Are accurate boxer ratings important to you?

[SHAKYR]

Are they important to you and if they get a boxing expert or someone with a deep boxing history(not me) would you be for it?

http://boards.ign.com/fight_night/b7350/164894007/r166541033/

--"Brizzo1, I hope you read this. I was wondering how you guys are going to rate stamina and other ratings for FN4." -- This was before Fight Night Round 4 came out

Brizzo1:
Yup, I'm here.

I didn't work on it, so I don't know what the goal was for the ratings in FNR3. But I know that setting the ratings in a game isn't always easy. On one hand, you can try and make them as true-to-life for each Boxer. On the other hand, you can try to adjust/balance them so that every Boxer has strengths and weaknesses. One way, almost everybody ends up using the same guys (i.e. because he's the greatest heavyweight of all-time, or the best P4P fighter in history). The other way, you get discrepancies that might irk the hardcore fan.

Even if you decide to go with true-to-life ratings, there is a huge difference in opinion on a lot of guys, especially when it comes to legends that had long careers, or when comparing guys from different eras. If you're a boxing fan, you know you could argue about this stuff with other fans for, well, for YEARS and never come to an agreement, lol.

So let me ask you guys, what do you prefer? Boxer Ratings that are set to match each Boxer's abilities in reality, or Boxer Ratings that are "adjusted" to balance all the Boxers on the roster and make it easier to have competitive fights with more than just the 2 or 3 best guys?

My response:

I rather have true to life abilities, Just add sliders, so people can adjust boxers if they want. If a guy is weak in one area let him be that way in the game. I don't want balance if a guy isn't good in real life. If he's knockout material he's knockout material. I want realism.

*You can't call a game a simulation if there is balance with strength, speed, and other physical attributes. Chris Byrd and Tyson's strength are not the same. Strategy balances out a game.

Please click the link to see all the posts he posted in the topic.

[Money99]

Re: Are accurate boxer ratings important to you?

And this is the biggest issue EA faces. They try to be too many things for too many people.

It's ridiculous to think that Ali or Tyson can't be dominant in this game because some cry-babies might get ticked if they can't beat him with Ernie Shavers.

I want to see a very noticeable difference between great fighters and good fighters and poor fighters.

I'm also tired of boxing career modes where you cap out at the same number of attribute points. Sure, you can pour them in to different attributes, but essentially the fighters are all equal in their overall amount of points.

What's wrong with allowing the user to create a monster from the start? Or give them a 'random' button that gives you a random collection of skills?
This way, if you want to be a young Tyson, Chavez or Robinson, you can do it. Heck, I paid $70 for this game, I should be able to play it however I like!

Anyway, thanks for posting this Po. Good topic.

[SHAKYR]

Re: Are accurate boxer ratings important to you?

And this is the biggest issue EA faces. They try to be too many things for too many people.

It's ridiculous to think that Ali or Tyson can't be dominant in this game because some cry-babies might get ticked if they can't beat him with Ernie Shavers.

I want to see a very noticeable difference between great fighters and good fighters and poor fighters.

I'm also tired of boxing career modes where you cap out at the same number of attribute points. Sure, you can pour them in to different attributes, but essentially the fighters are all equal in their overall amount of points.

What's wrong with allowing the user to create a monster from the start? Or give them a 'random' button that gives you a random collection of skills?
This way, if you want to be a young Tyson, Chavez or Robinson, you can do it. Heck, I paid $70 for this game, I should be able to play it however I like!

Anyway, thanks for posting this Po. Good topic.

Thanks.

Some fans and EA are scare of the penalty and reward system that THQ UFC had last year for fights, the true one punch Ko's.

Many people fear realistic stats. If EA marketed Fight Night Round 4 as a sim it should be just that.

I started this same post on the EA Fight Night Round 4 forums and the Developers have been active in it.

http://forum.ea.com/eaforum/posts/list/75/1062717.page

[ChampN252]

Re: Are accurate boxer ratings important to you?

They matter to me. I'll take Roy for example. In his prime, probably the most unstoppable boxer every. He was lightning fast with knockout power. I've seen him smack other boxers in the face before they knew what was happening. It wouldn't be fair to make him less dominant, because others can't beat him. That's why I'm really hoping someone eventually comes along and makes a game that puts real stats and fighting styles to use. I want to see James Toney pivot at the hip and dodge punches (when he was younger and smaller ) or RJJ throw a barrage, drop back like he's leaving, and suddenly throw another barrage.

[JayBee74]

Re: Are accurate boxer ratings important to you?

They matter to me. I'll take Roy for example. In his prime, probably the most unstoppable boxer every. He was lightning fast with knockout power. I've seen him smack other boxers in the face before they knew what was happening. It wouldn't be fair to make him less dominant, because others can't beat him. That's why I'm really hoping someone eventually comes along and makes a game that puts real stats and fighting styles to use. I want to see James Toney pivot at the hip and dodge punches (when he was younger and smaller ) or RJJ throw a barrage, drop back like he's leaving, and suddenly throw another barrage.

Roy was great but his caliber of opponent during his prime was questionable.

[Complex]

Re: Are accurate boxer ratings important to you?

Accurate movements > Accurate Ratings

[BestJumping]

Re: Are accurate boxer ratings important to you?


I didn't work on it, so I don't know what the goal was for the ratings in FNR3. But I know that setting the ratings in a game isn't always easy. On one hand, you can try and make them as true-to-life for each Boxer. On the other hand, you can try to adjust/balance them so that every Boxer has strengths and weaknesses. One way, almost everybody ends up using the same guys (i.e. because he's the greatest heavyweight of all-time, or the best P4P fighter in history). The other way, you get discrepancies that might irk the hardcore fan.

Even if you decide to go with true-to-life ratings, there is a huge difference in opinion on a lot of guys, especially when it comes to legends that had long careers, or when comparing guys from different eras. If you're a boxing fan, you know you could argue about this stuff with other fans for, well, for YEARS and never come to an agreement, lol.

[Complex]

Re: Are accurate boxer ratings important to you?

I would take accurate movement, meaning a jab by Lennox doesn't look like a jab by Juan Diaz. I would rather have Wright punching from his turtle shell defense by default like he does in real life rather than me pushing up to block. Feel me?

[SHAKYR]

Re: Are accurate boxer ratings important to you?

I would take accurate movement, meaning a jab by Lennox doesn't look like a jab by Juan Diaz. I would rather have Wright punching from his turtle shell defense by default like he does in real life rather than me pushing up to block. Feel me?

I totally agree.