M16 v. FBG: The Ratings Release Discussion Thread

[charter04]

Quote: Originally Posted by guppya

Another flaw is the fact of how a simulated season plays out stats wise. If you have such a difference in player attributes such as a rothlisberger and a brady how is it possible for rothlisberger to put up similar stats as brady. It would make no sense for two quarterbacks who generally put up similar regular season stats to suddenly have completely different production levels. On the other hand lets say the sim stats stay accurate and they are both somewhat identical. Then what is the point of rating a player more than 15 points below the other.

I would guess it's because how great it plays when you play the game. Sim's only use a few ratings right now. Like a QB's awr and THA. It doesn't even use the three different accuracy ratings in sims.

Most are more concerned about actually playing the games I would assume.

Not that sim stats aren't important. But, Ea has been messing up sim stats for years anyway. Lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[D81SKINS]

Quote: Originally Posted by DCEBB2001

Like what? If you base everything on the potential of the player and grade them based on that, what is left out? Production? I don't use production because scouts don't grade for it. In the words of Bill Belichick: "We scouts traits, not production."

This a valid point that will more than likely get buried in this thread but I'm reposting anyway.

I could see EA using all your scouting traits, not your ratings. Let me explain,

For ex. J. Flacco goes deep every X amount of throws and he throws out of bounds every X amount of throws.

So EA would have to put a tendency rating/attribute on deep pass atts. To get that to play out in EA's world they may have to set his DAC @ 82 and AWR 85.
FBG ratings would be great if it translated to EA's world of animations but that's still yet to be determined.
Same thing for throwing the ball away, say it's tied to awareness and the higher the awareness the more they throw the ball away avoiding sacks.

Or for ex. J. Charles is rated @ 74 spm(by fbg) but EA has to have it @ 85 to even get him to do it consistently.


So I could see them using these reports to get more of what we see play out in real life. But not use FBG ratings
Either way I signed the petition.
Good luck Dan!

[michapop9]

Quote: Originally Posted by D81SKINS

This a valid point that will more than likely get buried in this thread but I'm reposting anyway. I could see EA using all your scouting traits, not your ratings. Let me explain, For ex. J. Flacco goes deep every X amount of throws and he throws out of bounds every X amount of throws. So EA would have to put a tendency rating/attribute on deep pass atts. To get that to play out in EA's world they may have to set his DAC @ 82 and AWR 85. FBG ratings would be great if it translated to EA's world of animations but that's still yet to be determined. Same thing for throwing the ball away, say it's tied to awareness and the higher the awareness the more they throw the ball away avoiding sacks. Or for ex. J. Charles is rated @ 74 spm(by fbg) but EA has to have it @ 85 to even get him to do it consistently. So I could see them using these reports to get more of what we see play out in real life. But not use FBG ratings Either way I signed the petition. Good luck Dan!

This seems like a solid theory, but didnt DCEBB and CMHOOE mess with all these to figure out precisely this? Or was it just the physical traits? (speed, accel, agil, strength, etc)

[BreakingBad2013]

Can you also post your bottom 5 at each position?

[Number999]

Figure I'll just drop my 2 cents.

I don't get why people believe that changing that ratings skill radically will lead to some sort of World War III effect. EA could quite simply 2 very simple approaches... either A) totally ignore it and not market it like they do now. It would be really damn interesting to not know ANYONE's ratings until the game was actually released (or leaks happened). It's doubtful it really gets in the public eye and even if it does, you can do plan B) which is market it as a brand new feature that'll separate Madden from all the other sports games!

Madden introduces a revolutionary method of "breaking the mold" and using the full 0-100 scale! NBA2k, FIFA, and MLB The Show weren't bold enough, but in order to truly enhance the experience and FEEL the difference on the field between Aaron Rodgers to Cleo Lemon, the expanded ratings have provided an all new in-depth experience for users! 80s of the past which were solid starters now feature superstars, and with this device you will truly feel what it's like to utilize the dominance of Rodgers in the actual NFL.

Boom... that simple. The reluctance of change simply because we have the norm is a foolish path to take. I really do feel like even if there was backlash from a fleet of 12-year olds, by the time Madden 17 comes out it'll be ignored if the game players awesomely.

But maybe that's just me.

[BreakingBad2013]

Quote: Originally Posted by TheBleedingRed21

While I like your work and the way you go about them.. I think for you to have a realistic shot to have EA use your stuff, ratings need to go up. Tournament and average joes (their biggest market) would be outraged to see players in the 60s as starters. While I don't suggest rating them high as they are now, maybe you can work at a happy medium to better propose to them.

Tournment players and average joes shouldn't have much access to ratings (before release) if Madden marketed things like features, graphics, and other meaningful improvements. I've said it once, and I'll say it again:

Average Joes aren't searching for ratings to decide if they'll get Madden.

If Madden re-imagines their rating system, and makes it the norm (3-5 years), it will be a non-issue, especially if it translates into gameplay well.

If you're deterred from buying a game because you're favorite player isn't a 90 overall, A) get real and B) you shouldn't be the demographic they target.

If you're an " average joe " I doubt actually, that you're puttibg much weight into ratings, you're probably just booting up and playing MUT, Play Now, or a lonely cfm.

[D81SKINS]

Quote: Originally Posted by michapop9

This seems like a solid theory, but didnt DCEBB and CMHOOE mess with all these to figure out precisely this? Or was it just the physical traits? (speed, accel, agil, strength, etc)

Idk,
Another ex.
To get a player's strength rating, one would have to use a combo of his production(on the field eye test) and scouting reports.

That is what's confusing b/c to get a scouting report on any player, they use film from on field production.
Anywhoo, what do I know. So many variables,

Another ex.
FBG has LT Trent Williams rated @ 78 Pbk and 80 Str but in EA's world for T. Williams to perform at his scouted level and not get beat and allow a sack every 8 pass atts. He would need 92 Pbk and 90 str

So like I said, so many variables and you would need a team of guys to test this full time imo.

[BreakingBad2013]

Quote: Originally Posted by D81SKINS

Idk, Another ex. To get a player's strength rating, one would have to use a combo of his production(on the field eye test) and scouting reports. That is what's confusing b/c to get a scouting report on any player, they use film from on field production. Anywhoo, what do I know. So many variables, Another ex. FBG has LT Trent Williams rated @ 78 Pbk and 80 Str but in EA's world for T. Williams to perform at his scouted level and not get beat and allow a sack every 8 pass atts. He would need 92 Pbk and 90 str So like I said, so many variables and you would need a team of guys to test this full time imo.

I'm sure they test them in-game to make adjustments each year. Also, ehile Trent Williams may be "low" the defensive players are also "lowered" Again, creating differences in elite, good, okay, and bad.