Backbreaker Preview - Natural Motion based football title

Brando70 · Post by **Brando70** » Mon Jun 07, 2010 3:46 pm

I finally had a chance to spend some time with the demo. I will say that this game certainly wows at first glance. The player movement is so amazing that I don't even care about the ridiculous player models. Running the football is also a lot of fun because of the way the line blocks and the way the RB can get out of tackles. I had one nice outside run where I shed a couple of blocks and almost made it into the endzone before a safety made a nice tackle. Very cool.

But it's definitely a tech demo and not a finished game. Even the MLB 2k games have done a better job of hiding their bugs. It's literally football AI a la Michael Bay: the CPU players do stuff that looks amazing but is laughably illogical.

Outside of the AI, there are two things I can't get past. One is the camera angles. I dig the close view for running and close defensive plays, hate it for everything else. I get that they're trying to show how hard it is to make reads as a QB, but the view is too limiting. A real QB can swivel his head to quickly scan the field, which you can't do here. On defense, while it is great to flip the view and be able to cover receivers, it's really bad for switching on big plays.

The passing controls are the real monstrosity. Again, not a bad idea for trying to simulate reads, except this game doesn't simulate reads because the receiver switching is linear. So instead of being able to make the reads myself and then throw to that receiver, I have to go through a clunky manual progression. Bleh.

These guys have made a giant leap in the way football games move. The engine is truly remarkable, probably the most impressive improvement in a sports game since the introduction of 3D polygons. Now they just need to hire some folks who understand how football plays and they'll be golden.

grtwhtsk · Post by **grtwhtsk** » Mon Jun 07, 2010 5:42 pm

matthewk wrote:I wish they would've let us edit the player abilties too. Too many of the QBs seem to be rated low, even on the teams with a lot of Gold offensive players.

Evidently one of the guys on OS has found a way to get in on the 360 version and edit. I believe he is the same guy that has done so much work on NFL 2k5.

GTHobbes · Post by **GTHobbes** » Mon Jun 07, 2010 6:16 pm

grtwhtsk wrote:
matthewk wrote:I wish they would've let us edit the player abilties too. Too many of the QBs seem to be rated low, even on the teams with a lot of Gold offensive players.

Evidently one of the guys on OS has found a way to get in on the 360 version and edit. I believe he is the same guy that has done so much work on NFL 2k5.

I just saw that thread today -- Great news for 360 owners.

This game rocks, plain and simple. I hope the roster editing tools pan out for the 360 guys and more people get a chance to enjoy this great, great game.

Danimal · Post by **Danimal** » Mon Jun 07, 2010 8:11 pm

I borrowed a copy over the weekend and well I'm glad I never bought this thing.

I can't even phantom how people are saying this is a good game, I'm not going to start an argument over here when I spend my days derailing them over at OS. If you enjoy the game that's great for you, I was hoping this would tie me over to NCAA but it's not for me.

I will say I didn't play an online game, I tried but after sitting in a lobby for 10 minutes and not having anything happen well I'm not sure if i did something wrong or what.

I'll be curious to see the sale numbers and if this thing has any traction. I see they said they were working on a BB2, but then again 2K announced a APF sequel and we saw what happened there.

Brando70 · Post by **Brando70** » Mon Jun 07, 2010 8:19 pm

I definitely get the fun factor and can see how people dig it, especially head-to-head. It's not really a question of BB vs. Madden, because I'm almost done with Madden 10 anyway. It's more like why would I play BB when I could play The Show for my current sports fix, or Red Dead Redemption or Rock Band. There's a lot to like but I simply can't overlook what I strongly dislike. However, I do hope they get a chance to make BB2 or license the engine to someone, because if this game had the football brains to go with the football moves, it would be incredible.

One thing: I would also love this in a college setting where I could run the triple option.

Danimal · Post by **Danimal** » Mon Jun 07, 2010 8:30 pm

Who would they license it to for a Sports game besides EA and well that's not happening.

NHL is EA's physics engine, I have no idea if it is good or s***, but my friend tells me that it is just the start of them moving to physics based games. I would not be surprised next year if Madden steals this engine.

If you think about it Madden has stolen everything that has worked in other games that are well received like FIA, so I am sure they will steal this.

