E3 Day 1

I'm gonna try to be quick, so please excuse any typos.

First off, the new locomotion system in Madden 11 feels incredible. They've been long overdue in that department, and I think they;ve finally gotten it right. I'm not at the point yet where I can implicitly trust their newfangled Gameflow system, but I did give it a try. They have a nice addition where you can choose a basic fourth down play on the fly, so no more having to search through plays when you want to fake it. Not having a sprint will take getting used to, but I think it's better in the long run.

Crackdown 2 feels a lot like the first one, and that means it feels good. I probably spent more time with that demo than any other today. It just speaks volumes about how fun the basic game mechanics of that series are.

I gave Dead Rising 2 a little bit of playtime today. It, too, feels exactly like its predecessor, but in this case it feels a little clunky. I was also disappointed with the seemingly small number of zombie character models. It's particularly noticeable when you kill identical twin zombies standing next to each other, especially when they're dressed the same. Sonic the Hedgehog 4 felt terrible during my playtime. It takes a full 2 seconds to get up to speed, what's that about? The new Tron game felt surprisingly fresh. I only played cycle racing, but it was pretty intense. I played Medal of Honor a little bit. Felt exactly like Bad Company 2. I'll wait for the beta to make a call on that one.

Metroid: Other M is an interesting game. Metroid Prime is my all-time favorite game, and Other M feels nowhere near as good as that game. That new Zelda game uses Motion Plus for more accurate sword mapping, and I can confirm that they did a pretty good job with it. Unfortunately, the graphical style is disagreeable. It's like a cross between Twilight Princess and Wind Waker. It needs to commit to one.

I saw Cliffy B and Shaun White.

I'm on a personal mission to snag as much swag (stuff. we. all. GET!) as possible. I've kinda been sucking it up on that part so far, but I'm going to work harder at it tomorrow. I missed out on Bulletproof-themed free burgers with T-shirt give-aways. I feel like a real sucker for that. I also feel like a sucker for not getting a business card from the Activision exec who checked out Vision by Proxy. Tomorrow will surely be more successful. I gotta go, it's eatin' timez.

--Chilly P

Fifa > Madden/NCAA

All too often I hear people getting all up in a tizzy about the newest madden or NCAA and I never really understand why. From my post about Tecmo to all of the NCAA footballs I have owned I can say that I, like any other person, enjoy a football game... but probably unlike the other folks in this horde of people, I am of the opinion that the more realistic you try to make it, the more likely you will run into problems that people will complain about. I think put simply, you could chalk this up to pathing and interactions between models, but I also have other areas of concern that make me lean towards the beautiful game instead of tossing the pigskin.

Ability to control the flow of the game:

From a fundamental standpoint, Soccer translates much better to video games than football. Passing and shooting is something that is easy to create and manage, whereas blocking, tackling, etc are much more of a problem. Soccer's interactions are pretty limited, with the only real problems coming from the occasional awkward challenge/tackle or goalkeepers, whom are always controlled by the computer when you do not have the ball. Other than those two things, most of the areas within the game are completely controllable by the human players. Unfortunately in football, the human player can only control one (possibly more if you consider rolling coverage or telling an O-line to block in a certain direction).

The importance of this here is that in soccer most interactions occur on a one on one basis (you can also control a nearby computer player to asisst in defense as well), but that is mostly it. You aren't relying on the computer to do most of the defending for you because you are fully capable of changing players to consistently keep up the one on one interactions. In football, once the ball is snapped, the human player can only control one player meaning he is only going to fill one zone, or cover one man. Now the computer is controlling 10 players that directly impact your ability to stop the opponent. On offense the same is applicable, the O-line is out of your control, the routes the computer runs are out of your hands, and any other outside blocking (TE, WR, RB, FB, etc) are outside of your area of control. The interactions become much more complicated, and in doing so, cause frustration. If one of your O-Line players gets beat (by an opponent who is a human or the computer if the opponent is controlling another player) you will not be pleased and might cry foul. These types of examples can go on and on, but the main point is that you cannot consistently make these games fair because the computer is far too inconsistent and the AI is not solid enough to simulate interactions that will please both players.

Broken Players:

Have you ever played NCAA or Madden and thought, "holy shit, this one player is breaking the game?" I know I have, and I think you would be lying if you said you hadn't as well. For example, it could be a DE that is repeatedly running all the way around OTs, TEs, and HBs that you assign to help block or a RB/WR that is unrealistically fast... the list can go on and on, but the point stands that certain players are capable of ruining a game because certain plays can be repeatedly run in order to exploit their unfair attributes.

FIFA really doesn't have these same problems to the extent that Madden or NCAA does. One extremely fast striker or midfield player can dramatically influence the game, but can be easily stopped without game-altering changes to be made in order to do so. Like mentioned earlier, the interactions in FIFA are 1 v 1 and 2 v 1 (when holding down "B" and having a computer player assist you on defense), which means that there is no one to blame but yourself if you get worked by an opponent. As opposed to some TE and OT getting caught up in awkward pathing that allow a human controlled DE to simply run around them and get an easy and unrealistic sack. Take home point here: FIFA doesn't allow ONE player to take over a game and cause extreme, game-altering changes to be made in order to defend against broken players (as long as the teams are comparable, and the same goes for all of my football examples as well). Yet this problem is highlighted by my next point...

Pathing/Routes:

It is no mystery that the pathing that goes on in Madden/NCAA can be abysmal and many times causes players to yell and scream while frantically and desperately watching instant replays in awe of the problems. I won't drone on too long about this, but the routes and pathing of computer controlled players in football is far too complex for a video game, and it is practically impossible to simulate the actual interactions and movements of players fairly for both players to accept. FIFA's pathing is somewhat simple, with the majority of the movements by computer players being on tracks up and down the field, which causes little problems. These straight lines back and forth will rarely be a “game breaker” and are consistent and reassuring. I suppose all the evidence I need for this is on any play where a running back (or WR, TE, FB, etc) can find that happy pathing line where the defensive players take the wrong angle and he is able to squeeze out 4-8 yards (sometimes more) when he really should have been hit 2 yards past the line of scrimmage. Like I said, I could drone on and on about terrible blocking patterns, bad blitz routes, etc. but it would become tedious.

________

I won't make this post into a novel, but I think my points stand with concrete legitimacy in regards to FIFA being a more well-rounded game than Madden or NCAA football. I think some important things to remember after reading this post, is that I am not saying FIFA is a better game than Madden/NCAA or that Soccer is better than Football. What I am saying, is that FIFA takes the game of soccer, and creates a better representation of how the sport is played than Madden/NCAA does with football. So before people get up in arms about how soccer is stupid, I am an idiot, yada yada, etc. just keep in mind the actual question here: Which game do you think actually creates the better representation of the real sport?

Well, what do you think?

SC