General Gaming Anybody else noticed that we're getting a few Football games this year?

[best3444]

2 minutes ago, Keyser_Soze said:

 

Sorry to say sir but the Dreamcast only lasted 2 years before Sega bowed out of the hardware business. 9.9.99 to March 2001

 

Jfc what a shame. Dreamcast was so fuckin good but the hype of the PS2 absolutely destroyed Sega's dreams. 

[Paperclyp]

2 minutes ago, best3444 said:

 

Jfc what a shame. Dreamcast was so fuckin good but the hype of the PS2 absolutely destroyed Sega's dreams. 

I would argue that sega making some horrible decisions was the primary factor in its hardware demise. 
 

I also feel like you are not alone in like what you remember the dreamcast to be vs how it actually was (like remembering yourself playin NFL 2K5 on it ) just based on nostalgia and a deep seeded sadness for the death of a childhood companion. 

[best3444]

2 minutes ago, Paperclyp said:

I would argue that sega making some horrible decisions was the primary factor in its hardware demise. 
 

I also feel like you are not alone in like what you remember the dreamcast to be vs how it actually was (like remembering yourself playin NFL 2K5 on it ) just based on nostalgia and a deep seeded sadness for the death of a childhood companion. 

 

I wasn't a child lol. I was 18 and 19 when the Dreamcast came out and died. I agree Sega didn't make good decisions but it had a incredible library of games. Plus it introduced online gaming. Playing Phantasy Star online on my dial up modem was revolutionary for me. 

[Paperclyp]

7 minutes ago, best3444 said:

 

I wasn't a child lol. I was 18 and 19 when the Dreamcast came out and died. I agree Sega didn't make good decisions but it had a incredible library of games. Plus it introduced online gaming. Playing Phantasy Star online on my dial up modem was revolutionary for me. 

What I mean is that sega had been around in games your entire life and then it was over with the dreamcast. However, that aside I absolutely consider 18 and 19 year olds children lol. 

The library was pretty good for the number of games on the system and the short lifespan. I think a lot of the fondness for the console is due to the uniqueness of some of its biggest games. Which is cool. I just find it’s one of those consoles that people defend vehemently but my personal opinion looking back is like… eh…. Wasn’t that great. I harbor similar feelings toward the N64. 

[best3444]

2 minutes ago, Paperclyp said:

What I mean is that sega had been around in games your entire life and then it was over with the dreamcast. However, that aside I absolutely consider 18 and 19 year olds children lol. 

The library was pretty good for the number of games on the system and the short lifespan. I think a lot of the fondness for the console is due to the uniqueness of some of its biggest games. Which is cool. I just find it’s one of those consoles that people defend vehemently but my personal opinion looking back is like… eh…. Wasn’t that great. I harbor similar feelings toward the N64. 

 

I have to disagree with you on your opinion on the Dreamcast. Same with the N64. Both libraries were fucking amazing and the N64 had like 4 of my top 10 games ever for me. But now I'm playing my PS5 and I personally think with its PS4 inclusion of titles that it's the best console ever. 

[AlwaysDyingX]

1 hour ago, best3444 said:

 

You mean online ranking? That game was dope and TO was a monster. 

 

Yeah online ranking. We used mostly KC ( Priest Holmes), Miami (Ricky williams) and Pittsburgh (Zeroue, Bettis, Ward). 

[Paperclyp]

7 minutes ago, best3444 said:

 

I have to disagree with you on your opinion on the Dreamcast. Same with the N64. Both libraries were fucking amazing and the N64 had like 4 of my top 10 games ever for me. But now I'm playing my PS5 and I personally think with its PS4 inclusion of titles that it's the best console ever. 

 

The 64, even moreso than the Dreamcast, was quality over quantity. I would never deny that it has some bangers, but I think there were less than 400 games on the system, horrible controller, shitty expansion kit needed to run some of its games, etc. I think the PS1 had like triple the number of games or more. And hey, it certainly had its issues with hardware too. But for me, there are dozens of PS1 games I'll go back to and enjoy today vs I dunno, 5-6 N64 games I find worth my time nowadays. 

[best3444]

6 minutes ago, Paperclyp said:

 

The 64, even moreso than the Dreamcast, was quality over quantity. I would never deny that it has some bangers, but I think there were less than 400 games on the system, horrible controller, shitty expansion kit needed to run some of its games, etc. I think the PS1 had like triple the number of games or more. And hey, it certainly had its issues with hardware too. But for me, there are dozens of PS1 games I'll go back to and enjoy today vs I dunno, 5-6 N64 games I find worth my time nowadays. 

 

Fair enough. 

[Remarkableriots]

I think SEGA hurt themselves when SEGA CD, SEGA 32X (which I enjoyed), and SEGA Saturn bombed; it hit them hard financially. They needed a miracle with the Dreamcast, and it wasn't realistic.

[stepee]

Sega made a millllion mistakes before Dreamcast that led to them bowing out. And they were simply nowhere near cash heavy or organized enough as a business to compete with the likes of Sony and Microsoft.

