NCAA Football 13 Heisman Challenge Webcast Introduces Reaction Time

[WazzuRC]

I thought this mode was completely different than what it turned out to be. I was under the impression that you played as Heisman Winners in "Heisman Moments" of their great seasons. This just seems...pointless.

[AttackAttack]

Quote: Originally Posted by ultralow36

Athleticism Maxed out attributes Overall ratings above 100 Eddie's speed Herschel's power Tim Brown's hands Flutie's elusivene

All that means is that those ratings for those guys will be maxed. They won't actually play like they did in real life. Which is a shame because 2k legends had their own skills.

[DukeC]

Why.....every single time they always use a terrible player to demonstrate the game (This goes for all sports games). That's such a terrible marketing decision. THEY MAKE YOUR GAME LOOK WORSE THAN IT IS.

[Playmakers]

Quote: Originally Posted by ODogg

I am going to go against the grain here and say I think this Heisman mode looks like it could be quite fun and I think I may enjoy it. I think it's funny all the criticism EA is taking over this when so many people really LOVED 2K Sports addition of superstar mode with Michael Jordan and all those classic players, which is probably where EA got this idea from btw. As for me, I know I played NBA2K a LOT more because of that superstar mode where you had goals set for players and had to meet them to unlock achievements and although I'm not sure this mode will be that addictive it certainly looks like it has the potential to be.

Those guys at NBA 2K are passionate about historic players and basketball in general.

They also understand that you just can't make every single player a 100 overall just because he was a great player.

Players have strength and weaknesses Odogg.

That is why player tendencies and player traits are so imprtant. I could do a better job than EA at seperating players.

Here's a prime example of how Ratings matter in NBA 2K classic players.

Dominque Wilkins is not a 100 overall rated player even though he was a beast back in his day. He was a terrific athelete but that doesn't mean he was a great shooter

2K Ratings for Wilkins that made him play to his strengths
Shot Inside-97
Shot Close-96
Dunk-99
Shoot In Traffic-94
Speed-80
Quickness-82
Vertical-96

2K Ratings that made Wilkins avg in his lesser skill categories
Shot Medium-79
3-PT Shot-67
FT Throw-81
Ball Handle-78
Passing-60
Blocking-40
Defensive Awareness-74


Larry Bird was awesome but 2k rated him in a realistic manner.

You can tell they actually did some research because while most people assume Bird was a great 3-PT shooter in reality he was good but not great from that range. He was a mid range shooter and not very atheletic and 2K also gave him weaknesses.

Bird has (80) 3-Pt rating, (78) Layup, (48) Dunking, (72) Ball Handling, (47) Blocking, (65) speed, (65) quickness and (48) jumping.

Those are things that truly capture player seperation and tendencies Odogg.

Just because Bird was great doesn't mean he has 90+ ratings in all skill sets.

EA i can gurantee you will give Eddie George and Archie Griffin 90+ speed and agility which is just flat out wrong.

I understand those players were great players but they should also have aspects of their game that wasn't great. That makes you utilize the players to their strengths.

Why would i want to have Eddie George running around on the field as if he's got the same speed as Warrick Dunn and the power of Jim Brown?

So the two modes are diiferent IMO because one company (2K) takes their classic teams and players seriously and the other company (EA) does it for marketing reasons only.

[Bootzilla]

That. Was. Awful.

[Big FN Deal]

Quote: Originally Posted by ultralow36

Athleticism Maxed out attributes Overall ratings above 100 Eddie's speed Herschel's power Tim Brown's hands Flutie's elusivene

I have been harping on the fundamental importance of realistic player ratings since I joined OS and before, for good reason. This occurrence seems to clearly highlight the issue with the current player ratings scale in EA football games. If EA/Tiburon is going to now include the greatest collegiate and professional players within EA football's player ratings scale, I don't understand how that does not mandate that the entire system be scaled appropriately. However, instead they seem to choose to give Hall of Fame/Heisman players skill ratings of 100+, like 115 SPD, 125 THP, 107 ACC, 122 MCV, 145 AWR, etc.

IMO, that seems to set a precedent for players currently playing in the prime of their careers, at the top of their game, to have skill ratings in EA football games exceeding 100. For example, Aaron Rodgers during GB's Super Bowl run should have been over 100 because he was demonstrating Hall of Fame greatness, likewise for Devin Hester a while back as a KR/PR.

Can any CE attendee or Game Changer comment on why this type of decision would be made to go over 100 instead of scaling the entire system back, other than the fact the former was obviously easier and quicker? Does anyone else see an issue with this or feel like it's no big deal?

[cparrish]

Not a fan at all of this Heisman Challenge. It's just a fancy "create a player" mode with super human attributes. No thanks.

[avwhitechic]

ok i guess but i wont touch it.. I'll create a player before i do this...waste of resources imo.