[mercalnd]

Quote: Originally Posted by ODogg

Why should the intention of the call by a digital ref make any difference?

Because in a video game, even if it's a blatant bad call on the replay, if the AI made a true bad call (ie not intentional) it still wil not be reverse. For instance, the person who mentionned challenges sounded like challenges could correct the AI's mistakes. At least that's how I perceived it. THat simly does not happen.

Quote: Originally Posted by ODogg

By your rationale it's more realistic to have 100% perfect calls in videogames than it is to have a programming method which you don't like because it involves coding intentional errors.

I never said anything about realism. I was merely pointing out that challenges in games do not actually allow you to correct AI mistakes but rather introduces intentional bad calls thus even if you know the call was bad and it's clear on the replay the AI will not reverse it unless it was an intentional bad call.

Quote: Originally Posted by ODogg

By having bad call possibilities you are right that it does cause the cpu to intentionally make mistakes but if done correctly, makes the game more realistic because you as a user must watch for and potentally challenge bad calls. Just like in the real NFL.

Quote: Originally Posted by ODogg

In real life the refs make mistakes because they are human, in the game coding in mistakes doesn't make the game more "sinister" because the digital refs have to intentionally make bad calls.

Wow, sinister! Ok I gues I had it kind of coming when I said "That's why I don't like challenges in videogames". Seriously though it's more that I don't like bad calls period, whether in games or not. Challenges were introduced in the NFL BECAUSE thes refs are human and make mistakes. It is meant to correct an undesirable and otherwise unremovable aspect of the game. In games, you have to reintroduce that element in order to be able to allow the user to remove it.

Quote: Originally Posted by ODogg

If it bothers you so much just pretend the little digital guys making the bad calls honestly made a mistake, and he wasn't programmed to make that bad call.

Gee. You really took offense with what I said. It doesn't bother me "so much". There is one problem with your suggestion though: When the AI makes a genuine mistake, NO MATTER HOW BLATANT ON THE REPLAY, challenges will not correct it. But some times, an intentional bad call that is barele even debatable on the replay gets overturned.

Quote: Originally Posted by ODogg

And again i'll bring up my other past analogy. EA could also program Madden so that QB's completed every pass but instead they program the QB's to sometimes overthrow or underthrow and passes therefor are incomplete. Do you think that it is unrealistic that your QB you're controlling intentionally overthrows or underthrows? No quite the contrary, I'll bet if EA made the QB's perfect and every QB in the game went 34 for 34 and etc then there would be utter outrage as to just how unrealistic that is.

There is a significant difference though. When it comes to player performances, everything is calculated on probabilities based on player ratings, current situation such as throwing off the back foot, etc. so the result is not as arbitrary in nature as the "Time for a bad call" aspect that comes with challenges. I see your general idea though. As far as realism is concerned, I agree with you guys, except for the part where the actual bad calls cannot be reversed, just the intentional ones. But I'm sure one of you will point out that sometimes bad calls are not overturned even when it's fairly clear on the replay and that refs can make mistakes even on challenges so yeah as far as realism goes it is better to have them.