Official Madden 2006 Impressions Thread

[10spro]

No. You can press the right analog stick, left or right to move the visison and find any open receivers.

[ScoopBrady]

No, there shouldn't be any sort of penalty. If Manning drops back looking at his primary and receiver and decides to look at his slot receiver (first tap) his head will turn to that receiver in roughly the same amount of time that Vick's head would. Again, it makes no sense.

[Danimal]

What advantage is double tapping anyway? The WR still has to be open. It has been my experience that there have not been too many guys running wide open on every play.

What your basically saying is people can look at primary X, then double tap B, throw it high and determine the touch on the ball in the same time they could have just hit B last year?

[matthewk]

To me, double-tapping negates the intention of having the cone. I can scan the field (or screen) regardless of where the cone is placed. A quick double-tap and I'm just as successful with Grossman as I am with Manning, at least as far as awareness goes.

Wasn't the whole point of the cone to emulate a QBs awareness? At least this is what most are saying. If that's the case, then the double-tap method negates that, and we're right back to the player determining awareness.

This looks like it's going to be one of those things you either love or hate. It's similar ot MVPs hitting model in that it is different from what we are used to, but I don't think it's a deep as that.

[Danimal]

Wasn't the whole point of the cone to emulate a QBs awareness? At least this is what most are saying. If that's the case, then the double-tap method negates that, and we're right back to the player determining awareness.

Aren't most people who are saying this, the same ones who hate the cone? I can't see how doulbe tapping puts them at an advantage.

[Badgun]

What advantage is double tapping anyway? The WR still has to be open. It has been my experience that there have not been too many guys running wide open on every play.

What your basically saying is people can look at primary X, then double tap B, throw it high and determine the touch on the ball in the same time they could have just hit B last year?

Pretty much, but the most important thing is by double tapping, it makes no difference what size the beam is. If you use Manning, you can move the cone with the right stick and easily set it on your desired receiver just be nudging it a little in his direction. If you do the same thing with Vick, then you have to be more exact and you have to move the stick further and with more precision. By double tapping you can get Vick's narrow cone on the same receiver instantly and without any delay. I can't believe you guys don't get what I'm saying.

[Inuyasha]

The other point I was going to make is if EA is going to allow you to double tap to bypass actually touching the stick, shouldn't they make the weaker qb's cones move across the field slower than say a Manning or Favre? I guess what I am trying to say is that if Manning's vision is so good, that you could double tap the receiver and his beam would move almost instantly to the next guy, where a guy with poor vision like Michael Vick's beam would move across the field slowly and he couldn't throw the ball until his beam got onto the receiver. It seems to not matter how big or small your beam is if you double tap.

Why should it matter? When you use a qb like Manning you don't have to double tap that much since he can see a large chunk of the field and throwing the ball to a receiver in that area won't result in a decrease in accuracy or chance of completion. Use a guy like Rex Grossman and you have to switch to pretty much any reciever you want to pass to because his vision cone is much smaller. Any quarterback with a fully functioning neck will be able to turn their head at roughly the same speed. What you wrote just makes no sense to me.

It does make sense if you are double tapping. My point was that if you are going to the B receiver on the right side of the field, then decide to go to the X receiver on the left side of the field, it makes no difference if you're using Michael Vick or Manning, the cone is still going to be on the guy at exactly the same time. Shouldn't there some kind of penalty for double tappers? Some sort of delay?

This is the same point I was trying to make. If I use manning , brooks, or grossman, whenever I hold R and press the WR button, the target still locks onto the WR. There seems to be no difference.

[Badgun]

Wasn't the whole point of the cone to emulate a QBs awareness? At least this is what most are saying. If that's the case, then the double-tap method negates that, and we're right back to the player determining awareness.

Aren't most people who are saying this, the same ones who hate the cone? I can't see how doulbe tapping puts them at an advantage.

It doesn't put them at an advantage, it's like matthewk said, though, it simply makes all cones the same size, at least in terms of using it. Double tapping means Vick's sliver of a cone will instantly go to his desired receiver, where if you were using the right stick, you'd take longer and may result in a sack.

You do realize that double tapping is a whole lot faster than moving with the right stick, don't you? And double tapping is also exact, where moving the stick isn't.

