What do you guys think of this idea?

[Massive Meat]

so Ive been thinking of ways to make the NCAA games more realistic and I came up with this, but I'm not sure if everyone else will like it, let me know what you think:

in NCAA currently there is no such thing as position battles. we already know who our starters are before we even see them play just by looking at their ovr rating. if a starting QB is struggling, in real life a coach may pull him to see what the backup can do. in NCAA this is pointless because we know he wont be as good since he is rated lower.

in real life, coaches and staff evaluate players during summer practice and spring games to see who they want to play. there is no need for us to do that in game because we see exactly how good each player is just by looking at a number. well what if in dynasty mode they hid each player's ratings? this would require us to scout our players and see who we want to start based on our own evaluation, not on a number. this means if our starting QB is struggling, we could pull him and see what his backup could do. who knows, he may even play good enough to keep the starting job. another example is if a starter goes down with an injury. currently, as soon as the starter is healthy we put him back in becaue we know he is better than the backup, no matter what, just based on a number. but if the rating was hidden, maybe the backup is actually better than the starter, and the starter being injured actually turned out to be a good thing because we got to see how good the backup is.

so what do you guys think of this idea? i think it should at least be added as an option for dynasty mode.

[gschwendt]

I think there are two ways to come close to accomplishing the same thing while not having to play countless snaps to figure out how your players play.

A) Hide OVR rating... forces you to look deeper into their ratings instead of just who has the highest OVR
B) Give ranges for players... instead of showing an 80 for CAR rating, show 60-85. The longer a player has been on your roster, the more narrow the range. That way RSSrs have a small window whereas that 5-star true freshman has a large window.

[Massive Meat]

good ideas. I think a good idea would be to combine your two

[JBHuskers]

Fully agree.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

[morsdraconis]

EXCELLENT ideas. Head Coach did something like this (combined with ratings based on offensive and defensive systems) and it worked quite well.

I'd LOVE to see ranges for players ratings instead of just a flat rate. Doing that would actually be fine, even with overall having a range (based on the lowest possible range of all stats and the highest possible range of all stats).

I think basing it on playing time would be a huge addition, personally. Would give you a reason to customize those formations to try to get more players more playing time. Even something as simple as, based on your coach's ratings, 100 snaps equals 10% information garnered, 200 snaps 20%, etc (so, by midseason, someone that plays every snap of a game would probably have 50% of their actual ratings revealed via ranges with great talent evaluators being better at figuring out the ratings and poor talent evaluators being worse at figuring out the ratings).

Boy, would it add something really interesting for dynasty. Recruiting would be more interesting and would have to be upgraded to accommodate this change in the rating system. Give us the College Hoops 2k8 scouting system with scouting the player needing to be done to evaluate their attributes. Even go as far as being able to play as them (My Player mode style) for a game to evaluate their abilities on the field against a team in high school. How fuckin' cool would THAT be? There is SO much that can be done to add depth to the recruiting besides some bullshit numbers game that's so incredibly boring, it's tedious.

[Massive Meat]

i love those ideas as well, if they added something like this it would add so much depth and replayablility to the game. right now i get tired of it pretty fast because its just the same thing over and over again, but this would give you an incentive to keep playing and add much more diversity to the game

[psusnoop]

Great ideas guys and something id love to see!

To late tonight but I'll give my thoughts too :D tomorrow.

[ryby6969]

I have wanted something like this for a long time now, especially for the QB position. I hate being able to audible at any time or hot route any reciever with a Freshman QB. I think RTG finally implemented something along the lines of building up the coache's confidence before you are allowed to audible with a QB and really think this could be huge for dynasty. It would make starting a true freshman QB more of a risk, especially on the road in a big-time game.

[steelerfan]

FIFA uses ratings ranges for scouting and for the scouted players who are eventually signed to the Youth Academy. The longer you scout a player, or have him on your youth squad, the more the range narrows. Seems like a good method to me.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using Tapatalk

[ram29jackson]

nice simulation football idea but would never have mass popularity. Theres a reason they brought in the ability to change any players ratings when ever you wanted. People want customization freedom , not restrictions and time consuming research for just a game that is ultimately for fun. I'm not saying its not a good idea, it just wont sell..unless they are willing to put that kind of logic in as a choice/option. But i'm it wouldnt be used by anything but a real small percentage of people...besides, you could still have the AI make the choice and it should automatically choose the better rated player. Drafting is time consuming enough, you just want to get on the field and play. thats the fun part, the middle week/off season stuff is just time-killer /filler stuff.

the progression of a players ratings as he improves through 4 years needs to make more sense and be consistant.

