Making Virtual Sports More Like the Real Thing 93
The New York Times has an article today with an unexpected source of game criticism: Seattle Seahawks football player Sean Alexander. The athlete made the EA execs nervous at a press conference this week, where he offered up some insightful comments about the Madden series of games. From the article: "Madden has always been great, but it's always been one-on-one, just you and another person, and real football is a team game. You should be able to make a team and play together with your friends. Like if you have 10 friends, you could all play different positions and be in 10 different houses and play together over the Internet. Or maybe you just have like five people, and you control the skill positions and the program controls the other guys."
Cool, so in the karate sims (Score:2)
My kid's in karate (Score:2)
They wear altogether too much padding and gear nowadays for you to break ribs. A good turtle pad and the only thing you'll be breaking is your metatarsals, you tough talker you. Maybe on sub-par pads you could knock the kid's wind out if you catch her right. (Bully.)
Ironically, the one thing the Web does seem to really be offering us is trash talk... Which is the one thing we can verify you actually like to do in real life. ;-)
Re:My kid's in karate (Score:1)
Re:My kid's in karate (Score:2)
Ah, I was taking the piss about "realism". (Score:1, Offtopic)
In terms of training in class, the idea there is to make it as realistic as is possible[1] without getting hurt, mainly because it bloody hurts to breathe, never mind laugh, sneeze or train while you wait 6 weeks for your ribs to heal.
[1] Actually this idea was abandoned decad
Re:Ah, I was taking the piss about "realism". (Score:2)
Some games *do* have realism. (Score:2)
Ars Technica article (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Ars Technica article (Score:1)
"lock" to player (Score:3)
In NHL Hitz and Sega Soccer Slam, if I'm playing on the same side as a human, I always like to lock my controller to a single player, because I can identify with the single person, rather than bouncing around (esepcially because sometimes there's contention for control of the player nearest the action.)
Player locking's a failing across all sports (Score:2)
Even in soccer, otherwise excellent games often have a "switch you into the defender when you're running the opposite way" bug. Argh.
Already exists....but not for sports games (Score:5, Insightful)
The one genre where teamwork should seem obvious lacks any sort of teamwork gameplay for more than two players. I wonder why it took an NFL player to bring it to the EA execs' minds.
Then again, when you have what amounts to a monopoly in sports games, there's little motivation to innovate. We certainly haven't seen EA do much in that area...
Re:Already exists....but not for sports games (Score:1)
EA innovates by having new lapses in each edition (Score:2)
there's little motivation to innovate. We certainly haven't seen EA do much in that area...
Are you kidding? Their franchise modes lack a new conspicuous feature every year!
On the other hand, their game play -- I mean, how many NBALives has it been now where rebounding is utterly and completely unrealistic and bizarre? There's some continuity there. If they were innovating per their usual style, some years you wouldn't be able to jump, and others your arms wouldn't reach for the ball...
Re:Already exists....but not for sports games (Score:2, Informative)
There is no monopoly in sports games, just a monopoly on licensed sports games. I don't understand why EA's competitors just folded after EA grabbed exclusive rights to the NFL license.
I typically avoid the sports games genre (I haven't played a video game sports title in years), but most of my favorite sports games didn't involve real life players or teams. For example, some of my favorite sports tit
Re:Already exists....but not for sports games (Score:2)
Re:Already exists....but not for sports games (Score:1)
I don't dispute this, but I think there's still a market for sports games that don't include real players, teams or stadiums. Blitz sold over 1 million units [ampednews.com] without any of those things. Now, granted 1 million units is probably nothing compared to what Madden sells in a single year. But most developers out there would be thrilled to sell 500,000 units, let alone 1 million. Although maybe 1 million units is the limit of the "fake" football market.
Visual Concepts could've don
Re:Already exists....but not for sports games (Score:2)
It's because the branding and marketing works, especially on kids, and people have been brainwashed into desiring strong brand identification. Go stand in the video game section of WalMart or Target for a half hour. Really, the experience will be worth a half hour of your time. You will witness a child consider which game to purchase. The kid will probably have one where they think it looks cool, or one of their friends has told t
Re:Already exists....but not for sports games (Score:2)
Re:Already exists....but not for sports games (Score:2)
Re:Already exists....but not for sports games (Score:2)
But not all of the competitors jumped ship "The League" came out after the exclusive license shoe dropped.
