Recommended Videos

Collapse

To people criticizing ratings (and LD2k)

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • mango_prom
    Pro
    • Oct 2008
    • 737

    #1

    To people criticizing ratings (and LD2k)

    Alright, so many people complain about roster updates, and I agree. But if we want improvement for 2k14, people need to realize that overall ratings don't mean sh*t. If 2k devs read this forum, they'll get the impression that gamers care about OVR without having any clue about how the game actually works.
    So for anybody who cries about "player x should have 80 OVR" and crap like that: Overall rating has no influence on how good a player performs! None!!!

    All that matters are individual ratings. OVR is calculated from these ratings, and the formulas used are arbitrary and mean nothing at all. You can not evaluate players based on a single number. If 2k removes OVR, nothing changes at all.

    The bad thing about OVR is that if most gamers only care about a meaningless value, why should the developers invest time and effort in accuracy beyond this stupid and primitive ranking system? The whole talk about "xy should be at least 84 OVR" shows that a lot of people don't know what they're talking about, and 2k has to make these guys happy, even though they hurt the poduct by requesting adjustments that make no sense at all.

    If somebody says "player a shoots 40% from midrange, his rating should be higher", that's a valid statement. But "he's been great lately, he's clearly an 82 OVR" hurts my brain. And a guy like LD2k can read stuff like that in every roster update thread. So if 2k devs pay attention to what fans want, they put emphasis on meaningless numbers just because the majority of gamers has no idea how the game they're playing works.

    So to LD2k, please don't give feedback on the whole OVR-crap to developers. It's a meaningless number and evaluating players based on an arbitrary ranking system instead of their true abilities hurts gameplay in a big way.

    I wouldn't mind if 2k removed OVR from 2k14 altogether. Use it as some kind of logic for AI lineup calculation, but hide it from all the casual Lakers and Heat fans who don't know what they're talking about.
    What I'd love is a system similar to Sega's Football Manager series.
    Not overall ratings to give lazy gamers the impression of being able to judge players according to a stupid ladder system, but all the ratings on one simple screen, so you can look for the skills you need for your team.

    Here's an example. That's how you organize player ratings in a simulation: http://footballmanagerstory.com/scou...ca-caprari.png

    So no matter how many people talk about OVR, the stat is empty and means nothing. So LD2k, please ignore all the talk in roster threads about "Melo should be 94 OVR" and "Lebron doesn't deserve 99".

    OVR could be an option in 2k14, but it should be meaningless to how 2k manages rosters. The emphasis should be on scaling ratings according to real statistics instead. But we won't have accurate rosters as long as gamers complain about an imaginary rating with no impact on gameplay whatsoever.
  • giftedchick
    Rookie
    • Nov 2012
    • 402

    #2
    Re: To people criticizing ratings (and LD2k)

    i think the biggest problem people have is not ovr ratings... but the fact that actual players are not in the game

    Comment

    • mango_prom
      Pro
      • Oct 2008
      • 737

      #3
      Re: To people criticizing ratings (and LD2k)

      Originally posted by giftedchick
      i think the biggest problem people have is not ovr ratings... but the fact that actual players are not in the game
      I agree, that's one of the biggest problems. On the other hands, read some roster update threads, there are pages full of pointless rambling about players deserving a +2 OVR boost. Also, people miss the new Jordans...who cares about real players...

      Comment

      • keshunleon
        MVP
        • Apr 2006
        • 2106

        #4
        Re: To people criticizing ratings (and LD2k)

        Originally posted by mango_prom
        people need to realize that overall ratings don't mean sh*t.
        I agree! The only problem is the game itself don't believe in this rule. Regardless of their role the CPU will adjust rosters and rotations based on the higher ratings.

        The player's role could be the sixth man or role player but rated 70 will start over the starter rated 69 who's role is a starter.

        This is a big problem in association
        True bout my business, Mane!

        Comment

        • mango_prom
          Pro
          • Oct 2008
          • 737

          #5
          Re: To people criticizing ratings (and LD2k)

          Originally posted by keshunleon
          I agree! The only problem is the game itself don't believe in this rule. Regardless of their role the CPU will adjust rosters and rotations based on the higher ratings.

          The player's role could be the sixth man or role player but rated 70 will start over the starter rated 69 who's role is a starter.

          This is a big problem in association
          That's certainly a problem. But I think before they change the whole game logic, it's important to get away from putting emphasis on OVR when updating rosters.
          As long as most gamers have no clue about how ratings actually work, any change will lead to ever more pointless talk about "Durant needs to be a 99, Earl Clark deserves a +3 boost" and all the other crap you can read in roster threads. But you're right, the lineup logic is messed up.

