After watching madden 17, i still feel like its ratings need to be spread

[CM Hooe]

Quote: Originally Posted by roadman

No one knows about how the ratings are playing out for 17 just by watching the videos the past week. The ratings were all randomized.

I've been away for two weeks acclimating to a new job so I may be reading this incorrectly, but the ratings in the EA PLAY builds absolutely were not randomized (I am reading "randomized" here as "purely random"). They were very clearly marked as not final, but the players you'd expect to be good were good and the players you'd expect to be not as good weren't. If by "randomized" you mean that some fuzz / noise was applied to all the players, that certainly was possible, however.

With respect to OVR ratings, the only thing that stood out to me was that rookie ratings were lower than I've come to expect from years of playing Madden. Again, however, don't read too much into that because ratings were very clearly marked as not final in multiple places in the Madden booth.

[jpdavis82]

I don't know what exactly this means but I've been told by one of the devs that the ratings are spread this year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[roadman]

Quote: Originally Posted by CM Hooe

I've been away for two weeks acclimating to a new job so I may be reading this incorrectly, but the ratings in the EA PLAY builds absolutely were not randomized (I am reading "randomized" here as "purely random"). They were very clearly marked as not final, but the players you'd expect to be good were good and the players you'd expect to be not as good weren't. If by "randomized" you mean that some fuzz / noise was applied to all the players, that certainly was possible, however. With respect to OVR ratings, the only thing that stood out to me was that rookie ratings were lower than I've come to expect from years of playing Madden. Again, however, don't read too much into that because ratings were very clearly marked as not final in multiple places in the Madden booth.

I'm just going by what Clint said on Twitter, he did say the ratings were randomized. He didn't go into elaboration beyond that point.

[mrprice33]

Quote: Originally Posted by roadman

I'm just going by what Clint said on Twitter, he did say the ratings were randomized. He didn't go into elaboration beyond that point.

Yeah, sorry if I contributed to the confusion. It wasn't like Aaron Rodgers was a 20 OVR or something.

[Allball76]

I bet what the Devs wanna do with ratings vs the casual/mut community there a lil worried . But Gameplay just went major simulation So rating should go hand in hand. People don't wanna believe the avg player isn't that great that why in the NFL the avg career is 2 years . We just got the tier system . And only certain WR will make alot of spec catches. Just need to keep going down that line . talent from ok to avg is big and elite guys are special ! We have seen 1000's of guy come into the nfl that ran a 4.3 4.4 40 yard dash but most them guys don't make it because that's all they are is fast without alot of football awareness . Like was said Dri Archer has out this world speed but that it (he should be like (55 overall )! Im a Hugh vikings fan we drafted troy Williamson first round 4.3 speed he sucked ,Cordell Patterson 4.3 also he may get cut this year! Speed is way over rated ! These fast guys most plays don't get separation good enough ! The other attributes that make a player should go way down ! leave the fast guys speed alone but route running ,release and specific attribute to there position should be the major end all to how good someone is ! The ratings should be so spread that the elite players should require double teams (WR & TE) (DE ,DT ,LB) , 8 man Fronts for running backs in game planing ! I myself believe were headed that way by reading the blogs so lets see what we get in the next few years ! edit ( btw Chad Johnson didn't make it on the Pats because he didn't get there football concepts of choice routs and how NE ran there offense !) Just had to add that football awareness is Hugh !

[UtahUtes32]

Quote: Originally Posted by Allball76

We have seen 1000's of guy come into the nfl that ran a 4.3 4.4 40 yard dash but most them guys don't make it because that's all they are is fast without alot of football awareness .

I think this is the thing that Madden fails to represent. If football was purely a track meet, the track stars would be superstars. A 4.3 40 is amazing, but in no way guarantees the receiver being able to get off the press, get open on a route, catch the ball in traffic

[Yazan Gable]

I wonder where this idea that being above 90 made you Hall of Fame caliber. In the first place, the ratings fluctuate in the game as the season goes along according to recent performances. That indicates (to me at least) that the ratings are representative of perceived skill and ability of players for that season. Not to mention it's also subjective, since I didn't see many people squabbling about Joe Flacco somehow being rated 82 OVR despite evidence to the contrary. I'm sure there will be people who say he had a fine year and quote his great playoff record, but then you can find writers and analysts who see a mediocre QB with bad mechanics, feet, and pocket awareness who has gotten by with a great defense. If the Ravens make the AFC Championship despite these issues in his game not disappearing, there will be complaints about Joe Flacco not being in the 80s range even in reality his play does not deserve it.

Related to this issue is what you do with QBs like Teddy Bridgewater who have played very well and have the traits of an anticipatory, accurate QB but is gimped by an ill-fitting scheme and demolished offensive line? This year, he got an 84 OVR, lower than Matthew Stafford's 86 OVR despite Matthew Stafford playing atrocious and being kept afloat by two very good receivers and an offensive scheme that made him throw short, easy passes that inflated his completion percentage. Marcus Mariota is an ugly 78 OVR and is always missing passes, despite actually playing very well despite his mediocre supporting cast. Philip Rivers is rated lower than Andy Dalton and Matt Ryan even though the former had the best supporting cast in the NFL and the latter was busy crapping the bed with inexplicable interceptions, all because most of his offensive cast was decimated by injuries.

