Done.

[Azamien]

Re: Done.

I don't understand the thinking of the people claiming that EA "wouldn't admit to" comeback code.

What, exactly, would they gain by having comeback code and lying about it?

[clarkerots]

Re: Done.

I don't understand the thinking of the people claiming that EA "wouldn't admit to" comeback code.

What, exactly, would they gain by having comeback code and lying about it?

Quite simply, they would gain a "band-aid" fix for some programming issues. No one can claim the AI is too soft or the AI is too easy to beat if there is comeback logic that evens out every game. I'm not saying there is or there isn't comeback logic, just stating an opinion. Don't forget that you're talking about the company that fixes easy long passing and receiver separation by giving defenders a super speed burst, instead of fixing the actual problem.

[plaidchuck]

Re: Done.

can we get some mods to stop the never ending "EA is mean with its comebnack AI" whining? In regards to Madden I mean really, STFU and play APF2k8.

[dorismary]

Re: Done.

I just don't see this comeback you guys are talking about.
In my last 2 games I have had leads going into the 3rd and won both, the first by a score of 5-2 vs Ottawa and the second of 4-1 vs NJ.
I was pressured in the 3rd both games but didn't give up the flukey goal. I gave up a legit powerplay goal in the 3rd to OTT with around 8 minutes left and I gave up a goal to NJ with (in a 1994 flashback) 1.1 seconds left on a bad play by Rozsival (gee imagine that) in front of my own net.
I didn't feel anything out of the ordinary in the way of a CPU boost. I was pressured but I expected to be. My D was solid in front of my own net, aside from the Rozsival play.
Again, not to discredit anything being said here, but I don't see the comeback on the SS level.

With proper sliders I agree with you but theres just way too many wierd glitch goals that I have seen when the cpu couldnt score any other way .
Ex: thru goalie pads , goals clipped framrate aka goalie seizure , magical goals from the corner behind the line while cpu shoots away from the net , center Ice dump ins all while going 5mph
Just very slopply done imo but still a fun game and I really preffered 09 gameplay overall .

[Spanky]

Re: Done.

I'm a discriminating gamer, don't like wasting my time with trash, like the garbage of an NFL product EA has force-fed upon the gaming public for years.

But I really think the people whining about NHL 10 are either too spoiled, too picky, have it in their nature to complain, are just plain clueless or all of the above.

This is a fantastic game. A highly entertaining game. And I even haven't gotten around to downloading the patch yet.

Just played one of my most exciting games: Florida (me) vs. Rangers (CPU). Game 6 in Florida, first round of the playoffs, Rangers leading series 3-2.

I jump out to 3-1 lead, Rangers storm back for three straight goals to lead 4-3 after two periods. We trade goals, ended regulation tied 5-5. Overtime, I'm going all out on the attack, sitting back is for wussies. Lundqvist makes a few big stops to deny me. I get caught on a three-on-one, Higgins scores to complete the hat trick. I lose. Vokoun was a complete sieve, as I outshot them 57-22.

Don't know why, just felt like reliving that game.

The great thing about this game is I get varied experiences -- tight, low-scoring games, blowouts, shootouts, shutouts, the whole 9 yards.

I wasn't getting many shots early on, averaging in low 20s. Then I realized I need to get off more wristers instead of hammering slap shots 90 percent of the time. Now I'm happy with the shot totals.

I play seven minute periods, on the slowest speed.

[Vikes1]

Re: Done.

The great thing about this game is I get varied experiences -- tight, low-scoring games, blowouts, shootouts, shutouts, the whole 9 yards.

I see a lot of variety in my games as well Spanky.

And the varying game experiences really help to keep the game fresh, and add greatly to the replayability for me.

The best thing I can say about NHL '10' is...it's the most fun I've had with a sports game in quite awhile.

[Flyermania]

Re: Done.

But I really think the people whining about NHL 10 are either too spoiled, too picky, have it in their nature to complain, are just plain clueless or all of the above.

As someone who does have documented issues with NHL 10, I find your post to be pretty worthless.

I know hockey, and also know the CPU AI has taken several steps backwards from NHL 08/09. I also know cheap goes when I see them. But I guess if everything is fine for you, everything must be good.

[Qb]

Re: Done.

This is so frustrating. I don't want to tell people they can't voice their opinion, be it "there is comeback code" of "AI cheating" or the other side of the coin. But it inevitably leads to crap like "STFU" and the oh-so-fun "you just suck at the game" arguments.

So what's the answer, fellas?

[Spanky]

Re: Done.

I know hockey.

That makes it all the more humorous that you wasted $60 on this game. Enjoy.

[Flyermania]

Re: Done.

That makes it all the more humorous that you wasted $60 on this game. Enjoy.

Sorry to spoil your laugh, but I received a free copy since I attended the Community Day. But thanks for trying! Enjoy!

[speels]

Re: Done.

Here is the thing with hockey games, and generally sports games altogether. There is no way for a video game to imitate real life because of the lack of an AI that thinks like a human being and the lack of a competely accurate collision detection option. Also, when you look at a puck in real life it is very small when compared to a human body, so when you take a slap shot from the point, the little tiny puck is going to have an easier time getting through the maze of legs and arms and bodies compared to a basketball. There is no arguing with that, so don't try.