 

Nintendo has always been good at turning a profit even when things weren’t going that well, and they also always had their ace in the hole, which was total domination of the entire handheld market. Still it’s impressive that Nintendo was able to stay in and become as large as they are today once the big businesses got involved.

 

Sega? Never had a shot even if Saturn wasn’t such a disaster. And no, DVD would NOT have saved dreamcast. Their management was so terrible. It was sooner the better that they made the move to at least remain a relevant publisher after that.

[stepee]

The question is, in Wild Card Football, will you be able to pulverize the opponent still after the play?

[Remarkableriots]

37 minutes ago, stepee said:

The question is, in Wild Card Football, will you be able to pulverize the opponent still after the play?

That definitely was a fun part in Blitz.

[Paperclyp]

From a guy who hasn’t bought madden since madden 25, and that was primarily to get the free subscription to Sunday ticket that it came with: 

 

I like madden 24!

 

- Having gone that long between games, the additions don’t seem incremental to me, they seem big. Defense primarily seems more fun to play, with the strafing options and icons that show you what your player should be doing, then a lot of options at the point of attack. Defense used to feel like “play passive until the ball is in the air then swap to a DB and don’t mess it up” type of thing, or spy the qb but use it as like a robber or something. But now it not only feels more fun to play but it feels like you’re playing your position. 
 

- I think the game looks amazing. I’ve seen 1-2 funny glitchy things per game, but nothing egregious. In motion and during replays I’m like… damn. Looks good. 
 

- what used to feel like cheating in the game, ie rolling out Michael Vick and running 15 yards is not only accounted for but feels designed (this is thanks to that’s just how the nfl is now). That was always a big problem I had with madden… it felt like you could not play the game “right” to win, so I didn’t feel like I was learning the systems and gameplay properly at times. Now there’s all sorts of stuff like that especially if you pick a team like the eagles. It scratches some of my NCAA itch with tons of RPO plays, trick stuff, etc. 

 

- announcing seems pretty good in my limited experience so far. I will typically turn it off once I start hearing the same stuff. Pry about 3 hours into the game and haven’t heard any repeat stuff. 
 

- huge pet peeve I had with older football games was the inability to throw to a guy in a gap in a zone where one guy is underneath and safety over the top. They’ve accounted for that now and seem to have paid special attention to it this year in particular. Probably my biggest complaint with the old ncaa games. 
 

- negatives: it’s hard to tell when a game has saved in game. Like 2K you could just make a save file mid game and come back. At first I didn’t even think this had it, but it does in some capacity. However I’m not sure how to trigger it and if you go to rest mode and then come back and it has lost connection to the es servers for any reason, you might lose progress (even with an “offline” franchise). To be fair this is probably just a Google search away from being clear, but at the same time I’m no dummy and it’s not immediately obvious to me, so to me that’s a negative, 

 

- for my taste the game is too ambitious. I think they should cut way back on the modes in this type of game. Or at least scale down the scope of each mode. Which may feel like blasphemy but I think each mode suffers because they have their resources spread out so much. I am probably the most unusual madden player at this point (I just want to play franchise mode, MAYBE create a player, but I don’t need a cinematic story for my player I just want to fill those gaps in myself). 
 

- kinda to go along with that as with any game is seems like nowadays, what is with the menus in games? They’re all a goddamned mess.

 

ANYWAY, all that being said, I’m still not sure if I’ll cough up another 62 bucks to buy the full version, but I can say I genuinely enjoy playing the game. 

[best3444]

@Biggie read above.

 

I was watching a feed on YouTube and the guy was playing in broadcast view and it litteraly looked like I was watching a real NFL game. Ths visuals are incredible and so are the animations. 

[Biggie]

5 minutes ago, best3444 said:

@Biggie read above

Madden 24 is fantastic. Anyone who shits on this years game has never actually played it and is just going by years past. That being said, the best video game football of all time is Tecmo Super Bowl III Final Edition for the SNES. 

[Paperclyp]

Oh another thing I thought about too: 

 

I think Madden coverage has been held hostage by its most ardent (and critical) players as well as people who have a bone to pick with EA. 

 

This is all conjecture by me for the most part so take it with a grain of salt, very much my opinion, and perhaps it's misguided if this just happens to be a quality Madden game and they've been more shitty the past few years.

 

But anyway - first off it's hard to even find a mainstream review of the game. Maybe they're starting to trickle out (quick google search confirms that they are), but it kind of goes to my opinion that the game is too full of shit (I'll explain in a minute), as well as I think reviewers MAY literally feel hesitant to praise the game, except for backhand or one off phrases in the review. 

 

Which is something I always would notice - these phrases in the reviews, like this year it seems to be something like "though Madden has never felt better on the field," then boiler plate vague criticism. And for me, while I don't want to forgive other flaws the game has, I MOSTLY CARE ABOUT HOW IT FEELS ON THE FIELD. THAT'S HOW I PLAY THE GAME. 

