Potential-Performance Slider?

[diderooy]

First post--

I'm finding a lot of threads evolve into whether they prefer performance-based progression or progression based on potential ratings. While I prefer the performance incentives, why can't Madden put a slider on our Franchise modes...10 settings, different weightedness of the two attributes. It shouldn't be that hard, and it would give both camps something they want from a game that sells so well.

[FlyEaglesFly3]

Re: Potential-Performance Slider?

It should be based off of performance. If a 35 year old player goes off two or 3 years in a row (most likely he is a DL or OL) he should be one of the better players.

Or a 7th rounder who would get a F potential in Madden, if he works hard for 3 years and shows up in the NFL his ratings should project so.

[fahrenheit]

Re: Potential-Performance Slider?

The problem with performance is you get system players, players that put up great numbers because of the team their in and the talent that surrounds them. Plug in any RB to an elite offensive line and you have a good chance of putting up 1100+ yards.

And then theres the flip, you could have players who never see the field and don't develop which is completely unrealistic.
<style> qtl { position: absolute; border: 1px solid #cccccc; -moz-border-radius: 5px; opacity: 0.2; line-height: 100%; z-index: 999; direction: ltr; } qtl:hover,qtl.open { opacity: 1; } qtl,qtlbar { height: 22px; } qtlbar { display: block; width: 100%; background-color: #cccccc; cursor: move; } qtlbar img { border: 0; padding: 3px; height: 16px; width: 16px; cursor: pointer; } qtlbar img:hover { background-color: #aaaaff; } qtl>iframe { border: 0; height: 0; width: 0; } qtl.open { height: auto; } qtl.open>iframe { height: 200px; width: 300px; } </style><qtl style="display: block; left: 63px; top: 59px;" class=""> <qtlbar name="bar"></qtlbar> <iframe name="content"></iframe> </qtl>

[Argooos]

Re: Potential-Performance Slider?

I've been advocating a slider or some kind of option for a long time. I have seen many debates on this or similar topics, and there's never any agreement. Some people are dead set on keeping progression and potential pretty much as-is, others want potential to be dynamic or flexible based on stats, and still others want progression to not be based on stats at all, but rather on things like coaching, practice, age, potential and off-season workouts.

I personally fall somewhere in the middle of all that. I'd like progression to be based on a combination of stats, age, potential and coaches, and I want potential to be non-dynamic, yet exceed-able through extraordinary performance.

The problem is that designing and implementing all those different progression systems would actually likely be a lot of work for the devs, which is probably why we haven't seen such an option put in yet.

[diderooy]

Re: Potential-Performance Slider?

Fair enough...I'm sure it would take some work to put performance-based progression back in. But we've seen both these systems used in past installments--it's not like they'd be breaking any new ground. Not knowing anything about programming, is it really that difficult to give us the option of one or the other when we begin a Franchise?

[diderooy]

Re: Potential-Performance Slider?

And Fahrenheit, I'm not saying you're wrong about this. You are correct to think that people like Olandis Gary were simply products of their systems, and not that Olandis Gary outperformed himself.

But if EA's not going to give us the option to run two-a-days, weight room sessions, film meetings, and so on, we're not left with a lot of options. Only allowing potential to affect progression doesn't allow for outliers (like Tom Brady), which is more ridiculous than performance-based progression--the next installment of the game might have a more realistic view of their ability, but I'm not going to play my season and then wait for the next $60 game to show a more accurate rating. And I'm not sure I care to play the games if there won't be any reward/effect for me playing the game "better" than the CPU would.