NCAA Football 09 Postmortem - Operation Sports

Feature Article

NCAA Football 09 Postmortem

Submitted on: 01/13/2009 by Christian McLeod

It is the perfect time to revisit EA Sports' NCAA Football 09 and discuss the game in postmortem fashion. NCAA 09 did a lot of things right both on and off the field. I wanted to focus specifically on what 09 brought to the table this season, and how these features held up over the course of the 2008 college season. I know there are many of you out there still playing the game -- and many who will not agree with what I have to say -- but as of this week, I feel it is important to at least "officially" end our NCAA Football 09 discussion, and begin our NCAA Football 10 discussions.

Plus, it is always fun to take a look back at a title nearly seven months after release because, at this point, most people can speak more calmly about a title that is not so fresh in their minds. Is the honeymoon officially over? How did NCAA 09 withstand the test of time?

NCAA performed as good as Florida this year - there was a bump or two, but it was largely rather good.

Graphics/Presentation

Graphically, NCAA Football 09 was beautiful. The game was finally able to nail the look of the college athlete, and subtle details such as flak jackets, the corporate logo on visors, back bars and the different helmet options added a lot visually. The fields also looked great with EA's touted grass-rendering engine showing some unique differences at certain venues (Oregon, Boise State, The Coliseum). The authentic stadiums also looked great, and had enough small details to keep even the most rabid fans happy -- assuming, of course, their stadium made it into the game. Even the sidelines were a visual upgrade over NCAA 08, and had enough detail to create a sideline that was at least passable.

Visually, the only real sore spot would have to be the crowd graphics. It was yet another year of blocky, PS1-style fans and crowd interactions. This really is not that big of a deal considering how much the crowd actually plays into a game of NCAA 09, but after seeing some great looking crowds in games such as NHL 09 and NBA 2K9, this aspect certainly stands out more than ever.

From a presentation standpoint, NCAA 09 turned in yet another weak (or should I say, Notre Dame-like) performance. For the third straight year on next-gen consoles, gamers had to live without any type of pregame Gameday festivities, bowl patches, special bowl presentation, highlight shows of any type, pride stickers that actually equate to on-field performance, and many of the other small nuances that fans of the franchise took for granted during the last generation.

Gamers also did not witness any further integration of the ESPN license in NCAA 09 -- other than the ESPN Radio updates and ESPN Motion capabilities within a separate menu.

Retrospective Review Score for Graphics/Presentation: B

The graphics were certainly a step up in NCAA Football 09.

Gameplay

Here is a category that caused some of the biggest forum uproar of 2008. Before NCAA 09 even released, there was a firestorm of criticism about the game's higher than average CPU completion percentage, broken gameplay sliders, broken special teams coverage, and a lack of CPU/human pass rush.

Eventually, two patches (one and two) were released that helped address some issues on defense, fixed special teams coverage, and fixed the sliders. However, there was never an official confirmation from EA that the patches corrected the high completion percentages and lack of a pass rush. Some gamers reported the problems had been fixed, while others reported never seeing a difference between pre- and post-patch gameplay.

My personal experience with the gameplay was very positive. I did have issues with the CPU completion percentage when I first purchased the game, but I slowly began to learn how to combat this by tricking the programming. Early on, it seemed that if you played a man-to-man defense you were able to magically start shutting down the CPU's pass game, no matter what play the A.I. ran. I also had a difficult time generating any type of pressure on the CPU pre-patch. While both of these issues were frustrating early on, I still did enjoy the wide-open gameplay and college football pacing. Once the second patch was released, however, the gameplay really hit a high for me.

I was one of the gamers who felt the patch did fix zone coverage enough to lower the CPU completion percentage. In other words, the patch made my players engage in better coverage. This in turn, allowed me to generate more pressure on the CPU QB, and I began seeing myself get 3-5 sacks per game with powerhouses like USC and Florida, and 1-2 sacks per game with weaker schools like Purdue and Baylor. To me these were realistic enough numbers, especially when you consider the fact that you really do not see that many sacks in your average NCAA game -- now imagine a real NCAA game where only five minute quarters are played.

