
It simply will not be usable in play against a human player. Every man coverage look will be responded to with a quick hot route to a slant, and bam.
That was the idea behind my Greg Estandia test. I figured, OK, Reggie Williams and Jerry Porter aren't rated so bad. How about I line up a 3rd string TE (a guy that's practically an OT) that's got a 71 rating and see? Certainly Bailey can react quickly enough to a guy that runs a 4.9 40 (or, in Madden terms, a guy who has speed and acceleration ratings slower than most of the team's defensive linemen)?
Nope. It's an AI flaw. Take it into replay mode and watch the pattern unfold in slow motion. The receiver will always (in my tests) be a body-and-a-half horizontally to the inside before the CB takes his first step in that direction.
In the NFL as well as Madden. He is a bad passer at this point in his career. A lot of people gave him credit for the 2006 Titans' rally to a wildcard spot, mainly because none of them bothered to look at what the other 21 starting players were doing.
That's a good point on the out patterns. I haven't inspected it closely, but I do know from just playing a couple of games that, in order to complete an out pattern, I have to have that QB's arm in motion before the WR's break. Throw it late, and the defender will cut under the route and make a play on the ball - exactly what he should be doing on slant routes as well. The out pattern plays out well, requiring the right timing and the right read (if the defender is covering the flat instead of the man, throwing that out pattern will usually result in the defender touching the ball, with a serious pick-six possibility).
You should follow me on Twitter: @legion
Steam: *Legion* | Xbox Live: Legion SB | PSN: Legion_SB | Origin: LegionSB
I think it's the game itself. I tried something else, for sh*ts and giggles, sending the AI on a corners blitz on a play (I can't remember which) that sends Mario Manningham on what I believe was a fade route, I can't remember honestly. Either way, it pitts Manningham, listed as a "Speed" weapon against Greg Ellis in a dead sprint as I lobbed it up there.
Now, Manningham will almost always be in position and make the catch, which is fine, but the issue is that Ellis will be in his hip pocket every step of the way.
Ellis has a speed of 78. Manningham, a 93.
That's a fifteen point difference, and Manninham is unable to create a single yard of space, sprinting downfield with a LB. Oh, he'll make the catch, but don't expect him to gain any yards after, because Ellis will be right there to make the tackle.
All respect to Mr. Ellis, but if a WR can't beat a LB in a flat sprint for a deep ball, with noone else interfering, assuming the QB throws it competently, shouldn't he beat the LB flat out most of the time? By some distance?
Quote:
XBL Tag: Prederick
Playing On Semi-Pro
We definitely seem to be identifying an effect where a receiver and a defender in man coverage basically just run down the field together, maintaining more or less the same distance between them as they go. I noticed that when it was a slow WR (TE, rather) being followed by a lightning fast DB. You've done it the other way: fast receiver followed by slow defender. The fast guy doesn't gain (or make up ground) on the slow player.
Now, NFL players are all fast, and the difference between a WR and, say, a linebacker or even a lineman isn't as much as the lay person may think. These guys are all athletes. That said, when we're talking about a dead sprint straight down the field, there should be separation (or a closing of the gap if it's the fast guy chasing).
You should follow me on Twitter: @legion
Steam: *Legion* | Xbox Live: Legion SB | PSN: Legion_SB | Origin: LegionSB
No question, these guys could all outrun me easily. I'm not a student of the game, at least not like I was as a kid, but it has generally been my understanding that if there's a LB lined up on a WR, that's generally considered a mismatch. Some LBs can make up that difference, i'm guessing Greg Ellis isn't known for it. Certainly not on fade routes.
My gripe is essentially that, the game tells me Manningham is significantly faster than Ellis (I'd consider 15 points significant), but we don't see it. The only time i've seen it in-game so far was matching up the absolute fastest WRs in the game (Randy Moss, etc) against others, and then you see some serious separation. Anyone else? Bupkus.
Quote:
XBL Tag: Prederick
Playing On Semi-Pro
No, you're definitely correct on that. It is a mismatch, it should be an opportunity that the offense jumps to exploit. In real football, that mismatch is as much about agility and quickness as it is straight-line speed. But even still, when both hit a full-on sprint down the field, where the WR has enough room in front of him to reach that extra gear, the WR should unquestionably create separation, particularly if the LB doesn't have a significant depth advantage at the start of coverage.
