Madden 2005 initial impressions.

d151b · 08-11-2004, 04:27 PM

I have to agree with skinsncanes on this one! I bought 2k5, took it home and I initially didn't like it b/c I wasn't used to it. The controls, gameplay etc. But, once I got used to all of that, ..... it sucked even worse. The gameplay is absolutely atrocious!!! And that's all that matters! Anybody who disagrees and thinks ESPN 2k5 is the bomb can keep your swapmeet game and argue your point(s) until you're blue in the face. Just because you're an elitist doesn't make your game better.

skinsfanthru&thru · 08-11-2004, 04:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SKINSnCANES

There should be a seperate thread for this argument. one for people that only play one of the games and are hugely biased, and another thread for those people that own both games and have played both of them through atleast one season and know the differences. Its just getting annoying having the same arguments with people that having even played both games. My final opinion is that ESPN is pretty to watch, but is inferior to madden as a complete game.

didn't u say that u stopped playing espn around week 7 or so?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I have tried the 2K series several times in the past and for me I just prefer Madden.

I'm sorry if that annoys some people, but as long as Madden is a quality product, (which it definitely is no matter what some sega fanboys may say), I see no reason to buy another game.

It's not like Madden receives horrible reviews while 2K receives glowing reviews. They are both very highly regarded. I can see your point Ill if Madden was clearly on the decline and people were still buying it, then they would definitely be buying it on the name alone. But that's simply not the case.

I know I'm arguing so strongly for epsn 2k5 cuz in my mind its a very solid football game and I'm trying to help save fellow skins fans some money, lol.
Yes all the franchise stuff is nice in madden but for those who enjoy an actual game of football, I highly recommend ESPN 2k5. Neither game is perfect but with each being roughly the same game and with each having the edge in various categories, u really can't go wrong with spending $20 bucks for an incredibly gorgeous game. If u go for the madden then have at it cuz its almost assured that its going to be a very solid title every year, like I said I'm just trying to help open some eyes and help some pocketbooks, lol.

Quote:

Originally Posted by illdefined

any other games that add so little every year are called EXPANSION PACKS and don't cost $50. EA has been getting over on its customers for years.

it's too bad they won't just have each year be an expansion-like upgrade cuz almost every sports title is just a slightly retooled and enhanced copy of last year's game with new rosters.

oh and my suggestion of buying espn 2k5 is mainly for x-box owners cuz I honestly haven't seen the gameplay of the ps2 version and can't give a fair grade of it.

That Guy · 08-11-2004, 06:31 PM

if 2k5 was on pc i'd try it out, but until then....

MTK · 08-11-2004, 08:14 PM

I got Madden CE for only $20 after trade-ins

:thumb:

redrock-skins · 08-11-2004, 08:52 PM

Madden vs ESPN is like a Coke vs Pepsi or Bush vs Kerry. Everyone likes their choice and no amount of talking is going to sway any views.

illdefined · 08-11-2004, 10:33 PM

worth a rent of the latest installments no?

SKINSnCANES · 08-11-2004, 11:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skinsfanthru&thru

didn't u say that u stopped playing espn around week 7 or so?

I know I'm arguing so strongly for epsn 2k5 cuz in my mind its a very solid football game and I'm trying to help save fellow skins fans some money, lol.
Yes all the franchise stuff is nice in madden but for those who enjoy an actual game of football, I highly recommend ESPN 2k5. Neither game is perfect but with each being roughly the same game and with each having the edge in various categories, u really can't go wrong with spending $20 bucks for an incredibly gorgeous game. If u go for the madden then have at it cuz its almost assured that its going to be a very solid title every year, like I said I'm just trying to help open some eyes and help some pocketbooks, lol.

it's too bad they won't just have each year be an expansion-like upgrade cuz almost every sports title is just a slightly retooled and enhanced copy of last year's game with new rosters.

oh and my suggestion of buying espn 2k5 is mainly for x-box owners cuz I honestly haven't seen the gameplay of the ps2 version and can't give a fair grade of it.

yea i only played half the season, but before that I ran through two simualted seasons to check out the draft and progression and stuff.