NCAA 09 was the first NCAA game since NCAA 04 that really made me pay attention to defense post-patch. I found that I really had to mix my coverages up this season, pay attention to offensive adjustments, and even hot route my defensive players to combat mismatches recognized at the line. Completion percentages could still be high, depending on the strength of your defense as a whole. Nevertheless, when I look at Tim Tebow, Colt McCoy, Sam Bradford, Grahm Herrill and even Nate Davis's completion percentages this season, NCAA did not produce passing percentages that were as unrealistic as a number of gamers have complained about.

The gameplay had some drawbacks but was largely good.

All of the defensive strategies mentioned above are techniques I never had to employ before, because it seemed like the past four iterations in the series have allowed you to play lazy defense (i.e. you pick a play and your CPU teammates do all the work for you). Post-patch defense was really a lot of fun to play, and it was extremely rewarding to sack a QB or make a big play all because of an adjustment you made at the line. There are still times when I will run into an impenetrable CPU-controlled offensive line, but this happens perhaps 1-2 plays per game to me now post-patch, as opposed to all game pre-patch.

On the offensive side of the ball, NCAA played great. New left-stick juke movements made a world of difference, allowing you to effectively hit your holes in the ground game and evade tacklers in the open field. Offense was a lot of fun this year and more wide open than in past years. Some people really liked this, myself included, but some despised this change. Personally, I felt the game conveyed the offensive-style of college football better than it had during the past few years. After observing this year's 2008 college football season, I could not help but think that NCAA 09's offense nailed college offenses spot on.

The NCAA in real life is becoming more of a wide-open league offensively, and I think NCAA 09 did a great job of conveying that sense of explosive offense. Face it people, NCAA 09 allowed you to set your offense up as a Florida/Texas Tech spread attack, a USC pro-style rushing/aerial attack, or even as an Alabama pound-the-rock-on-the-ground attack. You could run the style of offense that best suited your play style in NCAA 09, and there was no better feeling in Dynasty mode than recruiting kids that would fit into your style of offense.

The main downside of NCAA 09's offense was that once your team's offense was rated an A- or higher, you could pick apart pretty much any team not rated an A on defense. However, this is hardly a game-breaker, as it would be like not rooting for Florida or USC because their offenses are too efficient. I know gamers want a challenge, but there just comes a certain time when you build a monster of a program. You cannot be upset if you are dominant at that point; you just have to move on to a weaker school.

The gameplay of NCAA 09 took a ton of heat, and is still being scrutinized by many gamers out there. To me, this criticism is widely unwarranted, especially after the second patch. As I said before, NCAA 09 is the type of game where you need to adjust strategy manually, and cannot just rely on your CPU teammates to make every big play for you. I realize many in the sim and 2K camps are going to have a field day with this statement, but I feel NCAA 09's gameplay was the pinnacle of the series. It is not perfect, but it is the best we have seen so far.

Retrospective Review Score for Gameplay: A

The pinnacle of awesomeness in college football.

Online Options

NCAA 09 gave us one of the greatest online modes in sports-gaming history: Online Dynasty mode. Not only could you compete in a full-fledged dynasty with your buddies online, but the game allowed the CPU to take full control over teams that were not user controlled. This was a first for online leagues on consoles, and drastically extended the replay factor within the mode. Another first for console online leagues was the fact that everything that could be done in an offline dynasty could be done in an online dynasty.

Until NCAA 09, it seemed like an online league feature would always have a set of limitations that differentiated online from offline franchises (no trades, no stat tracking, and so forth).

Online Dynasty is incredibly addictive, and it is one of the best online features we have ever seen.

Outside of the Online Dynasty mode, NCAA 09 offered us the first mostly lag-free online versus mode I have ever experienced in the series. Gaming with a buddy across the country was no different than if he/she was sitting in the same room as you -- this was a huge plus in my eyes as recent years have been a test of patience due to lag. The addition of the "Online Game of the Week" lobby was also a huge winner in my book, as it kept the weekly matchups fresh, and kept me coming back weekly to create my own history.

Retrospective Review Score for Online Options: A+

There is something to be said about the Online Options in NCAA - some of the best out there.

Feature Set

The final aspect of NCAA 09 I wanted to touch on was the feature set. NCAA 09 included one of the more robust feature sets that we have seen in the series. We were given a nice set of mini-games, a full-featured four year Campus Legend mode, a silly Mascot Game option and your run of the mill Practice modes.

