Madden ratings and Simulation football.

[CM Hooe]

Quote: Originally Posted by ForUntoOblivionSoar∞

They don't give numerical ratings nearly as varied as Madden, however, nor do they dole out these nymbers for every trait (they are usually only goven as overall values, put together in part from trait rankings that are NOT given any number ratings, as opposed to numbers for every trait like Madden has). Furthermore, you won't find 0-99 that is standard and unchanging every year in any scouting agency, and you won't find that because there isn't enough quantitative data available to distinguish to that level. You see ratings closer to 1-10, and agaun, usually these are just overall draft grades. Most of the scouting information is given in words. Why don't you see 0-99? Because scoutong agencies are aware that it's ludocrous to assume that level of precision and accuracy in rating NFL prospects, simply because there are too many unquantifiable and "intangible" aspects for players. Of course, that's real life. Madden isn't real life.

I hear your points. That said, none of this presents a good argument as to why Madden should remove player ratings from its UI.

Regardless the level of precision, quantitative grades are provided to teams for qualitative player traits. The ratings are still there. The post I was initially responding to argued that Madden should remove ratings from the UI outright, not replacing them with something else.

Heck, the primary source document from an actual professional football team which FBGratings used to power their ratings back in the day graded players from 0.0 to 5.0, with tenths decimal places, and all the values in the scale were used. Even NFL teams are doing this stuff, why shouldn't Madden?

[vtcrb]

Nothing should be hidden in the game. That is the issue now too much stuff hidden that Users can't edit that effect the game.

Take NBA Live for example, no editing options is tanking sales(among other things). If Users could actually edit things within the game when it came to individual players the game could be vastly improved. No way i want Madden doing the same thing.

[Toupal]

In regards to hidden ratings...

Why not just have an option before starting your franchise to "hide" the ratings. That way people have options.

All I want in Madden is options and customization, so not everything has to be absolute. This especially applies to rosters and draft classes.

[StefJoeHalt]

Quote: Originally Posted by vtcrb

Nothing should be hidden in the game. That is the issue now too much stuff hidden that Users can't edit that effect the game. Take NBA Live for example, no editing options is tanking sales(among other things). If Users could actually edit things within the game when it came to individual players the game could be vastly improved. No way i want Madden doing the same thing.

To clarify my point..when I say I want ratings hidden I don't mean, hiding them for good..like above poster stated just an option to hide..but still available to be edited..I guess my point is..allow me as the HUM coach/GM the ability to make a mistake in evaluating talent.


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

[Madwolf]

As someone said earlier, compared to the actual NFL ratings systems, the Madden rating system has way too many numbers, 0-100 (101) to be exact, and even then it only really uses 60-100. I'd much rather see a more simplified ratings system where each rating has a noticeable difference. Then as OP said, we could use combine results for physical attributes.

[4thQtrStre5S]

I think EA/Dice should do more to present the game as it actually is, in that, from what I have witnessed at least, the best apparent ratings, do not mean they should be starting automatically... I think many people assume this, but from what I have experienced, and of course this is personal perspective, the apparent best is not always so.

Actual play style of the user matters and the types of plays called matter.

It is difficult to write down all the details, but it comes down to, every play in the playbooks is a viable play, but not every play is viable if the personnel doesn't mesh well with the play logic of any one particular play.

It is impossible to field a single team that will run all the plays in a playbook effectively.

But if you practice with different plays and personnel, and fill backup spots with players that produce better in certain plays, you can achieve a rather robust play selection.

The fastest player isn't always the best; the strongest isn't always the best... The best example I can give for now would be offensive linemen; try substituting different rated linemen and see how they run something like the Power O. Just because someone has faster Acceleration or higher strength or better awareness, may not make them the best - for that to be so, each play logic would have to be perfect, and it isn't.

Variation of just the Power O can require different players; the timing is crucial, and that means for everything to reach its optimum level, it has to time right, so the blocks are set at the correct time, and they hold for the right amount of time, and awareness, especially, is at the right level to pick up or not pick up a block..Some linemen can actually have too high an awareness to be effective on certain plays....Of course this is my personal observation and I have no empirical evidence for support at this time.