[Badgun]

Why should it matter? When you use a qb like Manning you don't have to double tap that much since he can see a large chunk of the field and throwing the ball to a receiver in that area won't result in a decrease in accuracy or chance of completion. Use a guy like Rex Grossman and you have to switch to pretty much any reciever you want to pass to because his vision cone is much smaller. Any quarterback with a fully functioning neck will be able to turn their head at roughly the same speed. What you wrote just makes no sense to me.

It does make sense if you are double tapping. My point was that if you are going to the B receiver on the right side of the field, then decide to go to the X receiver on the left side of the field, it makes no difference if you're using Michael Vick or Manning, the cone is still going to be on the guy at exactly the same time. Shouldn't there some kind of penalty for double tappers? Some sort of delay?

This is the same point I was trying to make. If I use manning , brooks, or grossman, whenever I hold R and press the WR button, the target still locks onto the WR. There seems to be no difference.

Exactly! And it's instantaneous as well.

[dbdynsty25]

I still don't understand why you think this is such a big issue badgun.

My take is that sure, the sliver will go across the field at the same speed as the huge cone, but that is just showing how fast a guy can turn his head. Now, if you're Manning, you turn your head to that side of the field and virtually every receiver on the same side of the field is available to throw to...when Vick does it, you can only throw to that one and only receiver as no one else will be in his cone. That to me shows the "awareness" of the qb when there are more options available due to the size of his cone. Worst case, you've got half of your receivers available, regardless of where your cone is focused...whereas with Vick, you've got one and only option. Assuming the DB's pay attention to the cone, it makes it a hellova lot harder to guard Manning when there are a few options to throw to when Vick has one.

I think it's a damn good representation...

[Inuyasha]

Wasn't the whole point of the cone to emulate a QBs awareness? At least this is what most are saying. If that's the case, then the double-tap method negates that, and we're right back to the player determining awareness.

Aren't most people who are saying this, the same ones who hate the cone? I can't see how doulbe tapping puts them at an advantage.

It doesn't put them at an advantage, it's like matthewk said, though, it simply makes all cones the same size, at least in terms of using it. Double tapping means Vick's sliver of a cone will instantly go to his desired receiver, where if you were using the right stick, you'd take longer and may result in a sack.

You do realize that double tapping is a whole lot faster than moving with the right stick, don't you? And double tapping is also exact, where moving the stick isn't.

Yup. Thats why I thought it was more challanging doing it the R stick way, because it doesn't automatically lock onto the WR. But now the more I think about it, that method is probably broken too since moving the R stick feels the same for all the QBs.

For the sake of argument, lets use the preferred way EA wants you to use it, the R hold. The way it should have been implemented is if say I use Manning who has a high Qb accuracy rating and I choose another WR, the lock on the WR should be more accurate than say I used Brooks who has a less accuracy rating. So if I use Brooks, his cone shouldn't lock onto his WR but maybe be to the left or right or something that is not as perfect as Manning's.

But it doesn't seem to do this, it locks on regardless who the Qb is.

[Leebo33]

Exactly! And it's instantaneous as well.

Man, I can't wait to get home tonight to try this. I could have sworn that the you can see the cone move across the field if you change from a receiver all the way from one side of the field to the other.

[HipE]

Exactly! And it's instantaneous as well.

Man, I can't wait to get home tonight to try this. I could have sworn that the you can see the cone move across the field if you change from a receiver all the way from one side of the field to the other.

You do see the cone move, but it only takes a split second for it to do so. It probably takes as much time for you to press the button a second time to pass as it does for the cone to move all the way across the field.

I can see the merits of all of the arguments for and against the cone, at least the way it works when double tapping the receiver icon. I do think that it makes the most sense, at least in terms of making the qbs feel different, to move the cone manually with the right stick. However, this is pretty impractical as you would have a hell of a time being effective with 90% of the starting qbs in the league. I still am not sure whether or not I like the cone more than the old passing system. If nothing else, at least it is something new and it makes the game feel a little fresher. I'm just wondering if this is a one year deal for the cone, I'm guessing that enough people probably dislike it enough to keep EA from putting it in Madden 07. If that is the case, it will kind of suck to invest the time to master it if it is not a long term investment.

[Leebo33]

I still am not sure whether or not I like the cone more than the old passing system. If nothing else, at least it is something new and it makes the game feel a little fresher. I'm just wondering if this is a one year deal for the cone, I'm guessing that enough people probably dislike it enough to keep EA from putting it in Madden 07. If that is the case, it will kind of suck to invest the time to master it if it is not a long term investment.

