f13.net

Move over ESPN, it's time for the big boys to play now:
http://ps2.ign.com/articles/536/536289p1.html?fromint=1

For those people wanting to know what new features are in 2005:
http://www.madden04.com/maddenplanet/2005/newstuff/index.shtml

The franchise mode features for Madden just seem to blow ESPN out of the water.  What does ESPN have that Madden doesn't?  Under the helmet?  Oh, and it's only $20.  I guess you get what you pay for.

Bruce

Do you just go around to every website (that hasn't banned you yet) copying and pasting the same posts?

Bruce is afraid that of the 5 or so people who don't at least browse both sites, some of them won't get to see whatever clever point he's making.

... but it will make the bets on which site permabans him first interesting.

(http://community.codemasters.com/forum/images/smilies/cussing.gif)

Unless Madden is more than 2.5x better than ESPN then I see no reason to buy it.  The reason I bought ESPN this year is based on a decision I made to send a message to the market.  If I'm the only one who does it then obviously it isn't much of a message.  But, if everyone else who bought ESPN refuses to buy Madden based on the price point then maybe we'll see some results at some point.  I found top notch quality at $19.99.  

And to be quite honest, I'm still a bit pissed about paying $50 for a certain EA college football game that has a noticeable slow down issue on my xbox.

The relationship between price and quality is rarely linear.  So sure, Madden might not be 2.5x better than ESPN, but it is better, and it delivers what ESPN simply can't.

I doubt it will work as sending a message, either.  ESPN doesn't have some magical formula of developing their game for 2.5x less.  As long as EA puts enough of the profits back into Madden's development budgets, it'll be a long time before ESPN can match Madden in quality, even if they can match them in quantity.  If anything, it will force Madden's quality to go down, so they can sell at a cheaper price.

Bruce

Madden's storyline mode, player moods, and the sports radio does sound kinda cool. Too bad ESPN didn't think of something similar using Jim Rome. Yet, if I was playing it, I'd probably turn all that shit off because it sounds like it'd be too much to manage (I'm not a big fan of the Sims). I just want to play "football", not baby sit Terrell Owens.

How could it possibly cause Madden's quality to go down?  The game is basically the same as it has been for the past few years with some upgraded animations, overall graphics tweaks, and a few extra features.  They are charging the same amount for an upgrade as I will be paying for Fable and Halo 2.

Your point is cute but irrelevant when you consider you could make the same argument about the next ESPN or the next, well, just about any sports game.  The facts is, making these games, even if you consider them to be an "upgrade", still costs money, and if ESPN forces Madden to lower its prices to staunch any losses in revenues, Madden will be able to afford fewer improvements with each game.  They also won't have any big motive to have substantially more features than ESPN, because they'll be trying to compete on price, unlike now where you pay more for Madden but you also get more features.

Bruce

1.
ESPN > Madden, but Ray Lewis is on the Madden cover so even if it was a plastic dashboard bobble-head inside the box instead of a game, that would be the game I buy.

2.
You have a comment about a post on another domain - then here's a simple little rule for you to remember: POST YOUR THOUGHTS ABOUT IT THERE. Stop being a tool.

3.
Stop making every thread about Bruce, you jackasses. Any website that bans based upon comments made anywhere on the rest of the internet has a fool for an admin.

I am a bit amused at seeing this thread already, seeing as how Madden isn't even released yet.

Bring the noise.
Cheers............

People in Canada got the game yesterday.  Many stores have had the game sitting in their storage for a couple of days now, and some people have managed to sneak out a few copies.  Most stores will have it on the shelves today.

Bruce

Plus most reviewers for the third or fourth year in a row think the Visual Concepts title is better.

For anyone who actually likes to play the game, I believe ESPN is the better game.  For people who just want to coach like Bruce, the Madden might be best for him.  But that and the 'madden heads' are the only ones I see buying this years madden.  Too bad the 'madden heads' are a huge percentage of idiot console gamers.

I get my Madden tomorrow, with a $10 store gift card (Circuit City).
Offer extends to all platforms.

Don't forget, you know, PC gamers.  ESPN isn't available on the PC; Madden is available for the PC next month.

But Madden has plenty of features for the non-coach.  That's what I like about Madden... it appeals to all kinds of players, rather than just the button-mashers who prefer ESPN. :)

Bruce

Don't forget: ESPN has the special "cant see but 10% of the field in front of you" camera mode, which in my book, is way way cooler than playing in widescreen 'sideline to sideline' camera mode.

honestly, why am i the only guy unimpressed with 'inside the helmet' mode. Unless the game ships with an actual helmet you put on, its a dumb feature.

Bruce, you might want to TRY ESPN before making a statement like this....the passing game in 2k5 is much more realistic than Madden, and is based quite a bit on timing. On basically anything other than a go or a fade, you have to time your pass with the break, or you're looking at a deflection or a pick.....and the game punishes you for trying to force passes quite regularly. Additionally, the rush actually determines how likely you are to throw off-target.