          Comment

          • LD2k
            2K Sports Community Manager
            • Oct 2010
            • 1261

            #6
            Re: To people criticizing ratings (and LD2k)

            So LD2k, please ignore all the talk in roster threads about "Melo should be 94 OVR" and "Lebron doesn't deserve 99".
            Community Manager 2K Sports // Twitter: LD2k

            Master of Operation Sports .gifs

            Comment

            • JerzeyReign
              MVP
              • Jul 2009
              • 4832

              #7
              Re: To people criticizing ratings (and LD2k)

              I think the overall thing is used by casuals to judge who are the best players in the league. I agree with the OP and hope it never changes but the moment Kobe drops below 90 or below an upcoming star (and its coming) the Laker fan base will flip.

              I think they should explain the ratings and how they come to that conclusion... A blog or something will go a long way IMO.
              #WashedGamer

              Comment

              • Angel_G
                MVP
                • Mar 2012
                • 2036

                #8
                Re: To people criticizing ratings (and LD2k)

                Overall definitely matters in this game. In association mode players rated 73 and up until maybe 82 accept a 6th man role. Guys 66 - 72 want to be Role players and of course starters 83 and up.
                List of the best Shoe Creations found on the OS Shoe Vault Discussion Thread

                Comment

                • LoudMouthHoops
                  Banned
                  • Dec 2012
                  • 207

                  #9
                  Re: To people criticizing ratings (and LD2k)

                  I've been saying this for months...

                  It's annoying to see every post on OS regarding roster updates filled with the same crap though...all a bunch of posters complaining that "Melo should be a 92"....or that "Tyson Chandler is better than a 77".

                  So freaking stupid...

                  Comment

                  • JazzMan
                    SOLDIER, First Class...
                    • Feb 2012
                    • 13545

                    #10
                    Re: To people criticizing ratings (and LD2k)

                    Overalls DO matter, if you play anything other than Quick Ranked, My Team, and Exhibition...

                    The moment you start an Association/My Career, all of the lineups get reset according to the players' overalls.

                    Take the Jazz for example: Raja Bell is still a 72 overall rating or something like that. So, when you have a guy like Gordon Hayward at 68, the CPU that is managing the Jazz will immediately start Raja Bell, and turn Hayward into a 10 minute a night guy. That's not realistic whatsoever.

                    It then affects the contracts that some players receive. Within the 3rd season of your Association, you'll see guys in the high 70s, low 80s that sit in free agency ALL YEAR, because team's can't even afford them.

                    Until 2k can fix their CPU team management, overalls do indeed matter.

                    Besides, the ratings I criticize are not overall ratings, but more of individual ratings. Take Hayward as an example again: his speed is in the 60's, vertical in the 60's, and on-ball defense in the 60's. How does he have these ratings when he is one of the more athletic swingmen in the league and Utah's best perimeter defender?

                    Whoever is in charge of 2k's Rosters, Insider or not, is completely slacking. There are guys who have been on an NBA roster for MONTHS (Kevin Murphy, Kevin Jones, Ben Hansbrough, Mickael Gelabale, etc.). That is completely unacceptable.

                    None of us were criticizing LD2k. This is not his department, and he is doing his job well by taking feedback from us to the developers.
                    Twitter: @TyroneisMaximus
                    PSN: JazzMan_OS

                    Green Bay Packers
                    Utah Jazz
                    Nebraska Cornhuskers

                    Dibs: AJ Lee

                    Comment

                    • MarvinOida
                      MVP
                      • Feb 2012
                      • 4855

                      #11
                      Oh overall. I remembered when the fact that LeBron was 98 overall in the game. People went crazy "LeBron can't be 1 less then Jordan!" Then I said overall is just a number shown by the game, doesn't really mean anything. Here we are, nearly to the Playoffs, people still complaining about overall.

                      Comment

                      • Itsfuntobethespurs
                        Rookie
                        • Jun 2012
                        • 84

                        #12
                        Re: To people criticizing ratings (and LD2k)

                        As the Jazz fan above me, I will talk individual ratings.

                        Ginobili. 70 pass rating? Really? He averages 7 assists per 36min as a SG/SF. He probably deserves dimer too (if harden can have 80+ pass)
                        Manu. No lay-up sig skill? Really? Will acrobat ever come back?

                        Dragic. Finisher? Really? He has one of the (EDIT: worst) FG% on drives

                        And if 2k doesn't care about overall ratings, WHY DO THEY DO UPDATES WHERE THEY ONLY CHANGE CONSISTENCY? Yeah, right
                        Last edited by Itsfuntobethespurs; 03-06-2013, 09:00 PM.
                        "When nothing seems to help, I go and look at a stonecutter hammering away at his rock perhaps a hundred times without as much as a crack showing in it. Yet at the hundred and first blow it will split in two, and I know it was not that blow that did it, but all that had gone before." - Jacob Riis

                        Comment

                        • qpc123
                          MVP
                          • Jul 2003
                          • 3784

                          #13
                          Re: To people criticizing ratings (and LD2k)

                          Originally posted by Itsfuntobethespurs
                          Ginobili. 70 pass rating? Really? He averages 7 assists per 36min as a SG/SF. He probably deserves dimer too (if harden can have 80+ pass)
                          I believe this is what the OP was referring too. You post stats for a player you like, followed by his current 2k rating and what you believe should be different. Spouting off ratings that are "wrong" without providing evidence of how the rating produces incorrect results in the game is pointless.