Anyway back to BB, there is nothing wrong with the engine, the problem and this is my own personal belief is the devs don't know enough about Football to capture the finer points of the game. The engine takes care of a lot of issues Madden hasn't been able to in 20 years, and they know enough to make a football game. However I don't see this game ever reaching it's full potential unless the makers really invest in it and bring in some people who understand football.

GTHobbes · Post by **GTHobbes** » Wed Jun 09, 2010 4:18 pm

Scoop, I saw your post on the other forum re: your experimenting with the editor tool and am curious to hear how your subsequent experiments have gone. Along those lines, I saw this post today from "one of the Bills", i.e., Bill Harris:

"Okay guys, I ran an initial test using Finn's editor.

I took a created team and pumped off their offensive starters ratings to for every rating, with the exception of lineman, who were bumped up to 95.

For its opponent (the team I would use), I lowered the defense lineman ratings to 10. I set linebackers at 60 and all CB/S at 65.

I was trying to use a relatively extreme case to see if I could get the CPU offense to be competent. I'd tried half a game previously with the defensive line at 50 for all ratings, and they STILL got five sacks in a half.

Well, this time was different. Even using 5-minute quarters, I was behind 34-3 at half, and the CPU had 295 yards total offense. No interceptions. No sacks.

I did limit myself to using Cover 2 zones, but I was doing that in previous test games, too.

The CPU QB, with more time to throw, was throwing many more intermediate passes, and he even threw a bomb (the first one I've seen).

There are certainly A.I. issues with the shipping version of the game, but it certainly looks like we can use ratings adjustments to "fix" some of them.

I'm going to copy two existing teams, just modify and DL/OL ratings, and see how the game plays. I'd like to make the fewest changes possible to get a well-played game."

GTHobbes · Post by **GTHobbes** » Wed Jun 09, 2010 4:24 pm

Danimal wrote: Anyway back to BB, there is nothing wrong with the engine, the problem and this is my own personal belief is the devs don't know enough about Football to capture the finer points of the game. The engine takes care of a lot of issues Madden hasn't been able to in 20 years, and they know enough to make a football game. However I don't see this game ever reaching it's full potential unless the makers really invest in it and bring in some people who understand football.

Not to start another argument, but I find your "impressions" interesting, Dan. There are SO MANY small things dealing with football that these developers GOT RIGHT out of the box that I do have to disagree with your take. The ball actually bounces like a real football when it hits the ground, ballcarriers stretching the ball over the first down and goal lines, ballcarriers looking behind them in the open field to see if anyone is behind them, receivers looking for the ball, etc., -- I could go on and on. For someone who hasn't made football games for the past 20 years, I'm actually quite impressed by what they've shown they know about football. Different strokes for different folks, I guess.

Post by **ScoopBrady** » Wed Jun 09, 2010 6:36 pm

I haven't had that much time to mess around GTHobbes. The only experimenting I did was to lower the Agility rating of every defensive player on both teams. The qb play was better, the sack totals went down, the INT's went down, the cpu passing yards went up, my rushing yards went up but the cpu rushing yards needed a little help. It's still way too early to tell but I think lowering agility helps a lot and then maybe some minor tweaking will be needed elsewhere. I will try raising the strength of the OL and lowering the strength of the DL and see what happens. Not until tomorrow though because Lord Stanley is a possibility tonight!

GTHobbes · Post by **GTHobbes** » Wed Jun 09, 2010 6:42 pm

Thanks for the update, Scoop. Hope you're able to tweek things to the point where you're able to enjoy the game.

Edit:

Saw one more update from Bill Harris:

"Okay, guys, if you want to play the game more than you want to edit rosters, just lower the ratings of all the defensive lineman on your created team to 10 for each rating category.

When you play against the CPU, that will give the CPU QB much more time to pass, and it's pretty shocking how much better they are when they have time to throw. Plus the CPU OL actually can get a push forward now on running plays.

It's not ideal (that would require much, much more editing), but it really changes how the game plays in a positive way."

Danimal · Post by **Danimal** » Wed Jun 09, 2010 9:56 pm

I'm not going to argue, you clearly enjoy the game so that's great. If they make another one and if it plays a good game of football I will try it, but for me it's not a good football game right now.