 

So what I think happens is like, there's too much goddamned stuff to review. There's too much game. Like reading through it's like yeah playing madden is great but the mini games aren't fun, the story mode is cheesy and bad, it lacks depth in these certain on off modes, what have you. And again for a person like myself, I could not give LESS of a shit. The franchise has RPG shit and micromanagement even immediately after each game with players earning XP and you can assign where it goes and all that type of stuff. And guess what, none of that stuff fucking matters, at all. Which is a valid criticism absolutely, and for me I just skip that stuff and am happy as a clam, but there's a game in here that is probably better than any game you have ever played in the Madden series, the caveat being you have to chop through a bunch of weeds to find it. 

 

And some of it reminds of me the recent discussion of Overwatch and how the devs design the game around the complaints of its most dedicated and cranky players. If you go on Steam it'll be like 2/5 stars, game sucks major ass, 70 hours played. It's like, what? Why would you take 70 hours of your life to play something you think sucks? I dunno.

 

My mind is wandering a little now and I've got little kids telling me they need breakfast. But I do think reviewers are afraid to heap too much praise on the game even if they do like it, because they know nobody else is gonna rate it too highly and they feel like the fans (which seems ironic) will come after them if they do lol .

[Biggie]

I wish they would just release a $40 version that has roster updates and offline Franchise Mode. No online 1v1 or MUT. @Paperclyp

[Paperclyp]

12 minutes ago, Biggie said:

I wish they would just release a $40 version that has roster updates and offline Franchise Mode. No online 1v1 or MUT. @Paperclyp

I would definitely pay 30-40 bucks for that version. Of course I’m sure they make most of their money on folks who play ultimate team. 
 

I just feel like I am no longer the target for sports games. And it makes me feel sad and like the world has passed me by haha. The younger generation cares about the my player and ultimate team stuff and I just want my franchise mode. I have friends who play 2K and all they do for hundreds of hours for each game is make their own player and play 3 on 3 games online. And that is the jankiest fuckin way go play that game and yet I’m sure I’m way in the minority on that view. 

[Biggie]

18 minutes ago, Paperclyp said:

I would definitely pay 30-40 bucks for that version. Of course I’m sure they make most of their money on folks who play ultimate team. 
 

I just feel like I am no longer the target for sports games. And it makes me feel sad and like the world has passed me by haha. The younger generation cares about the my player and ultimate team stuff and I just want my franchise mode. I have friends who play 2K and all they do for hundreds of hours for each game is make their own player and play 3 on 3 games online. And that is the jankiest fuckin way go play that game and yet I’m sure I’m way in the minority on that view. 

I’m a Franchise Mode guy. Sometimes I play MUT until you hit a wall and you realize you’ll have to spend real money to compete. 

[Paperclyp]

For a specific example of the game being overwrought with shit and reviewers not knowing what they should even review: the Gamespot reveiw is 23 paragraphs. Three of them are about the ability to move your franchise to a different city and specific problems he has with some of the stuff around that. Not that it's not worth mentioning I guess, but that's a fairly sizable chunk of a review for a one-off feature in a specific mode that, I dunno, probably 80 percent or more of the player base will never even touch. 

 

There was an article before the embargo...might've been from Gamespot even, that questioned what the point of sports reviews even is lol. Which it's hard to disagree with with all the options you have at your disposal to judge the game for yourself. But even still I feel like the reviewers are doing a poor job. 

[Keyser_Soze]

5 minutes ago, Paperclyp said:

For a specific example of the game being overwrought with shit and reviewers not knowing what they should even review: the Gamespot reveiw is 23 paragraphs. Three of them are about the ability to move your franchise to a different city and specific problems he has with some of the stuff around that. Not that it's not worth mentioning I guess, but that's a fairly sizable chunk of a review for a one-off feature in a specific mode that, I dunno, probably 80 percent or more of the player base will never even touch. 

 

There was an article before the embargo...might've been from Gamespot even, that questioned what the point of sports reviews even is lol. Which it's hard to disagree with with all the options you have at your disposal to judge the game for yourself. But even still I feel like the reviewers are doing a poor job. 

 

It's a hard line to walk. For people who play it every year, really all you need to say is what's new and if you liked the new stuff. (moving franchises sounds "new" (a feature that way older games had)) - But if someone has never played a madden game or it's been a long time like yourself then you have to write up everything.

 

That being said Jeff Gerstmann said that barely anyone reads the reviews and those who do rarely go to the second page of a review (it looks like they did away with multipage reviews)

 

In any case a five from gamespot lol

[Paperclyp]

1 minute ago, Keyser_Soze said:

 

It's a hard line to walk. For people who play it every year, really all you need to say is what's new and if you liked the new stuff. (moving franchises sounds "new" (a feature that way older games had)) - But if someone has never played a madden game or it's been a long time like yourself then you have to write up everything.

 

That being said Jeff Gerstmann said that barely anyone reads the reviews and those who do rarely go to the second page of a review (it looks like they did away with multipage reviews)

 

In any case a five from gamespot lol

yes I feel like they try to walk both lines and that’s part of the problem. And like the score on a 10 point scale … like clearly a 5/10 is not reviewing the game in a vacuum, they’re trying to comment on the staleness of the series with that score, but that’s not made clear at all.