Any timeline for NCAA 12 news?

[oweb26]

It use to piss me off to no end, when they were inelgible for my big games. Though I did like it enough to the point were it showed there discipline and you always had to use calculated risk on some of the big players.

[JeffHCross]

I liked it because it was random and I had little to no control over it. Suddenly, my RB was suspended and ineligible. Just like what we sometimes see on Saturdays. I would love to see it make it back in. Granted, it wasn't perfect, but I liked the inclusion of it.

Conceptually, I didn't really have a problem with it. The execution was just poor.

[morsdraconis]

Conceptually, I didn't really have a problem with it. The execution was just poor.

Exactly. It was random for random's sake and not because it has to be random.

No one is going to get a kid to come to their school without doing background checks that should, at the very least, hint at the possibility of the kid being a moron and doing something stupid with his life once he's free in the wild of college athletics.


If they were going to do it right, it would have to be a combination of several things to make it worth having:

1. Having enough things that the kids could get in trouble for doing without it always being stupid repetitive stuff
2. Having a hidden (very important) "rating" that determines the likelihood, how often, and the severity of their stupidity (aka the player screwing up)
3. There being a "background check" system implemented in recruiting - basically just another option to do with your time spent for the week on the recruiting (something like a background check requiring a certain amount of recruiting time for the week and would be accessible through the same menu in recruiting that you would go to to choose what topics to talk about during their visit for that week) - the background check would show information based on the amount of time you spent on it (allowing you to use just 10 minutes to get a very general feeling to spending a full 60 minutes on it and getting a thorough breakdown (but still not giving you the true "rating" for their "discipline" stat) - also, there would need to be the possibility of not getting all the facts on a situation or getting the wrong story completely if you don't spend the full 60 minutes (a percentage chance always being there, but it only being 5-10% at 60 minutes and increasing by quite a bit as you spend less time during the "background check").
4. Schools not going after the "troubled" recruits
5. All of this tying into school prestige, sanctions on the school (which would absolutely need to be implemented correctly to truly have the possibility of death penalties or another USC situation), and a coaching carousel (along with stats for coaches like College Hoops 2k5) and coaches and schools with high prestige having an affect on the athlete's likelihood of them causing trouble (along with having more athletes that are likely to not cause trouble setting good standards for the bad seeds and decreasing that likelihood that much more) (along with the fact that if you have more bad athletes, then the likelihood of them causing trouble would increase because of the bad standards being put forth by so many of the athletes at the program)

All of that, and discipline would be a very much welcomed addition to the NCAA series once again, in my opinion.

[JeffHCross]

No one is going to get a kid to come to their school without doing background checks that should, at the very least, hint at the possibility of the kid being a moron and doing something stupid with his life once he's free in the wild of college athletics.

Sure about that?

[Geauxlden]

Exactly. It was random for random's sake and not because it has to be random.

No one is going to get a kid to come to their school without doing background checks that should, at the very least, hint at the possibility of the kid being a moron and doing something stupid with his life once he's free in the wild of college athletics.


If they were going to do it right, it would have to be a combination of several things to make it worth having:

1. Having enough things that the kids could get in trouble for doing without it always being stupid repetitive stuff
2. Having a hidden (very important) "rating" that determines the likelihood, how often, and the severity of their stupidity (aka the player screwing up)
3. There being a "background check" system implemented in recruiting - basically just another option to do with your time spent for the week on the recruiting (something like a background check requiring a certain amount of recruiting time for the week and would be accessible through the same menu in recruiting that you would go to to choose what topics to talk about during their visit for that week) - the background check would show information based on the amount of time you spent on it (allowing you to use just 10 minutes to get a very general feeling to spending a full 60 minutes on it and getting a thorough breakdown (but still not giving you the true "rating" for their "discipline" stat) - also, there would need to be the possibility of not getting all the facts on a situation or getting the wrong story completely if you don't spend the full 60 minutes (a percentage chance always being there, but it only being 5-10% at 60 minutes and increasing by quite a bit as you spend less time during the "background check").
4. Schools not going after the "troubled" recruits
5. All of this tying into school prestige, sanctions on the school (which would absolutely need to be implemented correctly to truly have the possibility of death penalties or another USC situation), and a coaching carousel (along with stats for coaches like College Hoops 2k5) and coaches and schools with high prestige having an affect on the athlete's likelihood of them causing trouble (along with having more athletes that are likely to not cause trouble setting good standards for the bad seeds and decreasing that likelihood that much more) (along with the fact that if you have more bad athletes, then the likelihood of them causing trouble would increase because of the bad standards being put forth by so many of the athletes at the program)

All of that, and discipline would be a very much welcomed addition to the NCAA series once again, in my opinion.

I was never a fan of this feature and hope that it doesn't return. However, if it does I hope that the system is revised to reflect some of your ideas. I'm skeptical that discipline will return because I don't think the NCAA would allow it. Off the field behavior has been a black-eye for the NCAA and I can't see them being happy about EA wanting to "feature" that aspect of collegiate athletics.

[cdj]

I was never a fan of this feature and hope that it doesn't return. However, if it does I hope that the system is revised to reflect some of your ideas. I'm skeptical that discipline will return because I don't think the NCAA would allow it. Off the field behavior has been a black-eye for the NCAA and I can't see them being happy about EA wanting to "feature" that aspect of collegiate athletics.