I'm becoming more and more convinced that Madden ratings exist more for the amusement of the real NFL players than they are for actually impacting the simulation itself.
You should follow me on Twitter: @legion
Steam: *Legion* | Xbox Live: Legion SB | PSN: Legion_SB | Origin: LegionSB
How does 2k's game fare in this tesing?
XBox Live: SwampYankee68
STEAM: SwampYankee
A big red FAIL at the end of each of these tests would make me happy as a former 2k employee
ThePolypusher | Polypusher
It's been a while, so I can't really recall the fine details, but the answer is, not particularly well, at least in terms of the pass placement test.
Fine passing control has not been a 2K strength for a while. In fact, if you'll recall the 2K5 leagues, for a long time, I was the only person to enable and use the Maximum Passing feature, which is supposed to give you the kind of pass placement control I'm talking about.
And, in some ways, it did... but it created more problems than it solved. Receivers seemed ill-equipped to deal with passes that ended up outside of where the normal, "automated" (for lack of a better word) pass trajectory would put it. What I found is that my underneath routes were a mess of drops and misses. I couldn't complete the same passes that everyone else that eschewed Maximum Passing could.
It was only when I gave up and accepted the idea of playing the game without minute pass placement control that I was actually able to start winning some leagues. My completion percentage soared. It was very clear why Maximum Passing was a practically undocumented feature, and not a default.
It wasn't always that way. In prior 2K games, Maximum Passing was, IMO, absolutely essential to good passing. But by 2K5, it seemed like a discarded feature.
Now, on the topic of defensive back AI, that's even harder to remember, but I think this one goes in the 2K corner. I do recall that man coverage was more solid. There wasn't a route that triggered a guaranteed breakdown in coverage. I also seem to recall that defenders did a fairly good job of being where they needed to be, and the main breakdowns were not playing the ball well when it was in the air - a defender wouldn't necessarily make the correct move or take the correct path to disrupt the play.
However, in 2K5 at least, the fact that WRs dropped a decent number of passes did help keep some coverage breakdowns in check. Receivers in fairly tight coverage often dropped balls that hit their hands, and we had to suspend disbelief a bit and consider that a successful pass defense, even though the defender didn't necessarily actually make a clear, animated play on the ball.
There were a ton - and I mean, A TON - of flaws in the 2K passing game. But perhaps what was most important was a certain balance of those flaws. It kept any one thing from running unchecked. If you can't be perfect, at least balance out the shortcomings! That's what 2K5 did well, and was the reason we all played it so much, even though I could rattle off a list of flaws and shortcomings that would rival the Bible in length. Balance is important. Right now, it looks like we have a major isolated flaw in Madden that throws that balance out of whack. It doesn't matter that Madden is doing a lot more of the smaller things right that 2K didn't. If the lack of balance creates an exploitable situation, the rest of the game becomes inconsequential.
It's becoming an unnerving trend in Madden games. I pick up the new game, I go "wow, they've gotten all of these details right! Wow, look at that! Wow.... OH NO, a major dealbreaker!". Madden can't seem to just have flaws, it's gotta have exploits.
You should follow me on Twitter: @legion
Steam: *Legion* | Xbox Live: Legion SB | PSN: Legion_SB | Origin: LegionSB
I think the real answer is that if you have human controlled players, the game is arcade over sim. Every game can be exploited. We play with Goodjers in a league, because we don't do that to each other, at least purposely. I think the kinds of tests you and Bill Harris have done (as well as many others) are great to get a good look at how a football game works, but it doesn't have much of an impact on how enjoyable I find the game.
If someone is worried about sim, the old FBPro and the new possibility of Head Coach are the real answers. Now, these games have their share of issues, but the lack of human controlled players creates a very sim like game. I'm probably going to pick the CE of Madden to start getting the hang of Head Coach. I don't believe the game is there yet, but throw in online league play functions, and you have a real shot at a fine football simulator. The problem with these kinds of sims is that Franchise AI is just not capable of drafting, trading, or even setting up depth charts worth a crap. You need humans running every team.
I played in two outstanding FBPro leagues. In one, we created a fantasy draft for 10 teams or so, and then we played head to head over the internet, calling plays. Insane good fun, it was.