The mini-games and mascot challenge are time wasters. They are not revolutionary, but I am not going to complain that they were added. Now, if you told me that the reason NCAA 09 was missing bowl patches was because of these modes being included, I would have a beef with the game. Assuming that is not the case, I am cool with the modes being in the game, and give Tiburon some credit for giving us more game, vs less game as has been the norm the past few years.

Campus Legend mode is not necessarily the strongest feature in the game, but it was solid enough to keep you busy for at least a little bit. The A.I. of your teammates was awful, and the mode got repetitive quick, but at least the mode was included for those who are big fans of the "Be a Pro" formula. I will not complain too much about a feature that works relatively well and provides entertainment for some.

Overall, I was pretty impressed with the feature set in NCAA 09. It added to the overall package of the game, and extended replay value for more casual players.

Retrospective Review Score for Feature Set: B+

Next year, hopefully NCAA Football 10 performs better than the Big 12 South in Bowls.

NCAA 09 has provided me with hours upon hours of gameplay over the last seven months. As a big fan of the series who had been letdown by NCAA 07 and NCAA 08, this year's game made me believe that the franchise is once again headed back towards its last-generation greatness. NCAA 09 was not perfect and needs some work -- many would say more work than I think it needs -- but at the very least, NCAA Football 09 was finally a reinvention of the franchise for the current-gen consoles.

The Christian McLeod Postmortem Review Score for NCAA Football 09: A-

NCAA Football 09 Videos

Member Comments

# 41 Pared @ 01/14/09 03:21 PM

OS Writing Staff,

You guys have to be in a very difficult situation here. Between the numerous glowing, positive articles regarding NCAA (that was blasted by the community early on) to this, I don't think you can "win" unless you are overly critical of this and Madden.

I empathize with the situation you're in.

I think you can say you enjoy the game for whatever reason... but I honestly feel that there are plenty of valid, legitimate comments being made and elaborated on how the game plays and the strategies involved that ultimately lead to a negative, un-enjoyable experience for some gamers here.

Perhaps an article on the community's expectations for '10 would balance out how some feel about the future of this series.

# 42 fistofrage @ 01/14/09 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pared


	OS Writing Staff, You guys have to be in a very difficult situation here. Between the numerous glowing, positive articles regarding NCAA (that was blasted by the community early on) to this, I don't think you can "win" unless you are overly critical of this and Madden. I empathize with the situation you're in. I think you can say you enjoy the game for whatever reason... but I honestly feel that there are plenty of valid, legitimate comments being made and elaborated on how the game plays and the strategies involved that ultimately lead to a negative, un-enjoyable experience for some gamers here. Perhaps an article on the community's expectations for '10 would balance out how some feel about the future of this series.

If you didn't know any better, they would appear to be on the take....

# 43 AuburnAlumni @ 01/14/09 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rudyjuly2


	Your opinion on this game went from rage to high praise to rage right from the beginning. I felt you blew a lot of stuff out of proportion when this game was released. Chris can have his opinion and it's one you shared at one point. For a game that sucked, I'm surprised you played it much but weren't you in a ton of dyansties as well?

The high praise came from sliders working so that I could get a realistic pass rush on varsity..or close to it.

The problem is...once I got into a few weeks of playing post patch...I saw all of the ugliness on varsity start to rear its ugly head...such as the lack of a good CPU playcalling AI, and inability of the CPU to stop me.

Heisman is still a cheese/cheat fest all the way through.

And yes...I was in a bunch of dynasties...because I LOVE college football and I tried and tried to give this game a chance.

I still have dynasties going but the constant "55-52" Human vs Human games, the fact that I had a game I beat Florida 98-0 and then got it recorded as a loss, the fact that anyone who has played this game for longer than a week can consistently destroy the computer on All American or lower..and the only reason on Heisman that games are close is by flat out cheating Computer play (greased pig animations galore, Robo QB, zero pass rush, etc.)

None of what I have said is blown out proportion. If you doubt it...see how many folks are getting these ludicrous numbers in their games 65-52, 76-10, 66-27, etc. See how many folks have had games turn from Ws to Ls. See how many folks had guys win Awards then transfer to Western Kentucky.

The game is severely flawed. The only reason I stick it in my console is a)I'm a college football nut and there is no other option b) the comraderie I have with my online buddies.

# 44 Pared @ 01/14/09 03:31 PM

fist,

I think that comment would be very unfair, no matter who made it.

