NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat

Collapse

Recommended Videos

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Allaboutme
    Rookie
    • Oct 2008
    • 289

    #91
    Re: NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat

    Originally posted by FadeEmAll
    Yes it was because I'm sure the developers are smart enough to realize that the more people say it, the bigger the issue. also if more people see it, other posters might agree further increasing the chance it will be reviewed. Nobody bashed the developers nor is this some "petty" request about shoe colors or whatever. It's very possible they developers skimmed through the stuff the first time and didn't see it. Posting it again limits the chance that might happen again.
    im pretty sure u wernt serious but ill let you keep that statement, also when u quoted what he said it was on the same page, so the developers would see it, or maybe they are blind....
    You either in or you out and if you're out, then you better stay in because them wolves is out..

    Comment

    • FadeEmAll
      Banned
      • Dec 2008
      • 880

      #92
      Re: NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat

      Man I didn't even quote what he said. I had posted the exact same question 5 pages back, and I quoted my original statement. I did that to illustrate to the developers we were gamers with similar interests and so it may be a common complaint. Please make sure you are correct in your assumptions before smarting off because apparently many of them weren't this time.
      Last edited by FadeEmAll; 03-25-2009, 03:04 PM.

      Comment

      • md0t
        Rookie
        • Feb 2009
        • 153

        #93
        Re: NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat

        Originally posted by FadeEmAll
        Man I didn't even quote what he said. I had posted the exact same question 5 pages back, and I quoted my original statement. I did that to illustrate to the developers we were gamers with similar interests and so it may be a common complaint. Please make sure you are correct in your assumptions before smarting off because apparently many of them weren't this time.

        funny because like most major complaints of this game it is still being ignored.

        Comment

        • MMAsterkillah
          Rookie
          • Jan 2009
          • 79

          #94
          Re: NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat

          Online Dynasty Hirings and Firings would be great too.

          I am in a BIG12/ACC dynasty and I have won 6/8 BCS titles. Texas and Miami still have like 4x the amount of interested recruits every year, so I wouldn't mind going and getting one of those teams if possible. I finish up #3 every year in recruiting regardless of their respective records.

          Don't you think 6/8 titles would get me the Notre Dame treatment?

          Comment

          • kindella2
            Rookie
            • Jul 2008
            • 449

            #95
            Re: NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat

            Originally posted by MMAsterkillah
            Online Dynasty Hirings and Firings would be great too.

            I am in a BIG12/ACC dynasty and I have won 6/8 BCS titles. Texas and Miami still have like 4x the amount of interested recruits every year, so I wouldn't mind going and getting one of those teams if possible. I finish up #3 every year in recruiting regardless of their respective records.

            Don't you think 6/8 titles would get me the Notre Dame treatment?
            I asked a designer/producer in the EA forums about it yesterday and he said it wont be back this year cuz the commish can just change the teams. i think the game should do the firing personally. at least let contracts and offers from other teams into '10.
            Comeback can happen...thanks to EA Sports!

            Comment

            • Russell_Kiniry_EA
              NCAA Football 10 Designer
              • Mar 2009
              • 141

              #96
              Re: NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat

              Originally posted by AuburnAlumni
              It's a huge boost to my expectations to see the OL/DL getting worked on.

              The core of NCAA should be the OL/DL interaction. The game is won in the trenches..both on the field and in video games.

              (Edited for space)

              Love to hear how you guys plan on addressing these issues in NCAA 2010.
              So I'm going to try and cover your questions by explaining what our goals are on the line... Mainly because the line play is still a work in progress and not everything is functioning correctly yet.

              1. The D-Line has to matter, blitzing should not be the only way to get pressure

              What I mean is simply we want the defensive line to be able to make an impact on the running and passing game, guys should be able to get off blocks and make plays.

              2. Higher rated players should dominate (when faced up against lower talent) on both sides of the ball

              Ratings need to be able to drive the action, while I don't want to create a situation where a 90+ DE beats a 75 OT 100% of the time, you should be scared that every play that DE can be in the backfield.

