Random Assorted Stuff
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
GAME-BY-GAME REPORT CARD
Game 1 vs USC Trojans (L 7-52, D): I can't really say I expected anything but being the whipping boys of Pete Carroll's Men of Troy, but any blowout loss isn't going to earn any high grades, regardless of the opponent.
Game 2 vs Richmond (W 16-0, C): A defensive struggle of a game against a FCS opponent; six of the 16 points came on a late defensive touchdown by third-year defensive back Vic Hall. It was a cause for concern for the offense at the time, but the effort displayed by the defense was certainly admirable.
Game 3 at Connecticut (L 10-45, F-): The defense flat-out didn't show up; the effort exerted by the group in this game was atrocious. On offense, Marc Verica was inserted into the lineup at quarterback as Peter Lalich did not make the trip due to legal problems, but that's still no excuse for getting whipped so badly. After this game, Lalich was removed from the football team due to a violation of his alcohol probation; Verica was the quarterback from here on in.
Game 4 at Duke (L 3-31, F---): Rock bottom. At this point, I was calling for the Grohs' heads (head coach Al and offensive coordinator / son of head coach Mike). Though Duke is admittedly looking better under new head coach David Cutcliffe, this loss is still inexcusable.
Game 5 vs Maryland (W 31-0, A+): The complete antithesis of the Duke game; a competitive Maryland team that was in the mix of the top teams in the ACC Atlantic came to Charlottesville on a Saturday night and simply got rocked in all phases of the game. At this point, I have no idea what to make of this year's Cavaliers' squad.
Game 6 vs East Carolina (W 35-20, B): Was a solid game by the Hoos, though we certainly got off to a slow start in this one (went down 6-0 early thanks to a 3-and-out and a turnover, then reeled off 28 unanswered). Verica threw his first two TD passes of the season in this game, and TB Cedric Peerman had a monster game with 173 rushing yards.
Game 7 vs North Carolina (W 16-13 OT, C+): Wasn't the sharpest game by either team by any means, but a clutch drive by Verica with less than a minute in the fourth quarter sent the game to overtime, where Cedric Peerman once again willed our team to victory.
Game 8 at Georgia Tech (W 24-17, B-): A classic example of the "Cardiac Cavs" living up to their recent moniker after they won an NCAA-record five games by less than a TD last year, the Wahoos rode the shoulders of Peerman throughout all four quarters (noticing a trend?) and took the game in its late stages, despite trailing 14-3 early.
Game 9 vs Miami (L 17-24, C): The Cavs had the upper hand throughout the entire first half, but the inconsistency of the team, combined with the apparent disappearing act of Peerman for much of the second half (he physically wasn't in the game, for no apparent reason) gave a more talented Miami team the opportunity they needed to send the game to overtime. Once in overtime, Miami would take the game.
Game 10 at Wake Forest (L 17-28, D): The Wahoos were flatter than a pancake under a steamroller for three quarters, spotting Wake a 28-3 lead. Marc Verica attempted some heroics in the fourth, putting together two solid drives, but there wasn't enough game left for Virginia to continue the comeback effort.
PLAYER AWARDS
OFFENSIVE MVP: RB Cedric Peerman, Sr: This is a no-brainer; Peerman has simply carried the Cavs for stretches at a time, and he is the heart and soul of this team, and a great person to boot.
DEFENSIVE MVP: LB Clint Sintim, Sr: Another no-brainer, as he currently leads the ACC in sacks and has proven to be a very good linebacker. I don't feel that he's as strong of an emotional leader as Peerman is, but his play sets the standard for everyone else on the field.
MOST IMPROVED: CB Vic Hall, Jr: Last year, my nickname for Hall was "Toast"; for a cornerback, that's not a good nickname to have at all. This year, along with Ras-I Dowling, the secondary play has markedly improved over the course of the season. He's not great by any stretch yet, but he's no longer a turnstyle for receivers to go through either.
OUT-OF-NOWHERE GUY: QB Marc Verica, Soph: At the conclusion of last season, Verica was the fourth quarterback on the depth chart with nary a shot of ever seeing the field in Charlottesville. Between then and September, starter Jameel Sewell is academically suspended and Peter Lalich gets into legal trouble. Given the volatility of the position and the rock-bottom expectations for him, Verica has played admirably, though he's still got plenty of room to improve.