But I can understand those who could read some of these articles regarding NCAA and feel they are almost as out of touch with what other gamers think as those developing the game.

Madden and NCAA are consistently grouped and discussed as being EA's worst products this year. I don't like to get hung up on specific portions of an article/review/comment (ok, I'm lying here; I do it all the time) but I just can't agree with anyone giving NCAA a grade of "A" in any area outside of Online Dynasty.

I would say that single mode saved the game for a large portion of the NCAA Online community.

# 45 fistofrage @ 01/14/09 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pared


	fist, I think that comment would be very unfair, no matter who made it. But I can understand those who could read some of these articles regarding NCAA and feel they are almost as out of touch with what other gamers think as those developing the game. Madden and NCAA are consistently grouped and discussed as being EA's worst products this year. I don't like to get hung up on specific portions of an article/review/comment (ok, I'm lying here; I do it all the time) but I just can't agree with anyone giving NCAA a grade of "A" in any area outside of Online Dynasty. I would say that single mode saved the game for a large portion of the NCAA Online community.

Maybe unfair, but I don't think so. I think these guys are in a tough spot like you said, but I also think in some ways they are also our voice. To the outside, I am sure they are considered the "experts" on the subject. Why else would they be writing on it? To say the gameplay is an A is calling it just short of perfect in the 95-97 range. That would indicate EA college football is a minor tweak away from being A+ or perfect.

EA would be quick to point to this review and for their own agenda, equate the OS perception with this article and deem the entire site gave gameplay an A.

I may have been harsh, but its frustrating. At a time when we need people to reach out and communicate our concerns with EA so we can get a complete product once in our lifetime(because we'll be back to square 1 with the next next gen in a couple years), we end up getting someone who has give them near perfect marks in gameplay. Where would EA's motivation to improve gameplay now come from?

# 46 Pared @ 01/14/09 03:55 PM

I agree that they are our voice, in a sense. That is why I suggested an article highlight the issues the community has with the game. I think this is just one individual's take on the game but much like you said can be interpreted as to being the general consensus of OS.

That, IMHO, would be a shame.

I just feel claiming they are on the take is unfair as someone may honestly feel the gameplay is an A. Would I or others agree with them? No... but that doesn't mean they don't have a right to their opinion.

But yes, when it becomes the voice of the community I can understand the resulting worry and frustrations.

# 47 fistofrage @ 01/14/09 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pared


	I agree that they are our voice, in a sense. That is why I suggested an article highlight the issues the community has with the game. I think this is just one individual's take on the game but much like you said can be interpreted as to being the general consensus of OS. That, IMHO, would be a shame. I just feel claiming they are on the take is unfair as someone may honestly feel the gameplay is an A. Would I or others agree with them? No... but that doesn't mean they don't have a right to their opinion. But yes, when it becomes the voice of the community I can understand the resulting worry and frustrations.

Exactly, that's why I said that they are in a hard place. Everyone should be entitled to share their opinion, but when an OS writer puts his opinion in an article, it can be deemed the consensus view of the community.

I would imagine that less than 10% of the active community would grade this game an A in gameplay, but EA could spin this article in an entirely different position.

Also, I don't feel that the reviewer could have possibly tested out our concerns. For the fact alone that speed kills and after 1 year of recruiting 99 speed 2* receivers, you can with the national title on Heisman with anyone. That's a freaking game killer if you allow yourself to recruit speed. The AI not throwing deep, the pick 6's, the AI run game non existant unless you totally up their ability and lower yours, the cement shoe shuffle QB choice run over and over again by the AI, the automatic 55 yard FG's, Oline/Dline interaction, lack of penalties, the list goes on an on.

If you are a reviewer, don't you take points off for this?

An A rating means nearing perfection, 1 tweak here or there and we have reached the gold standard.....Can you honestly find a reason why somebody would make that claim? And have it speak for a whole community?

