New Abilities

[LBzrule]

Quote: Originally Posted by Trojan Man

I know what you mean about the first step--or lack thereof. I've recently started controlling that position manually, and you can definitely feel the burst of the run reader ability when you're actually controlling the guy. But you're right about the CPU controlled guys, and I hope that they change that if we get another game. BTW, Spielman is a beast--I've never used him, but every time I play him he seems to be just fast enough to get to the edge when my back does, he doesn't miss tackles, and despite a lack of height, he gets his hands on a lot of balls in zone coverage. He was lots of fun to watch play, too. LBz, why doesn't 2k just hire you?

They are not doing football man. If they were, I know the folks, we'd have some kick *** stuff to look forward to. But they are not on it right now and with Kush gone, everything has been handed to VC, which means they are getting blasted. Just no time for football.

[NFLHITMAN]

How about a non stop motor. Always fighting hard until the whistle.

[DonRSD]

Quote: Originally Posted by LBzrule

They are not doing football man. If they were, I know the folks, we'd have some kick *** stuff to look forward to. But they are not on it right now and with Kush gone, everything has been handed to VC, which means they are getting blasted. Just no time for football.

YO LB!!!
you screaming into the mic during games when the ai does dumb stuff = still makes me laugh 5 years later....LMAO

keep us posted about another 2k football game.
is there any way they can get a patch/update going?
even dlc id gladly pay for!!!

[yamabushi]

How about some kind of Intimidator ability for D-lineman. basically a 'cadence' for the D, causing O-lineman to jump the snap fearing the pass rush of say, an LT or Reggie White.

[MC Fatigue]

Quote: Originally Posted by catcatch22

There is no reason for negative abilities since everyone would have to have a whole bunch since you can't be good at everything. Trojan is right in that negative abilities already states the obvious in that they don't have the positive ability.

Absolutely false. Not everyone has a problem with dropping the ball - there are players out there who tend to have an issue dropping the big catch, or fumbling excessively. Having attributes that do this would make a pretty big difference in players; instead of having pretty much all the players fumble just the same unless they have the secure ball strength.

This way there can be those who hold onto it very well (strength), those who are average and fumble here and there (nothing), and those who have it as a problem (weakness).

Or how about a QB who obviously has a problem tossing INTs? It would be nice to be able to give that as an attribute that makes him toss it into questionable defense a little more than a QB who doesn't have the weakness. It would add a whole new dimension; you've got to weigh their weaknesses and decide if they're worth it or not. Adds a whole new perspective to choosing players. Do I pick the RB who doesn't have that big shoulder, but holds onto the ball, or do I pick the RB who's going to run over defenders, but has an issue putting the ball on the ground?

I don't see how it's useless.

[CreatineKasey]

I think it'd be a bad idea. When creating players- who gives their favorite guy negative abilities? Are people going to make a sick Braylon Edwards then give him bad hands? I think the weaknesses are inferred through the lack of abilities listed.

EX. Dan Marino doesn't have leadership. Barry Sanders isn't a workhorse. Earl doesn't have a break away burst. OJ Fumbles as he doesn't have ball security. Rod Woodson has issues in man coverage- he doesn't have coverage bonus. Elvin Bethea isn't the best against the run - he has no run stopping abilities.

[catcatch22]

I think your thinking that by not showing a "weakness" that it isn't there. These are real players, not fictional. I can almost guarantee that all the "weaknesses" many of you have stated are already there but just not listed as weaknesses. Sure it isn't highlited with a huge neon felt tip marker to tell you here or there but by knowing the players and doing some research you can see which players were more clutch than others. If anything by not giving them a clutch or positive ability you can thereby assume that there is a chance they might be a negative to that part of their overall game. However just like the generics it is up to you to find what that weakness is. There are several players in the game that have several strengths not totally highlited. If you want to know each and every point of the player you might as well not even look up these great players and just have ratings and no more "abilities".

Huge example, Jackie Smith the Gold TE with the soft hands ability. Has no clutch ability. So you can assume maybe in a clutch situation he might not come up with the big catch as say dwight clark who is clutch and also has soft hands. Some here might say I rather have Clark than Smith on their team. So even without the "weakness" ability in play a Bronze player can outshine a gold just by playing with them and testing them out and not just look at ratings which is basically what you are asking for when you say weaknesses.

[MC Fatigue]

Quote: Originally Posted by CreatineKasey

I think it'd be a bad idea. When creating players- who gives their favorite guy negative abilities?

I would. I'd give Tiki Barber the fumble weakness in a heartbeat - it was his one chronic problem that near the end of his career he finally addressed, but it was still a major problem that will pretty much be tied to his career. As it is, I can't create him with that. Putting him at silver or so would make him a strong player, who really wouldn't have a fumble problem - which wouldn't imitate his career at all; it's completely negating it.

I'd just like to see a little more realism - especially when creating players. Just because a player was a legend, doesn't mean they didn't have a weakness.

And I totally disagree that "not having a strength" is a weakness. Like I said earlier - just because a player doesn't have the strength that makes them almost never fumble, doesn't mean it was a weakness - it just means they're average. Hence, you have two settings - great at holding onto the ball, or average at holding on to the ball. Believe it or not, there were players who were weak at holding on to the ball.

Legends or not, no one was perfect, and everyone had a flaw.

It's just like NFL 2k5. I don't see people complaining that certain players have low attributes. Well in APF 2k8 we've unfortunately lost those attributes, which really makes every player exactly the same minus those "strengths". I can make 5 RBs with different attributes, and with the attributes I don't give them, they're exactly the same. How is that realistic? Certain players had weaknesses; some of them blocked really poorly, while others were just average. I'm not going to go ahead an waste a "blocking" strength on the others, when it wasn't a strength. So why can I not give that one RB a "blocking" weakness instead?

It makes a lot of sense.