Yeah, me too. I like it in theory, but I am not real found of the look of it as it it constantly reminding me that I am playing a video game with the flashlight across the screen.

It also makes it tougher to switch between Madden and NCAA.

[btmmayor]

Man, I can't wait to get home tonight to try this. I could have sworn that the you can see the cone move across the field if you change from a receiver all the way from one side of the field to the other.

I'm looking forward to seeing if it "snaps" to the receiver as well Leebo. In the Cube version there is no double-tap, another reason why I prefer that version. You HAVE to use the R-Stick which is the way it should be in all the versions in my opinion.

Badgun,
I get what you are saying and agree with you 100% if indeed the vision cone does "snap" to the receiver.

[Brando70]

I still don't understand why you think this is such a big issue badgun.

My take is that sure, the sliver will go across the field at the same speed as the huge cone, but that is just showing how fast a guy can turn his head. Now, if you're Manning, you turn your head to that side of the field and virtually every receiver on the same side of the field is available to throw to...when Vick does it, you can only throw to that one and only receiver as no one else will be in his cone. That to me shows the "awareness" of the qb when there are more options available due to the size of his cone. Worst case, you've got half of your receivers available, regardless of where your cone is focused...whereas with Vick, you've got one and only option. Assuming the DB's pay attention to the cone, it makes it a hellova lot harder to guard Manning when there are a few options to throw to when Vick has one.

I think it's a damn good representation...

Bingo. That is the whole point of the cone. Playing with Grossman, I can pretty much only see one receiver in the cone at a time. If I change my receiver, even via the double tap, I usually also only see one guy, and so on. Because a QB like Manning has a higher awareness, he might "see" three receivers at once, making him much, much harder to defend, as db said.

Without the cone, all QBs really are equal, and awareness means nothing. I think the cone is a step forward for the series.

[HipE]

I still am not sure whether or not I like the cone more than the old passing system. If nothing else, at least it is something new and it makes the game feel a little fresher. I'm just wondering if this is a one year deal for the cone, I'm guessing that enough people probably dislike it enough to keep EA from putting it in Madden 07. If that is the case, it will kind of suck to invest the time to master it if it is not a long term investment.

Yeah, me too. I like it in theory, but I am not real found of the look of it as it it constantly reminding me that I am playing a video game with the flashlight across the screen.

It also makes it tougher to switch between Madden and NCAA.

Yes, I most definitely don't like the look of it. For a game that is trying to look more and more like an actual television broadcast, having a yellow cone scanning the field of play is a step back. My wife thought it looked absolutely ridiculous the first time she saw it. Someone mentioned earlier in this thread that the colors may be darker and duller than NCAA intentionally, because of the need to have the field lit up by the cone and still be viewable. I sometimes feel like I'm in War of the Worlds with that beam scanning the field, I almost want my receivers to run away from the light to avoid being fried.

[Inuyasha]

I still don't understand why you think this is such a big issue badgun.

My take is that sure, the sliver will go across the field at the same speed as the huge cone, but that is just showing how fast a guy can turn his head. Now, if you're Manning, you turn your head to that side of the field and virtually every receiver on the same side of the field is available to throw to...when Vick does it, you can only throw to that one and only receiver as no one else will be in his cone. That to me shows the "awareness" of the qb when there are more options available due to the size of his cone. Worst case, you've got half of your receivers available, regardless of where your cone is focused...whereas with Vick, you've got one and only option. Assuming the DB's pay attention to the cone, it makes it a hellova lot harder to guard Manning when there are a few options to throw to when Vick has one.

I think it's a damn good representation...

Bingo. That is the whole point of the cone. Playing with Grossman, I can pretty much only see one receiver in the cone at a time. If I change my receiver, even via the double tap, I usually also only see one guy, and so on. Because a QB like Manning has a higher awareness, he might "see" three receivers at once, making him much, much harder to defend, as db said.

Without the cone, all QBs really are equal, and awareness means nothing. I think the cone is a step forward for the series.

but aren't you supposed to see one guy in your cone? Before you snap the ball, you pick your primary WR correct? Or are you pressing A to have the cone in the middle of the field?

I set it to a primary WR. So when the ball is snapped, the cone is shining on him. If he's not open and I switch to another WR, the cone locks onto that other WR and I only see him. And so on if I keep switching. It'll lock onto each WR. So when I want to actually pass the ball, I'll press the WR button again. So it's no different than the regular method but just with an extra button push. And since it seems that there is no difference between a Manning and a Brooks since the cone always locks onto the WR target, I dont know what gameplay advantage it's making.

