Test Cases instead of hate post

[chillinscott]

I work in software development and the biggest problem with making quality software is having quality unit testing. Quality unit tests arent always easy to have because many of the developers/testers don't play the game like we do and for example instead of testing progression after 3 years they are testing to make sure that each player has progressed. I am almost certain their is no unit test at EA that is "Player Progression Test" simulate 3 seasons and make sure that a sun belt team doesn;t win the NC or that 2 star recruits don't turn into 90+. So I thought it would be a good idea to start a thread where people here would assist EA by designing un0it test insetad of griping at how broken the game is. So i'll start with player fatigue.

Player lock on the saftey/CB with 75 stamina and sprint side to side after play starts for 8 plays straight. If he isn't in the red for exhaustion test fails, otherwise test passes.

Repeat last test with a safety/CB that has 99 stamina.
If he is dark yellow/orange test pass, if not test fails.

Take a DL with 75 stamina and sprint sideline to sideline and if he is fatigued to a red after 4 plays test passes, if not fails.

Repeat last test with 99 stamina and if fatigue is yellow/dark orange after 4 plays test passes, if not fails.

Repeat previous test with LB's of 75 and 99 stamina, after 6 plays of sprinting sideline to sideline fatigue should be red - yellow/orange respectively.

If any defensive player is on the field for 12 straight plays, they should be at minimum yellow fatigued. If not fatigued test fails, else it passes.

This is a very broad level of unit testing but it will be alot better material for EA sports to use then yelling how a game is broken, at least this way you can sorta speak developer language.

[mcpheje]

Good idea, although EA will probably contend that they are executing adequate test scenarios.

One thought I've been having is regarding program progression. The grading of programs should be relative to each other and should follow a standard deviation curve. This would always allow for a net zero effect over time. There would always be as many D or F programs as there are A and B programs. This should be a simple test to execute keep simming into the future and confirm the distribution stays true to form.

Technically recruit creation should also be following the standard deviation curve but in that case it's necessary to have a lot more 1 and 2 star recruits than 4 or 5 star guys.

[GrayFolded]

It does not matter what we write or how many threads are made on the subject, EA does not care......Sim Gamers have been complaining for years about all of these problems and every year we have 200 threads on whats wrong and how it needs to be fixed.......EA only cares about Launch Date Deadlines and Sales not Quality Products........Call up EA Customer Service and tell them you want to return the game because of Bugs and Glitches and want a full refund, THEY WILL LAUGH AT YOU WHILE HANGING UP THE PHONE!!!

Remember, Sim Gamers are a SMALL FRACTION of overall sales, we don't matter to them, their $$$$ comes from Casual Gamers that don't care about Fatigue, Recruiting or Progression, they just want to beat there buddies on 3min Quarter Exhibition Games......

We could always go play that other College Football Game, oh wait, there is not an other option.....

this is what happens without competition......