Gameinformer review ruins my day

[Ceteris Paribus]

Quote: Originally Posted by Tide311

It is leaps and bounds better. It is online which you can play with friends in NCAA. There is no dynasty option for that online in NHL...star players don't just disappear or into Free Agency never to be seen again like BeAGM, or not have stats that are not even close to what they should be. Your examples are quite weak.

I was in two OD for NCAA 11 and am in one now which will restart with the new patch.

While we may do a decent job with the 12 teams we control, the other 108 are TERRIBLE. The recruit terribly and they mange their depth charts terribly. I'm not saying you can't enjoy it. But it is not a compelling challenge. It is annoying.

[Ceteris Paribus]

Quote: Originally Posted by mkharsh33

the way EA does the ratings scale for players, i'd happily like to see a 40 rated player on an nhl team... the equivalent to the NHL series of a 40 rated kicker is an 86 rated goalie...

That's too true, even if it is an exaggeration. My understanding is that in NHL is is jut a 0-49 rating. They add 50 to the total to make it look better.

So an 83 is really a 33, which would scale to 66. An 86 is a 36, which would scale to 72. So the gap is more than it appears. A 78 is a 28 that scales to 56. A 92 is 42 which scales to 84.

My guess is that their sim engine looks at the numbers on a 100 point scales and sees them as much closer than they are. Because the action on the ice is significantly different by rating.

Also, team OVR ratings are extremely misleading. Th average of the two goalies, is not an indication of how good the team's goaltending is. Neither is an average of their forwards. So when you face the Red Wings or Canucks, it does feel different and more significant than the OVR spred indicates.

[ChaseB]

Just for the record, I did not see any "stars" not get signed in my two simmed seasons. Maybe it becomes an issue later still, but I wasn't seeing like Crosby etc. sitting in FA. There were a good amount of low 80s guys that did not get signed and all that though.

[adayinthelife]

Quote: Originally Posted by Ceteris Paribus

That's too true, even if it is an exaggeration. My understanding is that in NHL is is jut a 0-49 rating. They add 50 to the total to make it look better. So an 83 is really a 33, which would scale to 66. An 86 is a 36, which would scale to 72. So the gap is more than it appears. A 78 is a 28 that scales to 56. A 92 is 42 which scales to 84. My guess is that their sim engine looks at the numbers on a 100 point scales and sees them as much closer than they are. Because the action on the ice is significantly different by rating. Also, tema OVR ratings are extremely misleading. Th average of the two goalies, is not an indication of how good the team's goaltending is. Neither is an average of their forwards. So when you face the Red Wings or Canucks, it does feel different and more significant than the OVR spred indicates.

I'm not trying to be a dick, but where is this info coming from?

[Ceteris Paribus]

Quote: Originally Posted by adayinthelife

I'm not trying to be a dick, but where is this info coming from?

This is kind of funny. But it comes from a post I am 99% sure you read.

http://www.operationsports.com/forum...post2040179810

[Ceteris Paribus]

Quote: Originally Posted by ChaseB

Just for the record, I did not see any "stars" not get signed in my two simmed seasons. Maybe it becomes an issue later still, but I wasn't seeing like Crosby etc. sitting in FA. There were a good amount of low 80s guys that did not get signed and all that though.

This is why I normally only play single seasons of these types of games. Generally, the AI can handle one season of decisions adequately. It's when it comes time to cut and sign players that developers drop the ball. Even OOTP is pretty awful.

When I was playing text sims, I leaned towards Diamond Mind Baseball and Strat-o-Matic. OOTP featured career play, but it was terrible. It has improved statistically, but the GM's are still pretty awful.

I also turn off trades when I play a single season. If you leave it on, most games will dork that up, too.

[Ceteris Paribus]

Another thing to consider is that OVR are subjective. I am not positive that this is the case in the NHL games, but in EA's Madden and NCAA games, players with the exact same ratings will have different OVR's based on their postion, which makes sense. A MLB is going to be a terrible WR.

NHL have players with all sorts of tendencies. I suspect and Grinder's OVER is based on having his ratings weighted differently than a Playmaker. But I really don't know that for a fact.

One thing I do think you can take EA (and many other developers) to tak for is not providing any information, even online, about how the game uses each attribute in conjunction.

[canucksss]

Quote: Originally Posted by Money99

I'm starting to think EAC purposely neglects the offline modes so that people are forced to play HUT and EASHL, and then spend $$$ for upgrades.

i think this is the REAL REASON for EA to keep ignoring the tons of players like me who only play BaGM most of our limited free time. if this is the reason, of course EA will not admit to it, EA SHAME ON YOU!!!!!