Madden 20 Gameplay New Details! Custom Animations, Online Replays

[underdog13]

Quote: Originally Posted by JoshC1977

As a guy who does sliders, the sheer irony of making this statement about EA made me laugh (though I DO agree with it). The people playing the game are even worse. "Run game too easy!!!" "Run game too hard!!!" "Too many fumbles!!!" "Pass rush too hard!!!" "CPU completed 80% of their passes....get rid of 'Robo QB'!!!!" "Too many sacks!!!" That's a good chunk of the feedback that slider makers (and developers) get from people playing the game. It's utterly useless feedback. You can't easily tune a game based on JUST stats and you can't do crap with the "too easy/hard" gripes. Now, the relative ease of posting clips has alleviated that a little but most people posting vids never bother showing the ratings of players involved in an "incident". And sure, sometimes, it's a simple glitch - but that is WAY different than something involving game-balancing. Sorry, I totally get your post was taking a different angle on things than what I'm talking about...but I do think it is related. We (as a Madden community) need to give much more explicit feedback. If we just give them outcome-based feedback, they'll just fix outcomes. Our feedback needs to provide the context behind the outcomes, like, "Running is too easy up the middle because the ILBs are too aggressive and over-running the play" or "Threshold is too low because O-linemen are releasing their blocks (not shed by the d-line) and going downfield well before the RB can even get to the LOS." Once we start giving them much more explicit feedback like this, it's going to be much more difficult for them to get away with 'outcome-focused' tuning. We need to help them help us!

Agree with everything you said. I never go into the slider sub forum any more. All conjecture with no video or statistical proof.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[ODogg]

Quote: Originally Posted by JoshC1977

As a guy who does sliders, the sheer irony of making this statement about EA made me laugh (though I DO agree with it). The people playing the game are even worse. "Run game too easy!!!" "Run game too hard!!!" "Too many fumbles!!!" "Pass rush too hard!!!" "CPU completed 80% of their passes....get rid of 'Robo QB'!!!!" "Too many sacks!!!" That's a good chunk of the feedback that slider makers (and developers) get from people playing the game. It's utterly useless feedback. You can't easily tune a game based on JUST stats and you can't do crap with the "too easy/hard" gripes. Now, the relative ease of posting clips has alleviated that a little but most people posting vids never bother showing the ratings of players involved in an "incident". And sure, sometimes, it's a simple glitch - but that is WAY different than something involving game-balancing. Sorry, I totally get your post was taking a different angle on things than what I'm talking about...but I do think it is related. We (as a Madden community) need to give much more explicit feedback. If we just give them outcome-based feedback, they'll just fix outcomes. Our feedback needs to provide the context behind the outcomes, like, "Running is too easy up the middle because the ILBs are too aggressive and over-running the play" or "Threshold is too low because O-linemen are releasing their blocks (not shed by the d-line) and going downfield well before the RB can even get to the LOS." Once we start giving them much more explicit feedback like this, it's going to be much more difficult for them to get away with 'outcome-focused' tuning. We need to help them help us!

This is the best positive I have seen in a while on here. It's so true that people don't understand that if they rush too well with a good rushing team it does not mean the rushing game is overpowered. The inverse is also true!!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[4thQtrStre5S]

Quote: Originally Posted by JoshC1977

As a guy who does sliders, the sheer irony of making this statement about EA made me laugh (though I DO agree with it). The people playing the game are even worse. "Run game too easy!!!" "Run game too hard!!!" "Too many fumbles!!!" "Pass rush too hard!!!" "CPU completed 80% of their passes....get rid of 'Robo QB'!!!!" "Too many sacks!!!" That's a good chunk of the feedback that slider makers (and developers) get from people playing the game. It's utterly useless feedback. You can't easily tune a game based on JUST stats and you can't do crap with the "too easy/hard" gripes. Now, the relative ease of posting clips has alleviated that a little but most people posting vids never bother showing the ratings of players involved in an "incident". And sure, sometimes, it's a simple glitch - but that is WAY different than something involving game-balancing. Sorry, I totally get your post was taking a different angle on things than what I'm talking about...but I do think it is related. We (as a Madden community) need to give much more explicit feedback. If we just give them outcome-based feedback, they'll just fix outcomes. Our feedback needs to provide the context behind the outcomes, like, "Running is too easy up the middle because the ILBs are too aggressive and over-running the play" or "Threshold is too low because O-linemen are releasing their blocks (not shed by the d-line) and going downfield well before the RB can even get to the LOS." Once we start giving them much more explicit feedback like this, it's going to be much more difficult for them to get away with 'outcome-focused' tuning. We need to help them help us!

100% truth. Something I also notice, which I have been guilty of forgetting to add to criticism is identifying Game Mode and skill level.

For example - could have 1 person stating that pass rush is too quick and another saying pass rush is perfect or too slow, but if the first player is in All-Madden and the other in Pro skill level, then they could both be true but Devs won't know which game level and that complicates issues rather than making things easier.

[Cardot]

Quote: Originally Posted by JoshC1977

We (as a Madden community) need to give much more explicit feedback. If we just give them outcome-based feedback, they'll just fix outcomes.

I agree, but as users we really don't know the mechanics of the underlying code. When EA says "new/updated logic will result in DBs in LB positions to be less effective vs the run", I am left scratching my head. Doesn't the game already take player size/weight into consideration? If not, that might be the root cause? And maybe that is indeed what they fixed?? But the bullet point kind of sounds like they just added some if/then logic for when a player is playing out of position...and adding yet another layer of complexity which then makes the slider work more even difficult and bewildering.

[ODogg]

Quote: Originally Posted by Cardot

I agree, but as users we really don't know the mechanics of the underlying code. When EA says "new/updated logic will result in DBs in LB positions to be less effective vs the run", I am left scratching my head. Doesn't the game already take player size/weight into consideration? If not, that might be the root cause? And maybe that is indeed what they fixed?? But the bullet point kind of sounds like they just added some if/then logic for when a player is playing out of position...and adding yet another layer of complexity which then makes the slider work more even difficult and bewildering.

Not difficult to understand, players out of position simply take a ratings hit


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Cardot]

Quote: Originally Posted by ODogg

Not difficult to understand, players or if position simply take a ratings hit Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It is a bandaid. If someone can get an unfair/unrealistic advantage by using a player out of position, there is an issue with the mechanics of the game and/or how it recognizes player ratings. Simply nerfing a player if playing out of position (or some other condition) my resolve one symptom, but often creates another. I would rather they identify the root cause.

[ODogg]

Quote: Originally Posted by Cardot

It is a bandaid. If someone can get an unfair/unrealistic advantage by using a player out of position, there is an issue with the mechanics of the game and/or how it recognizes player ratings. Simply nerfing a player if playing out of position (or some other condition) my resolve one symptom, but often creates another. I would rather they identify the root cause.

They cannot gain an advantage now that it has been fixed. A band aid implies something is still wrong. It's not, or shouldn't be. We shall see.

Honestly though I've played a lot of online and not really even saw this as any sort of an issue in '19.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Grey_Osprey]

The one I don't get is …"subbing a DB at LB will cause the DBs jumping to be calculated in accordance to the LB calculations - so DBs will not get a jumping advantage."

Moving from one position to another shouldn't change physical skills like jumping. If you could jump at DB, you should still be able to jump at LB. Maybe you are a liability vs the run, (tackling, block shed, strength, positional awareness, etc), but forgetting how to jump? Come on. What's the point of all the ratings and traits if you have to manipulate stuff like this?