Madden 08 Hands On

Wilk5280 · Post by **Wilk5280** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 1:10 pm

Yeah, it can't possibly be related to the fact that the PS3 is just too complicated to program for right now. That couldn't possibly be it.

Yet I notice a common trend among MOST games that are out for both consoles. That being they tend to run more smoothly on the 360.

Look, I'm not here to praise MS and bash Sony. I was one of the few folks around here who regularly played their PS2 last generation and most people seemed to favor the XBOX due to XBL.

Facts are facts though and I'm not going to just bash EA and let everyone else off the hook. Fair enough, VC and Ubi developed their software for the more powerful console and then ported to the less powerful system last generation.

Is the PS3 "supposedly" not more powerful this gen? Then if 2K Sports was to continue with tradition, shouldn't their game be maximized on the 3 and then ported to the 360 where you'd think it would suffer a bit from the port?

Let's face it fellas. We're starting to see the complicated architecture of the PS3 surface with these multi-platform games.

MizzouRah · Post by **MizzouRah** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 1:13 pm

Rodster wrote:
MizzouRah wrote:You have to consider their priorites. With the ps3 being last in sales, I can see why they and 2k might not have had the time to get the game up to par this year on it.
Good point but that is an excuse for EA because they only care about the bottom line and not quality.

Fixed it for ya.

Everything is about the bottom line when all is said and done.

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 1:18 pm

MizzouRah wrote:

Fixed it for ya.

Everything is about the bottom line when all is said and done.

True that...

I wont forget the crappy ports last gen...

The way understood it. It was easier to program for XBOX than the PS2.

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 1:32 pm

You can find discussions around the web where even some developers repeat that conventional wisdom, that PS3 is hard to program for

It may be for certain developers but then you have other developers disputing that.

But yeah, there's probably no economic incentive to optimize at this point.

In fact, if it was the PS3 which was 60 fps and the X360 stuck at 30 fps (I don't think previous Maddens were even 30 fps), there would be also a lot of anger and noise.

But would it really hurt overall Madden sales?

Probably not. So it may not just be PS3 sales but the fact that Madden is a juggernaut and they're going to get huge sales regardless.

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 1:34 pm

PRBoom wrote: Let's face it fellas. We're starting to see the complicated architecture of the PS3 surface with these multi-platform games.

It is possible and If thats the reason.... The PS3 is never going to catch up unless Blu-ray really takes off...

Wilk5280 · Post by **Wilk5280** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 2:00 pm

XXXIV wrote:
PRBoom wrote: Let's face it fellas. We're starting to see the complicated architecture of the PS3 surface with these multi-platform games.
It is possible and If thats the reason.... The PS3 is never going to catch up unless Blu-ray really takes off...

I don't know. I think the developers with more time will learn the in's and out's and it'll pretty much all be a moot point. Most likely within the next year.

Plus, I think a lot of the Sony 1st party games will show what the system is capable of which will "hopefully" push other developers to keep up. I just really think that right now, they're all still learning.

Post by **ScoopBrady** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 2:53 pm

It's easy for you guys to b*tch and moan that EA and 2k is taking the easy way out and being cheap but do you guys really know anything about the situation? Do any of you know what it would take to get those games up to 60 fps on the PS3? Do any of you know how long it would take to get that done? Would it be justified at this point to delay the games on the PS3 until they could be locked in at 60 fps? I have no problem with this and can't believe all the bagging on EA about it.

This is more Sony's fault than EA's or 2k's but even then it's more of a timing thing. Sony didn't get dev kits out to publishers in a timely fashion for the PS3. Developers have had way less time programming for the PS3 than they have the 360. Where the 360 may have been released a year before the PS3, the dev kits were in devs hands a year-and-a-half before the PS3 ones were. By next year devs should have a better grip on how to reach 60 fps. After all, this is the first time the 360 is getting it.

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 3:34 pm

Well it seems they didn't have too long a time to get The Show up and running at 60 FPS on the PS3.