The other was a full 28 team league (yep before expansion, and the game was never patched to allow for 30-32 teams) with real rosters. In this league we did not play head to head, but instead submitted gameplans for our teams to the commish, and let him run all of the games on his computer. We then used a third party program that would "gamecast" the games using the logs generated by the simmed games. The commish could run four games simultaneously on one screen while members watched the games and chatted within the program. so every Sunday night we got together and watched the games, four at a time. Oh, and they are still doing this, as the PNFL are now playing 2012 season.
But those games are a different beast from user controlled players on the consoles. I'd like them to be more accurate, but 2K Football has been plenty fun enough to just play, and not worry about the breakdowns. Madden09 is fun enough, but less lifelike than 2K. I doubt they would ever be good enough for Legion, as his expectations are too high, at least for 2008. We'd all like the games to be better, but are they fun to play now?
Honestly, as much as I loved the 2K series for its realism, it is a waste of time trying to force games with user controlled players into pure sims. You may as well be wishing for pixie farts.
Xbox Live: JayhawkerStL
I know, it's sad that I never gave a damn about Tim Tebow. And he never gave a damn about me.
I don't even know how to reply to this, other than to roll my eyes and (attempt to, and fail to) ignore it. You've drawn a conclusion based on, I assume, just skimming the posts and not bothering to actually "get" the point. The comment about 2K being fun enough and "not worry about the breakdowns" suggests to me that you skipped at least the next-to-last paragraph, as I pointed out that 2K5 (and, to extend the point here, the 2K games in general, really) have done well in keeping those shortcomings fairly balanced and in check, so as to not throw off the entire game.
You seem to be operating under the assumption that critiquing AI problems means being entirely unable to play the game "as is". It's a bad assumption, based on nothing, and I'd suggest not using it any longer.
Every year, the football games come out and are reviewed by dozens and dozens of people, and posted about on message boards by thousands. We see vague comments about certain things seeming off, but very few of the people paid to write about the game are able to give any kind of specifics about what is happening and why. I look at these things myself because I rarely, if ever, see anyone else who has a clue taking the time to do so. And I share what I find. If you can't see how that endeavor can co-exist with simply playing the game, I don't know what to tell you.
More to the point, though, don't come in here and start throwing around crap like "I doubt they would ever be good enough for Legion". This thread is for breaking down flaws and AI performance in the passing game, a topic of interest to some of us. If that doesn't interest you, there are other Madden threads for you to peruse. Find your way to those.
You should follow me on Twitter: @legion
Steam: *Legion* | Xbox Live: Legion SB | PSN: Legion_SB | Origin: LegionSB
It wasn't meant to be that snide. I'm sorry.
I'm actually operating on the assumption that you found 2K8 unplayable online for reasons that 99% of us would not notice. But you did notice, and that affects your enjoyment. While I was hoping you would have joined the league, it was obvious that you didn't enjoy the game. I really wanted your expertise as part of the league, so I sorry to see you pass. But I totally understood why.
I am pointing out that your critiques of games in general are extremely accurate for anybody wanting an in-depth simulation of football. I just don't think that the 2K and Madden games could really be considered sims. While Head Coach may be getting there, I don't think there really is a good, let's call it an action sim, available.
Since you don't play APFB and Madden 08, I figured it was safe to say that those games do not measure up to you standards. That's not bad, it just is.
Honestly, I read every one of your posts about football, because I learn a lot from them. I especially enjoy your analysis of videogame football. You take the time to really dig into a game and expose its flaws and praise its strengths. But in the end, at least over the last year, you haven't been playing videogame football, at least on the 360. I am assuming that someone that loves football as much as you, and takes as much time evaluating football games, that if they met your standards, you would be playing them.
I probably assumed too much, but I don't think I was "throwing crap around." I hardly think my post was off-topic.
Xbox Live: JayhawkerStL
I know, it's sad that I never gave a damn about Tim Tebow. And he never gave a damn about me.
It was a little off-topic. But I think it's a good answer to the thread overall. The answer being that no game is truly a "sim". It's a game. And actually, you kind of want it to be a game. If it behaved exactly like things behave in real life there would be no place for the human element. I skateboard and yet I can't do the tricks I do in skate. I played college football and yet I can't be a heisman winning quarterback in real life. I've shot a gun, yet I haven't won the entire D-Day offensive almost single-handedly in real life. These are games. If you want a sim with more accuracy, put down the controller, volunteer as a coach and have fun in real life.
