No names equals better gameplay

[charter04]

WOW! I am sold! The default, no name rosters make a huge difference. I have been using the community rosters for a will. I have played play now and dynasty modes a lot. I decided to save the default rosters and test them out. I used the exact same sliders and played Alabama in a play now game.

I used them because I just played them in dynasty mode. What a difference! It was not easier. Some things were harder. It was just much more realistic. Here are a few things I noticed

1. The Blocking worked the way it should.
2. Players played much more realistically. From power backs to scrambling QB's. Every possition played realistically.
3. The deep ball was more realistic. It was harder to throw.
4. I had to run the offence more realistic to score.
5. My DE's got the sacks instead of my DT getting all of them.
6. The CPU could run a successful screen pass.
7. Penalties worked better.

I can't stand no name players but, I will be playing this way until the patch.

[CrewmanV2]

Wow...People and what they believe in...Lol...Game has played fine for me since day one. with and without the rosters...

[charter04]

Quote: Originally Posted by CrewmanV2

Wow...People and what they believe in...Lol...Game has played fine for me since day one. with and without the rosters...

It's not about belief. It's about facts. There is a roster glitch. I really does affect game play. I was enjoying the game with named rosters but, playing with unnamed fixes the problems I had with the game.

[Spanky]

I tested this in one game and believe it to be true, at least with the frustrating passing game. With CPU generated names, the sliders seem to work as they're intended and it resulted in a better passing game, which was my main complaint.

The question is, can they fix this in the patch? Given their track record and apparent indifference, if not arrogance, I don't have much faith in their ability or desire to do so.

[OGKing]

Quote: Originally Posted by sirjam

Play a game with named rosters. Notice how many big hits the CPU gets on u. Notice supermen on defense. Notice psychic defenders. Then sign out an play with jus default rosters. Notice how many realistic hits there are. Notice how u have some time on some plays in the pocket to dissect the defense. U will just notice on your first possesion how much more realistic it is.

I still haven't noticed this yet. Must be just me, but the gameplay feels the same in my opinion.

[carnalnirvana]

i agree with TC and the few posters who claim the game works fine without names.

the tendencies affect gameplay alot this year, however its crazy to ask gamers to play without names,

[12]

Quote: Originally Posted by CrewmanV2

Wow...People and what they believe in...Lol...Game has played fine for me since day one. with and without the rosters...

I think it's foolish to discount what many, many people have said.

I'm skeptical when people complain, but this issue has merit. The game does play differently when using the base, unedited rosters. It plays better. Of this I'm convinced.

It might have something to do with the tendency issues... I don't know.

[sycodmn]

Honestly, I've played extensively with both named, and unnamed, rosters, with several different roster sets, with just numbers, and with auto-named, and, outside of the obvious tendency glitch issues (scramblers no longer being scramblers, and thus scrambling, and vice versa), I've noticed little to no difference. I think its part placebo effect, and part sliders. If you 'want' to believe the game plays better without named rosters, you will. With a good set of sliders, ones that fit you (which is why its best to build your own), you'll get a good game, regardless of which rosters you use.