Now when it comes to hockey video games, your player is, well lets say smaller than a real life hockey puck. So if you were to proportion the video game puck to the players, it would be so infitesimaly small that you would not be able to see it. This would cause issues when playing hockey if you could not see the puck! So inorder for a video game manufacturer to be able to show a puck, they must make it bigger in relation to the players than it actually is. So here is a way to think about it, take a box that is 4" * 4" and see how many different angles and ways you can put a hockey puck in that box. Now take a tea cup plate and try to see how many ways there are to get that into the box. This is the problem faced by hockey game producers, they are trying to make it realistic to fit as many plates into the box as pucks into the box to make the game ultra-realistic.
You can't do it, which leads to what some consider "cheap goals". It is the only way that video game manufacturers can "even-up" the lack of realistic options available because of the lack of the ability to have ratios that are equal to real life.

So in the end, we are just going to have to deal with some cheap goals to allow these games the ability to imitate real life in terms of scoring amounts and whatnot. And, as I've discussed in a previous thread, the low shot totals are only a result of the lack of the AI acting human and just putting any shot on net, as opposed to shooting only when quality scoring chances are available. The computer is limited to chooting only when the chance to score is historically statistically 50%, whereas a human feels that their is a 50% chance of the puck going in anytime they shoot. Increasing the shoot-pass bias would probably help a little to increase shots.

[Vikes1]

Re: Done.

This is so frustrating. I don't want to tell people they can't voice their opinion, be it "there is comeback code" of "AI cheating" or the other side of the coin. But it inevitably leads to crap like "STFU" and the oh-so-fun "you just suck at the game" arguments.

So what's the answer, fellas?

I would never even pretend to have the answer QB.

So I guess the best thing I can think of is...to each his own. Thankfully...we all see things a little differently. Life would be some kind of a huge drag if we didn't.

For some reason, this does seem to be kind of a touchy subject. If theres cpu cheating or not. For those that have made up their minds one way or the other, I doubt theres anyway to convince them otherwise. So imo...why bother? [not meaning you personally QB] Myself...I have no idea if the AI cheating is actually there or not. Real or imagined...personally, it hasn't hurt my enjoyment of the game.

It is an interesting subject though. Hopefully we can discuss it by focusing on the game...and not each other. [trips and falls off soapbox]

[ballgameronny]

Re: Done.

Is there a comeback logic, that is very tough to tell for sure. I am trying to accumlate my sliders to post, but it is tough to find the perfect balance. There are games where the AI seems uninspired, and other games they are severely amped up. But what I have noticed a few times(over 30 or so games), I will jump out to an early 2-0 or 3-0 lead, and end up losing the game 5-4 or 4-3. Their offense turned into a machine and I couldn't stop them. But it only happened against two team, which were the Caps and Pens, and having a 2 or 3 goal lead against them isn't easy to keep. So that being the only weird flaw, I love this game from head to toe. FlyerMania knows his hockey, there is no doubt about that, I always take his opinion in any argument.

But I dont think NHL 10 is really a step back in any sorts, but i do agree the AI does seem more inconsistent from previous years, but if you like hockey, this is the game to own for sure.

[Rhudey]

Re: Done.

I'm a discriminating gamer, don't like wasting my time with trash, like the garbage of an NFL product EA has force-fed upon the gaming public for years.

But I really think the people whining about NHL 10 are either too spoiled, too picky, have it in their nature to complain, are just plain clueless or all of the above.

This is a fantastic game. A highly entertaining game. And I even haven't gotten around to downloading the patch yet.

Just played one of my most exciting games: Florida (me) vs. Rangers (CPU). Game 6 in Florida, first round of the playoffs, Rangers leading series 3-2.

I jump out to 3-1 lead, Rangers storm back for three straight goals to lead 4-3 after two periods. We trade goals, ended regulation tied 5-5. Overtime, I'm going all out on the attack, sitting back is for wussies. Lundqvist makes a few big stops to deny me. I get caught on a three-on-one, Higgins scores to complete the hat trick. I lose. Vokoun was a complete sieve, as I outshot them 57-22.

Don't know why, just felt like reliving that game.

The great thing about this game is I get varied experiences -- tight, low-scoring games, blowouts, shootouts, shutouts, the whole 9 yards.

I wasn't getting many shots early on, averaging in low 20s. Then I realized I need to get off more wristers instead of hammering slap shots 90 percent of the time. Now I'm happy with the shot totals.

I play seven minute periods, on the slowest speed.

Don't download the patch then dude, it will be the end of scoring and lead changes...

[Scottdau]

Re: Done.

Some think there is a come back logic and some don't. What is so hard about that. It is all opinion. Even if the Dev comes in and says that there is no comeback logic it stills doesn't matter. Plus devs have lied before, I am not saying redshirt lied. I just know when I have a lead the CPU sure makes some questionable goals. Especially in the 3rd period. But like I said it still opinion. I also think I learned today. Who cares if someone thinks there is a comeback logic or not a comeback logic. It is like people can't speak their mind with out getting attack. And wow I am guilty of that in the 2k hockey thread. So for now on I am going to let everybody speak their mind. I really believe this game has a comeback logic. If it doesn't that is great too, but what I am experiencing is a comeback logic if you aren't that is great. But it is still opinion.