I did like in the past how you could do drills to raise a players ratings in the off season.

its a cool idea, just not for this company or this game.

[steelerfan]

Again, the ranges are used in FIFA (which sells a whole lot more than NCAA).

The ability to edit players in a Dynasty was a community request so that users could have their first recruiting class resemble the real-world incoming recruits of their school.

[ram29jackson]

Again, the ranges are used in FIFA (which sells a whole lot more than NCAA).

The ability to edit players in a Dynasty was a community request so that users could have their first recruiting class resemble the real-world incoming recruits of their school.

which hardly anyone knows about (high school recruits) the majority of the public just liked the freedom to do with it what ever they wanted..and the reasons you give for fifa dont matter because NCAA wont do it anyway..I wouldnt mind being wrong, but I doubt it.

[Pig Bomb]

i love the idea of hiding the overall rating.... we don't talk about real life players that way - we talk about their attributes and strengths/weaknesses

"overall" rating is really a matter of opinion anyway isn't it....depending on my style and system i value certain players more than others despite their "overall rating" becuase im looking for a certain skill set


i currently recruit this way...i look for certain attributes that fit my sytem and how/where i want the player to play... the players "star" rating is not very important to me

[Pig Bomb]

if a starting QB is struggling, in real life a coach may pull him to see what the backup can do. in NCAA this is pointless because we know he wont be as good since he is rated lower.



one comment about this though..... i think this is incorrect... during a game if your QB is throwing picks and bad balls he'll turn blue making him less and less effective... subbing in the backup is exactly what i would do... unless the back-up is a total scrub rated 60, he'll be better than the QB that has turned blue IMO

[steelerfan]

reasons you give for fifa dont matter because NCAA wont do it anyway..I wouldnt mind being wrong, but I doubt it.

So now, you change your story. Before, it was "this idea won't sell, and this company won't do it". Then I tell you it's already in FIFA (which sells alot), and you change to "NCAA won't do it". :D

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using Tapatalk

[steelerfan]

Good points, Pig Bomb.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using Tapatalk

[ram29jackson]

So now, you change your story. Before, it was "this idea won't sell, and this company won't do it". Then I tell you it's already in FIFA (which sells alot), and you change to "NCAA won't do it". :D

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using Tapatalk


LOL no dude , I did not change my story. You said they did it for a completly different sports game. American kids dont want a game full of simulation mystery. Its about big plays and win now..not about-is my LT a better run or pass blocker.

but they arent getting the basics right yet and you want to up the anti with something that seems more complex?
i accept the game as is and like playing it..but when you break it down they are so far behind the EA hockey and 2k basketball and MLB Show games... I did notice last night that NBA 2k has letter as well as number ratings of players and that even though a guy was rated 82 in a category, his letter grade for the 82 was a C-...I dont know if that means he's good at it but inconsistent? but it was interesting to notice

[steelerfan]

"American kids"? Lol.

Read the demographics portion of the link below. It says the average age of gamers is 37. I'd venture to say it's higher for sports gamers because Madden is too complicated (versus Mario Kart) for 5-year-olds.

Even at 37 though, assuming NCAA is for kids, is archaic. Video games may have been for kids in 1975 when you started playing, but times have changed.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_culture

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using Tapatalk

[ram29jackson]

"American kids"? Lol.

Read the demographics portion of the link below. It says the average age of gamers is 37. I'd venture to say it's higher for sports gamers because Madden is too complicated (versus Mario Kart) for 5-year-olds.