# 48 ChaseB @ 01/14/09 04:38 PM

I'll preface this by saying I'm not a football guy -- I don't really like to watch it etc. -- and I don't enjoy Madden or NCAA all that much, but I obviously feel compelled to talk about this sort of backlash, just like I was after I got back from E3 and noticed the uproar from the original NCAA review.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fistofrage


	But he has a point. What if the EA programmers are sitting around right now trying to figure out what they can do to appease the OS critics. I know, I know.....But just imagine they read our posts are take the constructive criticism. And then EA Smithers goes running up to them with the review. "I think you'll be pleased sir." "Exxxxcellent, apparantly we don't have to change a thing, OS just gave our gameplay an A. And to think, Johnson, you were going to work this weekend trying to fix that pick 6 issue they were complaining about. Go enjoy that new movie you wanted to see instead".

I don't downplay the possible effects OS can have on a broader sports-gaming audience, truly I don't. I do believe we can be a "beacon" for sports developers and all that, but I also realize that these developers are not robots, and they take in more than simply what a front page or review says. After all, they are here in the community and so they have to know many of you are not happy. It would be nearly impossible not to notice this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pared


	OS Writing Staff, You guys have to be in a very difficult situation here. Between the numerous glowing, positive articles regarding NCAA (that was blasted by the community early on) to this, I don't think you can "win" unless you are overly critical of this and Madden. I empathize with the situation you're in. I think you can say you enjoy the game for whatever reason... but I honestly feel that there are plenty of valid, legitimate comments being made and elaborated on how the game plays and the strategies involved that ultimately lead to a negative, un-enjoyable experience for some gamers here. Perhaps an article on the community's expectations for '10 would balance out how some feel about the future of this series.

Definitely the staff response has been more positive than negative when it comes to NCAA this year. I also do not personally poo-poo the valid complaints being made about the game. As an outsider, I do think a lot of the positive staff vibes have to do with playing with friends in an online dynasty. I know I sometimes play games that are not all that great and have a good time them because I am playing with friends, and so we are BSing as we play or whatever. And at the same time, I can't tell the writers to be negative just to be negative -- unless it's actually for part of a story aka playing devil's advocate. I don't think the staff has been universally positive either though. I know Patrick Williams wrote a "negative" NCAA article a bit ago discussing his unhappiness with the game, and the fact that the patch was too little too late.

But returning to the point, before the "postmortem" went up, the day before we did post the consolidation process article, which was meant for people to post their biggest expectations for the following year, so we did at the very least that. Having a whole article devoted to the comments within that growing thread isn't a terrible idea either. And I can also say that as I edited Christian's article, I knew there would be anger and all that -- because hey I remember the review thread and having to talk about all this then. Frankly, I sort of dreaded it. But I think as one of the editors it's important to let people write about what they want, because otherwise it wouldn't be good in the first place. Christian was passionate about writing this article, and so an editor let him do it.

However, this is the first "postmortem" we have really done, and we plan to do them again moving forward. So, this is another learning experience, and I think I have learned from this, and in the future I think we will put more weight behind postmortems. As it stands, it was Christian's opinion and Christian's grades. The next postmortem we do will probably be by the "OS Staff" and will have opinions from multiple staff members, so we can better gauge the response of the entire staff -- or perhaps we won't put grades on the various aspects of the game, it's up for discussion. That way, at least the whole staff will either be berated or praised or whatever, instead of Christian having to take these body shots for his personal opinion. As of now, I think you should blame me before Christian, because I am the one who allowed the article to go up, he simply wrote it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fistofrage


	If you didn't know any better, they would appear to be on the take....

I am swimming in EA printed money as I write this response.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith121212


	I'm never wasting my time reading a "ChrisS" article again after this garbage.

It was written by Christian -- "Bumble" on the forums. Chris just posted the article, like he always does for any written articles.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fistofrage


	Maybe unfair, but I don't think so. I think these guys are in a tough spot like you said, but I also think in some ways they are also our voice. To the outside, I am sure they are considered the "experts" on the subject. Why else would they be writing on it? To say the gameplay is an A is calling it just short of perfect in the 95-97 range. That would indicate EA college football is a minor tweak away from being A+ or perfect. EA would be quick to point to this review and for their own agenda, equate the OS perception with this article and deem the entire site gave gameplay an A. I may have been harsh, but its frustrating. At a time when we need people to reach out and communicate our concerns with EA so we can get a complete product once in our lifetime(because we'll be back to square 1 with the next next gen in a couple years), we end up getting someone who has give them near perfect marks in gameplay. Where would EA's motivation to improve gameplay now come from?