I was in Best Buy tonight and they are selling the game for 59.99, they had like 20 copies on the shelf. I can't believe they are selling it for over list price.

matthewk · Post by **matthewk** » Thu Jun 10, 2010 9:02 am

Danimal wrote:I can't even phantom how people are saying this is a good game, I'm not going to start an argument over here when I spend my days derailing them over at OS.

If you want to avoid an argument, try leaving out things like the first part of the quote above.

matthewk · Post by **matthewk** » Thu Jun 10, 2010 9:03 am

GTHobbes wrote:
grtwhtsk wrote:
matthewk wrote:I wish they would've let us edit the player abilties too. Too many of the QBs seem to be rated low, even on the teams with a lot of Gold offensive players.

Evidently one of the guys on OS has found a way to get in on the 360 version and edit. I believe he is the same guy that has done so much work on NFL 2k5.
I just saw that thread today -- Great news for 360 owners.

Not so great for those of us on the PS3

Danimal · Post by **Danimal** » Thu Jun 10, 2010 5:33 pm

http://www.vgchartz.com/weekly.php?reg= ... ole=&maker

1st week sales.

GTHobbes · Post by **GTHobbes** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 12:04 pm

If anyone has any interest in what online league play looks like for this game, here is a link to the homepage for a league that I joined (I'm currently 2-0 and tied for first place as the Steeler Greats after the first week's games).

http://www.virtualsportzcenter.com/Sing ... LHome.aspx

I forgot to report my stats after my first win so my numbers are not all there, but both games I've played so far in the league have been against quality opponents and were closer than the scores indicated (13-3 and 16-6). The first guy I beat had not lost online before (he was 19-0 at the time) and he also had never been held to 3 points before, which gave me a sense of accomplishment. In that first game, I had Barry Foster sitting on 92 yards (21 carries) with time running out and he scampered for 16 yards on the final play to put him well over 100 for the game (another good feeling).

The guy who's running the league is doing a nice job with the league and the website (he's supposedly broadcasting his games also), and he got Motorola to sponsor the league and give the champion the Bluetooth headset shown on the webpage. I'm really looking forward to going up against one of the other undefeated teams when we have a chance to play this week, thinking about my gameplan. Great stuff.

Brando70 · Post by **Brando70** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 1:18 pm

Danimal wrote:http://www.vgchartz.com/weekly.php?reg= ... ole=&maker

1st week sales.

Ouch. About 28,000 copies when combined with the PS3 sales. I'm sure they didn't expect huge numbers but that seems pretty bad considering how large the football gaming market is.

I'm genuinely sorry the game didn't do better, if only because it would be nice to have a competing football franchise to push EA. I wonder if they would be able to do BB2 with numbers that low.

webdanzer · Post by **webdanzer** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 1:47 pm

It's certainly possible that the game didn't sell well, but VG Chartz is an awful source:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VG_Chartz

VG Chartz provides tools for data analysis and charting and regular written analysis of the data referencing major news in the video gaming industry. Sales figures on VG Chartz are based on estimates extrapolated from small retail samples.[2] VG Chartz does not want to publish any sources on how they get their data. [3]. Because of this, some sites have questioned the reliability of the information presented by the site.[4][5] VG Chartz has defended the credibility and reliability of its sales data often comparing their numbers with the ones published by NPD Group,[6] although the charts are adjusted after NPD's monthly report is released. However VG Chartz is still not considered a reliable site for sales data with many companies and websites, including Wikipedia, refusing to endorse it's data.

Danimal · Post by **Danimal** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 1:58 pm

Well NPD numbers should be out in a few weeks but I can't imagine that those are that off.

Regardless low sales, plus less then stellar reviews and lack of a license are usually not a good thing. NM can however do what they want since it is there engine and I doubt the sales number mean anything to them.

matthewk · Post by **matthewk** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 2:14 pm

After 3 weeks and lots of games, this game NEEDS a patch if I am to keep playing it.

There is a lot to love about BB, but there is also a lot to cause you to seriously contemplate tossing a controller at the screen. The initial honeymoon for me and BB is over. No patch, no more play for me.