Even at 37 though, assuming NCAA is for kids, is archaic. Video games may have been for kids in 1975 when you started playing, but times have changed.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_culture

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using Tapatalk

what difference does anything you said make ? what age they are isnt important nor the number of people that age. The point is, the majority are casual users and casual users pick up and play, they dont want to spend time looking at a draft class and play selection etc and they are 95% of the sales( i dont care what the actual number is,the point is they are the major majority)..they arent wasting time being in 2 dynasties that need to advance every 3 days like some 14 year old who thinks its life or death..and...its a wiki page LOL ie not official..and..its a very general description..the majority of older people classified as playing a video game could be just because they are playing farmville once a week..none of my adult friends own or play on a xbox or ps3..they may have bought one for their kids, but that does not qualify as being a gamer or someone who plays them on a regular basis...the so called average might be 37 because of people playing apps or whose name was on the credit card when the game was bought..but the majority who play this game like its an important hobby are definitely younger...that could be 25 and under...but again, the true senses is that all my adult friends dont play these games and that means that it carries over into the rest of society..adult,so called gamers are the minority, not a majority in the mass general public..some people might play something for an hour or two a week, they dont care about something needing to be a hardcore sim , the people that do are a minority, and minorities arent what give the game big sales numbers

[steelerfan]

I gave you the wikipedia page because it was easier than a pdf.

http://www.theesa.com/facts/pdfs/ESA_EF_2011.pdf

Is that "official" enough for you?

Most people your age don't play console games because they weren't playing them as kids. I'm 37 and I'd say that most of my friends who are a few years older don't play. However, nearly all of my friends who are a few years younger do.

The average age of gamers will continue to climb as those of us who grew up in the 80s get older.

But, I'm sure you know much more than the ESA. :rolleyes:

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using Tapatalk

[ram29jackson]

I gave you the wikipedia page because it was easier than a pdf.

http://www.theesa.com/facts/pdfs/ESA_EF_2011.pdf

Is that "official" enough for you?

Most people your age don't play console games because they weren't playing them as kids. I'm 37 and I'd say that most of my friends who are a few years older don't play. However, nearly all of my friends who are a few years younger do.

The average age of gamers will continue to climb as those of us who grew up in the 80s get older.

But, I'm sure you know much more than the ESA. :rolleyes:

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using Tapatalk


who said anything about people my age ? I said all my adult friends,anyone from 21 up to what ever. You are taking it at face value without looking at underlying stats and reasons. Poles are subjective and will bend the numbers or not specify as they choose. and you are getting away from the ultimate point...the majority still want less complex and to sell the game to the majority games will remain dumbed down and/or the majority will use the dumbed down option. I'm not denying alot of people owning and playing stuff but the majority dont play that often..and if the average age was really older than i would think it would be easier to find a straight sim random online match up but that isnt the case...so if the majority are older, they are incredibly immature because they constantly go on 4th and only seem to know 3 or 4 plays LOL, except for you, my valued NCAA 12 friendlist guy ! :)...and Gschwendt and CDJ and JB and Giggem and oneback etc et al, here :nod:

[steelerfan]

The average is still 37. There's no way that can be so wrong that it is actually "kids" who are the majority.

I can go round and round with you and you will still believe that the numbers you pull from your ass are better than the ESA's, so I won't bother.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using Tapatalk

[ram29jackson]

The average is still 37. There's no way that can be so wrong that it is actually "kids" who are the majority.

I can go round and round with you and you will still believe that the numbers you pull from your ass are better than the ESA's, so I won't bother.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using Tapatalk


LOL it still doesnt indicate how much or how often or what an older player is playing or whether they want a game full of complex sim stuff. The majority that play alot are still younger and that is not a number out my ass.that is an experiential, educated assessment. gee whiz, learn to take a compliment LOL:D

[baseballplyrmvp]

i love the idea of using ranges for the ratings. not only could this be used for us to get an idea of where his actual rating is, it could also be tied into the player's composure level in-game. if he gets on a hot/cold streak, his ratings could improve/regress over the course of the game. it'd be a better system that what is currently in place, imo.

[steelerfan]

LOL it still doesnt indicate how much or how often or what an older player is playing or whether they want a game full of complex sim stuff. The majority that play alot are still younger and that is not a number out my ass.that is an experiential, educated assessment. gee whiz, learn to take a compliment LOL:D

And no feature has ever been added that catered to the hardcore crowd, right? :fp:

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using Tapatalk

[ram29jackson]

And no feature has ever been added that catered to the hardcore crowd, right? :fp:

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using Tapatalk

what the heck does that have to do with it? The majority arent concerned with sim or bother being concerned how its used or implemented..pick up and play is the majority