It was perhaps worded a bit harshly/unfairly but it is honestly a valid point in some regards. We do have input with developers at certain points. I know when I preview games, sometimes developers will ask what I think of the game or what the reaction will be from the community once the game comes out. Now most of the time, I don't think it's my "job" to tell them right then what I think of the game -- my "job" is to tell you all first what I think of it so I can remain as fair as possible without being swayed one way or the other. Then, later perhaps I will e-mail the developers or simply let them read the preview or something else along those lines. But, I don't want this point to lose focus: I do think it's important to tell them what can be improved upon at some point. But it's not solely my job to do so.

You all have done a great job giving the developers advice for months now. Developers have been around these parts and you guys have given tons of input and I think the EA developers are deeply interested in what you all have said. Plus, I would guess this year there will be some full-time OS "Community Leaders" like there are now for most of EA Canada's sports games/Sony Sports -- if it has not already happened, like I said at the start of this I am not an avid football follower, which does somewhat include the latest community info.

I don't think Christian's beliefs about the game would make them simply stop working, even if I do kind of think it would be rather awesome if OS had that much pull. Being able to start and stop development improvements at the drop of a hat would be quite a powerful tool.

# 49 fistofrage @ 01/14/09 04:46 PM

^^^Thanks for the response Chase. Believe me, I understand that you guys are in a tough position and will take heat no matter what you write.

But I also appreciate that you understood where I was coming from in my response that its hard to hold EA to task when they get an A in gameplay from OS.

# 50 Pared @ 01/14/09 04:58 PM

Bumble wrote this? Between these comments and the NBA Live comments he really enjoys causing quite a stir, eh?

I think you hit a great point about allowing this sort of article to include multiple opinions on the topic being discussed. It would allow readers to discern who they trust (or don't) regarding a sports video game.

Perhaps even allow a few forum goers to provide their input as well.

# 51 ChaseB @ 01/14/09 05:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pared


	Bumble wrote this? Between these comments and the NBA Live comments he really enjoys causing quite a stir, eh? I think you hit a great point about allowing this sort of article to include multiple opinions on the topic being discussed. It would allow readers to discern who they trust (or don't) regarding a sports video game. Perhaps even allow a few forum goers to provide their input as well.

I know, he is such an EA fanboy this year, jeez.

Jokes aside, yea I agree with you for sure about how to deal with these going ahead.

# 52 ftball11 @ 01/14/09 10:12 PM

Here is my quick "postmortem" review of '09.

Graphics/Presentation: D

The stadiums and players look great, but the in-game animations are a little stale, too "last-gen" for my taste. Presentation? There is no presentation or atmosphere. Every game you play is just another football game.

Gameplay: D

I am not going to go into too much detail here, these boards are filled with the obvious problems. Over all, the gameplay feels more like a PS-1 game rather than a "next-gen" game. '09 reminded me too much of Gameday.

Feature Set: D
Not enough features, Dynasty Mode makes absolutely no sense most of the time and I won't even go into the problems with recruiting. On-line play is the only feature that saved this game. This game does have replay value, only because it is the only college game on the market.

Overall: D

I have been playing football games for 16 years, '09 is not the worst game I've ever played, but it doesn't even crack my Top 20. Definitely not worth the price tag.

# 53 jyoung @ 01/14/09 11:28 PM

I think people would be a lot less forgiving of the numerous flaws in this series if it didn't have the online dynasty feature this year, because the gameplay to me still doesn't play anything like real football, and the presentation is second only to Madden in terms of being the worst in sports gaming.

But if the author enjoyed the game, I really don't have any problem with him saying so.

At the end of the day, it's his opinion on the game, and he presents it fairly well, even if I completely disagree with many of the grades.

# 54 cameldunginit2 @ 01/15/09 04:13 AM

Campus Legend was broken. It needs to be retooled to reflect a hurry-up offense at the end of each half. The QB needed to make more changes at the line and God forbid he audible to another play entirely. The QB camera angle doesn't allow the player to see the receivers. It would be awesome IMO if they ported the game from NCAA 07 for ps2/xbox to next gen. Those games were awesome and had good mini games that actually had something to do with football. Madden also needs to port to next gen from 06. Just my opinion.

# 55 Bumble14 @ 01/15/09 09:11 AM

All-

I just wanted to clarify this article as it has garnered a lot of passionate response from our community (which is what OS is all about).

