NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat

[sportzbro]

Re: NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat

I mentioned this to Greg on the NCAA team months ago, but hopefully Russ sees this as well and can confirm that some changes are being made. The way this was done in NCAA 09 was horrific and completely ruined Create-A-Prospect/Player for me. It takes hours to create the 25 recruits for a class with the current system.

No doubt...I usually just make 3 maybe 4-5 if I am in a good mood. Any more though and I feel like I am almost punishing myself.

Awesome..yea I had a feeling someone had already said something about it. I just haven't seen it brought up anywhere so I figured why not. Thanks for being on top of it really early in the process though. Hopefully its fixed or tweaked in some way.

Definitely agree on the pre-set attribute ratings. It should work like this:

Position: RB (just one example)
Type: Power/Balanced/Finesse
Star: 1/2/3/4/5

You're type would dictate what type of back they are of course, and what stats stand out, and then you could change how good of a back they are by the star ratings which would increase or decrease their ratings accordingly.

It was incredibly frustrating in 09 to allow everyone to create a player that could only be a 3 star player.

This is also a cool way you could do it...I almost like it better than my idea.

[ram29jackson]

Re: NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat

You are correct that games lessen in time but honestly I think you're missing my point, EA's NCAA series playtime gets shorter and shorter for me (and I think I speak for a lot of folks) each year now since the series came to next-gen. Back on the PS2 I would literally be playing the previous year's game up until the time the new one would come out. Then on next-generation the time has lessened with each release. Last year I played it for slightly longer than a month on and off.

Personally I will not be playing The Show 09 probably 6 months down the road but that's because i'm not a big baseball fan, not because The Show isn't able to hold my attention. The bottom line is that even for NCAA 09 the game felt stale after just a couple of weeks and there is no WAY that should happen that quickly to a die-hard, fanatical football nut like myself.

yeah, when playing by yourself- you want some suprises / a little candy- so to speak. when you win big games and titles you want animations that make it eventfull - and things that come from nowhere too- rember on ps2 when there was a safety or int or something , it caused the player to do some crazy egyptian dance...?

[ram29jackson]

Re: NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat

will there be fluidity in the frame rates? Not just balls jutting into a receivers hands when about 4 feet away ?

and will the players feel more solid when controlling them? it just seemed like the legs were fragile sticks that never really touched the ground.

will sideline catches start looking legit with players aware of the out of bounds ?

[baumy300]

Re: NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat

Don't remember hearing anything about this or maybe I missed it, but is that miserable, horrible, ridiculous "Jump the snap" feature going to be gone this year or at least have an "off" option?

[Russell_Kiniry_EA]

Re: NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat

Alright, I haven't seen this mentioned on here yet:

Preset Attribute Ratings (Create-a-Recruit) - let me explain

While in dynasty I typically will create 3-5 players for the upcoming class. It is really annoying though when all of the sliders on the ratings are preset at 78 (I believe that is the number). No matter what position the player is, all of them are set at that default number.

Example: When I create a QB for the upcoming class, I don't want to have to go all the way down the attribute list and lower ratings like Impact Blocking, Man Coverage, or Kick Return. These are irrelevant for that position.

Instead, the ratings that correspond to that position should be the only ones preset highly, and the rest could be preset somewhere between 0-50. In the case of the QB, you would essentially see a 78 rating as the default number for the attributes that matter (Throw Power, Throw Accuracy, Awr, etc.). Of course though you would still have the ability to adjust any of the ratings to your liking.

Any chance you guys can give this a look?

I doubt this year we'll make the ratings show up based on position, sorry. However I might be able to get the starting value to change, would it be better if all the attributes started as say 40?

-Russ

[dubuque]

Re: NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat

i would like to see teams like northern iowa

[youALREADYknow]

Re: NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat

I doubt this year we'll make the ratings show up based on position, sorry. However I might be able to get the starting value to change, would it be better if all the attributes started as say 40?

-Russ

Yes, 40 would be a better starting point if you can't make them position specific. It's still a terrible process to create prospects, but with the multitude of ratings in the game now it's easier to go up on the position specific ratings than to edit down the out-of-position ratings.