And then there are counters when you cannot find the right player for a given position...Take the linemen example; lets say I cannot find the right guard that takes the block and holds right when I need him to so the hole is created and held just long enough to get a clean run through the gap - then I can counter with a stringer back that has better break tackle ability, foe example...

But if the linemen hit all their blocks and are timed just right, which is possible, yo can run any RB through the hole for good yardage.

Thus, practice is very important, but again it isn't necessary for those who rather take the other approach and build a roster by overall, and then just find the plays that work, and play that handful of plays; sort of like tournament players do.

[ForUntoOblivionSoar∞]

Quote: Originally Posted by CM Hooe

I hear your points. That said, none of this presents a good argument as to why Madden should remove player ratings from its UI. Regardless the level of precision, quantitative grades are provided to teams for qualitative player traits. The ratings are still there. The post I was initially responding to argued that Madden should remove ratings from the UI outright, not replacing them with something else. Heck, the primary source document from an actual professional football team which FBGratings used to power their ratings back in the day graded players from 0.0 to 5.0, with tenths decimal places, and all the values in the scale were used. Even NFL teams are doing this stuff, why shouldn't Madden?

The difference is in accuracy. Madden is infinitely accurate, while scouting agencies will always be inaccurate to one degree or another (no matter how accurate scouting agencies get, they'll never hit exact, thus making Madden's rating accuracy an asymptotic that will always be out of reach).

A cloudier rating system would make running an NFL team in Madden more realistic, and I do not see how this is even a debatable point. However, as has been pointed out in many video game forums, "more realistic" doesn't always correlate with "more fun." For me, this would be much more fun, but for MUT players/more casual NFL fans/people with limited time to play the game, it would probably not be as fun.

Making a cloudier ratings system optional would be a great solution, but I doubt there will ever be enough time in a development cycle to do that.

[CM Hooe]

Quote: Originally Posted by ForUntoOblivionSoar∞

The difference is in accuracy. Madden is infinitely accurate

You are correct that the rating system has 100 discrete points of delineation (0-99; 101 points if you count 100). In that sense, it is accurate, sure. However, those numbers don't guarantee how players will perform on the field given that weighted dice rolls, player traits, user inputs are factors in the outcomes of plays.

For example, if you have a Terrell Owens clone with 95 CTH and "Drops Open Passes", he could drop that key 3rd down pass you need in the playoffs despite his high CTH rating. Heck a player with CTH 99 could still conceivably drop that pass, however unlikely. On the very next play, though, you could get a heroic in-traffic catch out of some 4th-string reserve with 75 CTH / 75 CIT. Is that scenario "infinitely accurate" the player's ratings? I'd argue absolutely not.

Another example - for whatever reason, I could never play well with Brett Favre in any Madden game I ever played. I don't know what it was, but I sucked whenever I used Favre far more than with any other quarterback, even some backups. I was better with Quincy Carter than I was with Brett Favre. Favre was consistently rated 90+ in Madden, but I could never get good performance out of him specifically for whatever reason; is that "infinitely accurate"? Nope.

The game is already dynamic enough to produce scenarios which don't conform to player ratings; how many countless stories have you seen on this message board about low-rated players who end up being great in people's franchises? How many low-rated players have you played with who have become feel-good stories in your franchises? That's exactly what's happening here; the game is behaving dynamically. Sure, the ratings represent the peak performance level of a given player - so a player with 90 CTH will certainly be more likely to catch more passes than a player with 75 CTH over a long enough timeline - but just like real life quantitative scouting reports the ratings are not themselves guarantees of that level of performance.

Quote:

A cloudier rating system would make running an NFL team in Madden more realistic, and I do not see how this is even a debatable point.

I see no reason to take information away from the player. The 0-100 scale is easy to understand, real-life scouting reports grade players quantitatively with similar scales (so it's realistic), and those ratings given do not absolutely define a player's in-game performance. Other than offering the option to a small group of players who want less information for a greater sense of challenge, I see no benefit to changing anything.