Is Madden's Gameflow a Revolution or a Gimmick?

[Johnny_Rep]

A complete gimmick. Entirely defeating the object of the game. How on earth can the cpu pick better plays than I can. I'm studying my opponents tendencies, I have a sense of what he can and can't do and what he likes to do in certain situations. Gameflow does not. I can also set him up, run different plays out of the same formations in similar circumstances. It's designed for people who don't want to think about what they're doing.

Sadly, the game this year doesn't particularly punish that.

Gameplanning could potentially be useful, but only if I could watch hours of my next franchise opponents 'gamefilm'. Otherwise, it's a farce.

Incidentally, and yes I am somewhat disillusioned. I do not recall a single person, with all their thoughts, ideas (some of them excellent) and criticisms (many of them justified) on this board last year say 'What we need is a system that calls plays for you'.

Not one.

[Romeclone]

Total Gimmick. It's kind of funny if you did this year with all this stuff... I know when the pitch line for this years Madden was Faster, Quicker, Deeper or whatever we were in for some laugh's.

For the record, I really like Madden this year and am enjoying the game a lot. But this post is about gameflow. It's silly and I turned it off durring the demo. Have not even had it on once with my retail copy. Why? The whole reason I play madden is so I can play the human chess game of football. I like to sit there in between plays and think about what defense they are going to come out in, what play i might run, which player I want to get the ball to. For the CPU to do all that is just silly; defeats the whole reason I play the game.

Different strokes for different folks I guess. For some I quess it might be apealing but for me it's just silly. And for those that said ask Madden is better, I agree. There you get a few more choices and you get to hear Madden...Yes!

[sportyguyfl31]

Still using it, still loving it.

Combined with gameplanning, it works very well.

Gameplanning allows me to focus on the plays that I am going to use.

There are plays that i NEVER call, and would never consider calling, so why not filter them out, and load up on plays that I actually want to run?

Plus I have my audibles...if I have to check out of a play.

It really works pretty smoothly. If I like the play, Im able to strat pad immediately, and make a couple of adjustments (im totally comfy with strat pad now), and I can pull up either a formation audible or one of my set audibles, seamlessly.


I have no complaints.

I hope they take it deeper in the future and allow us to implement substitution packages based on down/distance...and plays based on more specific situations.

[silence1206]

I would hate gameflow for online or head-to-head gaming. But, I exclusively play offline franchise. And I find that gameflow is good for two reasons.

1) It speeds up the game

2) It levels the playing field between myself and AI, as we now have equal standing in how plays are called.

[bgeno]

Quote: Originally Posted by RaiderKtulu

Not exactly... It does mean faster games, but not the way you're saying. If you're using the accelerated clock, the clock is going to run down to 20 seconds every time, regardless of whether you call your play at 30 on the clock or instantly at 40 with gameflow. It doesn't change the total number of plays called. What it does do, is save somewhere between 5 and 15 seconds of real time per play.. except during the final 2 minutes where it actually makes it even easier to call too many plays. So, going for simulation - around 120 plays per game... it'll generally save somewhere between 10 and 30 minutes, depending on how fast of a playcaller you normally are.

I could be wrong, but doesn't accelerated clock run off the set amount of time, not jump to a certain point? Say you set it for 20 seconds, doesn't it run off 20 seconds once you pick your play? Not jump strait to 20 seconds? For example, if you pick your play with 32 left on the play clock, it runs the clock down to 12 as opposed to jumping to the 20 second mark? If it just jumps strait to a specific time that you set, then, yes, you're right. But if it's a run-off, then my point still stands.

[JaymeeAwesome]

Quote: Originally Posted by bgeno

I could be wrong, but doesn't accelerated clock run off the set amount of time, not jump to a certain point? Say you set it for 20 seconds, doesn't it run off 20 seconds once you pick your play? Not jump strait to 20 seconds? For example, if you pick your play with 32 left on the play clock, it runs the clock down to 12 as opposed to jumping to the 20 second mark? If it just jumps strait to a specific time that you set, then, yes, you're right. But if it's a run-off, then my point still stands.

The accelerated clock runs the time off from the original play clock which is 40. So no matter how many seconds you let it run before hand 15 seconds will bring you to 25, 20 will bring you to 20, and 25 will bring you to 15 seconds.

[Flamehead]

Well, I tried it a few more times. After my initial thought was "not bad", I'm come back to realizing it's just not my cup of tea. Just too much control out of my hands. Like someone else said, I have the gameplan in my head and call plays accordingly.

Just not a needed feature, IMO. But we can turn it off so win/win for everyone I suppose.

[roadman]

Quote: Originally Posted by Flamehead

Just not a needed feature, IMO.

I disagree with this statement. I don't know if you went in and changed the offensive and defensive game plans on your own, but if you did, that would give you a sense of picking your own play. Also, this is part of the weekly experience of the NFL during the season. NFL coaches have about 35 plays to choose from every Sunday.

I just think we need to see more features to it. Stunts, assignments, etc......

Game planning is part of the NFL and should be in the game in some shape or form. Like you said, though, there is an option to go back to the old way.