The progressions, from what I saw in two years of espn, were not that good. And the stats wernt acurate either. Portis made the probowl with like 800 yards rushing, I think one back had more than 1000. I set the game time to 3 min qtrs and what I think espn does is assume the computer plays wiht 3 min qtrs to.. This is cool that you can play a shorter qtr and not be behind in all the stats, but they failed to coreleate that to progression. They didnt take that into account, and almost everyone in the league dropped. Its these sort of things that madden has ironed out over the years. In madden this year old players have just as much value as younger players. Theres actually a reson to use guys over 30 in madden this year.

I dont want you guys to think im trying to start fights, heh, I own both games and spend a great deal of time playing them so there are a lot of little things that I have come to notice about these games that makes me pick madden. if you have fun with espn then by all means have a blast, and drink some beers.

illdefined · 08-12-2004, 12:36 PM

its obvious people really get off on their franchises, stats and progression. yeah sounds like Madden really is clearly better for that apparently. although have you guys seen this Weekly Prep thing in ESPN? its totally nuts, every DAY of the week between games you choose each player's excerise regimen, diet and rehabilitation, then it increases/decreases their stats accordingly. say you want Rasby to slim down and get faster, or Portis to gain some muscle for those Gut runs. the idea is pretty cool..

personally, all this number stuff isn't for me though. when i get a football game, i only play the actual current roster and season (or at least keep the same players). i don't wanna RUN the 'Skins (the only team i'll ever play), i wanna BE the 'Skins, and i pick the game that does the most convincing job of that visually and mechanically. on the FIELD.

it's funny. when playing Madden or ESPN, people make me aware that i'm not such a fan of football, as i am a fan of the REDSKINS. don't get me wrong, i'm all about the Xs and Os, but only in relation to the CURRENT Skins and how much i need them to win. i won't play another team! not even a historic 'Skin team!

That Guy · 08-12-2004, 12:55 PM

madden 2k5 has a much better skins team, as in espn made the 2k5 skins kinda sucky in comparision.

illdefined · 08-12-2004, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by That Guy

madden 2k5 has a much better skins team, as in espn made the 2k5 skins kinda sucky in comparision.

that is TRUE. it's only made it more challenging for me though! i've had to become a custom audibling(def. and off.), individual assignment, man-in-motion master! i was totally frustrated before, but it was a blessing in disguise. 16-0 on All-Pro! time to bump it up...

hopefully as the season progresses the live roster updates will change to reflect Gibbs's presence like Madden did (Rock Cartwright 86??)

joecrisp · 08-12-2004, 03:24 PM

I bought both games the day they became available in stores, and here's my initial impressions of both, with the caveat that I'm not here to get in a pissing contest about how many hours I spend playing either game:

I was initially a little uncomfortable with ESPN's controls, which is to be expected, as the only football game I've ever played aside from Tecmo Bowl (still the greatest football game ever made-- even after an all-night kegger, you can still rush for over 400 yards on your buddy!) is the Madden series. But after a few games, the controls became second nature, just like with Madden.

IMHO, the graphics and presentation of ESPN are more realistic, though the color saturation is a little extreme. I hate the way players run (read: "waddle") in ESPN, but everything else about the player animations is so cool that I began to overlook the ridiculous running form after a while.

I was very impressed with ESPN's attention to detail with the stadiums-- "Washington Redskins Stadium" really looks like FedEx Field, not a drab burgundy-and-gold amalgamation of some programming teams' collective impressions of what a generic Redskins stadium should look like.

I was also very happy to see that ESPN made a concerted effort to produce a Redskins playbook that resembles what Gibbs will probably be using this season. Madden pissed me off big-time in this category when I found the same damned playbook in 2005 that they proffered last year as Steve Spurrier's brainchild. The only noticeable difference is the new option routes for the receivers. There are no true "counter-treys" in Madden's Gibbs playbook, and few counter plays in general, whereas the ESPN Gibbs playbook is loaded with them.

One problem with both games: there is no true H-back spot on the depth chart, and Rock Cartwright is presented as a fullback. The thing that sucks about that on ESPN's game is that you can't replace Rock on the depth chart with one of the guys that will actually line up at the H-back spot, like Kozlowski, Sellers or Cooley. Nor can you change Rock to a runningback, which is where he belongs. At least in Madden, you can move Rock to runningback on the depth chart and put him in that rotation, while inserting Koz, Cooley and Sellers into both the fullback (H-back) and tight end rotations.