              Also I'm going to have to double check but I'm pretty sure most of the huge impact blocks no longer play for inteior linemen. It is sort of silly a 280 pound player gets pushed back in the air 3 yards. But they still can be cut blocked, so you will see some D-Linemen on the ground.

              -Russ

              Comment

              • Russell_Kiniry_EA
                NCAA Football 10 Designer
                • Mar 2009
                • 141

                #97
                Re: NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat

                We are working on the Recruits (with a close eye on ATH) to get a few more players that can play multiple positions.

                I have been looking at the position changes rating hits, and I agree that getting a negative 4 in speed does not seem right. The reason for this hit originally was to stop exploits, but I do not feel like that is a valid reason anymore and will likely be removing those penalties (AWR will stay for sure, but SPD, ACC, STR penalties are high on my chopping block).

                -Russ

                Comment

                • MorePlays445
                  Rookie
                  • Mar 2009
                  • 2

                  #98
                  Once again I want complete playbooks...also why was Tebow only a 95 rating last year especially as the season goes on you should update ratings on the game. Donald Brown of UCONN rating was in the 80's. Please keep more up to date charge 10 dollars more if u have too.

                  Comment

                  • JAYMO76
                    MVP
                    • Aug 2008
                    • 1361

                    #99
                    Re: NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat

                    Originally posted by Russell_Kiniry_EA
                    We are working on the Recruits (with a close eye on ATH) to get a few more players that can play multiple positions.

                    I have been looking at the position changes rating hits, and I agree that getting a negative 4 in speed does not seem right. The reason for this hit originally was to stop exploits, but I do not feel like that is a valid reason anymore and will likely be removing those penalties (AWR will stay for sure, but SPD, ACC, STR penalties are high on my chopping block).

                    -Russ
                    Russ, the ATHLETE issue is huge. By definition an athlete should be good at several positions but ATHLETE in next gen has been useless. I really hope this glitch can be fixed so an athlete will be strong in multiple positions.
                    Roar you Lions roar!

                    Comment

                    • wde1723
                      Rookie
                      • May 2008
                      • 81

                      #100
                      Re: NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat

                      What you said about the ratings has really excited me. I would love to see this because in last years game ratings didn't seem to matter other than speed.

                      Comment

                      • SHO
                        Give us a raise, loser!
                        • Mar 2005
                        • 2045

                        #101
                        Re: NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat

                        Originally posted by Russell_Kiniry_EA
                        We are working on the Recruits (with a close eye on ATH) to get a few more players that can play multiple positions.

                        I have been looking at the position changes rating hits, and I agree that getting a negative 4 in speed does not seem right. The reason for this hit originally was to stop exploits, but I do not feel like that is a valid reason anymore and will likely be removing those penalties (AWR will stay for sure, but SPD, ACC, STR penalties are high on my chopping block).

                        -Russ
                        Will you also work on players attributes according to height/weight? Too many times in recruiting where 5-11, 200 defensive ends and 6-0, 257 d-tackles are coming in with C+ and B- strength while the mammoths (6-3, 260, 6-1 290) only end up with C- or C level strength.....

                        Comment

                        • mierk
                          Rookie
                          • Dec 2005
                          • 117

                          #102
                          Re: NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat

                          Russell (and OMT), thanks for being available for questions.

                          Are you guys going to be able to address imbalance in CPU recruiting and depth charts -- ie, teams with 6 QBs but only 3 OTs? Or starting a 65 rated walkon RE when they have a pair of LE's in the 80s? Has there been any thought on the general philosophy of some positions that should be fairly interchangeable -- FS/SS, RE/LE, RT/LT? If not, can you explain the thought process behind why they are relatively inflexible and what you are hoping to prevent or encourage?

                          Comment

                          • OMT
                            MVP
                            • Jun 2008
                            • 2997

                            #103
                            Re: NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat

                            Originally posted by mierk
                            Russell (and OMT), thanks for being available for questions.