CFL? Rugby? Aussie? Gaelic? (Score:2)
But does EA have a long-term lock on the Canadian Football League or any of the rugby or Australian Rules or Gaelic football leagues?
Re:CFL? Rugby? Aussie? Gaelic? (Score:2)
In general though, at least for the American market, I think you would get less sales making a game using those licenses then you would making a game based off of no license at all. (and that's a shame, I love rugby)
Re:Already exists....but not for sports games (Score:2)
Re:Already exists....but not for sports games (Score:2)
Re:Already exists....but not for sports games (Score:2)
Re:Already exists....but not for sports games (Score:2)
Not really. First of all, you can play Total Annihilation (a quite old RTS) with up to 8 players. Second of all, there is room to have a game where there is a single commander per team, and people can jump into vehicles/units and control them, taking direction from the commander like any other unit, or ignoring them.
Re:Already exists....but not for sports games (Score:2)
TA might be old, but it's still the best. Man, I can't wait until Supreme Commander [wikipedia.org] comes out!!!
Kinda like the original Starsiege:Tribes where each side can have a commander giving orde
Re:Already exists....but not for sports games (Score:2)
Savage [s2games.com] is exactly what you describe.
Re:Already exists....but not for sports games (Score:1)
Battlefield has commander+underlings gameplay, it focusses mostly on the underlings to make sure everyone's having fun, not just the commander.
By the way, the opensource TA remake [clan-sy.com] allows users to control units directly.
Already exists....AND in sports game (Score:1)
Ultimate Baseball Online: www.ubo2006.com
Re:Already exists....but not for sports games (Score:2)
One problem: if you have a griefers on your team in the real world, you can fire them; it's a lot harder to ban a determined griefer in a virtual game.
Re:Already exists....but not for sports games (Score:2)
Why? Because I suspect that EA et al realise that the primary reason people play sports simulators rather than getting off their butts and playing *real* sport is that they don't have enough people around to form a team. Once you've got the team, playing real sport is much better than sitting staring at a screen, and EA know i
Re:Already exists....but not for sports games (Score:2)
What about playing 'the real thing'? (Score:4, Insightful)
If he's strictly talking about getting 10 of your personal friends together, why not just go to Target, pick up a cheap football, go to a park, and...play football? Compared to the price of getting 10 gaming systems, 10 copies of the game, 10 online subscriptions, and coordinating the same time to get all 10 of your friends together it's far too much effort.
Now, for online play in general (playing with people you don't know from the entire world), it seems like it may be feasable. The only problem I forsee is the same types of complaints with most other online games: more than half of one team disconnecting before they lose, n00bs bringing a team down, and 1337 players pwning everyone.
Re:What about playing 'the real thing'? (Score:3)
I assume you play paintball instead of FPSs?
Re:What about playing 'the real thing'? (Score:2)
Admittedly Lazer Tag and Paintball can be cost prohibitive, whereas a football/basketball/soccer ball costs very little and you need only one for entire group of people. Frankly I find it disturbing to see these obese kids (and adults) sitting on their fat asses playing simulated sports when it wouldn't kill them (or even save their lives) to go outside and play the real thing.
As a parent I make damn sure the TV goes off
Re:What about playing 'the real thing'? (Score:1)
The point I was making was not in reference to online gaming in general, just to the fact that it sounded like his suggestion was limited to your personal friends.
Re:What about playing 'the real thing'? (Score:2)
Continuing with the football example, the upfront costs are X consoles and X copies of the game. There are also X subscription fees (ISP/game service/etc), probably recurring monthly/yearly. To buy a football and go to a park to play has one cost: The price of the football. There are no recurring charges, and the initial capital investment is quite a bit lower.
Now consider your FPS example. The upfront and ongoing costs are similar to the football game on console. To p
Re:What about playing 'the real thing'? (Score:2)
Re:What about playing 'the real thing'? (Score:1)
Re:What about playing 'the real thing'? (Score:2)
You have now [specialopspaintball.com] (okay, so it's not exactly the same caliber--pardon the pun--of sniper rifle; an interesting read nonetheless). You may have a point with the tanks and the rockets.
Re:What about playing 'the real thing'? (Score:2, Insightful)
Have you seen the amount of fat those guys carry? (Score:2)
ok sure, it's flamebait, but true, nevertheless.