In contrast, I've never even had to consider timing in Madden...just pull back on the stick, and chuck the ball up to the guy who isn't double covered just before the defense gets to you.

To say that ESPN is a "button masher" when you haven't even played it is pretty pathetic IMO. Just as the morons proclaiming that ESPN is a "just pick up and play" game that doesn't bother with inane details, when it has a feature where you SCHEDULE HOW MUCH TIME EACH POSITION SPENDS WATCHING FILM every week.

I'll be renting Madden, but I'm not about to declare one better than the other until I've actually PLAYED BOTH TITLES. With the shit technical problems I'm having with ESPN, and the dog-shit bugs I had with NCAA, IMO the bar is pretty goddamned low right now.

Bring the noise.
Cheers..............

I was unimpressed when Sega did the same thing with Joe Montana Football back in like 1994 or whenever. I like the concept, athough the lack of peripheral vision and "feel" makes playing under this mode even more difficult than actually playing RL football.

I played one game of it so I could nab my crib points, and that's it. The audio started fucking up then, and the imploded during my next celebrity match against Jamie Kennedy....now I can't play a fucking game without hearing the commentary go haywire every time it needs to access a piece of variable data.

Bring the noise.
Cheers............

with perennial sports titles whose feature improvements focus heavily on roster updating and graphical tweaking here and there, Id say if you've played it within the past 2 seasons, your opinions are still valid.

I don't have to.  I've read enough reviews and opinions of others to know what features ESPN has and I know what features of Madden that I want.  So I don't have to play ESPN at all... it could be 10 times more fun to pass and run on the field, but since I don't play these games to master my juke button-timing skills, that doesn't matter to me.  What matters to me is the intellectual exercise of personnel management, strategic game planning, tactical play calling, and so on.

Perhaps you feel "button-mashing" is an exagerrated label for ESPN, and you may be right.  I don't deny ESPN has some other coach and franchise features, but they do not stack up against Madden's.  The only appeal of ESPN I can see objectively is the controller action on the field, and to me, that's "button-mashing".  Not that there's anything per se wrong with button-mashing; it's a time-honored videogame tradition that I mastered playing Asteroids and Space Invaders 25 years ago.  Today, I prefer more depth in my games.

Bruce

So, in short, you are an admitted, unrepentant Madden fanboi who is gushing with orgasmic frenzy about a game based on what people wrote about it in a magazine?

Really, when a person says "Game X kicks Game Y's ass" one would think that they actually tried playing one of them before making that assessment. Whether "playing" to you means coaching and personnel decisions or actual on the field play is pretty irrelevant. It's just asinine to proclaim one better than the other when you haven't tried either one.

Go to your local Blockbuster, drop $13 for rentals of both titles, play each one according to your own personal playstyle preferences, and then come back here armed with some credibility. Until then, you're just a fanboi with a hard-on for your game of choice.

Bring the noise.
Cheers............

So wait...

You haven't played EITHER game's 2005 version, and you have already proclaimed that Madden is the king based on a feature list?

Goddamn, have I got an MMOG for you. It's called Dawn and it is TEH R0Xx0RZ!

I already explained how one was better than the other based upon the facts and my personal preferences.  You know, what you said would have been true thousands of years ago, but today we've progressed beyond the need to personally sample every experience before we can evaluate it.  Valuable tools like logic, reason, science, and jurisprudence have been developed that enable us to render decisions and pass judgements about things we haven't personally engaged in yet.

Bruce

Yeah right, because declaring one game better than the other (which is entirely subjective to begin with) without actually trying either one is quite the logical, reasonable, scientific conclusion.

Either PHYO or STFU already, you fucking fanboi.

Bring the noise.
Cheers.............

So you feel you can't declare that having sex with Halle Berry is better than having sex with a wood chipper, because you haven't tried either?

In that case, let me recommend you try to wood chipper.  Let us know how it works out!

Bruce

Am I out of the loop or something, wtf does PHYO mean?

Typo...should have been PYHO (pull your head out).

Bring the noise.
Cheers.............

But that's the thing, the two items you are comparing are not so drastically different. It's more like saying having sex with Halle Berry is better than having sex with Uma Thurman. Which is why I'm saying to try them both before you declare a winner.

Bring the noise.
Cheers.............

Well, except that I can know people that have had sex with both, and I can read the web sites where each girl advertises their l33t sexual skills, and I can decide that Uma is better than Halle because Halle won't do it in the booty the way I like.

Bruce

Well played, Bruce.

There is no substitute for personal experience.

However, the topic of this thread did not allow for personal experience, but instead stated its case in the form of a fact. For you, the feature set kicks ESPN's ass. For me, I could care less what the price of hot dogs in my franchise's stadium is.

