CFM Rookies Not Adjusted To Stock Player Scale (EA Is Investigating)

Collapse

Recommended Videos

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Hooe
    Hall Of Fame
    • Aug 2002
    • 21555

    #151
    Re: CFM rookies not adjusted to Stock Player Scale

    Originally posted by griffy20
    The simple fact is that EA will continue to overlook these types of things in CFM due to the fact that CFM is particularly hard to monetize. Their main focus is MUT because that provides a steady revenue stream even after players have already spent $60 on the game.

    I'm not saying this is wrong, or that I blame them, it's just a fact. The only way things will change are if CFM becomes a bigger part of the game, which I don't foresee happening because they currently can't monetize it the way they can with MUT.

    I would actually argue that it's in EA's interest to NOT make CFM playable for long periods of time due to the fact that if people were satisfied with their draft classes and overall gameplay many seasons into their CFM's, the incentive to purchase next year's edition of the game is greatly diminished when one could presumably just keep playing the old game.
    Explain then why Tiburon rebuilt a ton of stuff in CFM and added little to nothing new for Ultimate Team this year.

    Comment

    • griffy20
      Rookie
      • Aug 2015
      • 33

      #152
      Re: CFM rookies not adjusted to Stock Player Scale

      Originally posted by Mauer4MVP
      I tried that kool-aid too but had to spit it out.
      I don't get it?

      Did I say anything incorrect?

      Comment

      • redsox4evur
        Hall Of Fame
        • Jul 2013
        • 18169

        #153
        Re: CFM rookies not adjusted to Stock Player Scale

        Originally posted by griffy20
        I don't get it?

        Did I say anything incorrect?
        Yea you did...you said their main focus is MUT. What proof do you have for that? If you compare all of the work to game modes this year it goes, Draft Champions, CCM, and then MUT in that order. Draft Champions is obviously first because they built the mode from scratch. In CCM they added some new stuff including combine results, a new dynamic drive goals, a new whole new scouting system, new watchlist that was made AFTER E3. And what was changed on MUT? Seriously... I haven't seen anything that has changed on MUT for this year. And if that shows that there main focus is MUT than they are horrible company that should just close shop now.
        Follow me on Twitter

        Comment

        • Mauer4MVP
          MVP
          • Mar 2010
          • 2407

          #154
          Re: CFM rookies not adjusted to Stock Player Scale

          Originally posted by griffy20
          I don't get it?

          Did I say anything incorrect?
          Yeah you're assuming the developers don't have pride in their work and are only looking to impact the game that will drive direct sales. Sure, they're a business. But they also have pride in their work. And developing a great CFM will drive sales as well (see what 2k just revealed and the huge buzz they've generated).

          I think it's wrong to assume that they entire team that works on Madden only cares about $.

          The truth is somewhere in the middle. They care about $ but also care about developing a quality game. I think they've shown time and time again that they listen to their customers. Like it has been pointed out, sometimes things just get missed or are buggy. It happens with literally every game.

          Comment

          • Maverick09
            Rookie
            • Jun 2004
            • 267

            #155
            Re: CFM rookies not adjusted to Stock Player Scale

            Originally posted by CM Hooe
            I'd rather personally rebuild how draft classes are generated.

            I wrote a small app for personal use in the lead-up to Madden NFL 15 to do exactly this, actually; my motivation was to be able to build draft classes which match the FBGratings roster set. The idea behind it was that, if EA enabled draft class editing in CFM (which they didn't in M15 and haven't in M16), I would feed the program a roster spreadsheet and it would generate players using the existing player ratings as the valid ranges for each rating. For example, in Madden NFL 15, the mean SPD for WRs was 90 and the standard deviation was 4. Using those values I can spit out a rating which fits within the range, given the ratings provided. Here's an example of SPD ratings my app spits out for a generated population of NFL wide receivers in a hypothetical custom draft class:

            Code:
            97 
            96 
            95 
            94 94 94 94 94
            93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93
            92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
            91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91
            90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90
            89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89
            88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88
            87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87
            86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86
            85 85 85 85 85 85
            83
            81
            75 75 75 75 75
            Notice that the SPD ratings bunch up around 90, just like the base Madden NFL 16 roster, and ratings on the extremes are pretty rare. For comparison's sake, the SPD ratings for the WR population of my 2035 season CFM:

            Code:
            99
            98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98
            97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97
            96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96
            95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95
            94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94
            93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93
            92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
            91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91
            90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90
            89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89
            88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88
            87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87
            86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86
            85 85
            84
            83
            82
            81 81 81
            80
            77 77 77
            This distribution is far more linear, resulting in a more diverse player set but also one with more values on either extreme of the range.

            This app is not quite robust enough to be used publicly, and I won't be releasing it for now - it doesn't consider player type and scheme, for example, and I'd want that information to better build more distinct player archetypes. In addition, there's no point to me releasing it publicly, since Madden NFL draft classes can't be edited anyway. I'd be happy to talk about what I did with Tiburon, though, if they are interested in hearing about it.
            This is exactly what every sports gaming developer should be doing for calibrating drafted player ratings to their current default roster sets.