I really feel like Madden took a step back (or no step at all) with the overall impression of the graphics, player movement and game presentation. The player's bodies look bloated and 'roided up, making them look rather comically cartoonish. ESPN's players look much more true-to-life, aside from the facemasks, which look kind of goofy for some reason. I also noticed Madden 2005 seems to get a little choppy on me, especially when there's a replay going, or when there's just a lot happening on-screen. Last year's Madden was much better in this area, in my opinion. The overall presentation and gameplay of Madden 2004 was much more fluid, seamless and dynamic... kind of like ESPN 2k5.

These are just my impressions of the realism of the gameplay and presentation so far. I haven't done any franchise work with either of them yet, though I'm an avid franchiser, so I'll be moving onto that shortly. Thus far, I'm pretty pissed off about Madden 2005 essentially being a roster update, though I'm hoping the franchise stuff will boost my spirits about spending $50 for said update. ESPN 2k5 has been a very pleasant surprise to this point, and it's very close to being the best $20 I've ever spent (there's a lot you can do as a young guy with $20-- but that's for another forum!). If I don't find anything particularly compelling about Madden 2005's franchise mode, ESPN may have successfully converted me. Madden will have to step up their game big-time next year if they want me to keep paying a premium for their product.

MTK · 08-12-2004, 03:31 PM

Cartwright is way overrated for some reason, I don't quite understand that either.

In my second season he's up to a 92 and he made the pro bowl in season one as a FB.

illdefined · 08-12-2004, 04:18 PM

JoeC, in total and complete agreement with all your points.

the players in ESPN look like athletes, Madden players still look dumpy, how can you tell? imagine the Madden player withOUT pads, he'd look like a mutant T. especially the skinny guys. i know it must be a rigging issue (sorry, game dev speak)

if Sega could only get rid of that waddle! they go so crazy with the insane animations and animation transitions, only to get the waddle in between.

yeah and i mentioned the saturation problem in another post, helps to turn it down a bit on the TV itself heh.

SKINSnCANES · 08-12-2004, 04:27 PM

yea rock is ranked really high.

Chris cooley starts low, but moves up really fast from what I saw in simulation. Im playing my last preseason game now, we'll see waht he goes up. Hes leading my team in receptions, hes got GREAT catchign for a TE, expecially a third round rookie.

MTK · 08-13-2004, 08:42 AM

I'm not a huge fan of this years' player models in Madden either, guys are a little too bulked up. Some guys look on target like Arrington, but then someone like Coles is a little too pumped up. I do like the increased definition on the jerseys and the helmets look incredible.

As for the playbook I'm also disappointed they didn't tweak it more to Gibbs' style. I was expecting more 'big' sets and more double TE stuff. It's basically last year's playbook with a few minor changes. And a shotgun? C'mon now, maybe they know something we don't but Gibbs didn't run the shotgun the first time around. He tried it out briefly but quickly scrapped it. Even though I wished they had a more Gibbs-like playbook, on the other hand this is the playbook I'm comfortable with so I can't complain too much.

All in all I'm happy with '05, I don't see it as just a roster update. The gameplay has stayed about the same, but then again there wasn't anything terribly wrong with it from '04. They've just added more options especially defensively. I've seen a ton of new tackle animations so far and I really like the hit stick though it's still taking some getting used to.

The storyline has definitely helped to add a new dimension to the offseason. And I really like how they brought in player morale. Guys get upset if they're sitting on the bench or not getting enough touches. And you can no longer just re-sign everyone based on money alone. The newspaper feature is also a nice addition, even though the articles quickly become repetitive, it still gives you a nice weekly overview of what's going on around the league.

I wasn't paying much attention to the radio show until one week I heard Tony Bruno talking about what a great game Michael Vick had last week, throwing for 4 TD's. So I went and checked out Vick's stats and sure enough he did throw 4 TD's. I can live without the radio show, but along with the newspaper it does help add to the overall storyline experience.