You get the impression that they didn't really work on the PS3 version until after they'd shipped the PS2 version this year.

The Show doesn't have the greatest lighting effects or shading but then does Madden have those either?

I thought Lair might be 60 FPS. We'll see. GT may be 60 FPS and that looks gorgeous already -- by some accounts, it already looks better than Forza 2 which came out much later.

Maybe Sony is keeping things from third-parties. But then again, SCE reportedly helped Codemasters develop the engine used in Dirt.

PS3 has been out less than a year. Lets not let EA games of all things represent what's possible or not possible on the system.

Wilk5280 · Post by **Wilk5280** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 3:46 pm

I'm not claiming that 60 FPS isn't possible on the PS3. What I am claiming is that due to the more complicated architecture, that it's taking developers longer to figure out the in's and out's of it. It's more difficult to maximize their software due to it being more complex.

I'm sure that by next year this time, it won't even be an issue...even for the lazy asses over at EA.

sportdan30 · Post by **sportdan30** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 4:00 pm

EA must have been lazy the last two versions of Madden on the 360. Are you saying the 360 was hard to program for until now?

I'm frusturated, but I expect the PS3 to catch up next year. I just can't warrant picking up another 360 until all these failure issues are dealt with.

I'll see how tolerable it is playing football on the PS3. I'm not hard core that if I have to wait another year, that's fine with me.

Wilk5280 · Post by **Wilk5280** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 8:08 pm

Taking this a little off topic and I'll apologize in advance, but it's not just the football games.

Here's a quote taken from IGN's Darkness PS3 Review

Closing Comments "... The PlayStation 3 version is virtually identical to the 360, other than the occasional aliasing issues and sporadic slowdown.

And from IGN's Rainbow Six: Vegas review:

One area that Rainbow Six: Vegas on the PlayStation 3 does fall a little short on when compared to the other versions is with regards to visuals. It's a nice looking game to be sure, but the whole thing doesn't look quite as sharp as it could. Colors are a little duller and there isn't as much use of certain effects, like bloom lighting and such. Some folks may appreciate that aspect to a certain degree, but beyond that it still doesn't look quite as nice as what we've seen previously. Some texture work isn't quite as sharp, and the characters aren't as detailed as what's found in the 360 release, especially in the faces. Weapons that have been dropped pop in and out of view as you approach and walk away when they're but a mere 50 feet or so away.

Developers are struggling with the hardware, plain and simple.

-Out

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 8:44 pm

PRBoom wrote:Taking this a little off topic and I'll apologize in advance, but it's not just the football games.

Here's a quote taken from IGN's Darkness PS3 Review
Closing Comments "... The PlayStation 3 version is virtually identical to the 360, other than the occasional aliasing issues and sporadic slowdown.
And from IGN's Rainbow Six: Vegas review:
One area that Rainbow Six: Vegas on the PlayStation 3 does fall a little short on when compared to the other versions is with regards to visuals. It's a nice looking game to be sure, but the whole thing doesn't look quite as sharp as it could. Colors are a little duller and there isn't as much use of certain effects, like bloom lighting and such. Some folks may appreciate that aspect to a certain degree, but beyond that it still doesn't look quite as nice as what we've seen previously. Some texture work isn't quite as sharp, and the characters aren't as detailed as what's found in the 360 release, especially in the faces. Weapons that have been dropped pop in and out of view as you approach and walk away when they're but a mere 50 feet or so away.
Developers are struggling with the hardware, plain and simple.

-Out

Okay ....Fine...You are winning me over....
so at what point does Sony admit or take some blame for this obviously ill planned and poorly conceived launch?...

sportdan30 · Post by **sportdan30** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 9:21 pm

Perhaps we should now move this discussion to the "Console" thread seeing that we're now pointing out a game that has absolutely nothing to do with the football game discussion.

Just a thought.

