From: cg@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (charles.gavinelli)
Subject: Madden '93 vs Montana '93
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 18:46:37 GMT

	Here is a comparison between Montana '93 and Madden '93.

	First of all, I feel that before I can give you an opinion
on these games, one needs to understand my biases and how I felt
before I even got these games:

	I felt that Madden '92 was the greatest video game ever -
including arcade games. That one game possessed me to buy the
Sega system. I am not a video game junkie. I owned Madden '92
and the first two Montana games. I feel that Madden '92 is loads better than
either Montana game. With regard to the first Montana game, I love the
Vertical view and the passing windows. These aspects make Montana I
better in some regards than Montana II. The talking is annoying. I
don't go for any frills unless they are funny or violent.

	Now that you get a better picture of ME, the reviewer, here
is the review:

Montana '93:

	The players are the most lifelike looking bunch of players
out there. Having unique plays for a team is something I like. 
You can play this game vertically, if you like. Since I like
Madden '92, I like this option.  You can play with a blimp view.
That looks ridiculous, I hate it.

	When I run, the back does not respond quickly enough 
whenever I press the control pad. There is a slight pause once
the back gets the ball so that the computer can zoom in on the back -
I hate that. I wish that they can give you a "roving camera" view
without that momentary pause.

	Passing: H-O-R-R-I-B-L-E!!!!!!!!
I can't begin to tell you how much I hate the passing. When you have the
vertical
view and you send a receiver deep, they are out of the line of vision. How
can you pass to someone you can't see? Bring back the passing windows!
The receiver that the QB is locked into has a yellow arrow flashing over his
head (same as in Montana II). This arrow is tough to pick up.
SEGA threw in a handy passing reference to suppliment the documentation.
To me, it looks like a desperate measure at a last minute improvement
of the passing game.

	Passing with the "Passing Cursor": I tried a couple of times and gave
up.  It makes the Montana II style of passing (yellow arrow flashing over head) 
look great. I'm sure that someone out there likes the passing cursor, but that 
person will be tough to find.

	Documentation: I want stats, stats, stats!!! I want each player
rated in multiple categories. This game rates only SOME players. 

	Overall, this game is better than Montana II because of the
graphics (which doesn't mean much in my book) and because you get more plays
to choose from. The talking idiot is three moves behind (which is better than
being five moves behind as in Montana II). The game is challlenging in that
it is tough to run up the score in Normal and Difficult Mode (I did, however, 
beat the Seahawks as the Raiders in a Season Game (Beginner Mode) 135-0 
(five minute quarters). Once you get behind and you have to play catch up
(i.e.: throw long... or throw at all), you are dead meat because of the
Passing frustrations. I felt that Madden '92 was the best, until...

Madden '93!!

	(opinion after playing for 2 hrs and hearing my brother's input-
he played for three hours).

	THE new king of video games!

	I'm a player rating/stat junkie. I could read the player rankings
for hours. It is interesting for me to see what Madden (actually, it looks like
Madden's sons who did the rankings) thought of a player in a given year.

	I already posted my incident with Electronic Arts where, in Jan of '92,
I gave a critique of the '92 game and offered suggestions. One of my suggestions
implied having teams from different eras compeating. This is in place for the
'93 game (8 greatest ever teams). I wrote a letter to them asking if I could get 
compensated for the idea (I never asked if they thought of it first, I took full

credit :-) ).  They wrote me back and in a nice way said, "no". They never said
that they came up with the idea first, but they never said it was my idea either.
I'll probably never get a straight answer.

	The game play is just like the '92. It is tough to improve a
masterpiece. Madden's voice accentuates certain plays:

QB Sack "Boom, he's on his back"
Hard Hit "He'll remember that number" (...and others)
Poor Pass "That one didn't have a chance"
       (there are others)

As a dig at the Montana game, they state something like "we
have talking you won't want to shut off".

	Running: I played as oakland '76. 30 (Mark Van Eeghan) has
"15 speed". I had a tough time turning the corner. Perhaps it is because
I played "the Madden Greats" (a collection of the greatest players ever
to play the game), perhaps it is because Mark is a FB and he is not
getting the ball pitched out (as a HB would) or perhaps a back with
"15" speed is no longer as dominating as Barry Sanders was in the '92 game.
I hope the last case is the real reason (again, I've only played 2 hrs
worth). As with the '92 game, I will play GOAL LINE, READ, MAN ZONE
when an opponent punts. The FS1 will drop back to run back punts.
For oakland '76, that's the highly rated Jack Tatum. I breezed by,
scoring vs the DALLAS '77 team easily. My gut feeling is that I like the
running, but maybe it is because I was able to score a TD with Tatum :-).
Seriously, if it turns out that a back with 15 speed is not as dominating
as in the '92 game, then the running will be better.

	Passing: It is still the best! I think it is more challenging.
My brother thinks it is much more challenging. The pass routes are identical 
to the '92 game.

	Documentation: When you look at the "speed" rating of a RB or a
WR, it is really a measure of the overall greatness of a back. They
should not call it "speed" (no way is Larry Csonka as fast as Emmit Smith,
but they are both 15 in "speed").

	I like to figure out who was chosen on his All Madden '92
team and his Madden Greats team. What I do for the Madden '92 team is
go back, position by position, and try to figure out who was chosen.
Those players should be a subset of players from the 28 teams. Well,
if they are, the rankings are NOT identical. This is a documentation
problem. 

	Figuring out the Madden Greats is tougher. These guys may
not necessarily be members of one of his Eight Greatest teams of
all time. They probably cannot say "The QB is Joe Montana of the 49ers",
(for leagal reasons) but they can say "the QB played on the San Francisco '81
team, the San Francisco '82 team, ... and the San Francisco '91 team".

	Bugs: I cannot get the STOP CLOCK play to work. If it turns
out that it only works with 2 minutes or less to go, then it is a
documentation bug.

	There were no personal foul calls in the games I played.

	By the way, here are my scores from yesterday, 5 Min
quarters, Home team Natural Grass, no wind (I was oakland 76)

Oakland 76 28  Dallas 77 0
Oakland 76  6  Madden Greats 23   (first loss vs computer in 1/2 a year)
Oakland 76 20  Madden Greats 0    (revenge is sweet!)

Conclusion:

	Madden '93 is the best thing going today.

	If I had to design a better game, I'd start with Madden
'93, add the Montana '93 playbook, replace the player with a
Montana '93 digitized player and add more violence.

Player gets head knocked off on a hard hit, then puts it back on his
shoulders and jogs to the huddle

If there are any personal foul calls, have Jim Tunney's voice call
a "giving him the buisness" call


================================================================================

Now, lets start a long thread....

Player hints!

Anybody have any hints on either '93 game?! What works for
you? Anybody have any hints of any type for Montana '93?



Charlie