01-19-2017, 11:49 AM
|
#1
|
|
Rookie
|
How should progression work?
I have been playing sports games for many years now and have always drawn the most enjoyment out of the franchise modes, like many on OS. One of the nice things about modern games vs the older ones is that they tend to be less linear which is excellent, a great example being how injuries can derail a career in NBA2k. That being said, they still have a long way to go to reflect how seemingly random the NBA season can be.
Things like hidden ratings, letter grades based on hired scouts evaluations, coaches and scheme having a much larger impact...I have many ideas on how I, personally, would like the franchise modes to be laid out, but this thread is going to focus mostly on player progression. I personally feel that the "Potential" rating is very limiting and needs to go. While I understand that a player who has an 80 potential is certainly not guaranteed to reach that number, if a player has a potential of 70 there is no way he will hit 80.
In the real NBA players with physical gifts are considered high potential players because they have the "tools" to be great. In reality pretty much any player could develop skills like shooting ability, bball IQ, passing ability and even strength. The only things MOSTLY set in stone are their size and speed/jumping ability. In real life pretty much any player has the potential to reach great heights (which is why some physically gifted players receive chance after chance to prove themselves) but in the game this is not so.
I personally feel every player should have the theoretical potential to be an all-star caliber player but that potential should be tempered by variables such as coaching staff, coaching system, player attitude and work ethic, teammates leadership and teaching abilities and of course injuries. After all, this is why teams take chances on young players, because you just never know what they could turn into.
In the game, for example, a player like Frank Kaminsky is extremely limited in his potential...he will never be more than a role player. In real life, while that is certainly his possible cap, he could become anything. As a young player with a proven track record of improvement (look at his freshman - senior seasons in college) whos to say he couldnt become a great player with the right combination of teaching, coaching, training, teammates and health. This is true with any young player. For the first few seasons of his career Cody Zeller looked to be a kind of crappy PF that looked lost on the court, and the game started treating him as such. Late last season he was moved to center and has absolutely blossomed in his new role and is one of the most important players on the Hornets roster. (Obviously Im a Hornets fan, I just use their players as examples because I know them) Kemba Walker could never have improved as much as he has the last 2 years under the current progression system. MKG has the work ethic and physical tools to because a superstar at the age of 23 if his shot got fixed, but in the game he will never be more than a low 80's overall rating.
Im sorry about the rambling post I just kinda want to get my ideas out there at least as I think it would improve the way progression works. I would also like to see certain players put in the right position (or wrong) make fairly large jumps (or drops) in ratings ala Jimmy Butler a couple years ago.
How do you think progression should work? Are you happy with the relative linearity of it now or, like me, do you just want something more? Thanks for letting me vent my thoughts...I have many more about unimportant things like sports video games : )
|
|
|