[Danimal]

You do realize that double tapping is a whole lot faster than moving with the right stick, don't you? And double tapping is also exact, where moving the stick isn't.

Well I don't double tap so I don't know. I know that using the right trigger and pressing a button is faster then the stick. But when I do that I still need to then throw the ball, decided where to throw it (high, low etc) and pout touch on the pass. I don't just sit there and look at X and think he is covered, and then double tap B without looking at him.

I won't disagree that the cone should pan to the next receiver. But the main advantage of the cone to me is that even with double tapping, you still are simulating looking at the guy. In other words, if you are scanning the right side of the field and then decide to throw left without looking over there you are in deep s***. I'm not sure how people don't realize that even this split second it takes to move that cone over is making a difference.

[Leebo33]

My wife thought it looked absolutely ridiculous the first time she saw it.

LOL. My wife makes fun of it too. She didn't think it was too funny though when I didn't clean up a mess that the kids made in the kitchen because it was "outside my vision cone."

[MizzouRah]

I use the right stick when passing, I think it's easier than holding R2 and hitting the receiver buttons.

[Inuyasha]

if you are scanning the right side of the field and then decide to throw left without looking over there you are in deep s***. .

But don't you do that without the cone off too? Lets take last year, if my primary WR was covered, i would then look to another one of my WR's, read the coverage, and throw the ball if he was open. I dont know any gamer who would look to one side of the field and then throw to the other side without looking over there. I dont think any gamers play like that.

But do you need a cone to do this? I thought we were all doing this for the last how many so years football games have been out.

[Brando70]

but aren't you supposed to see one guy in your cone? Before you snap the ball, you pick your primary WR correct? Or are you pressing A to have the cone in the middle of the field?

I set it to a primary WR. So when the ball is snapped, the cone is shining on him. If he's not open and I switch to another WR, the cone locks onto that other WR and I only see him. And so on if I keep switching. It'll lock onto each WR. So when I want to actually pass the ball, I'll press the WR button again. So it's no different than the regular method but just with an extra button push. And since it seems that there is no difference between a Manning and a Brooks since the cone always locks onto the WR target, I dont know what gameplay advantage it's making.

Not exactly. With the double-tap, you will center that receiver in the cone. However, you can throw to any other receiver in the cone without penalty. So if I zero in on the B receiver, but X is also in my cone, I can hit him instead. That's the advantage of the better QBs. In fact, with a QB with a larger field of vision, you probably don't need to lock on as much, and thus not tip your hand to a defender. In the case of someone like Grossman, I have to double-tap and lock on because his cone makes it hard to move manually. The method may be very artificial, but I think the results add more realism to the passing game.

[Brando70]

if you are scanning the right side of the field and then decide to throw left without looking over there you are in deep s***. .

But don't you do that without the cone off too? Lets take last year, if my primary WR was covered, i would then look to another one of my WR's, read the coverage, and throw the ball if he was open. I dont know any gamer who would look to one side of the field and then throw to the other side without looking over there. I dont think any gamers play like that.

But do you need a cone to do this? I thought we were all doing this for the last how many so years football games have been out.

Yes, but it also led to a QB being able to not look at a receiver at all and still fling a pass to him as if he was staring at him -- the infamous Madden wrong-way QB animation. Now at least your QB has to shift his vision to where he wants to throw if he wants to throw accurately.

[Badgun]

I still don't understand why you think this is such a big issue badgun.

My take is that sure, the sliver will go across the field at the same speed as the huge cone, but that is just showing how fast a guy can turn his head. Now, if you're Manning, you turn your head to that side of the field and virtually every receiver on the same side of the field is available to throw to...when Vick does it, you can only throw to that one and only receiver as no one else will be in his cone. That to me shows the "awareness" of the qb when there are more options available due to the size of his cone. Worst case, you've got half of your receivers available, regardless of where your cone is focused...whereas with Vick, you've got one and only option. Assuming the DB's pay attention to the cone, it makes it a hellova lot harder to guard Manning when there are a few options to throw to when Vick has one.

I think it's a damn good representation...

db is doesn't matter that he can only throw to the one receiver...if you double tap X then you're throwing it to him anyway. The point of this is that it takes any real delay out of using the cone with the exception of the delay caused by the extra button tap.