08-11-2004, 08:14 PM	#19
MTK \m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Age: 52 Posts: 99,840	I got Madden CE for only $20 after trade-ins :thumb: __________________ Support The Warpath! \| Warpath Shop

08-12-2004, 03:31 PM	#27
MTK \m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Age: 52 Posts: 99,840	Cartwright is way overrated for some reason, I don't quite understand that either. In my second season he's up to a 92 and he made the pro bowl in season one as a FB. __________________ Support The Warpath! \| Warpath Shop

08-12-2004, 04:27 PM	#29
SKINSnCANES Pro Bowl Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: New Jersey Age: 43 Posts: 5,455	yea rock is ranked really high. Chris cooley starts low, but moves up really fast from what I saw in simulation. Im playing my last preseason game now, we'll see waht he goes up. Hes leading my team in receptions, hes got GREAT catchign for a TE, expecially a third round rookie. __________________ "I'm used to winning, coming from the University of Miami. " Clinton Portis

08-13-2004, 08:42 AM	#30
MTK \m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Age: 52 Posts: 99,840	I'm not a huge fan of this years' player models in Madden either, guys are a little too bulked up. Some guys look on target like Arrington, but then someone like Coles is a little too pumped up. I do like the increased definition on the jerseys and the helmets look incredible. As for the playbook I'm also disappointed they didn't tweak it more to Gibbs' style. I was expecting more 'big' sets and more double TE stuff. It's basically last year's playbook with a few minor changes. And a shotgun? C'mon now, maybe they know something we don't but Gibbs didn't run the shotgun the first time around. He tried it out briefly but quickly scrapped it. Even though I wished they had a more Gibbs-like playbook, on the other hand this is the playbook I'm comfortable with so I can't complain too much. All in all I'm happy with '05, I don't see it as just a roster update. The gameplay has stayed about the same, but then again there wasn't anything terribly wrong with it from '04. They've just added more options especially defensively. I've seen a ton of new tackle animations so far and I really like the hit stick though it's still taking some getting used to. The storyline has definitely helped to add a new dimension to the offseason. And I really like how they brought in player morale. Guys get upset if they're sitting on the bench or not getting enough touches. And you can no longer just re-sign everyone based on money alone. The newspaper feature is also a nice addition, even though the articles quickly become repetitive, it still gives you a nice weekly overview of what's going on around the league. I wasn't paying much attention to the radio show until one week I heard Tony Bruno talking about what a great game Michael Vick had last week, throwing for 4 TD's. So I went and checked out Vick's stats and sure enough he did throw 4 TD's. I can live without the radio show, but along with the newspaper it does help add to the overall storyline experience. __________________ Support The Warpath! \| Warpath Shop

08-11-2004, 04:27 PM	#16
d151b Special Teams Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 157	I have to agree with skinsncanes on this one! I bought 2k5, took it home and I initially didn't like it b/c I wasn't used to it. The controls, gameplay etc. But, once I got used to all of that, ..... it sucked even worse. The gameplay is absolutely atrocious!!! And that's all that matters! Anybody who disagrees and thinks ESPN 2k5 is the bomb can keep your swapmeet game and argue your point(s) until you're blue in the face. Just because you're an elitist doesn't make your game better.

08-11-2004, 06:31 PM	#18
That Guy Living Legend Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: VA Age: 42 Posts: 17,620	if 2k5 was on pc i'd try it out, but until then....

08-11-2004, 08:52 PM	#20
redrock-skins Impact Rookie Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Seattle Posts: 783	Madden vs ESPN is like a Coke vs Pepsi or Bush vs Kerry. Everyone likes their choice and no amount of talking is going to sway any views.

08-11-2004, 10:33 PM	#21
illdefined Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: nyc Age: 49 Posts: 2,631	worth a rent of the latest installments no?

08-12-2004, 12:36 PM	#23
illdefined Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: nyc Age: 49 Posts: 2,631	its obvious people really get off on their franchises, stats and progression. yeah sounds like Madden really is clearly better for that apparently. although have you guys seen this Weekly Prep thing in ESPN? its totally nuts, every DAY of the week between games you choose each player's excerise regimen, diet and rehabilitation, then it increases/decreases their stats accordingly. say you want Rasby to slim down and get faster, or Portis to gain some muscle for those Gut runs. the idea is pretty cool.. personally, all this number stuff isn't for me though. when i get a football game, i only play the actual current roster and season (or at least keep the same players). i don't wanna RUN the 'Skins (the only team i'll ever play), i wanna BE the 'Skins, and i pick the game that does the most convincing job of that visually and mechanically. on the FIELD. it's funny. when playing Madden or ESPN, people make me aware that i'm not such a fan of football, as i am a fan of the REDSKINS. don't get me wrong, i'm all about the Xs and Os, but only in relation to the CURRENT Skins and how much i need them to win. i won't play another team! not even a historic 'Skin team!