            Madden as well as The Show are guilty of poor generated player ratings coming out of the drafts, skewing the rating distribution between generated players and real players. There is a bi-modal distribution of player ratings in the league, and it hinders the re-playability of franchise mode.

            Thanks for taking the time to provide all of this information. This is really just basic statistics, and absolutely needs to be employed in future sports titles in order to prolong the re-playability of franchise mode.

            I'm very surprised that the engineers working on rookie generation haven't thought of employing these basic statistical principles on how they generate rookie attributes. As a franchise guy who likes playing multiple seasons in the mode, the issue with generated rookie ratings is keeping me on the sidelines with regards to purchasing the game. Hopefully it gets patched; if not, pass.
            Last edited by Maverick09; 08-20-2015, 11:06 AM.

            Comment

            • griffy20
              Rookie
              • Aug 2015
              • 33

              #156
              Re: CFM rookies not adjusted to Stock Player Scale

              Originally posted by Mauer4MVP
              Yeah you're assuming the developers don't have pride in their work and are only looking to impact the game that will drive direct sales. Sure, they're a business. But they also have pride in their work. And developing a great CFM will drive sales as well (see what 2k just revealed and the huge buzz they've generated).

              I think it's wrong to assume that they entire team that works on Madden only cares about $.

              The truth is somewhere in the middle. They care about $ but also care about developing a quality game. I think they've shown time and time again that they listen to their customers. Like it has been pointed out, sometimes things just get missed or are buggy. It happens with literally every game.
              I'm not assuming that at all. I'm not saying there isn't anyone in the building saying CFM needs more attention. The people cutting their paychecks have final say, though. When those people ask how they're going to grow sales and revenue this year, I guarantee you their not looking to hear "we improved the draft and incoming rookies for CFM."

              Look, I'm on your side. I wish to hell they fixed this stuff. I was in another thread complaining about how they still haven't fixed the equipment for incoming rookies, let alone the ratings.

              I think it's pretty clear, especially when it comes to the equipment stuff for incoming rookies, that this wasn't an oversight. It's just a blatant disregard to fix it due to budget/money issues because other modes are sexier/bring in new players.

              Comment

              • Sheba2011
                MVP
                • Oct 2013
                • 2353

                #157
                Re: CFM rookies not adjusted to Stock Player Scale

                Originally posted by griffy20
                It's just a blatant disregard to fix it due to budget/money issues because other modes are sexier/bring in new players.
                You have still completely ignored the fact that MUT was virtually untouched this year. More of their budget went to CFM than to MUT. This is just one of those things that slipped through the cracks, like was said earlier it happens just about every game. No game catches all the bugs no matter how much testing they do.

                Comment

                • redsox4evur
                  Hall Of Fame
                  • Jul 2013
                  • 18169

                  #158
                  Re: CFM rookies not adjusted to Stock Player Scale

                  Originally posted by Sheba2011
                  You have still completely ignored the fact that MUT was virtually untouched this year. More of their budget went to CFM than to MUT. This is just one of those things that slipped through the cracks, like was said earlier it happens just about every game. No game catches all the bugs no matter how much testing they do.
                  Exactly...what game has been released that doesn't need a patch, update, or server maintenance at all? I can't think of any.
                  Follow me on Twitter

                  Comment

                  • jdotpete
                    Rookie
                    • Nov 2014
                    • 12

                    #159
                    Re: CFM rookies not adjusted to Stock Player Scale

                    Are taking into account decline of the QB's we know (ie Rodgers, Flacco)? I mean two years ago many wouldn't have predicted the drop off we saw in Peyton Manning's deep ball.

                    Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

                    Comment

                    • eric7064
                      MVP
                      • Jan 2010
                      • 1151

                      #160
                      Re: CFM rookies not adjusted to Stock Player Scale

                      Originally posted by Sheba2011
                      You have still completely ignored the fact that MUT was virtually untouched this year. More of their budget went to CFM than to MUT. This is just one of those things that slipped through the cracks, like was said earlier it happens just about every game. No game catches all the bugs no matter how much testing they do.
                      I disagree. MUT makes them tons of money. Why havent they touched MUT because it is already perfect. There is no need to. CFM is not perfect. It never has been. And that is okay, it is a big mode. But There isnt people spending 5,10, 100's of $ on CFM, but there is in MUT.

                      In saying that regarding ratings. The team CLEARLY lowered base ratings in many areas particularly speed and deep accuracy. This was very evident. So how does not changing incoming rookies at all "slip through the cracks". If I am a CFM guy and they test the mode. Even have a sim 10 years option, tell me how they don't see it in the months they have been developing it. Especially with revamping the scouting system.