REMAINING GAMES OUTLOOK (vs Clemson, at Virginia Tech): In my opinion, both of these games are toss-ups, just as the ACC as a whole has been this entire season. Clemson has arguably underachieved more than any other team in the nation this year, but they still have a talented squad featuring tailbacks James Davis and C.J. Spiller. Tech presents a challenge; the Hokies' defense is always a tough matchup, and while they don't appear to have a great offense, they are beginning to gel just in time for the stretch run. In addition, the game will take place in Blacksburg, where Virginia hasn't won since their epic 26-point comeback in 1998.
Certainly it has been an interesting season so far for the Virginia Cavaliers, and with two games left it just as likely could be more fun as much as it could be spectacular crash-and-burn. Time will tell which we do get.
Effectively, then, this year was effectively my first year seriously playing "next-gen" football, both collegiate and professional, via EA's NCAA and Madden 09 titles. While both are very enjoyable games in their own right (and every bit as fun as their older iterations I might add), I've come away from both unsatisfied. For a generation of games dubbed as "next-gen", the only thing that's noticeably changed is the graphics. While the sports these games simulate obviously don't change much from year to year, the way the user partakes in the game hasn't fundamentally changed in a number of years; the kicks still use a golf-swing meter, players still pass using but a single button press, the performance ratings of players are explicitly spelt-out to the user, etc. etc. I'd argue that nothing about these football games is really "next-gen", in the way that Rock Band 2 is next-gen, or Gears of War, Call of Duty 4, LittleBigPlanet, Grand Theft Auto 4, or (insert innovative and critically-acclaimed next-gen game here) is "next-gen".
I'm sure there are a number of ideas that can be explored to bring football games back to innovation's bleeding edge; adapting more community-oriented online gameplay modes such as FIFA's Be A Pro and NHL 09's online EASHL modes are probably already topics of discussion inside Tiburon's thinktank, and the team did take a major step to improving the game to that end with the addition of Online Dynasty in NCAA 09 and online leagues in Madden 09. Strictly referring to the core gameplay experience, however, I have two proposals that, if ever implemented properly, potentially could change the fundamental experience of playing digital football.
The first proposal deals with the passing game. As I mentioned earlier, football games have by-and-large used an icon-based passing mechanic since their inception; each receiver is assigned a face button on the controller, and to throw to one a user simply presses the corresponding button. The user has some control over the type of pass his quarterback throws based on if he taps or holds the particular button - a tap throws a arcing lob pass, while a prolonged press throws a Brett Favre-esque dart. The user also has some ability to lead his receiver using the left stick while throwing, though this control mechanic has always been somewhat ambiguous in its execution, in my opinion. Effectively, beyond which receiver to throw to and what type of pass is to be thrown, I'd argue that the user does not have any control over the passing game; the ball gets delivered to a predetermined, somewhat-ambiguous spot somewhere further along the receiver's route (how close to this ambiguous spot is determined by the quarterback's accuracy rating).
A system that I think could radically change the passing game, and one that I'd like to see explored further than it has been previously, is one where the user chooses a spot to throw the ball to, rather than a specific receiver, per se. It's my understanding that such a system was an option in Microsoft's NFL Fever 2004 (a game I admittedly never played); called "Read and Lead", the user first selected a receiver to throw to, then moved a reticle around the area of the receiver to choose an area around him where he'd like the ball to go, and then pressed a single button to throw a pass to a particular spot. The receiver was capable of adjusting his route on-the-fly depending on where the ball was thrown. I'd personally like to see this concept taken one step further, however, with the abandoning of receiver selection and the use of just a reticle to throw a pass.
