To people criticizing ratings (and LD2k)

[mango_prom]

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]

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

[mango_prom]

Quote: 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...

[keshunleon]

Quote: 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

[mango_prom]

Quote: 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.

[LD2k]

Quote:

So LD2k, please ignore all the talk in roster threads about "Melo should be 94 OVR" and "Lebron doesn't deserve 99".

[JerzeyReign]

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.

[Angel_G]

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.