My point in linking these film room articles and players is that even if you spread these ratings out, it is so difficult to parse out is good and who is benefiting from their supporting cast. If you think Philip Rivers should be in the 80s because his team didn't play well this past season, then it would be a mistake in the ratings system that goes beyond spreading the ratings out. This is essentially a core issue that cannot be resolved without both transparency in how ratings are decided and the understanding that just because you *think* these handful of players are "elite" and thus pass this somewhat arbitrary 90 range doesn't mean you are right. There are very few players who are obviously special players, and there are players who are Top 5 or Top 10 in their position based on the scheme they work within and how their play complements the players on their team. Jason Babin played 30 snaps all last season, 22 of them in one game for the Ravens and 1 for the Cardinals in the Packers playoff game. Markus Golden played nearly 600 snaps for the Cardinals and it was noted often in coverage on the Cardinals how Golden was an up and coming piece to that defense. He is 70 OVR, below 76 OVR for Jason Babin and situational pass rusher 81 OVR Dwight Freeney. Ratings in Madden will never be as good as NBA2K's or FIFA's because the way in which the game is played is so much more dependent on the teammates of each player. Unlike baseball and basketball who have loads of really good statistics to use, total yards gained and allowed is still how Madden picks the best offenses and defenses. This isn't as much an indictment on Madden as it is on the state of football with regards to how it regards statistics and looking beyond clutch and wanting it more and just being a winner.

TL;DR spreading ratings out is a somewhat fool's errand in trying to more accurately represent players and teams in the NFL until the developers can figure out a an effective way to integrate scheme into how players and teams play/are rated (perhaps even beyond Franchise mode, even) and arrive on a transparently described method of analyzing players and teams with statistics and film work to make these ratings. Or they could use people like Pro Football Focus and Football Outsiders to help them in this endeavor.

[khaliib]

Quote: Originally Posted by Yazan Gable

I wonder where this idea that being above 90 made you Hall of Fame caliber. In the first place, the ratings fluctuate in the game as the season goes along according to recent performances. That indicates (to me at least) that the ratings are representative of perceived skill and ability of players for that season. Not to mention it's also subjective, since I didn't see many people squabbling about Joe Flacco somehow being rated 82 OVR despite evidence to the contrary. I'm sure there will be people who say he had a fine year and quote his great playoff record, but then you can find writers and analysts who see a mediocre QB with bad mechanics, feet, and pocket awareness who has gotten by with a great defense. If the Ravens make the AFC Championship despite these issues in his game not disappearing, there will be complaints about Joe Flacco not being in the 80s range even in reality his play does not deserve it. Related to this issue is what you do with QBs like Teddy Bridgewater who have played very well and have the traits of an anticipatory, accurate QB but is gimped by an ill-fitting scheme and demolished offensive line? This year, he got an 84 OVR, lower than Matthew Stafford's 86 OVR despite Matthew Stafford playing atrocious and being kept afloat by two very good receivers and an offensive scheme that made him throw short, easy passes that inflated his completion percentage. Marcus Mariota is an ugly 78 OVR and is always missing passes, despite actually playing very well despite his mediocre supporting cast. Philip Rivers is rated lower than Andy Dalton and Matt Ryan even though the former had the best supporting cast in the NFL and the latter was busy crapping the bed with inexplicable interceptions, all because most of his offensive cast was decimated by injuries. My point in linking these film room articles and players is that even if you spread these ratings out, it is so difficult to parse out is good and who is benefiting from their supporting cast. If you think Philip Rivers should be in the 80s because his team didn't play well this past season, then it would be a mistake in the ratings system that goes beyond spreading the ratings out. This is essentially a core issue that cannot be resolved without both transparency in how ratings are decided and the understanding that just because you *think* these handful of players are "elite" and thus pass this somewhat arbitrary 90 range doesn't mean you are right. There are very few players who are obviously special players, and there are players who are Top 5 or Top 10 in their position based on the scheme they work within and how their play complements the players on their team. Jason Babin played 30 snaps all last season, 22 of them in one game for the Ravens and 1 for the Cardinals in the Packers playoff game. Markus Golden played nearly 600 snaps for the Cardinals and it was noted often in coverage on the Cardinals how Golden was an up and coming piece to that defense. He is 70 OVR, below 76 OVR for Jason Babin and situational pass rusher 81 OVR Dwight Freeney. Ratings in Madden will never be as good as NBA2K's or FIFA's because the way in which the game is played is so much more dependent on the teammates of each player. Unlike baseball and basketball who have loads of really good statistics to use, total yards gained and allowed is still how Madden picks the best offenses and defenses. This isn't as much an indictment on Madden as it is on the state of football with regards to how it regards statistics and looking beyond clutch and wanting it more and just being a winner. TL;DR spreading ratings out is a somewhat fool's errand in trying to more accurately represent players and teams in the NFL until the developers can figure out a an effective way to integrate scheme into how players and teams play/are rated (perhaps even beyond Franchise mode, even) and arrive on a transparently described method of analyzing players and teams with statistics and film work to make these ratings. Or they could use people like Pro Football Focus and Football Outsiders to help them in this endeavor.

You missed the whole intent of what the OP is talking about.

It's not about data analysis, OVR's or best vs worst representation as most ratings discussions tend to veer towards, but about using as much of the current scale within the games ratings/animation structure to make "GAMEPLAY" stand out more between players, in particular AI players.

If you do a search, you will find that there a several ratings thread discussions, both in Madden and NCAA, that will help to highlight what the OP is driving at.

Its not fools errand if you understand how ratings affect gameplay and the user now having the ability to tweak said gameplay further to their liking.