The point of this retrospective review was more to touch on the things that NCAA 09 did right, before we start tearing the game down in our wishlist threads for NCAA 2010. I felt it was important to talk about the positives in 09, as we can not fully know where we want to go in the future without knowing where we have already been.

Sure, the game is not perfect, and there are always areas to improve on for us rabid sports gamers- but I really enjoyed NCAA 09 this year. The game was very enjoyable, and the scores that I posted were based on my enjoyement with the product in the noted areas.

Also, please be aware that a retrospective postmortem review is not the official OS review of the game. As I said before, the purpose of this article was to touch on NCAA 09 one last time, talk about what it did right, what was enjoyable about it, and to give an overview of what exactly it brought to the table this season for the NCAA Football genre.

Postmortem=game officially dead- time to tear the game apart, and put our improvements into the OS Consolidated Wishlist that we already have posted. I believe you will even find some posts from "Mr. NCAA 09 lover", Christian McLeod/Bumble14 in there as well ;-) You will find I love this series just as much as many of you, and am just as passionate about improvements in certain areas.

# 56 bangpow @ 01/15/09 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pared


	I agree that they are our voice, in a sense. That is why I suggested an article highlight the issues the community has with the game. I think this is just one individual's take on the game but much like you said can be interpreted as to being the general consensus of OS. That, IMHO, would be a shame. I just feel claiming they are on the take is unfair as someone may honestly feel the gameplay is an A. Would I or others agree with them? No... but that doesn't mean they don't have a right to their opinion. But yes, when it becomes the voice of the community I can understand the resulting worry and frustrations.

Actually, Pared. A LOT of these issues were brought up at the NCAA Community Event that took place last year.....before the game was released. Like, a couple months before, if I remember correctly.

There's no need for a community article.

# 57 Pared @ 01/15/09 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bangpow


	Actually, Pared. A LOT of these issues were brought up at the NCAA Community Event that took place last year.....before the game was released. Like, a couple months before, if I remember correctly. There's no need for a community article.

I know that but I'm making the comments in reference to the articles that get posted at OS...

I know all about the community day "fiasco" that went on.

Hopefully the scope of community day changes as well as what the "suits" deem as what is necessary to sell an NCAA football game this year.

# 58 rudyjuly2 @ 01/15/09 12:55 PM

It's funny how the Show had complaints about the game being too easy last year for the elite gamer. So they created an extra difficulty level called Legend to provide a challenge to anyone out there.

NCAA '09 had similar complaints by quite a few of the good gamers on the board here (fistofrage, Keyser Sose, stewaat, etc.) where they couldn't make the game hard enough on Heisman. Perhaps with a much improved slider system, they could also create a Legend difficulty level to provide a ridiculous set of challenges for those people.

# 59 Pared @ 01/15/09 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rudyjuly2


	It's funny how the Show had complaints about the game being too easy last year for the elite gamer. So they created an extra difficulty level called Legend to provide a challenge to anyone out there. NCAA '09 had similar complaints by quite a few of the good gamers on the board here (fistofrage, Keyser Sose, stewaat, etc.) where they couldn't make the game hard enough on Heisman. Perhaps with a much improved slider system, they could also create a Legend difficulty level to provide a ridiculous set of challenges for those people.

I hate being negative but this series has always shown a "harder" difficulty usually results in MORE unrealistic play by the CPU.

# 60 bangpow @ 01/15/09 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rudyjuly2


	It's funny how the Show had complaints about the game being too easy last year for the elite gamer. So they created an extra difficulty level called Legend to provide a challenge to anyone out there. NCAA '09 had similar complaints by quite a few of the good gamers on the board here (fistofrage, Keyser Sose, stewaat, etc.) where they couldn't make the game hard enough on Heisman. Perhaps with a much improved slider system, they could also create a Legend difficulty level to provide a ridiculous set of challenges for those people.

There's a difference between a game being hard and a game being unrealistically hard.

It would also be one thing to win games based on good playcalling and a sound gameplan and another to score at will due to bad pursuit angles and brain dead AI.

Everybody has their opinions of the game, but when you look at this article objectively with a knowledge of the game they are talking about, there's no way it gets an A. If the gameplay was even in the range of an A or even a B, there wouldn't be such polarizing opinions to debate that.

« Previous 1 234 5 6 Next »

More Links