Performance Vs. Equal Potential - I am Confused

[jip4]

Quote: Originally Posted by mjd3221

Yeah, as much as I want practice to be a part of progression, I hated the mini games too. So I'm not sure how it would work. I guess you could choose which areas of practice you would want to emphasize every week? Or you could ask players to have extra practice, and it's their choice whether to do it or not. You wouldn't have to actually do the drills, and which players and coaches you have would be more important. Something like that...

Or you could just have practice entirely behind the scenes. I hated the mini-game-based-progression myself. It's not sim, either. Just have progression based on various factors (coaching, potential, maybe playing time, definitely not performance) and if you ever find yourself asking "wait, why exactly is Player X progressing?" the answer would be entirely simulated, behind the scenes practice.

[mavfan21]

Quote: Originally Posted by jip4

Or you could just have practice entirely behind the scenes. I hated the mini-game-based-progression myself. It's not sim, either. Just have progression based on various factors (coaching, potential, maybe playing time, definitely not performance) and if you ever find yourself asking "wait, why exactly is Player X progressing?" the answer would be entirely simulated, behind the scenes practice.

Agreed.

I shouldn't be able to take any QB in the game and throw 30 tds and progress him to 90 ovr in a few seasons. That is a boring, busted, easily manipulted, and stupid system.

I don't know why these guys want to bring back the old cheat system progression. Want a stud RB? Don't worry about smart scouting and draft luck (like real life), just draft anyone and force feed them the ball (ESP. In the playoffs!) so they become a beast. So boring. Back in the PS2/xbox days it was so easy to create an entire starting line up of 90+ ovr players...how is that fun or realistic?

[mavfan21]

If you are playing on a realistic difficulty setting with sliders that are challenging you shouldn't be able to have all pro seasons with 70 ovr players.

In reality you shouldn't be able to just run any old player out there and be successful. Look at the Eagles, Pinkston, Thrash, Mitchell (1st rounder). They ran those clowns out for 3 years and none of them became a stud. In the old Madden you could turn them into studs after 3 seasons, easy. The new capped progression adds so much depth to the game.

You have to get a little lucky to get studs. Not every team can just "make" their own Larry Fitzgerald.

[kcarr]

Quote: Originally Posted by jip4

Or you could just have practice entirely behind the scenes. I hated the mini-game-based-progression myself. It's not sim, either. Just have progression based on various factors (coaching, potential, maybe playing time, definitely not performance) and if you ever find yourself asking "wait, why exactly is Player X progressing?" the answer would be entirely simulated, behind the scenes practice.

I think something along the lines of 2k5 where you just set up a schedule given a certain amount of time to train each player and a certain amount of time for each of your coaches to work with players and have meetings etc. Also, I would suggest some sort of autofill feature which would have the cpu fill in all this stuff for you so that it could be made as complex as possible without having to worry about it being too in depth as some people will just want to skip through all that. Also, you should be able to edit the "autofilled" schedule so that you can have as much or as little control as you want.

Also, maybe an option to save schedules so you can set up one or two and just work off them with some adjustment. Also, there should be a wide range of practices including things to implement gameplans that concentrate on winning now and things like running drills that work on developing players. Also, play learning really could be brought into this if it was included and could add a lot.

The key though is to be able to make this as in depth as possible but allowing it to be used in a streamlined manner as possible so it doesn't overwhelm the casual gamer and also as easy to sim through as possible without being punished for doing so.

[mjd3221]

Quote: Originally Posted by kcarr

I think something along the lines of 2k5 where you just set up a schedule given a certain amount of time to train each player and a certain amount of time for each of your coaches to work with players and have meetings etc. Also, I would suggest some sort of autofill feature which would have the cpu fill in all this stuff for you so that it could be made as complex as possible without having to worry about it being too in depth as some people will just want to skip through all that. Also, you should be able to edit the "autofilled" schedule so that you can have as much or as little control as you want. Also, maybe an option to save schedules so you can set up one or two and just work off them with some adjustment. Also, there should be a wide range of practices including things to implement gameplans that concentrate on winning now and things like running drills that work on developing players. Also, play learning really could be brought into this if it was included and could add a lot. The key though is to be able to make this as in depth as possible but allowing it to be used in a streamlined manner as possible so it doesn't overwhelm the casual gamer and also as easy to sim through as possible without being punished for doing so.

