Player Progression in Franchise Mode

[KBLover]

Quote: Originally Posted by Mauler97

It's pretty sad that a Madden after 2 more years is so far from Head Coach in terms of Franchise Mode, Head Coach blows it out of the water.

Which is why it's sad HC doesn't exist anymore.

It was the perfect solution. Madden can continue to be a generalist football game focusing mostly on on-the-field play and mechanics with a moderate franchise mode while HC was the reverse.

So people who are franchise fanatics could got get HC. Those that prefer on-the-field focus could get Madden. If you like both, you could get both or probably decide which focus you like more and pick that game.

I understand EA wanted to make "One game to rule them all" but...we're still waiting on it, and they brought the HC director over to Madden...but have we seen any impacts of that?

[Mauler97]

Quote: Originally Posted by KBLover

Which is why it's sad HC doesn't exist anymore. It was the perfect solution. Madden can continue to be a generalist football game focusing mostly on on-the-field play and mechanics with a moderate franchise mode while HC was the reverse. So people who are franchise fanatics could got get HC. Those that prefer on-the-field focus could get Madden. If you like both, you could get both or probably decide which focus you like more and pick that game. I understand EA wanted to make "One game to rule them all" but...we're still waiting on it, and they brought the HC director over to Madden...but have we seen any impacts of that?

I'm with ya, I still play Head Coach today, and I highly doubt I will be getting Madden 11 since they decided to ignore Franchise Mode again.

[ryan36]

I think the issue is what the OVR is truly representative of...I mean how they calculate it. If a guy is an 78 WR and his speed goes up +3 , how do we know that as far as the game is concerned that makes him a 79/80?

With all the different ratings they have if each one as it improved a point or two bumped the overall, you'd have 99 ovr players in no time at all. Then it'd be really broken, it's about the balance of a game.

What I'd like to have is everyone's ratings adjusted down, never seen it in a game...what if an 85 over was out of the box max, and that's all you started with. Then if Manning had a good year, he could still progress.

83-85 A
80-83 A-
77-80 B+
72-76 B
68-71 B-

etc....you'd make different ranges so that a C OVR player would be from like 55-65 so you'd have more of them. I like it, hire me EA.

[cam780]

Gotta be honest. I liked how they handled the progression last year. It is as realistic a system as they have had. KB was right with the evaluation vs progression point. If you look at the league there are plenty of cases where back ups stepped in and were found to be great QB's. Brady and Warner come to mind.

All 30 (and 32 teams) missed on both guys. Even though he has starred for the Pats, they didn't know they were drafting this Tom Brady. The problem was with the evaluation and I don't think you can keep the realism and fix that.

The other issue is the flip side to the argument. For every Brady and Warner, there's a Travis Henry or a Kelly Holcomb or a Derek Anderson, players who have flashed only to find out that maybe they weren't as solid as initially thought.

If your 70 overall QB had a 50 TD passing year and progressed to an 85, when you came back the next year to and only had 15 TD's , do you want him to regress just as significantly?

I'm in favor of having a base line talent level with marginal progression based on numbers and maximum progression based on development. I think they did that last year.

[CajunPunk]

Quote: Originally Posted by cam780

If your 70 overall QB had a 50 TD passing year and progressed to an 85, when you came back the next year to and only had 15 TD's , do you want him to regress just as significantly?

Yes. That would make more sense. Maybe he shouldn't digress as significantly, but digress nonetheless. We rarely see players plummet in ratings over a year from one Madden to the next, but we do see them jump from extremely low to fairly high. I think Warner was in the 50s, Brady was maybe a 64, and Stephen Davis, before his success in Washington, was rated a 59 FB, I think.

To me, what is more important than my success (the user will always have the advantage) with the players is the CPU's success, and while the solution may not be in progression, the ratings certainly do have an influence on who the CPU signs in FA, resigns, how the depth chart is arranged, etc.

