Donny Moore, the 'Madden Ratings Czar', Leaving EA

[SECElit3]

My ask is that we return to making this thread a ratings discussion and not a "Dan" discussion. I am stepping out.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Phobia]

Quote: Originally Posted by SECElit3

My ask is that we return to making this thread a ratings discussion and not a "Dan" discussion. I am stepping out. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Mutually agreed

[N51_rob]

This thread is on its last legs. Way easier to just close it. Consider this the final warning for everyone. This community is suppose to be better than this.

[charter04]

I think it comes down to personal preference. Some lean more toward the current ratings system. It's largely based on ratings being adjusted based on stats/production.

The other system would be one largely based on scouting data that's separate from production.

I prefer the second method.

I understand why people like the first method. It keeps guys in a certain order based on the production of the season.

I just think the product is better if you rate players as they are based on scouts opinions. Clearly those opinions are not 100%. They miss sometimes. I trust their opinion more than stats or the casual fan eye test though.

So what ever EA decides to do I personally hope they go with a guy like Dan or at very least go the scouting data route.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ggsimmonds]

Quote: Originally Posted by charter04

I think it comes down to personal preference. Some lean more toward the current ratings system. It's largely based on ratings being adjusted based on stats/production. The other system would be one largely based on scouting data that's separate from production. I prefer the second method. I understand why people like the first method. It keeps guys in a certain order based on the production of the season. I just think the product is better if you rate players as they are based on scouts opinions. Clearly those opinions are not 100%. They miss sometimes. I trust their opinion more than stats or the casual fan eye test though. So what ever EA decides to do I personally hope they go with a guy like Dan or at very least go the scouting data route. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I disagree with strictly using scouting data for two reasons.

1. Madden is not a scouting tool. It is a video game where the goal is to replicate real life results. Because of this production should have a larger influence on ratings than what a player may potentially be able to do.

2. More importantly, Madden is not deep or complex enough to utilize scouting data. The AI is not advanced enough either. In switching to scouting data I fear that there would be many issues. The use of scouting data would require much of the game to be rebuilt. E.g. scouting is largely focused on technique yet technique is completely absent from the game currently.

But mostly though I feel as if there is a false dichotomy present. All sources should be utilized. Why must we choose scouting over production? Use both.

[DCEBB2001]

Quote: Originally Posted by ggsimmonds

I disagree with strictly using scouting data for two reasons. 1. Madden is not a scouting tool. It is a video game where the goal is to replicate real life results. Because of this production should have a larger influence on ratings than what a player may potentially be able to do. 2. More importantly, Madden is not deep or complex enough to utilize scouting data. The AI is not advanced enough either. In switching to scouting data I fear that there would be many issues. The use of scouting data would require much of the game to be rebuilt. E.g. scouting is largely focused on technique yet technique is completely absent from the game currently. But mostly though I feel as if there is a false dichotomy present. All sources should be utilized. Why must we choose scouting over production? Use both.

I would like to say a few things based upon your points above:

You are correct in saying that Madden is not a scouting tool. However, Madden uses attributes and a scale for them. Scouts do the same thing. They attempt to quantify qualifiable information. Madden does the same thing. They attempt to give value to what is seen. If the goal is to replicate real life results, then why do they have ratings for attributes at all? Why not just have a YDS rating or a REC rating?

What production stat tells us how fast a player is or how tough he is? Name one that measures a player's stamina. Madden already has a framework built (albeit not perfect) that can harness scouting information. All that needs to be done is a proper application of it based on quality data. Sure, that would require matching animations (a complete overhaul, IMO), but it can be done. Will it? Who knows. All I know is that I don't expect anything soon...likely too much old code stacked up.

That being said, production is the product of a multitude of things happening on any given play, seemingly infinite at that. I use the "Open Receiver" example whereas a WR gets open every play because he is so fast, agile, and technically sound that he is merely uncoverable. However, if the QB never gets to the top of his drop before being planted on the turf, that WR will never "produce". According to the production line, a WR in that offense would be TERRIBLE. The fact of the matter is, that WR is not a worse player because of his lack of production. Take that same player and place him on a competent team with a decent line and maybe his production rises as he is finally getting the ball. Is he now better because of it, or is he the same player he was, just under different circumstances?

Production is very circumstantial. How many of you had Brandon Marshall in your top 5 WRs in the league before this season? I can tell you that I caught a bit of heat on these very forums for people mocking the fact that he was rated as a top 5 WR according to the FBG Ratings. The guy set a career high in TDs and may set one in receptions; placing him likely among the top WRs in the game right now, I will add. The point is that few expected him to produce up to the level at which the scouts knew he could play at. Did he magically get better because of having Fitzpatrick throw it to him, or have the OL that the Jets have? I would posit that he is the same player that the scouts slated him to be when the year started.

The bottom line is that we need to rate the players based upon their POTENTIAL attribute values in EQUAL situations to see how they really differentiate from one to another.