I like this. I would be very, very happy if this could be put in next year. Or eventually, at least.

[RavensFan2k3]

Quote: Originally Posted by kcarr

He should not be re-evaluated because he already has the ratings required to make that production in that situation. In real life there is no exact knowledge of how good every player is and therefor there is a need for re-evaluations. In franchise mode this is not the case. The game and the user both know exactly how good the player is so there is no need to reevaluate. If he made plays with those ratings then he obviously had the ratings to make those plays so no reevaluation is required. While I will agree, the ratings are not perfect and the devs do not know exactly how good a player is when they make them once you enter franchise mode those ratings control the player and therefore they are exactly how good the player is so then, yes, in the game you know exactly how good that player is. Once in the game you, the cpu, and everyone knows within the confines of the game being played exactly how good the player is. Ok, so they got cassel's rating wrong. Big deal. It happens. That said, as soon as you start your franchise matt is not the same matt he is in real life. He is controlled by a set of numbers that may or may not represent his real life ability. If those abilities are enough to produce like that, then why does he need to be made better for producing like that? Progression is a player actually getting better and gaining skills. Did matt really get better through his play last year? In some areas he might but those are mostly areas where there isn't even a rating to increase such as confidence and reading coverages. If there were ratings for those areas then I could see a big boost for confidence and maybe a small boost to his ability to make reads but he did not get any more accurate, stronger, more agile, anything like that through his play last year so if this is supposed to be a true simulation the shouldn't that also be the case here. Ok, here I will agree that high initial ratings are a somewhat of a reward for performance but once you are in the game, unlike in real life, we already know how good the player is and therefore there is no need for re-evaluation. That is why it is called progression, not re-evaluation. It is to should how much that player progresses or grows as a player which, in real life, really has nothing to do with how they preform. Do you really think a wr becomes better at catching a pass by catching 5 or 6 passes a week for a season? Those 5 or 6 are nothing compared to the number of passes the reciever catches in practice. Practice, not games, is the real place where skills are worked on and improved and this is how it should be in madden. If the kid does produce then he had already had the ability to produce in that situation. That is cred enough. They should put these things in the game if they are trying to make anything close to a realistic progression system. That said, potential somewhat takes care of this for the time being. The potential shows the player's ability to learn and improve and therefore how much they can get out of practice allowing players with higher potential to improve more that players without high potential. While I wouldn't really call progression based preformance a franchise killer I would really like to see them go into a more realistic system and that is one of the things I consider to be most in need of improvement in franchise. I agree, one person shouldn't have complete control over progression. That is why I think 1) potential should be editable, and 2) they need to go to a more realistic training based progression system where you have some control of the areas in which your players train. roster updates are not real life progression/regression. In real life people progress because they practice and regress either because they get older or because they don't put forth effort in practice or because they don't practice due to injury or holdouts. Roster updates are a re-evaluation. That is completely different than progression.

you're right. if the player did that, he already had the ability. so if you put the same senario in madden. Matt Cassel had a 70 OVR rating? Then he had a A potential. With everyone who thinks they it should be performance based, that means that you could put any player in the same position and they'll perform, and then progress. I'm sure if you put someone else in the same situation as Matt Cassel last year, lets say David Carr. Say David Carr did the same thing Cassel did, should he get a 15 point boost? Hell no, and you know what would determine that? Potential rating.

[northface28]

Quote: Originally Posted by TeamBuilder

Look at James Casey, TE drafted by the Texans in the 5th round. Why does he have "A" potential and WR Patrick Turner drafted by the Dolphins in the 3rd Round have "C" potential?

This is a poor example at best.

[Phife1442]

I guess my biggest problem is the idea of players with limited "potential" and also a system in which the user has no control over development.

That 50 ovr MLB with 90 spd i talked about has amazing potential because he is physically gifted. His limit is then his work ethic and his football acumen. Basically how much he trys and can learn. The rating should be ethic and smarts, not potential. Those ratings would then inhibit or amplify his progression.

I need to have some role in the development of my players. If the best they can give me is assigning training to players like 2k5, that kinda sucks. I loved the training camp model, it just needs to be revamped (especially wr catch) so that you cant just get 7 pts easily with anyone. The ratings boosts should not go to things like speed, kick power, jumping, throw power...