I will state that "under the helmet" is a more engrossing playstyle than anything Madden has to offer, even if this year's version of FPF isn't quite as good. But YMMV. And does, apparently.

The difference being that at this point, I've already banged Halle, and am gearing up for Uma as we speak...meanwhile, you've spent the last couple weeks jerking off thinking about Uma.

You've listened to some moron tell you about Halle and the booty, and took that 2nd-hand opinion at face value and dismissed her completely. I'm telling you that I went there, and that Halle won't shit for a week...yet you keep insisting that you know better based on what you heard from somebody else.

Bring the noise.
Cheers............

I'm beginning to forget about football.

So this is why the infamous SirB is so legendarily despised.

I can see clearly now the rain is gone.. :)

Anyhoo.. I will probaby buy the X Box version of Espn when I can find it (sold out locally the first week of release) because its only 20 bucks, its a Sega product, its not Electronic Arts, and I just want a fun on the field football game I will probably only play a half dozen times anyhow.  Don't care about pricing hot dogs.  Want fun game of football.  That's it.

ESPN's The Sports Guy chimes in about Madden (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/cowbell/040811).

Some interesting features (as well as an amusing article). If I had enough time to play it (I also own NCAA and ESPN), I would consider picking it up.

A GTR (Grand Theft Ricky) mini-game would be awesome.

Gamespot (http://www.gamespot.com/features/6104789/index.html) has posted (http://www.gamespot.com/features/6104789/index.html) a head to head between ESPN and Madden.


Not to be outdone, Team Xbox (http://features.teamxbox.com/xbox/870/Showdown-ESPN-NFL-2K5-vs-Madden-NFL-2005/p1) has also posted a comparison (http://features.teamxbox.com/xbox/870/Showdown-ESPN-NFL-2K5-vs-Madden-NFL-2005/p1).

These are all things I already said. :)

You get what you pay for.  ESPN is a good value, but Madden has more features, particularly if you're into franchise management.

Bruce

Unlike others in the thread, I have now played both games for at least 5 days.

Thoughts about Madden:

1) Players have different motivations for signing with a particular team, it's not just about money. This way, you can sign an aging player who is desperate to win a championship for less money than a lousy team could....you pay the so-called "bad team tax".

Unfortunately, there is no way to set these for created players....for some reason, I found myself demanding a $50M contract from Detroit, even though I wouldn't really consider playing elsewhere.

Still, pretty cool.

2) I like the playmaker controls, particularly adjusting direction of a run at the line. Defensive playmaker controls were a bit tricky to follow, but not bad.

3) The EA Sports Radio and Newspapers are neat as a concept, although the stories don't have much variety. The selection is a bit off too....after blowing out Philly by 52 points, and knocking Owens, McNabb, and Kearse out for multiple games, 4 of the lead stories in the national news involved the Vikings putting Hovan on the trading block. The radio show didn't even mention my huge win. Dote on me a bit more plzkthx.

4) Owner mode returns unchanged....and that's how my prices stayed for 2 seasons, with no problems whatsoever.

5) Trade logic is a bit iffy, in my book. For some reason, 80% of my roster is made up of guys with a value of F by other teams, and late round draft picks are worth squat...enough so that they don't ever seem to sway a deal in either direction. I still want to be able to trade future draft picks.

6) The CPU will accept a trade for **ANY** FA, no matter how bad, as long as it is worth a 7th rounder, and doesn't put them over the cap. I gladly signed and traded FAs to every team without a full roster to maximize my draft picks, and then swapped those around to move up. I ended up with 3 first round picks (including #1), 3 in round 2, and 2 in the 3rd round. They key, for me anyway, seemed to stem from signing guys without bonuses.....this allows you to trade or cut at will, even if you pay a bit more in salary.

7) Gameplay is pretty standard. A little more arcade-like on the field, IMO. Very hard to defend the pass, very easy to pick teams apart. I'd absolutely love it if someone would combine ESPN's passing game with Madden's running game.

Good game....for a Madden. I don't think the models look as good, but the skins and textures seem to look better. The player heads and faces are more customizable....and even little things like being able to select your team captains are nice. Still pretty tough to compete with a $20 ESPN tho....both games offer a pretty solid football experience, whether you're all about sim/coach stuff, or just OTF action.

The whole thing disturbs me a bit.....I'm a 2-3 Maddens a decade kind of guy, and here I am contemplating the purchase of 2 NFL games in one season.

Bring the noise.
Cheers.............

(http://spams-ukwildcatbasketball.com/thisthreadsucks.mbe.jpg)

So I just discovered something that nearly made me take Madden2005 back.

You can't play online w/ more than one player.

ie.  Me and my bud can't play from the same room vs. some other fucks somewhere else.

NFL2k5 allows you to play up to 4v4 online.

What the hell?