I mentioned the whole Matt Cassel scenario earier, and he may have been a system QB, but in Madden, we NEVER see teams take chances on one year wonders. Ever. We also never see breakout players like Warner or Terrell Owens who shoot to stardom. These two succeeded (statistically) nearly everywhere they went AFTER being nobodies who became successful elsewhere. It's one of the beauties of the NFL, and it's lost in Madden.

Perhaps if there was a stat or something that made the CPU more interested in player season success (i.e., evidence of player usefulness) rather than individual/overall talent levels, it would be more appealing to me.

I just hate releasing a 73 rated RB that has led the NFL in rushing yards, carries and TDs for two seasons disappear in FA years later because the CPU is that stupid. Even if he were to get signed, he's a third stringer.

And then we have the issue of players not seeing the field for 2 straight seasons and progressing. I wish they would have at least tweaked it somehow rather than just leaving it completely the same.

[cam780]

Quote: Originally Posted by CajunPunk

Yes. That would make more sense. Maybe he shouldn't digress as significantly, but digress nonetheless. We rarely see players plummet in ratings over a year from one Madden to the next, but we do see them jump from extremely low to fairly high. I think Warner was in the 50s, Brady was maybe a 64, and Stephen Davis, before his success in Washington, was rated a 59 FB, I think. To me, what is more important than my success (the user will always have the advantage) with the players is the CPU's success, and while the solution may not be in progression, the ratings certainly do have an influence on who the CPU signs in FA, resigns, how the depth chart is arranged, etc. I mentioned the whole Matt Cassel scenario earier, and he may have been a system QB, but in Madden, we NEVER see teams take chances on one year wonders. Ever. We also never see breakout players like Warner or Terrell Owens who shoot to stardom. These two succeeded (statistically) nearly everywhere they went AFTER being nobodies who became successful elsewhere. It's one of the beauties of the NFL, and it's lost in Madden. Perhaps if there was a stat or something that made the CPU more interested in player season success (i.e., evidence of player usefulness) rather than individual/overall talent levels, it would be more appealing to me. I just hate releasing a 73 rated RB that has led the NFL in rushing yards, carries and TDs for two seasons disappear in FA years later because the CPU is that stupid. Even if he were to get signed, he's a third stringer. And then we have the issue of players not seeing the field for 2 straight seasons and progressing. I wish they would have at least tweaked it somehow rather than just leaving it completely the same.

I agree with you on free agency and the CPU AI having deficiencies but veterans not finding jobs is a part of the NFL. Marvin Harrison and LT (sure he was signed by the Jets but there were only two teams that made offers for someone with a Hall of Fame resume) are perfect examples.

Progression will never be completely perfect but I think that's a function of the game dealing with numbers and ratings where in real life the art of evaluating a player is much more subjective.

[CajunPunk]

Quote: Originally Posted by cam780

I agree with you on free agency and the CPU AI having deficiencies but veterans not finding jobs is a part of the NFL. Marvin Harrison and LT (sure he was signed by the Jets but there were only two teams that made offers for someone with a Hall of Fame resume) are perfect examples.

If you are referring to my statement about TO and Warner, I was referring to when Warner left the Rams and when TO left the 49ers. Before then, they were nothing, yet they became stars and went on to have productive careers with other teams.

Quote:

Progression will never be completely perfect but I think that's a function of the game dealing with numbers and ratings where in real life the art of evaluating a player is much more subjective.

I agree. I just remember thinking five years ago that the franchise mode of the future would be amazing. It isn't. In Madden '05, franchise mode was nearly perfect in my opinion. Now, with today's technology, next gen's franchise mode is a joke.

I was reading on IGN that the franchise mode has been relatively the same since '99, but EA has been adding layers of code every since. Now, EA says that before they go into redoing franchise mode, it must be completely rewritten.

Next gen has been around for 5 years, and they still haven't done much of anything in regard to franchise mode, which sucks because it is the reason I play Madden.