Rodster · Post by **Rodster** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 2:14 pm

Brando70 wrote:
Danimal wrote:http://www.vgchartz.com/weekly.php?reg= ... ole=&maker

1st week sales.
Ouch. About 28,000 copies when combined with the PS3 sales. I'm sure they didn't expect huge numbers but that seems pretty bad considering how large the football gaming market is.

I'm genuinely sorry the game didn't do better, if only because it would be nice to have a competing football franchise to push EA. I wonder if they would be able to do BB2 with numbers that low.

I'm not surprised they only sold 28K copies. They made the same mistake Take2 made with APF2K8, they priced the game too damn high. If they had given it an impulse/intrigue price point of $19.99 or $29.99 they probably would have sold a lot more the first week.

The same thing happened with Blur The Game. Activision priced it at $59.99 and the game didn't sell and had no buzz about it until they started offering a $20 off coupon combined with Bestbuy's $10 off coupon and sale price of $39.99 for a grand total of $9.99

The cheapassgamer boards lit up. I think this sale alone generated more publicity for the game than the actual game was able to on it's own.

With the torrent of game releases games now a day's publishers need to strike quick and fast or the next game the following day or week will take away all of it's momentum. I had totally forgotten about BB until GT posted his thoughts.

toonarmy · Post by **toonarmy** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 2:22 pm

I am having a lot of fun with Backbreaker and think its positives far outweigh any negatives. I agree the price was too high. The team was warned about that but they chose to ignore the advice. 29.99 would have been a reasonable launch price, with plans to drop it to 19.99 around the time of Madden perhaps. Another problem was that the launch was too close to Red Dead Redemption. I think several other games that launched around that time also have had disappointing sales numbers since people are so involved with RDR. All of that said, it is obvious there will be a Backbreaker 2 since they spent so much time on the engine and have all but said there will be a sequel. They have something very special here, so if they step up their game and fix the bigger things then they should be able to have better sales next time around.

Danimal · Post by **Danimal** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 2:40 pm

Well they didn't build the engine for this game. The engine was used in GTA IV and RDR. Lets not forget this game started out as a tech demo, no one bit on it so they decided to make it a game.

3 years later and here we are, I can tell you if the game was $19.99 it would be in my collection. But now with NHL and NCAA coming out in the next few months and being able to get NCAA for $39.99 from Dell I probably won't ever add this to my collection.

As for BB2, these guys have stuck to their word when they said they would release BB and a lot of people (including me) thought they were full of it. If this was any other company, regardless of what they said there would be no BB2 with those sales and reviews, but since it's NM I can probably see it happening. Just remember they announced and APF2K10 and that didn't happen.

toonarmy · Post by **toonarmy** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 3:19 pm

Yeah I realize the initial engine was not designed for BB, but my point is they have an exclusive engine and have built a pretty cool football game around the engine. It's not like they have to put in enormous resources into a sequel. If they can get some consulting on balancing up the game to eliminate some of the things vexing people, get some of the rules straight, and give the Season mode a bit more depth, then they will have a strong start to a great sequel without having to break the bank.

Brando70 · Post by **Brando70** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 4:32 pm

toonarmy wrote:Yeah I realize the initial engine was not designed for BB, but my point is they have an exclusive engine and have built a pretty cool football game around the engine. It's not like they have to put in enormous resources into a sequel. If they can get some consulting on balancing up the game to eliminate some of the things vexing people, get some of the rules straight, and give the Season mode a bit more depth, then they will have a strong start to a great sequel without having to break the bank.

Fixing the AI to make the single player playable will be a big job. Not to mention they would need to invest time in team management AI, playbook customization, roster customization, and a lot of other things that would give the offline mode a lot more legs. That's certainly possible but this game needs a lot more than just some tweaks. They'll have to invest some serious resources into doing those things.

GTHobbes · Post by **GTHobbes** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 4:45 pm

Games like this never benefit when it comes to distrubtion either. I was in Target this weekend and was surprised to see the game (1 copy) on the shelf. If I worked at Gamestop and cared at all about sales of BB, I would've had the game on display in the window at some point. Instead, you'd never even know it was released with all of the Madden and NCAA signs throughout the store. It's quite an uphill battle when you're going up against something as firmly established as Madden.