GTHobbes · Post by **GTHobbes** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 10:07 pm

I guess all of this makes the job that SCEA did with The Show all the more impressive. I understand those guys are first party, but The Show on PS3 might be one of the smoothest sports games I've ever played on any system. You would never know the PS3 was hard to develop for if you only judged by The Show.

Sounds like it's either about talent or focus. If 2k spent the time/resources to push the PS3 the way they used to push the limits of the XBox with 2k5, etc., then the PS3 market could be all theirs if EA stays the same it's always been and optimized for the lesser (and easier to port) of the 2 systems. It was almost about to catch up with EA on the last systems when they pulled the rug out from under 2k. If my memory serves, 2k actually outsold (or came close to) Madden on the XBox...it was just on the PS2 where 2k got trounced. Hopefully APF will sell enough that 2k will have incentive to push for 60 fps in a sequel to APF next year. If they do, maybe Madden won't be far behind.

MizzouRah · Post by **MizzouRah** » Sun Jul 01, 2007 12:00 am

GTHobbes wrote:I guess all of this makes the job that SCEA did with The Show all the more impressive. I understand those guys are first party, but The Show on PS3 might be one of the smoothest sports games I've ever played on any system. You would never know the PS3 was hard to develop for if you only judged by The Show.

Sounds like it's either about talent or focus. If 2k spent the time/resources to push the PS3 the way they used to push the limits of the XBox with 2k5, etc., then the PS3 market could be all theirs if EA stays the same it's always been and optimized for the lesser (and easier to port) of the 2 systems. It was almost about to catch up with EA on the last systems when they pulled the rug out from under 2k. If my memory serves, 2k actually outsold (or came close to) Madden on the XBox...it was just on the PS2 where 2k got trounced. Hopefully APF will sell enough that 2k will have incentive to push for 60 fps in a sequel to APF next year. If they do, maybe Madden won't be far behind.

Again, The Show HAD to be good, plain and simple. I mean, it's THEIR game and all.

Ps3's are not selling, it's a FACT and makes them less priority on the food chain.

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Sun Jul 01, 2007 2:36 pm

Wasn't the PS3 version of Oblivion considered better?

But yeah, in multiplatform games, it appears for now that PS3 is lagging.

There should be more first-party or exclusives out in the fall which will either show that the PS3 can deliver or that these third-parties did all that they possibly can -- I'm skeptical of the latter but we'll see.

Sports games generally are not at the vanguard of graphics, unless you include something like GT in the mix. You get more technology (such as ragdoll physics) and better art in other genres.

Sports games are like competently-produced TV shows whereas if you want something like flashy special effects or Oscars-worthy cinematography, you go with other genres.

seanmac31 · Post by **seanmac31** » Sun Jul 15, 2007 10:43 pm

http://www.sportsgamer.com/content/926/ ... e-preview/

Some new gameplay footage. Much to my chagrin, it looks like the defensive ends are still utterly incapable of keeping the QB in the pocket. Surprising, seeing as NCAA seems to do a good job in this regard.

Bill_Abner · Post by **Bill_Abner** » Sun Jul 15, 2007 10:53 pm

seanmac31 wrote:http://www.sportsgamer.com/content/926/ ... e-preview/

Some new gameplay footage. Much to my chagrin, it looks like the defensive ends are still utterly incapable of keeping the QB in the pocket. Surprising, seeing as NCAA seems to do a good job in this regard.

I played this for about an hour with the Producer and this was brought up (actually by a dude sitting behind us watching us play..)

The answer was "fatigue."

The idea is that the sprint/scrambling QB will see his fatigue fall rapidly if this is abused. "No more Vick abuse", was the actual quote. No idea if this will work or not, but that's the idea. I really liked Madxen 360 at the show. The 2nd level blocking was *great*. No more mario running that I could see (maybe just a little) and the weapons and counter weapons idea is pretty novel.

