The Problem With Franchises in Sports Games

[jwassel]

The problem is simple. The player ratings are poor. Personally I would like to see a greater disparity in ratings, where the Superstars are significantly better than other players and so on. The ratings should be on a FULL 100 point scale, not on a 50-100 point scale like they mainly are now in sports games. But putting that issue aside, the problem is the REGRESSION of players. Games these days seem to have player progression, but have very limited regression. As you play through multiple seasons many players progress but many do not regress. This further shrinks the player rating scale. What happens is you tend to get most teams being mediocre and a few being good, but no, really bad teams. Every year in the NFL you have teams that go 2-14, 3-13 and so on, in Madden once you get a few years in, ratings have increased so much, that the gap between teams is not as great as it should be. The worst team may now be 6-10. In the NBA 2k series, once you get a few years in you will rarely see a team have less than 20 wins in a seasons, by comparison you will rarely see teams have upwards of 60 wins. This is because there is just too much mid level talent because of all of the progression and no regression. There will be so many players rated in the 80's once you get deep into a franchise mode in any sport. Older players need to regress faster, and what we really need is players who dont play, to regress. Youll have players sit on the FA list for years, and not lose one rating point at all. If you sit out for an entire season, you should lose a Ton of points, no matter who you are.

You see this problem in the madden weekly roster updates. Every week you will see a ton of players get better and better, we now have a lot of 99 rated players. But really, the roster updates to not have sharp enough declines. Matt Moore for instance on the Dolphins is rated an 80 currently....really he's an 80? I know he played well for a little bit, which led Madden to bump his ratings up to keep the game mimicing real life. But really an 80? The increases are too steep, and the decreases are almost non-existent.

This is the problem with every sports franchise. Every year when a new game is made the players are re-rated, I'm not saying thats how it needs to be every year in a franchise mode, but stats and playing time have so little effect on players. The progression system is fine, its the REGRESSION system that needs to be altered. In any franchise mode, if you within 5 years, cannot have a full starting lineup (in ANY sport) of all 80's you've done something wrong. However every year when the new games come out, very rarely do teams have all 80's starting for it.

The draft classes do nothing but hurt this problem. First of all we need every sport to hand-make each rookie and prospect, every single one. The computer generated ones come out as so unrealistic. But besides that, we need the ratings for those rookies and incoming prospects tweaked. In college games you know who the best players are going to be....the 5 star recruits, thats not how it is in real life. They need to hand make each player, and in addition like in College Hoops 2k8 give each player a progression rating, and this includes giving 2 stars and lesser rated prospects high progression ratings, which is something you rarely see. In the pro sports the ratings are too high. In the NBA 2k series you'll see autogenerated players come in as 80's and high 70's and such. Rarely will you see a top 10 pick be in the 50's. However when you look at the initial rookie ratings for this year in NBA2k12, Bismack Biyombo, was rated in the 50's. However you will never see a computer generated rookie picked in the top 10 be rated in the 50's. I also believe the rookies should not have a set rating at the start especially in Madden. In real life when you draft a player in the 1st or 2nd round, you come into the season with high expectations for them. Sure sometimes the players will be busts. But you dont know that until the season starts. In Madden, you know as soon as you draft a guy, if hes gonna be a good player for you, or not, before he ever steps on the field. (On a tangent: The madden progression ratings of A/B/C, is a joke, there needs to be a number correlation, again, on a scale, even 50-100 scale would be fine, but you cannot have a players potential be simply A or B or C, etc.)

That is the biggest problem in Sports Games today. The system needs to be fixed, not just in one game, but in every game. If you have an 84 QB, who (simulated) throws for 2500 yds 15 Tds and 25 Ints, that player should not be an 84 rated QB the next year. Especially if the guy is a guy past his prime. Stats dont need to dictate the entire progression, i dont even care if they dont progress, and ONLY regress players, but something needs to change. There needs to be more regression in players. Their ratings need to be much more fluid. Players should be able to go from 90's to 70's and then back up to 90's later on if they deserve it. The madden hot and cold streaks was a great idea. But it was just a Hot and Cold streak, it needs to show us the change in the players rating (especially if their playing terrible) and it needs to be permanent.