08-12-2004, 12:55 PM	#24
That Guy Living Legend Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: VA Age: 42 Posts: 17,620	madden 2k5 has a much better skins team, as in espn made the 2k5 skins kinda sucky in comparision.

08-12-2004, 03:24 PM	#26
joecrisp The Starter Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Charlottesville, VA Age: 49 Posts: 1,501	I bought both games the day they became available in stores, and here's my initial impressions of both, with the caveat that I'm not here to get in a pissing contest about how many hours I spend playing either game: I was initially a little uncomfortable with ESPN's controls, which is to be expected, as the only football game I've ever played aside from Tecmo Bowl (still the greatest football game ever made-- even after an all-night kegger, you can still rush for over 400 yards on your buddy!) is the Madden series. But after a few games, the controls became second nature, just like with Madden. IMHO, the graphics and presentation of ESPN are more realistic, though the color saturation is a little extreme. I hate the way players run (read: "waddle") in ESPN, but everything else about the player animations is so cool that I began to overlook the ridiculous running form after a while. I was very impressed with ESPN's attention to detail with the stadiums-- "Washington Redskins Stadium" really looks like FedEx Field, not a drab burgundy-and-gold amalgamation of some programming teams' collective impressions of what a generic Redskins stadium should look like. I was also very happy to see that ESPN made a concerted effort to produce a Redskins playbook that resembles what Gibbs will probably be using this season. Madden pissed me off big-time in this category when I found the same damned playbook in 2005 that they proffered last year as Steve Spurrier's brainchild. The only noticeable difference is the new option routes for the receivers. There are no true "counter-treys" in Madden's Gibbs playbook, and few counter plays in general, whereas the ESPN Gibbs playbook is loaded with them. One problem with both games: there is no true H-back spot on the depth chart, and Rock Cartwright is presented as a fullback. The thing that sucks about that on ESPN's game is that you can't replace Rock on the depth chart with one of the guys that will actually line up at the H-back spot, like Kozlowski, Sellers or Cooley. Nor can you change Rock to a runningback, which is where he belongs. At least in Madden, you can move Rock to runningback on the depth chart and put him in that rotation, while inserting Koz, Cooley and Sellers into both the fullback (H-back) and tight end rotations. I really feel like Madden took a step back (or no step at all) with the overall impression of the graphics, player movement and game presentation. The player's bodies look bloated and 'roided up, making them look rather comically cartoonish. ESPN's players look much more true-to-life, aside from the facemasks, which look kind of goofy for some reason. I also noticed Madden 2005 seems to get a little choppy on me, especially when there's a replay going, or when there's just a lot happening on-screen. Last year's Madden was much better in this area, in my opinion. The overall presentation and gameplay of Madden 2004 was much more fluid, seamless and dynamic... kind of like ESPN 2k5. These are just my impressions of the realism of the gameplay and presentation so far. I haven't done any franchise work with either of them yet, though I'm an avid franchiser, so I'll be moving onto that shortly. Thus far, I'm pretty pissed off about Madden 2005 essentially being a roster update, though I'm hoping the franchise stuff will boost my spirits about spending $50 for said update. ESPN 2k5 has been a very pleasant surprise to this point, and it's very close to being the best $20 I've ever spent (there's a lot you can do as a young guy with $20-- but that's for another forum!). If I don't find anything particularly compelling about Madden 2005's franchise mode, ESPN may have successfully converted me. Madden will have to step up their game big-time next year if they want me to keep paying a premium for their product.

08-12-2004, 04:18 PM	#28
illdefined Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: nyc Age: 49 Posts: 2,631	JoeC, in total and complete agreement with all your points. the players in ESPN look like athletes, Madden players still look dumpy, how can you tell? imagine the Madden player withOUT pads, he'd look like a mutant T. especially the skinny guys. i know it must be a rigging issue (sorry, game dev speak) if Sega could only get rid of that waddle! they go so crazy with the insane animations and animation transitions, only to get the waddle in between. yeah and i mentioned the saturation problem in another post, helps to turn it down a bit on the TV itself heh.

Madden 2005 initial impressions.

Parking Lot