                      Comment

                      • eric7064
                        MVP
                        • Jan 2010
                        • 1151

                        #161
                        Re: CFM rookies not adjusted to Stock Player Scale

                        Originally posted by redsox4evur
                        Exactly...what game has been released that doesn't need a patch, update, or server maintenance at all? I can't think of any.
                        Agreed. Every game. But I wouldnt put this in the same category. A balancing issue then yes. Instead of just the development team playing the game now there are millions, it is easier to find bugs. That is understandable. But this is not the case. The development team could have seen this. Test was done and 16 rookie WR's in the first draft already with 95+ speed. Wouldnt you assume the CFM team sims seasons, or hopefully decades to see if anything is wrong.

                        Comment

                        • howboutdat
                          MVP
                          • Nov 2012
                          • 1908

                          #162
                          Re: CFM rookies not adjusted to Stock Player Scale

                          Im still trying to understand how having 27 WRs with 97 or + speed after 10 seasons doesnt seem off by a pretty big margin ? There are a total of 2 in stock rosters. Meaning , there are 2 wrs that fast that is a result of the last decade of drafting in the real nfl. How does anything about that seem ok?
                          Yup, i said it !



                          Twitter
                          Twitch Channel
                          MBC Twitch Channel

                          Comment

                          • DerkontheOS
                            GB
                            • Jul 2009
                            • 3138

                            #163
                            Re: CFM rookies not adjusted to Stock Player Scale

                            Originally posted by CM Hooe
                            I'd rather personally rebuild how draft classes are generated.

                            I wrote a small app for personal use in the lead-up to Madden NFL 15 to do exactly this, actually; my motivation was to be able to build draft classes which match the FBGratings roster set. The idea behind it was that, if EA enabled draft class editing in CFM (which they didn't in M15 and haven't in M16), I would feed the program a roster spreadsheet and it would generate players using the existing player ratings as the valid ranges for each rating. For example, in Madden NFL 15, the mean SPD for WRs was 90 and the standard deviation was 4. Using those values I can spit out a rating which fits within the range, given the ratings provided. Here's an example of SPD ratings my app spits out for a generated population of NFL wide receivers in a hypothetical custom draft class:

                            Code:
                            97 
                            96 
                            95 
                            94 94 94 94 94
                            93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93
                            92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
                            91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91
                            90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90
                            89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89
                            88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88
                            87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87
                            86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86
                            85 85 85 85 85 85
                            83
                            81
                            75 75 75 75 75
                            Notice that the SPD ratings bunch up around 90, just like the base Madden NFL 16 roster, and ratings on the extremes are pretty rare. For comparison's sake, the SPD ratings for the WR population of my 2035 season CFM:

                            Code:
                            99
                            98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98
                            97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97
                            96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96
                            95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95
                            94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94
                            93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93
                            92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
                            91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91
                            90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90
                            89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89
                            88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88
                            87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87
                            86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86
                            85 85
                            84
                            83
                            82
                            81 81 81
                            80
                            77 77 77
                            This distribution is far more linear, resulting in a more diverse player set but also one with more values on either extreme of the range.

                            This app is not quite robust enough to be used publicly, and I won't be releasing it for now - it doesn't consider player type and scheme, for example, and I'd want that information to better build more distinct player archetypes. In addition, there's no point to me releasing it publicly, since Madden NFL draft classes can't be edited anyway. I'd be happy to talk about what I did with Tiburon, though, if they are interested in hearing about it.
                            This guy needs his own thread...Rex and all of Tiburon needs to see this.

                            Adding custom draft classes to CFM would fix a whole lot of problems and wouldn't use nearly as much resources as going around fixing the problems individually.

                            Threads like these would not exist anymore, I can't tell you how many times I have seen this thread around release time, instead of sitting around waiting for EA to fix stuff like this we would just be like "Eh I'll fix that real quick"
                            Last edited by DerkontheOS; 08-20-2015, 11:38 AM.

                            Comment

                            • bucky60
                              Banned
                              • Jan 2008
                              • 3288

                              #164
                              Re: CFM rookies not adjusted to Stock Player Scale

                              Originally posted by CM Hooe
                              Explain then why Tiburon rebuilt a ton of stuff in CFM and added little to nothing new for Ultimate Team this year.
                              I wouldn't call it "a ton of stuff". I would say "some things". And they again "rebuilt" instead of making it deeper with additions. I don't consider CFM as making much of a jump from last year. Just my opinion.

                              Comment

                              • Maverick09
                                Rookie
                                • Jun 2004
                                • 267

                                #165
                                Re: CFM rookies not adjusted to Stock Player Scale

                                Originally posted by howboutdat
                                Im still trying to understand how having 27 WRs with 97 or + speed after 10 seasons doesnt seem off by a pretty big margin ? There are a total of 2 in stock rosters. Meaning , there are 2 wrs that fast that is a result of the last decade of drafting in the real nfl. How does anything about that seem ok?
                                Not only are the generated draft classes to blame for this problem, but progression/regression may also be a factor contributing to inflated SPD ratings. More attention needs to be paid to the statistics around progression and the generation of drafted rookies.

                                For all we know, they may have overcompensated with regards to the regression in WR SPD following the issue they were having last year of WRs losing too much SPD too fast.

                                The issue is more complex than it appears.
                                Last edited by Maverick09; 08-20-2015, 11:41 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...