                            Are you guys going to be able to address imbalance in CPU recruiting and depth charts -- ie, teams with 6 QBs but only 3 OTs? Or starting a 65 rated walkon RE when they have a pair of LE's in the 80s? Has there been any thought on the general philosophy of some positions that should be fairly interchangeable -- FS/SS, RE/LE, RT/LT? If not, can you explain the thought process behind why they are relatively inflexible and what you are hoping to prevent or encourage?
                            We've fixed the issue with the CPU recruiting a bunch of LTs when they need a RT. The problem is you are only recruiting Ts, and you don't know if they are left/right until you sign them. The depth chart logic puts the best player with that natural position (left or right), but the CPU never does position changes.

                            Now the CPU will do position changes if the backup on one side is better than the starter on the other side. Note, this does not actually happen during Position Changes in the offseason, so if you look at CPU teams before starting a new season, the change won't have happened yet.

                            Comment

                            • mierk
                              Rookie
                              • Dec 2005
                              • 117

                              #104
                              Re: NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat

                              Originally posted by OMT
                              We've fixed the issue with the CPU recruiting a bunch of LTs when they need a RT. The problem is you are only recruiting Ts, and you don't know if they are left/right until you sign them. The depth chart logic puts the best player with that natural position (left or right), but the CPU never does position changes.

                              Now the CPU will do position changes if the backup on one side is better than the starter on the other side. Note, this does not actually happen during Position Changes in the offseason, so if you look at CPU teams before starting a new season, the change won't have happened yet.
                              I was under the impression that ratings or performance-wise, there was no distinction between LT/RT -- I haven't noticed a hit when I have done position changes. What I was talking about was the way teams will over-recruit for certain positions but under-recruit for others. There is no need for teams to have half a dozen QBs on the roster, especially when they don't have appropriate numbers at a different position.

                              And I haven't gotten far enough in my own dynasty to see this in action since I just got my new Xbox in December, but I saw threads from other users saying that 3-4 years into dynasty, CPU teams would be playing WRs and RBs on the line because they didn't have enough beef up front.

                              Comment

                              • deadlyCane
                                Pro
                                • Aug 2002
                                • 930

                                #105
                                Re: NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat

                                Originally posted by Russell_Kiniry_EA
                                We are working on the Recruits (with a close eye on ATH) to get a few more players that can play multiple positions.

                                I have been looking at the position changes rating hits, and I agree that getting a negative 4 in speed does not seem right. The reason for this hit originally was to stop exploits, but I do not feel like that is a valid reason anymore and will likely be removing those penalties (AWR will stay for sure, but SPD, ACC, STR penalties are high on my chopping block).

                                -Russ
                                This is music to my ears. Yeah, SS and FS should be somewhat interchangeable with nothing more than a 3-5 point AWR hit. Similar for OLB/MLB even though I wouldn't be upset if the hit was a little greater for the linebacker positions but nothing more than a 7 or 8 point hit. Zero hit for moving from ROLB to LOLB or vice versa.

                                While on the recruits, i would love to not see so many guys over 95 speed. After 2-3 years in an OD every freaking user team has a few. I would also venture to say we shouldn't see anymore than 15-20 96+ speed guys in a 4 year span (or no more than that in a dynasty at any one time). Twenty might even be too large a number. In the same token no more than 2 99-rated speed guys in any 4-year period. And the top speed for recruits in the 40-yard dash should not be 4.16. It should be somewhere around 4.27 or 4.28 for a 99 rated guy and 4.30 or 4.31 for a 98 rated player. Basically nothing below 4.27.

                                Thanks for taking the time to consider our input.
                                ----------
                                PSN: RuFF_NeXX

                                MLB: Toronto Blue Jays
                                NBA: Toronto Raptors
                                CFL: Toronto Argonauts
                                NFL: Miami Dolphins
                                NCAA Football: Miami Hurricanes
                                NCAA Basketball: Miami Hurricanes
                                NCAA Baseball: Miami Hurricanes

                                Comment

                                Working...