Not being snarky, being serious. I read your whole post and I don't even know how a game would offer the level of control you demand out of a game. 2k with Maximum Passing turned on offers some pretty good control. Better than madden, in my opinion. Yet even it isn't like actual football. No video game is right now. They're just all nicer versions of Tecmo Super Bowl at the end of the day.
3DS Friend Code - 5026-5130-3156
My primary problem with 2K8 online was the poor framerate during net play, which, while you might say "99% of us would not notice", has been a loud complaint on 2K boards about most recent 2K games (not just APF). That issue was really completely outside the scope of the football simulation itself.
I owned and played both games for a time. When it comes to playing online, a game has to either capture my attention fully or it doesn't get played at all, because I'm not a teenager anymore and I simply don't have the kind of online play time that I once had. And in a year where Team Fortress 2 released, no, those football games didn't have much of a chance. That's where something like the APF framerate thing becomes an issue. It's competing with great games for limited time, so something that I might live with if given unlimited online gaming time becomes something that knocks it down the list. Lord knows I lived with a ton of lag to play NFL2K1 on the Dreamcast.
Other, very good games, suffer the same fate. I haven't played a hockey game online in a long time, even though the EA NHL games have become absolutely fabulous.
It's not that hard, it's been done. The last-gen Madden engine got passing controls right towards the end of its run, but they started from scratch when they moved to an all-new engine (and, in fact, the ball placement is mostly fine in this year's version... it's the way the receivers react to the ball placement that's the problem. They need to keep running their routes, not start drifting off of them). 2K's football engines have done it from time to time, 2K5 was a step back. 2K8, from rough memory again, mind you, didn't quite get there, but was a step back in the right direction.
The point of a litmus test is to be something fairly high-reaching to aspire to. If the test was something that most games easily passed, it wouldn't really tell us jack, would it?
I'm not all that worried about Madden 09 not passing the fly pattern test, that one is a "gosh it would be nice if we could get this right again" test. Right now, the only serious concern I have is how poorly DBs handle inside pass routes in man coverage. It's one thing for them to be bad at it, it's another for them to be beaten a full 100% of the time, as they were in my test. I can tell you right now, if what I observed holds, any Madden online game I play will see my defense playing zone coverage on every. single. down.
You should follow me on Twitter: @legion
Steam: *Legion* | Xbox Live: Legion SB | PSN: Legion_SB | Origin: LegionSB
OK, now if I can find the exploit for zone coverage, I'll be golden
I think somewhat similar to *Legion*'s Fly route test for football games is my "Do I have feet" test for FPSs. Can I look down and see my own feet? No? Damn. Yes? Holy sh*t, this game rocks! (Unless I've missed some before, the gameplay trailers from Mirror's Edge makes it the first game to pass the test)
Fletcher wrote:
I once developed a similar test for FPSs, but got tired after all but one failed...
Actually, there have been a number of recent FPSs where you can see your feet. Like F.E.A.R. and the Halo games.
You should follow me on Twitter: @legion
Steam: *Legion* | Xbox Live: Legion SB | PSN: Legion_SB | Origin: LegionSB
I understand the time/quality game argument. Believe me. I have very little time to game anymore. But I guess where you and I differ is that my sniff test isn't whether the game is perfect or not. My test is "is the game fun?". If it passes that test and keeps passing it, I'll probably play it. Once it stops passing that test I'll stop playing it. I'm not saying that's better or worse, but I can't imagine breaking my games down like this. They're video games. If they're fun, I play them. If not I don't.
3DS Friend Code - 5026-5130-3156
That would be a straw man. Some of my very favorite games have been very, very flawed (see: SOCOM II). Hell, NFL 2K5 as a football sim was flawed up one side and down another, and you'll be damn hard pressed to find someone who put more time into that game than I did.
Don't mistake applying a little expertise to try and understand a game with demanding perfection before being willing to play the game. As I've already explained once in this thread, they are two different pursuits. Granted, there is some cross-over, as I cooked up the slant pattern test as a result of playing an online game and observing coverage breakdowns that made the game less "fun", as I find being able to play defense is a fairly important part to the "fun" of a football game.
