Are fifth year options there for everyone on a rookie contract, or just users in QB1?

[roadman]

Quote: Originally Posted by sunnyhmoon

Just to chime in but I just don't agree with people saying that something is better than nothing. And I'm not talking about JUST madden specifically. It goes for any video game, heck, even any product in general for consumers. But I don't see how (again, not talking about madden specifically) adding some half baked feature is better than having nothing. Just my point of view. I'm okay with waiting for the next iteration if I know it'll be done properly by then. Obviously madden can't please everyone and it makes most sense for them to go towards where the video game industry is at but at the same time CFM has been stale the last few years and I don't believe the scenario engine or the user only 5th year option is good enough to say it's an "upgrade".

That's fine, as I stated in that post you quoted, to each their own.

I'd like to determine if the SE or 5th year option is good enough on the user end to state it's an upgrade or not, but I won't know until I have experience with it.

[canes21]

Quote: Originally Posted by Sphinx

Maybe I am in the minority but I am pretty thankful they didn't add the scenario engine to the cpu teams. The cpu has a hard enough time managing their roster as it is. Adding in potential scenarios like 5th year options for them at this point would be counterproductive. We has users have the ability to review our roster and cap situation and determine if player X should be cut so we can extend player Y. The cpu still doesn't have this logic built in, at least not that I have seen. So I would want improved roster management for the CPU way before I would care about them having the scenario engine. Just my opinion though.

Personally, me wanting the scenario engine for the CPU assumes they use it logically and appropriately. I think that can be assumed for anyone wanting it in for CPU teams as well. I can't imagine anyone here is wanting the scenario in for CPU teams even if it meant they were absolutely illogical in the majority of their decisions with it. Then that becomes one of those moments where and addition does actually take away from the mode that some people in this thread didn't know if that could be possible or not.

[sunnyhmoon]

Quote: Originally Posted by roadman

That's fine, as I stated in that post you quoted, to each their own. I'd like to determine if the SE or 5th year option is good enough on the user end to state it's an upgrade, but I won't know until I have experience with it.

Agreed. At the end of the day it's good to have our opinions as consumers.

I just don't think what canes was saying was him throwing a temper tantrum. He was stating his opinion and not mindlessly bashing EA.

[canes21]

Quote: Originally Posted by roadman

I can respect that you'd rather have the feature in fully vs just the user. I just would rather have something better than nothing from a ask after the beta. I didn't think it would be put in initially after the beta. To each their own. At very least, at least 5th year contracts are out in the open, now, and should be improved going forward. I think we can agree on that one. lol Is the game out, yet?lol

How many additions to Madden over the years have we said this about just to see the feature not touched and even scrapped a year or two later at times? I can already see it now... "5th year options were not done in an authentic way and we heard your complaints. We are scrapping them for now until we can find out a way to deliver them in a more appropriate way that the CPU teams can also utilize logically."

Quote: Originally Posted by sunnyhmoon

Just to chime in but I just don't agree with people saying that something is better than nothing. And I'm not talking about JUST madden specifically. It goes for any video game, heck, even any product in general for consumers. But I don't see how (again, not talking about madden specifically) adding some half baked feature is better than having nothing. Just my point of view. I'm okay with waiting for the next iteration if I know it'll be done properly by then. Obviously madden can't please everyone and it makes most sense for them to go towards where the video game industry is at but at the same time CFM has been stale the last few years and I don't believe the scenario engine or the user only 5th year option is good enough to say it's an "upgrade".

I am a big proponent of adding in something half-baked is just as bad, if not worse, than not having it at all. That's not just in Madden or EA games. That's all video games, all products in life. If you're going to do something, do it well. Being a jack of all trades, but a master of none is a saying for a reason.

