|
Quote: |
|
|
|
|
Originally Posted by JoshC1977 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My biggest issue (aside from the obvious CURRENT lack of scenario variety). There need to be NEGATIVE consequences.
My lord, it's like these scenarios were written by someone who believes that everyone deserves a medal or participation trophy!
Had a scenario where Guice wanted more touches. Well, AP was out with an injury, so I fed Guice the ball. But, Guice was stymied and even though he got a lot of touches, he didn't produce.
He comes back, says something along the lines of "Sorry, you did your part coach, but I didn't produce." That's a great response....and added the smallest touch of personality (like I nearly felt for the guy). I was like, "Hey, that's a cool way to end the scenario". But then I get the pop-ups....my receivers all get a +increase in XP and Guice gets a boost to Morale! Like, what?!!! You fail at your objectives and get REWARDED for it? Guice should have gotten a negative XP adjustment, or a drop to ratings or something.
EA needs to take the kids' gloves off and make real consequences....it's just like the old confidence system - it's too one-sided and franchise will never grow until there are both positive AND negative outcomes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is where the casual user REALLY holds things back and I hope people scream from the rooftops about wanting more negative and impactful outcomes from scenarios.
Right now, the current viewpoint is that the negative consequence from that kind of scenario is simply not getting the reward. You missed out on a large chunk of XP or in certain cases a bump in DEV trait and the fact that you missed out is the negative part of the scenario and any additional penalty is looked at as piling on to an already "negative" outcome. And the reason I use "negative" is because you're essentially playing with house money as there's no risk to playing one way or another and it makes a lot of scenarios feel like dead ends because the player wants one thing, you do another and where there should be conflict or adversity, nothing happens.
Take the X-Factor scenarios for example, there's really no reason to do anything but try and negate X-Factors every week you play them as the only difference between the other two choices is the difficulty and level of the reward. If you plan to negate Khalil Mack and you do, you get handsomely rewarded for taking the risk. Meanwhile if you do the same and
Khalil Mack sacks you 14 times in one game, you miss out on the reward and move on to the next. It's not a balanced system at all.