Above are some screens of a little demo I'm working on of this concept using XNA Game Studio 2.0 and Microsoft Visual Studio C# (pardon the craptacular placeholder graphics
). In the first screen, we see a team lined up in Ace formation with the quarterback under center. We also see a brightened area on the field; in my demo, this is where the quarterback is focusing his attention. Any throw he makes will go somewhere in this area, depending on how good the quarterback's accuracy is (note that he can miss in any direction and distance relative to the center of the brightened area; in EA's games, it seems that quarterbacks who throw inaccurate passes will still throw them somewhere along the route of the receiver). The second screen and third screens demonstrate that the area of focus can be moved; ideally, the right analog stick would control this movement. Using the right stick, the focus area would move in a direction relative to the quarterback: straight up with target far down the field perpendicular to the quarterback, straight left or right would target the left and right sidelines about 10-15 yards downfield, etc. etc. The focus area is also able to 'lock' to different areas to aide the user, giving the user a little room for error when attempting to target areas on the extremes of the right stick's range. To finally throw a pass (not yet implemented in my demo), the user would hit just a single button; perhaps the tap / hold mechanic could still be used, but I'd personally opt for a power meter a la the FIFA soccer series when shooting the ball.This passing mechanic would allow the passing game to be expanded in a few ways, which would all add to the experience of playing a football video game. For the user, absolute control over passing would now be possible; the location and power of the pass both are decided by the user, then erred based on the ratings of the quarterback the player is using. For the computer on defense, you could truly have safeties and linebackers "read the eyes" of the quarterback; when in zone coverage looking at the quarterback, they should know where the focus area is, and would move relative to it. The user could in turn take advantage of this CPU ability to look off a defender, just like all the great quarterbacks do in real life. Finally, this system potentially could aid both the idea of pass pressure and the everlong fight against "cheesers"; foremost, controlling both the focus area and a quarterback on the run would be a more challenging feat (making a completed pass on a broken play more satisfying), and no longer would a pressured quarterback be able to just press a button of a random receiver at the last moment to avoid a sack and at the same time have a chance of a completion out of a dumb play. Understandably, such a system would have a rather high learning curve that unfortunately might turn off casual gamers just looking to score a buncha points, but for those craving a more realistic football experience, this idea may be worthwhile to explore.
My second idea, which can apply to any sports game really, involves the game's season / franchise / equivalent mode. In these modes, and throughout the entire game really, commonly the ratings of all the players in the virtual league are displayed to the user whenever he or she wishes to access them. In my opinion, this really is beginning to detract from the experience; the challenge of scouting your own team, your opponent's team, available free agents, draft prospects, and so forth is not evident at all, since all the exact information the user needs to make related decisions is already readily available.
In order to correct for this, I'd like to see the outright removal of any sort of player ratings information from season modes (and I really mean everything, even the OVR rating). The players would still in fact be governed on the field by their ratings; however, these ratings would not be provided to the user inside the season mode. This would allow for a number of things. Foremost, the importance of scouting players beforehand would increase exponentially, and more likely than not would become the most important off-the-field activity. In addition, a more dynamic progression engine could be utilized that, while if directly evident to the user, might be deemed unrealistic, but without knowledge of exact ratings, would add to both the challenges of player management and preparing for your next opponent. For example, a user's veteran players might have a chance to drop significantly in ratings; to the user, this change would only show up in the decreased performance on that player on the field, the player "hitting a wall" if you will; even a small ratings hit could be interpreted on the user's end only as a "down season", rather than an unfair ratings drop. Conversely, a player who has had a series of breakout games could improve in ratings dramatically, again hidden from the user, thus leading to a breakout season a la Adrian Peterson last year, or Greg Jennings this year. In order to make up for this loss of knowledge of exact player ratings, however, an expansive scouting system would need to be provided; perhaps using a fleshed-out version of either the Weapons system in Madden, where various indicators explain to the user what the strengths are of various personnel on the field, or the All Pro Football traits system, where the user only knows up to five performance characteristics of a particular player, could be used; a plethora of different weapon types and/or traits would need to be added, however, to account for any possible strengths and/or weaknesses of any particular player. Other ideas that could be implemented are increased user interaction at the rookie combine workouts, user-controlled free agent tryouts, and user-controlled team minicamps where the user learns the tendencies of his players.
The football gaming genre is in need of a breath of fresh air, and I'm sure there are a number of ways it can be provided. Here I have presented but two that could greatly change the way the game is played. Whether they get implemented by any company making football games, time will tell; if I have my way, however, they'll see the light of day sooner than later. The bottom line is that the companies making football games - EA, Midway, 2K, whomever is behind Backbreaker at this point - need to begin to push the envelope with the genre moreso than they have. Otherwise, I fear that these games will lose touch with the times and eventually lose ground to all the other games that are driving the gaming industry forward.
6,366 Forum Posts
3 Blog Entries
254 News/Blog Comments
3 Reader Score Votes
46 Friends
5 Chalkboard Messages
14 Screenshots
16 Videos
5,821 Arena Visits
Krioniq's Blog Categories
Krioniq's Xbox 360 Gamercard
More
Krioniq's Friends
Recent Visitors
The last 10 visitor(s) to this Arena were:
Krioniq's Arena has had 5,821 visits
Krioniq's Arena has had 5,821 visits
Working...