EA had a great show, IMO. Tiger looked freaking fantastic, but NBA Live '08 stole the damn show for me, though. I HATE NBA Live..but man this version was fun to play. I think when the Producer admits that previous editions sucked and that they went back to the bascis of basketball -- that's a good sign and coming from EA that's just...bizarro world.

seanmac31 · Post by **seanmac31** » Sun Jul 15, 2007 11:45 pm

Bill_Abner wrote:
seanmac31 wrote:http://www.sportsgamer.com/content/926/ ... e-preview/

Some new gameplay footage. Much to my chagrin, it looks like the defensive ends are still utterly incapable of keeping the QB in the pocket. Surprising, seeing as NCAA seems to do a good job in this regard.
I played this for about an hour with the Producer and this was brought up (actually by a dude sitting behind us watching us play..)

The answer was "fatigue."

The idea is that the sprint/scrambling QB will see his fatigue fall rapidly if this is abused. "No more Vick abuse", was the actual quote. No idea if this will work or not, but that's the idea. I really liked Madxen 360 at the show. The 2nd level blocking was *great*. No more mario running that I could see (maybe just a little) and the weapons and counter weapons idea is pretty novel.

EA had a great show, IMO. Tiger looked freaking fantastic, but NBA Live '08 stole the damn show for me, though. I HATE NBA Live..but man this version was fun to play. I think when the Producer admits that previous editions sucked and that they went back to the bascis of basketball -- that's a good sign and coming from EA that's just...bizarro world.

That sounds like a spectacularly misguided response. The reason this doesn't happen in reality isn't because quarterbacks get tired, it's because defensive ends watch the QBs as they make their rushes, while the offensive linemen have their backs to the action. If a QB ran away from the pocket on the snap like his pants were on fire, the defensive end would simply disengage from the block and run after him and (most of the time) would have no problems catching up. EA needs to figure out a way to program their defensive linemen so that they respond appropriately to what is in their line of vision. This just sounds like a cop out.

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Sun Jul 15, 2007 11:50 pm

That's why I'm skeptical about these claims of better blocking. EA football is too dependent on suction blocking, not just for pass blocking but run blocking as well.

If they let DEs disengage easily there would probably be too many sacks.

You can have them play contain but they don't close on the QB, they just shadow a QB and still let them roll out.

seanmac31 · Post by **seanmac31** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 1:43 am

http://www.gamespot.com/video/0/6174884 ... 32007_live

More video. No one gets to the outside like Tom Brady. I mean, the guys got wheels. What did he run, a 5.0 40 time? Yes, that was it. No wonder he scoots past Freeney and Mathis as if they aren't even there.

Sigh. That's really aggravating.

DivotMaker · Post by **DivotMaker** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:03 am

GTHobbes wrote:then the PS3 market could be all theirs if EA stays the same it's always been and optimized for the lesser (and easier to port) of the 2 systems.

PS2 vs XBox, this was indeed the case as the PS2 was out first, but obviously had the user base that trumped console capabilities.

This time it is different. 360 out first, PS3 second. This time, the two consoles are VERY evenly matched in terms of raw horsepower with the edge going to 360 for GPU and the edge going to PS3 for CPU. The edge in programming goes to 360 as it has much more refined developer tools though Sony is improving theirs as well. This generation is NOT a repeat of last generation as the gap between machine capabilities is marginal at best.

dbdynsty25 · Post by **dbdynsty25** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 12:57 pm

wco81 wrote:You can have them play contain but they don't close on the QB, they just shadow a QB and still let them roll out.

If you 'contain', they just take wider angles to keep the QB in the pocket...if you 'spy', then they shadow.

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 1:47 pm

dbdynsty25 wrote:
wco81 wrote:You can have them play contain but they don't close on the QB, they just shadow a QB and still let them roll out.
If you 'contain', they just take wider angles to keep the QB in the pocket...if you 'spy', then they shadow.

That's the way it should work but the way I described is what often happens.

sportdan30 · Post by **sportdan30** » Sat Aug 11, 2007 9:26 pm

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/23438.html

Nice review, but two things stuck out. The number of turnovers and the A.I. comeback tendency. Both of these issues have the ability to ruin an enjoyable game.