You should follow me on Twitter: @legion
Steam: *Legion* | Xbox Live: Legion SB | PSN: Legion_SB | Origin: LegionSB
QFMFT. I've sunk way more hours than i'd like to admit into PES 2008, and that game's borked on several levels. But it does most basic things right. Wanting NFL cornerbacks to be competent in basic Man-To-Man Coverage is not asking the game to be perfect, it's asking the game to do the basics of what it should do.
Quote:
XBL Tag: Prederick
Playing On Semi-Pro
I think coming into a thread with an epic post on the intricacies of the passing system might not be the place to trot out the "don't be so picky" argument. I really enjoyed the analysis, I'd rather see more of that and less back and forth about how Legion really feels. I mean, who cares about that?!
I heard that they were keeping Elysium in the ICU not because he needed intensive care, but because they needed to be careful of his intensity. - Wordsmythe
Sorry. I wasn't trying to ruin the thread personally. I just thought there was merit to asking whether the perfection Legion was after was even desired. I'll step out quietly now.
3DS Friend Code - 5026-5130-3156
But I can't see her feet!
Xbox Live: JayhawkerStL
I know, it's sad that I never gave a damn about Tim Tebow. And he never gave a damn about me.
Her what now?
Pyroman wrote:
Gravey wrote:
Google Profile
As bad as man coverage against slants is, zone coverage isn't starting out too hot either
You should follow me on Twitter: @legion
Steam: *Legion* | Xbox Live: Legion SB | PSN: Legion_SB | Origin: LegionSB
Forget zone coverage, I want to know why there's a Sex and the City clip in your YouTube profile.
I heard that they were keeping Elysium in the ICU not because he needed intensive care, but because they needed to be careful of his intensity. - Wordsmythe
It was for a work project.
I'd make a joke here, but I seriously don't even know any of the characters' names.
You should follow me on Twitter: @legion
Steam: *Legion* | Xbox Live: Legion SB | PSN: Legion_SB | Origin: LegionSB
That is very typical. I had Brody Croyle throw into almost the exact same situation. The defender for the Raiders never moved, even as the ball hit him directly in the facemask and bounced off. He didn't just drop it, he never moved.
Xbox Live: JayhawkerStL
I know, it's sad that I never gave a damn about Tim Tebow. And he never gave a damn about me.
It's funny. I was trying to figure out if you guys were playing the same game as me. Because in my copy of Madden the receiver will be wide open and I'll throw it deep. Unfortunately the linebacker will jump 5 feet in the air and pick it off. So a typical game for me will be somewhere in the neighborhood maybe a 35 point loss and 6 interceptions thrown.
Then I turned the setting from the default Madden IQ to default settings and suddenly I could pass. And I also started seeing the stuff you did. I'm not terribly impressed by the AI at this point. I hope I get some games with Goodjers in soon. Otherwise this could get sent back fairly quickly. My options are to either play with Madden IQ turned on and watch as my QB throws 6 interceptions (the virtual reality sim thought I was All-Madden passing) or watch the other QB throw 6 interceptions (the virtual reality sim thought I was a Rookie at pass defense).
So I'm back to custom settings. "Adaptive AI" completely tossed out the window.
3DS Friend Code - 5026-5130-3156
My Tom Brady drone threw three picks against the Dolphins to magic leaping middle linebackers hovering in the middle of the field, waiting to leap 10 feet horizontally to pick off the ball.
I forgive Madden these foibles because I know that in the end it will always let me throw those hook and slant routes when I absolutely need the yards.
The important thing is not that it's good simulation, it's that the game lets me win.
Xbox Live: psu13
One of the issues is that the whole "Virtual Trainer" that adjusts your Madden IQ is a glorified mini-game that has NOTHING AT ALL to do with actual gameplay. But it somehow ends up defining the way you should play the game. This is idiotic, at best. Shouldn't my skill at Run Defense be determined by both playcalling and tackling? Shouldn't calling smart coverages that put my players in the best possible positions be good pass defense, rather than hoping the QB throws it near me so I can try and make a tip (when keeping your man infront of you on a short route on 3rd-and-whatever and preventing the first is still good work)?
Quote:
XBL Tag: Prederick
Playing On Semi-Pro