NCAA Football 2008 Impressions

[Pilam69]

Originally Posted by JTK

Beyond that: Yes, Maddenmania is free but I think it's the right thing to do to throw those guys a couple of bucks for their efforts so I'm going to try to do it. I don't feel right about leeching off of effort like that.

You are a true gentleman for that. I try to support them with link hits too.

Enjoy your gaming.

[JTK]

Originally Posted by Pilam69

You are a true gentleman for that. I try to support them with link hits too.

Enjoy your gaming.

You, too.

Remember what I said earlier in the thread: I still give this game an 8/10 or so. It's not like I hate the thing. I just wish EA had taken a little more time and care with it. Even the 360 folks have some complaints so..y'know. You can't win 'em all I guess.

[mikem471]

All of this chilling almost makes me forget that I've been on hold for 45 minutes waiting on the status of my Xbox360 repair

[seanjohn21276]

After I got the Maddenmania file to work, I had to start a new dynasty. This time with the men of Troy; USC. I created a prospect named Willie Beamen and can't get Steamin' Beamen to sign with mighty scarlet and gold.

[Pilam69]

Who then went and signed with Texas.

Now you guys don't know me from anyone but there are 3 teams I do NOT have any love for. UW, ND, and TEXAS. I ESPECIALLY LOATHE Texas.

I restarted the entire dynasty and threw up in my mouth a little.

[Steelmaker]

Question,

To those of you who own NCAA for PS3, just how big (if any) of an issue is the 30 fps? It seems that none of the reviews I've read directly bring up this issue. Strangely, most of the reviews seem to be cut and pasted between the PS3 and 360 versions giving them both identical scores and write ups, giving absolutely no mention of the fact that there even IS a difference in frame rate. I would've thought the 30/60 fps difference would've affected the 2 scores more than it has.

[JTK]

Originally Posted by Steelmaker

Question,

To those of you who own NCAA for PS3, just how big (if any) of an issue is the 30 fps? It seems that none of the reviews I've read directly bring up this issue.

IGN, Gamespot, and 1up do mention it.

Strangely, most of the reviews seem to be cut and pasted between the PS3 and 360 versions giving them both identical scores and write ups, giving absolutely no mention of the fact that there even IS a difference in frame rate.

This is true, although IGN, for example, marked down the PS3 to a 7.8 because of the issue while they gave the 360 version an 8.0.

Obviously that's a negligible difference in scores but it's a tip off that yes, there's a slight difference.

I would've thought the 30/60 fps difference would've affected the 2 scores more than it has.

Lots of exaggeration on the issue both ways.

And the sites are always guilty of copying and pasting the same reviews and scores for multiplatform titles. At most, you're lucky if they alter the last paragraph to mention any specific points for that particular system.


I've played both and I'll put it to you like this: At least the PS3's performance is rock solid and stable. Once you get used to the slightly slower than you'd like speed you're good to go. The performance is stable and consistent at all times.

The 360 version does run a touch smoother and faster...at times. The frame rate is NOT consistent and it's not stable. Knub mentioned it earlier and he's right: You can find 360 owners complaining about inconsistent performance and frame rates. Yes, sometimes they'll 60...sometimes they'll see a lot less.

This is before we get into some of the issues that EA needs to address via a patch with the game across the boards but probably never will.

The 360 version does NOT have a serious leg up on the PS3 version.

This is assuming the 360 you use doesn't scratch your discs, pop you some unreadable disc errors, of fire off the red lights of death on you. 360 owners always have that hanging over their heads in addition to everything else. Even springing for an Elite doesn't get you out of that morass.

Both versions have some flaws and menu lag and other issues that EA themselves needs to address with a patch, but probably never will if precedent is anything to go by.

[Shin-Ra]

Originally Posted by JTK

The 360 version does run a touch smoother and faster...at times. The frame rate is NOT consistent and it's not stable. Knub mentioned it earlier and he's right: You can find 360 owners complaining about inconsistent performance and frame rates. Yes, sometimes they'll 60...sometimes they'll see a lot less.

Ahh yes, it's not always as black and white as it seems. EA and 'stable 60fps' in a console game don't exactly go hand in hand.

[JTK]

Originally Posted by Shin-Ra

Ahh yes, it's not always as black and white as it seems. EA and 'stable 60fps' in a console game don't exactly go hand in hand.

Especially on a wrecked platform like the state the 360 is in right now. That's a pretty volatile combination when you think about it.

[Steelmaker]

Thanks JTK for all the info!