[jbdeuce]

Re: NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat

Starting all the ratings at 40 would be perfect! With this at least when I create a WR I could only edit the ratings that effect the WR position instead of worrying about kick power and kick acc and throw power and throw acc etc. Again, 40 would be perfect!

-OUT

[canes21]

Re: NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat

You guys do realize you don't have to lower everything that does not corespond to that position. You can make THP 0 or 99 and it won't change the OVR of a K.

[sportzbro]

Re: NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat

I doubt this year we'll make the ratings show up based on position, sorry. However I might be able to get the starting value to change, would it be better if all the attributes started as say 40?

-Russ

Yes. I'm down with switching all of it to 40 instead of 78. I would only have to raise a few things, opposed to lowering almost all of them.

Thanks for responding Russ!

You guys do realize you don't have to lower everything that does not corespond to that position. You can make THP 0 or 99 and it won't change the OVR of a K.

Yes i realize this, but having a kicker with 95 Kick Power & 90 Kick accuracy, along with a 78 rating for everything else is annoying and unrealistic. By Russ changing the preset to 40, it will take less time to increase the attributes that matter, instead of lowering all the ones that don't.

[sportzbro]

Re: NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat

Yes, 40 would be a better starting point if you can't make them position specific. It's still a terrible process to create prospects, but with the multitude of ratings in the game now it's easier to go up on the position specific ratings than to edit down the out-of-position ratings.

Ha, i missed this at first, but yes this is also my stance.

[canes21]

Re: NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat

It bothers me some, but I don't lower them anymore. I use my Kicker as a Kicker only, so that 78 THP may be the best on my team, but I am able to control myself and be realistic with an unrealistic situation. But I do see your side of the argument and I just think Kickers need like 5 ratings. Kick Power, Kick Accuracy, Speed, Tackle, Strength.

[yanks26ngoin]

Re: NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat

Russ, was anything added to Dynasty mode this year? Was recruiting fixed, and will there be an AD mode like Madden has an owner mode?

[dubuque]

Re: NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat

any info on create a school

[acts238shaun]

Re: NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat

Only one or two players each year are truly good enough to be rated in the 80's at 3+ positions on opposite sides of the ball. I agree that ATH's need to be a little more flexible, but some of the suggestions I've seen would lead to major exploitation of the recruiting system as it stands today.

I totally agree...I was being very general in that example. One COLLEGE player I believe would have fit the bill would have been Mike Vick, as he would have been great at HB, CB, WR, S as well as QB. Who knows, with time and weight training maybe even a LB? He was a rarity, I admit. Michael Bush was another, though he was no Vick as far as speed goes. There are/have been HB/WR/LB/DB's on BCS teams that probably would have as good or better at one of the other positions, but the depth chart influenced their move to the posion they play/played. Could you have imagined Bo Jackson as a LB or S? I shudder for the ball carrier if he laid into them like he did the Boz on Monday night...

There is no reason for 3 star ATH's to be equally rated between two positions unless we're talking about WR/CB or OL/DT or OLB/DE. If they were truly that good to be equally rated at 3+ positions, then they wouldn't be 3 star prospects.

I agree...I would love to see in 2010 recruiting be LB, S, CB, DB, WR/DB, RB/LB, etc...stating all the position they can play. Let a player be recruited as a Safety and his overall be determined by which one you play him in (Free or Strong) and the system you use him. A Cover 2 SS is different than a typical SS. That's one thing I liked about MVP 05, it had multiple position for each player.

All of this debate seems tied around the OVR rating and will likely be a moot point in NCAA 10 anyways. They are re-working how the OVR rating is calculated in NCAA 10. The only reason most players suffer such a huge drop between positions is that the AWR rating takes a hit. AWR is the progression rating.

Ditto on that as well. Brian Toal was highly rated as a RB and LB in high school. His awareness rating should pertain to a position, but not drop dramatically if he moved to ILB or TE. The other skill sets should come into play.