I agree with you and would add that making it a "fun" system is pretty difficult IMO.

Any and all game features (regardless of genre) should have some sort of risk/reward to it as well as a 'rock - scissors - paper' hierarchy. I don't know their thoughts on it, but I doubt the NCAA would let players commit violations and then allow EA to create a system where the gamer can not punish them (eliminating the risk/reward). I suppose there could be some NCAA violation system should you not punish players harshly or swiftly enough, but when violations occur randomly and you are forced to discipline them, it could get old very quickly. I like the idea of a player morale/discipline system, but am leery of the execution of such a feature.


For the question at-hand, the first info came out in early March of last year so it may be here in a matter of days or weeks.

[CLW]

For the question at-hand, the first info came out in early March of last year so it may be here in a matter of days or weeks.

Really interested in seeing what the big feature is this year.

[JBHuskers]

Really interested in seeing what the big feature is this year.

Mascot Online Dynasty

[HWill]

Mascot Online Dynasty

[steelerfan]

Mascot Online Dynasty

Without the WKU mascot, I will find this useless.

[JBHuskers]

Without the WKU mascot, I will find this useless.

Always someone complaining....geez!

[steelerfan]

Always someone complaining....geez!

Big Red's appearance is looooong overdue. I can't even run a serious dynasty using WKU or schedule WKU as an opponent knowing that their spirit is neutered by his unexplained absence.

[CLW]

Mascot Online Dynasty

Well I would enjoy that FAR more than the "epic" feature that was/is Season Showdown.


LMAO at the WKU mascot. Born in raised in WKY and I have always loved the Hilltoppers mascot. Moreover, he's so...... fun for a video game. I DEMAND that WKU's mascot receive a separate entry in next year's TGT tourny. If Dreads got a #1 seed the Hilltopper should be the #1 overall seed in next year's tourny.

[steelerfan]

I DEMAND that WKU's mascot receive a separate entry in next year's TGT tourny. If Dreads got a #1 seed the Hilltopper should be the #1 overall seed in next year's tourny.

[Kwizzy]

Well I would enjoy that FAR more than the "epic" feature that was/is Season Showdown.

Season Showdown in itself was not a great feature but if I remember right it laid the groundwork & made one of last year's big features possible.

[CLW]

Season Showdown in itself was not a great feature but if I remember right it laid the groundwork & made one of last year's big features possible.

That's what they say. I find that somewhat questionable. Moreover, if the ultimate goal was Dynasty Wire (if memory serves correctly the "fine folks" said Season Showdown led to it) I wasn't that impressed with it considering its bugs (it still shows random box scores when I go to check my box score).

[jaymo76]

Big Red's appearance is looooong overdue. I can't even run a serious dynasty using WKU or schedule WKU as an opponent knowing that their spirit is neutered by his unexplained absence.

Stop thinking small Steeler... fingers crossed for create a windsock mode. Imagine mixing and matching windsock colours??? The lack of this feature on next gen continues to hold this game back

[JeffHCross]

I agree with you and would add that making it a "fun" system is pretty difficult IMO.

For me, the big thing is that the old system was "stupid". It wasn't fun, it was just "stupid".

No coach is ever faced with the decision of training his players or disciplining them. That just doesn't happen. If the off-season system had been designed that you're choosing to focus on improving the discipline of your players or improving their ball skills ... I'm okay with that. But discipline wasn't rated, it wasn't recorded, and it wasn't visible. So that wasn't it, certainly. You instead were faced with the decision of allocating points towards future discipline of hypothetical screw-ups or having your players improve in the off-season. And regardless it how many discipline points you had, it seemed like your "better" discipline guys, your "good boys", were the ones more likely to get in trouble. I can understand the system was semi-random, but wtf. You could willfully recruit "Bad" players, and they'd still not get in trouble as much as the good ones.

But the biggest thing is that you can't tell me that at any point in the season a coach is unable to willingly discipline his players. You can't run out of discipline. That's just not possible, and was, by far, the most mind-blowingly numb part of the "feature".

Yes, I'm passionate about this

[JeffHCross]

No one is going to get a kid to come to their school without doing background checks that should, at the very least, hint at the possibility of the kid being a moron and doing something stupid with his life once he's free in the wild of college athletics.

I couldn't help but think about this post today, mors.

Story Highlights

• A six-month SI/CBS News investigation ran criminal background checks on Top 25
• Of 2,837 players, 7% had criminal records; 8.1% of scholarship players in trouble
• Only two of Top 25 schools did background checks; none checked juvenile records

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...#ixzz1FUv8NLZT

So maybe "random" discipline is more right!

[MCdonnieG]

Is this real or just another false alarm? I need some clarification....

here's the link----->http://www.operationsports.com/news/...ures-revealed/

For those who don't feel like clicking the link this is what was said....pretty much Op Sports wrote a blog revealing vague yet new features....

Features

* Feel the hits, experience the thrills and revel in the glory of college football

* Suit up in the college colors of your choice and take the field as an NCAA athlete in the most authentic college football experience to date

* Enhanced in-game presentation brings the excitement of Saturday's game to life with all-new traditions and school-specific crowd celebrations

* Take on your school's most heated rival in intense matchups

* Go for the glory on the road to the National Championship