                          Depending on the roster editor and the scale they use numbers will differ, but some of widely accepted scales available here on OS would have Manu with a pass rating of somewhere between 70-75 and that would generate around 7 assists per 36 min in the sim engine(provided all the ratings are appropriately scaled as well).

                          However, you are right about Harden, if he was on the same scale as Manu above his pass rating would be 65ish.
                          "You come at the King, you best not miss..."

                          Comment

                          • mango_prom
                            Pro
                            • Oct 2008
                            • 737

                            #14
                            Re: To people criticizing ratings (and LD2k)

                            I agree with overall ratings being important for association lineup logic and player roles (even though I always turn them off). And that's exactly why I think it's a good idea to remove OVR from 2k14.

                            The problem is that no matter how good the formula to calculate OVR might be, it's still not possible to rank every player according to the same standards. It's not that simple.
                            For years we've known stuff like "Dirk's OVR does not mean he's not a top 3 PF"...So why do we need overall ratings anyway if they do nothing but destroy association lineups?

                            One idea would be to tie OVR to different player types. 2k could use adjusted formulas for various playstyles. So you'd get a list of a player's ratings at different subtypes of his position. For example Dirk could be higher rated at "faceup" than "slasher" or "defensive".
                            Another option is to simply expand the grade system we already have in the roster menu. Maybe ranking different skill categories with a 1-5 star system.

                            As the Jazz fan above me, I will talk individual ratings.

                            Ginobili. 70 pass rating? Really? He averages 7 assists per 36min as a SG/SF. He probably deserves dimer too (if harden can have 80+ pass)
                            Manu. No lay-up sig skill? Really? Will acrobat ever come back?

                            Dragic. Finisher? Really? He has one of the (EDIT: worst) FG% on drives

                            And if 2k doesn't care about overall ratings, WHY DO THEY DO UPDATES WHERE THEY ONLY CHANGE CONSISTENCY? Yeah, right
                            That's exactly the feedback people should give in roster threads! You make suggestions and back them up with stats.
                            I'm rooting for the Mavs, but Manu is shooting 68% at the rim and his passing needs no explanation. So he deserves your suggestions, absolutely. (but he's shooting 27% from midrange, that's just sad).
                            But I've looked up Dragic..he's shooting 68% at the rim, too. So he probably deserves some props, dude's underrated.

                            Besides, the ratings I criticize are not overall ratings, but more of individual ratings. Take Hayward as an example again: his speed is in the 60's, vertical in the 60's, and on-ball defense in the 60's. How does he have these ratings when he is one of the more athletic swingmen in the league and Utah's best perimeter defender?
                            You're right. Haven't checked it but isn't Amare still rated better defensively than Nick Collison? One reason for the botched speed ratings is related to closeout speed defensively I think. 2k underrates the athleticism of many forwards and big men to counter the insane recovery speed of defenders.
                            Also, they probably tried to improve AI transition offense (which blew up gameplay since big men just aren't that slow in real life).

                            So yeah, we should talk about inidvidual skills instead of OVR...but if you scale individual ratings according to real life stats while using the current OVR system, you'll piss off all the Lebron and Melo fanboys since their favourite big market team will not be so much better than anybody else. The league is much closer than all these kids think. I mean the difference between Miami and Charlotte offensively is 10 ppg (93 to 103). 2.5 points per quarter. It's a joke if you think about it.

                            So it's cool that people have responded in this thread, it's nice to see that others care about realism, too. And it's important that 2k sees this. If they only look at roster update threads, why should they put effort into playbooks and maybe advanced statistics if the average gamer cares about Jordans and dunk packages instead?
                            We have to show them that this stuff matters and that there are fans out there appreciating any effort spent on accuracy.

                            (btw, it wasn't meant as criticizing LD2k, but simply that he should read this thread)
                            Last edited by mango_prom; 03-07-2013, 06:18 AM.

                            Comment

                            • Itsfuntobethespurs
                              Rookie
                              • Jun 2012
                              • 84

                              #15
                              Re: To people criticizing ratings (and LD2k)

                              Originally posted by mango_prom
                              But I've looked up Dragic..he's shooting 68% at the rim, too. So he probably deserves some props, dude's underrated.
                              Oops. I misunderstood Zach Lowe's piece on Goran

                              "Goran Dragic shoots on just 36 percent of his drives, one of the lowest numbers in the league among all players recorded by the cameras. That seems awfully low for such a creative finisher"

                              You're right
                              "When nothing seems to help, I go and look at a stonecutter hammering away at his rock perhaps a hundred times without as much as a crack showing in it. Yet at the hundred and first blow it will split in two, and I know it was not that blow that did it, but all that had gone before." - Jacob Riis

                              Comment

                              Working...