That is the biggest problem internally with franchise modes in sports. There are other huge issues I know, but I think if the ratings system was changed, franchise modes would all be seriously improved, and thats without one layout, or mode change.

[PGaither84]

Quote: Originally Posted by jwassel

The problem is simple. The player ratings are poor. Personally I would like to see a greater disparity in ratings, where the Superstars are significantly better than other players and so on. The ratings should be on a FULL 100 point scale, not on a 50-100 point scale like they mainly are now in sports games.

I agree. That was kind of a goal with Madden 10's stretched ratings, but that didn't last very long, or go as far as I would have liked to have seen. I wish we had NCAA's ability to edit and share rosters.

Another problem is that even if you do a complete re-edit of the players... the rookies will all need to be edited too, other wise they will be too good.

Quote:

But putting that issue aside, the problem is the REGRESSION of players. Games these days seem to have player progression, but have very limited regression. As you play through multiple seasons many players progress but many do not regress. This further shrinks the player rating scale.

I agree here as well. I used to paly Madden 02 on my Nintendo Game Cube and that game was on the other extreme. Players would progress a lot from the ages of 21 through 24. They would progress slowly from 25 through 27 and stop around there. They would start a quick and very sharp decline at about age 30. It was very depressing to see Junior Seau retire as a 64OVR in like 2005 in Madden 02 [the 2001 season.] This was a nice system, but too extreme in the other direction in my opinion.

************************************************** ******

I have been playing APF2k8 a lot recently. I didn't have a 360 when it came out, so I didn't play it when it was new even though I wanted to... and over the last two or three years I only casually played it off and on. Only recently have I really began to fully appreciate just how great that game is. One of he things that game does really well is make "scrubs" play poorly. When you have a star, or are playing against a star, you can tell.

Srucb receivers drop passes and don't run quick sharp routes. then you have star receivers who not only run good clean routes, but depending on their abilities, they not only make catches... they make the tough catches no one else can. Players with "tough in the middle" hang on after big hits with consistency while others don't, and scrubs almost never will.

Scrub linemen will whiff on blocks or get dominated by star defenders. Star linemen can pancake defenders and move on to the next level in the run game, or be stone wall in pass protection.

Star Linebackers have the agility to make plays in zone or man that scrubs just can't. Stars also read and react to the run and wrap up the ball carrier better and with more consistency than scrubs.

Star QBs can throw laser accurate passes into tight windows... while scrambling. Scrub QBs have a hard time accurately hitting wide open receivers. If you have a scrub QB and scrub receivers, it's a nightmare and a crap shoot to move the ball down field. I made the good read, made a nice pass and DONK! incomplete. On the other hand, I can use two Gold star players and thread the needle between two or three defenders and take the hit.

I am not even trying to compare Madden to 2k8. I am just saying that the desparity in talent is noticeable on the field. Not just a disparity in speed. Some of that, in my opinion, also has to do with game play... but let's not go there.

Again, I agree that having a larger gap in talent levels would really help, but so do sliders. Sliders also help make the ratings matter more. If you have a slider setting where players with lower positional ratings fail to make plays as well or as consistently as their higher rated counter parts, then your game play experience will improve. If you combine that iwth strateched out ratings, then stars will really begin to shine.

With one set of sliders, you can have Punters come in and play O-line for you. With another set, you can have a Hall of Fame O-line play like scrubs. A good slider set makes a difference.

[woodjer]

I agree with some of this but I think that a bigger problem is that in just about every sports game that I've played, the ratings were static across all teams...especially the Overall rating. If I try to put Peyton Manning into an offense focused around a mobile QB, I shouldn't still see him as a 90+ overall. Especially in a football game, teams need to evaluate players based on the type of system that they (the teams) run. Sure, teams like Denver could change their entire offense to adapt to a player but the downside to doing that should be that other players become less effective because that's not the system that they learned in training camp.

In terms of franchise modes, the issue with this is that too often, that's the number the CPU uses to make decisions. If a 74-rated WR goes off in his free agent season but his Overall rating only goes up to a 78 or so, teams won't be going after him like they should. On the other hand, if he goes up too high to reflect the great season, you run into the same issues that you're talking about.