[DeuceDouglas]

I'm not really interested in getting in the middle of this conversation but I'm genuinely interested if the same tune would be sung if something like X-Factors and Superstar Abilities only applied to the user. Would everything still be cool there simply because it's "better than nothing?" Because the same kind of imbalance that you'd see within gameplay you're going to see with the scenario engine. I believe it was also canes who mentioned seeing three breakout scenarios in one season for his team, that's three chances at upgraded DEV as well as large chunks of XP that the CPU will never have. Virtually every week there's going to be X-Factor scenarios that can provide you with a chance at XP, morale, etc. that the CPU simply won't have. No matter how you cut it, that's a significant imbalance that only continues to enhance the feeling of singularity within franchise mode with the only provided alternative being to avoid it completely by turning it off.



Also, I know that fifth-year options being part of scenarios has caught some flak but I think it makes perfect sense which is why it was one of the first scenarios that I sent along to the franchise team. Obviously the fact that the scenario engine doesn't apply to the CPU pretty much negates that fact but in the future, I do think that it's a perfect fit granted the rest of your franchise is faced with the same decision you are.

[Jimbo12308]

Quote: Originally Posted by DeuceDouglas

I believe it was also canes who mentioned seeing three breakout scenarios in one season for his team, that's three chances at upgraded DEV as well as large chunks of XP that the CPU will never have.

Not that it’s a convenient fix, but you could always just randomly choose 3 players from each team and increase their dev manually so that they are on equal footing.

[AndreSwagassi86]

Quote: Originally Posted by TheOncomingStorm

Regarding holdouts and trade demands, I think users are expecting these to occur more often than realistically should happen. How many trade demands has the NFL seen recently? All I can think of is Antonio Brown. This isn't the NBA, with a trade demand happening every 5 minutes. Realistically, there should be maybe 1 player trade demand across the league every other season. Maybe 2 holdouts a season, across all 32 teams. If the Scenario Engine works in a realistic fashion, you should rarely encounter these scenarios. It's not like you're going to get two trade demands every season. If that's the case, I'd call the Scenario Engine broken.

Agreed 100%

I’m curious if people are expecting these scenarios to pop up like NBA 2K MyGM scenarios ( which doesn’t affect CPU) ... those come up wayyyy too often almost like it wants to set your morale up for failure.

If we are looking for Sim/realism most scenarios are something that should be seen barely once a season : Trade Demands, holdouts etc

Breakout scenarios might be seen frequently as it’s based on upcoming game /gameplay.

And although the scenarios won’t affect the CPU players on CPU teams will still not resign , test free agency , get traded if the logic is correct.

The scenarios I imagine were create to bring more life to the users franchise , I was shocked to see many expected it to affect the CPU also , as many Gabe’s with a comparable feature don’t.


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

[ForUntoOblivionSoar∞]

Quote: Originally Posted by DeuceDouglas

I'm not really interested in getting in the middle of this conversation but I'm genuinely interested if the same tune would be sung if something like X-Factors and Superstar Abilities only applied to the user. Would everything still be cool there simply because it's "better than nothing?" Because the same kind of imbalance that you'd see within gameplay you're going to see with the scenario engine. I believe it was also canes who mentioned seeing three breakout scenarios in one season for his team, that's three chances at upgraded DEV as well as large chunks of XP that the CPU will never have. Virtually every week there's going to be X-Factor scenarios that can provide you with a chance at XP, morale, etc. that the CPU simply won't have. No matter how you cut it, that's a significant imbalance that only continues to enhance the feeling of solidarity within franchise mode with the only provided alternative being to avoid it completely by turning it off. Also, I know that fifth-year options being part of scenarios has caught some flak but I think it makes perfect sense which is why it was one of the first scenarios that I sent along to the franchise team. Obviously the fact that the scenario engine doesn't apply to the CPU pretty much negates that fact but in the future, I do think that it's a perfect fit granted the rest of your franchise is faced with the same decision you are.

Be that as it may, most NFL Simulation* people control all 32 teams anyway (or are in full user leagues), so it doesn’t necessarily have to be an issue.

*I use “NFL Simulation” because apparently many people use “Sim” to mean only “ratings decide,” while “NFL Similarion” means “The game is an attempt to simulate the NFL.”