Production follows talent, not the other way around.

[roadman]

Quote: Originally Posted by DCEBB2001

I would like to say a few things based upon your points above: You are correct in saying that Madden is not a scouting tool. However, Madden uses attributes and a scale for them. Scouts do the same thing. They attempt to quantify qualifiable information. Madden does the same thing. They attempt to give value to what is seen. If the goal is to replicate real life results, then why do they have ratings for attributes at all? Why not just have a YDS rating or a REC rating? What production stat tells us how fast a player is or how tough he is? Name one that measures a player's stamina. Madden already has a framework built (albeit not perfect) that can harness scouting information. All that needs to be done is a proper application of it based on quality data. Sure, that would require matching animations (a complete overhaul, IMO), but it can be done. Will it? Who knows. All I know is that I don't expect anything soon...likely too much old code stacked up. That being said, production is the product of a multitude of things happening on any given play, seemingly infinite at that. I use the "Open Receiver" example whereas a WR gets open every play because he is so fast, agile, and technically sound that he is merely uncoverable. However, if the QB never gets to the top of his drop before being planted on the turf, that WR will never "produce". According to the production line, a WR in that offense would be TERRIBLE. The fact of the matter is, that WR is not a worse player because of his lack of production. Take that same player and place him on a competent team with a decent line and maybe his production rises as he is finally getting the ball. Is he now better because of it, or is he the same player he was, just under different circumstances? Production is very circumstantial. How many of you had Brandon Marshall in your top 5 WRs in the league before this season? I can tell you that I caught a bit of heat on these very forums for people mocking the fact that he was rated as a top 5 WR according to the FBG Ratings. The guy set a career high in TDs and may set one in receptions; placing him likely among the top WRs in the game right now, I will add. The point is that few expected him to produce up to the level at which the scouts knew he could play at. Did he magically get better because of having Fitzpatrick throw it to him, or have the OL that the Jets have? I would posit that he is the same player that the scouts slated him to be when the year started. The bottom line is that we need to rate the players based upon their POTENTIAL attribute values in EQUAL situations to see how they really differentiate from one to another. Production follows talent, not the other way around.

Dan, isn't scouting circumstantial as well though. It was already stated by Charter that scouting isn't always 100%.

You bring up WR's and something close and dear to our hearts. Look at the Packer WR's, no separation, Cobb, Jones and Adams. Adams played well as a rookie, McCarthy was praising him in TR camp, and kerflewy. Cobb strikes it rich in the off-season based on past performance and he isn't playing up to his normal standards, injuries or not. Jones, we all know he has regressed.

I would love to see Adams and Cobb take ratings hits for the lack of production they've had during the year. I am the type of person that doesn't care what Jerry Rice, Randy Moss and Sterling Sharpe did 20 years earlier and compare them with Cobb and Adams.

[charter04]

Quote: Originally Posted by ggsimmonds

I disagree with strictly using scouting data for two reasons. 1. Madden is not a scouting tool. It is a video game where the goal is to replicate real life results. Because of this production should have a larger influence on ratings than what a player may potentially be able to do. 2. More importantly, Madden is not deep or complex enough to utilize scouting data. The AI is not advanced enough either. In switching to scouting data I fear that there would be many issues. The use of scouting data would require much of the game to be rebuilt. E.g. scouting is largely focused on technique yet technique is completely absent from the game currently. But mostly though I feel as if there is a false dichotomy present. All sources should be utilized. Why must we choose scouting over production? Use both.

Here is why I don't like the big focus of production driving ratings. It becomes a little like chasing your own tail. I just don't like the overreaction feel of weekly updates based on stats personally.

It reminds me of one of my favorite games of all time, Tecmo Super Bowl. The best CB in the game was a guy on Tampa Bay named Wayne Haddix. If you know who he is then you either remember him from the game or you were a Bucs fan in 1990. Lol He had a lot of ints that's year. Was he the most talented CB in the NFL in 1990? No. He was rated in Tecmo SB the equivalent to a 99 overall. All 7 of his ints came that year.

If we want a true sim football game I want sim ratings. IMHO ratings largely based on stats are more arcade than sim. Just my opinion though.

From my experience using FBG ratings in madden 25, 15, and 16 they do a much better job replicating real life even stats wise then some assume.

People complain about how crazy accurate the CPU QB's are on default sliders or how the defense catches ints too easy or how any WR seems to be able to spec catch too much.

FBG rosters gives the desired result that is closer to real life than EA's stock rosters. I've played with them a lot. I've played with EA's a lot. FBG gives more realistic results.

And that's in an engine that should be 100% geared toward its own rosters. But, most QB's are deadly accurate because their ratings are too high.

What ever the case something needs to change. Either the engine or rosters do no replicate real NFL football as it should. The devs say they want a sim FB game so everything must be considered.

Again just my opinions