I can't remember who it was or what thread it was in but someone around here suggested that we have the ability to re-rate players based on the system that we want to run. For example, if I want to run HB swing passes regularly, I should be able to increase the impact that receiving attributes have on the overall that I see for that position. The same type of thing should be implemented across all of the CPU coaches. If you have that and a coaching carousel of some sort, teams would have to consider both the coaches ratings and how their existing team would fare under that system before deciding who to hire.

Anyway, just some of my thoughts on ratings and the issues they cause as they currently exist.

[jwassel]

sure and I agree with you about the systems, but that is a whole different argument that would be harder for games to implement rather than just being better about the ratings.

That argument is simply in franchise mode, coaches really dont either matter, or just give positions a boost in ratings. Madden the most, needs this to be fixed, they need coaches to matter, they need more coaches, they need specific ratings, and systems for coaches. Coaching in football is so much more important than every other sport. In Madden coaches really mean nothing, especially when you can go in and change how often you want to pass, and how often you want to run etc. An easy fix rather than revamping the whole thing (which needs to happen regardless) is just to have each coach have his own sliders that DONT CHANGE. If you sign Andy Reid as your coach, your going to throw more, you shouldnt be able to go in and change your run slider to 40/60 (which is YET ANOTHER thing to fix...the silder should have more increments, not simply 60/40, 50/50, 40/60, it takes all of the personality out of it).

In NBA 2k, the coaching system is stupid, and I would argue pointless. Coaches dont do anything, and maybe worst of all, the created coaches dont LOOK like their pictures. I cant tell you how many times I've signed some created Black coach, and on the bench hes white! So stupid

Coaching in sports franchises are all terrible and need to be fixed. But lets address that AFTER we fix the actual players, once we can get those ratings right, then we can move on to other stuff.

[zarmstead2]

I disagree about the whole regression thing. I do not think the fact is that players don't regress enough- I believe the potential rating is what kills franchise.

Going to be talking Madden, not 2K.

I think the true problem in the increasing rate of average starters is the potential.

If I draft Jonathon Martin in the 2nd Round- 78 OVR B Potential- there is no way he busts. NO WAY. He will be about an 85 in a couple years at most. He could lead the league in sacks given up and he would still progress. That is the problem. AGE SHOULD NOT FACTOR AS MUCH AS STATS.

If Drew Brees lights it up again next year, he will be a 99OVR IN MADDEN- not a 94 because he's a year older. Players in franchise should regress very little on age, and very heavily on their performance- based on quarter length obviously.

I can tell what you're thinking: any good player in madden would make his whole team superstars because they will perform well under his control. This is why there should be potential caps.

I know its not pretty- but otherwise a Madden veteran would have Rex Grossman in the upper 80s in very little time. A player should earn his full potential if he performs well- and if he's just average, he will hover around the upper 70s to lower 80s. While this eliminates undrafted players to turn into superstars- progression via statistics is the way to go in order to keep some variety between teams.

Just my opinion.

EDIT/TL;DR: Dont get me wrong, veterans do need to regress (otherwise steve hutchinsin could be a 92 'till re retires)- just not as much. The true regression and progression should rely on the stats.

[jwassel]

oh see I dont mean they should progress and regress with age, i agree with you, i think Stats and performance should be the main indicator.

You're totally right, a QB that comes out as a 78 B will not bust at all.....and thats terrible, you know before you even set your depth chart for the season, what kind of career rating wise hes gonna have.

But thats where i think Regression is the key for all of this. He can come out as a 78 B (even though i think 78 is too high for most rookies), and then if he plays poorly, he should absolutely regress. He shouldn't just automatically get better because he is a rookie.

Its not about just older players getting worse....its about ANY player getting worse. It always bothers me when you have guys that get stuck on the FA list for whole seasons unsigned....those players should absolutely get worse the next year no matter their age or potential. Not only did they not play a down of football. They weren't even on a team.

I agree with you whole heartedly that the progression is terrible and simply in a word PREDICTABLE which is horrible. But lack of regression is a huge part in that (or just NOT progressing one year, they dont necessarily have to get worse).

[vrock627]

the whole progression and regression needs to be revamped in all games.

the progression is awful too. in most games its based on age potential, and playing time. no game has progression based on how well they produce, except for 1-2 points here and there. and they get 5-10 points just for being young with good potential. i think it needs to be a balance of all of them.

[jwassel]

yep, it really does....