You know, it seems that we the gamers would benefit a lot more if instead of EA trying to crank out a new NCAA and Madden game every single year, that they would put a whole new one out every 2 years and then use the odd years for roster updates, bug fixes, tweaks, for the current iterations. I know a lot of gamers gripe at EA for releasing new versions every year with only minor differences. Many say it's because EA developers are lazy, they don't care, etc. However in EA's defense, I'd say the biggest contributing factor behind this is the fact that they only have one year to release a new game. I mean just how much can the devs really do in a year? It takes a company an average of 2-3 years (some even longer) to create a game nowadays. EA is expected to crank these games out year after year and fans always have high expectations. It's really almost as if EA creates one version of Madden or NCAA at the beginning of a platform's tenure that stays perpetually in beta form until that platform is at the end of it's run. Only then does the game seem to be fully realized. I think if EA would release them every 2 years, we'd get a much more polished product.

[JTK]

Originally Posted by Steelmaker

Thanks JTK for all the info!

You know, it seems that we the gamers would benefit a lot more if instead of EA trying to crank out a new NCAA and Madden game every single year, that they would put a whole new one out every 2 years and then use the odd years for roster updates, bug fixes, tweaks, for the current iterations.

Agreed.

Unfortuneately, they'd have to get through to the NCAA on that, since the NCAA has this stipulation that doesn't allow collegiate athletes to have their names put in videogames.

The freelancers out there, like Maddenmania, are doing great work off the radar, and it's becoming simpler with the next gen consoles to get the rosters in there, but that really shouldn't be necessary.

I know a lot of gamers gripe at EA for releasing new versions every year with only minor differences. Many say it's because EA developers are lazy, they don't care, etc. However in EA's defense, I'd say the biggest contributing factor behind this is the fact that they only have one year to release a new game. I mean just how much can the devs really do in a year? It takes a company an average of 2-3 years (some even longer) to create a game nowadays.

There's that and there's getting to know newer hardware better in that equation as well.

EA is expected to crank these games out year after year and fans always have high expectations.

Part of the problem is that EA set those expectations in the first place.

On that same note: EA knows they can crank these things out every year and make easy, big money off of them as well.

It's really almost as if EA creates one version of Madden or NCAA at the beginning of a platform's tenure that stays perpetually in beta form until that platform is at the end of it's run.

I totally agree.

Only then does the game seem to be fully realized. I think if EA would release them every 2 years, we'd get a much more polished product.

I totally agree again.

[becomingwater]

Originally Posted by Steelmaker

Question,

To those of you who own NCAA for PS3, just how big (if any) of an issue is the 30 fps? It seems that none of the reviews I've read directly bring up this issue. Strangely, most of the reviews seem to be cut and pasted between the PS3 and 360 versions giving them both identical scores and write ups, giving absolutely no mention of the fact that there even IS a difference in frame rate. I would've thought the 30/60 fps difference would've affected the 2 scores more than it has.

I love my version, I see nothing wrong with it. I think it runs smooth on PS3 IMO

[Pilam69]

I'd rather it was 60 FPS but it still looks dang good to me.

I have a question that maybe someone here can answer.........

Can I write this game to my harddrive so that it loads faster? If so, how? If I write it to my harddrive will it eliminate some of the menu lag do you think?

Thanks in advance.

[becomingwater]

Originally Posted by Shin-Ra

Ahh yes, it's not always as black and white as it seems. EA and 'stable 60fps' in a console game don't exactly go hand in hand.

I still don't understand why they would even mention the 60 fps vs 30 fps to the public, because you really would never know either.

[Blu-Ray Buckeye]

Originally Posted by emk4ou

Is anybody having trouble with running the ball? I bumped up the Run blocking AI to 90% because it was so ridiculous and my QB just got tackled before he could hand the ball off to the running back...out of I-form...running the ISO...with a lead blocker. Am I missing something? Because it seems like the people at EA didn't even give this a test run. By the way, I'm playing with Oklahoma (one of the best OL's) at home against Utah State so it's not like I'm playing with some trash team trying to upset USC.

Just got the game and play as Ohio State. Took a few minutes getting used to the controls and jumped into a tough game against #2 Michigan. There were a few times where they got into the hole and tackled me for losses but it seemed to be when my playcalling was predictable or maybe I was running at their best players. However I ran a solid 70% of the time and scored on every possession.

In short, I see no problem w/ the blocking or running game.

[supabilly8]

the demo for this game was killer on my hdtv

the graphics are great