Pro players ALL play these games now (Score:2)
why not just go to Target, pick up a cheap football, go to a park, and...play football? Compared to the price of getting 10 gaming systems, 10 copies of the game, 10 online subscriptions, and coordinating the same time to get all 10 of your friends together it's far too much effort.
It's ironic, but anyone who's seen a "life of the big star" thing about sports players knows that, nowadays, they all play these games. Kevin Garnett actually plays himself in NBALive. Yeah, he could go dunk it any time he wan
Playing 'the real thing' with actual other humans? (Score:2)
He DOES play 'the real thing' (Score:2, Insightful)
Are you dense? He's a friggen football player. He plays the real thing all the time. You're acting like this is some fat kid sitting on a couch compl
Pro Football vs. 'the real thing' (Score:2)
If you're not out on the field running around, you're not playing anything resembling the real game. Back when I was in college, I played intramural football - if you're playing offensive line, the big difference between touch football and tackle football is that you don't get to wear pads in touch fo
Re:What about playing 'the real thing'? (Score:1)
Re:What about playing 'the real thing'? (Score:1)
CRAP!!!... (Score:1)
Making Virtual Sports More Like the Real Thing (Score:5, Funny)
Ship steroids with the game discs.
Yeah... (Score:2)
Re:Yeah... (Score:2)
How about players fighting fans in the stands?
Re:Yeah... (Score:1)
Re:Yeah... (Score:2)
Uh oh... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Uh oh... (Score:2)
Definition of skill (Score:1)
Making food at McDonald's takes skill, but in standard labor terminology, fast food cook is not a "skilled" position.
Virtual Virtual Skeeball (Score:1)
Re:A good thought... (Score:2)
Offensive lineman comes up, bodyslam, punch, helicopter kick, then HADOKEN!
"Sean"? (Score:3, Insightful)
The all-pro Seahawks RB is named "Shaun" Alexander.
If you're going to post a front-page story on sports, at least get the first name of one of the top players currently in the game right. This is the equivalent of writing a story on MS and referencing "Steve Bullmer". It's kinda' sad...
Re:"Sean"? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:"Sean"? (Score:1)
Bleh. (Score:2)
Multiplayer Sports (Score:1)
Not practical (Score:5, Insightful)
The reason why football plays succeed in real life is because those 11 men on the field practice together like crazy before football comes up every Sunday. Who out there is going to want to try to get 11 buddies out there to practice there this much? Never mind conflicting schedules from real life that could make this impossible, or trying to audible using only your gamepad... it just doesn't make it as much fun. If you're the quarterback, you're involved in every passing play. If you're the running back, you're involved in every running play. If you only get to be a receiver, though, the ball might get passed to you a half-dozen to a dozen times per game. If you're a fullback, you're basically limited to running into people and trying to knock them down. Who's going to want that skill position? And it is a skill position, because of the possibility of getting to do a short-yardage running play or catching the odd pass out of the pocket, etc.
The only way to make sure that everybody holding a gamepad gets to be involved in every play is to make sure that the guy with the gamepad is the one with the ball. That's 1 guy out of 11.
I'm not passionate about this or anything, just not sure how this could work and be both practical and fun. Even in baseball, for instance, where coordinated execution isn't as important as football, it still means a whole bunch of bored guys sitting around waiting for something to happen.
Re:Not practical (Score:2)
Re:Not practical (Score:2)
Re:Not practical (Score:1)
Ira
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Not practical (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Not practical (Score:1)
It's practical, but the games will be pickup-level (Score:2)
There's no technical obstacle, but with live players in control, the play will look like a game of pickup football, not the NFL.
Packaging (Score:1)
Easy (Score:2)
I can remember as far back as Fifa '99 having support for at least four players at once. It was pretty fun.
All you need in order to have this kind of thing online is game join system similar to CounterStrike. You find a game with space on a team, and join. Obviously, unlike CS, you'd be taking partial control over existing players, instead of creating one new one, but the base concept is the same.
Add in a grouping system like Halo 2, and you can get a group of friends together and either create your own n
Cool...not practical for football (Score:1)
The Big Issue (Score:2)
There was FIFA Soccer on the 3DO... (Score:1)
Here's an idea! (Score:1)
Only two? (Score:2)
Furthermore, there are games like Fifa World Cup that support up to EIGHT players on a single console using two multi-tap units. Additionally I've seen more than one video hockey series that supported more than t