MVP
|
Andre is one of the greatest wrestlers of all time, and it's generally agreed upon that if he wanted to kill you in the ring, he could, and there'd be nothing anybody could do about it. But, to be fair, from 1987 and on, Andre was booked mid-card to upper and lost almost every big match he was in. He was booked as an unstoppable fan favorite giant from 1975 - 1986, but after his 2 or 3 year run with Hogan, Andre was a mid-card stable guy who was usually used as light enforcement and to put over rising talent. It's tough to rate him highly because for most of his WWF career, he lost his major matches, and in the matches he won as a heel it usually had to do with something dastardly that Heenan, Debiase, or another manager would do for him.
They should get rid of the visible overall rating because it doesn't make sense in a work. The wrestlers should be broken down by style and then have specific areas:
- Style (not a rating number, but a performance style)
Rating Numbers/Ratings:
- Strength - Ability to lift heavy guys
- Power - Ability to deal damage
- Tactician - Ability to deal damage with holds/submissions
- Stamina - Ability to maintain energy through a match, not get tired
- Recovery - Ability to get up more quickly after an attack, recoup energy, reverse moves, break pins, etc
- Speed - Ability to move around the ring
- Agility - Ability to chain moves quicker, perform specific moves, or do things like climb the turnbuckle, etc
And I'm sure there's others, if we're purely talking booked in-ring abilities those are just the ones I'm thinking of right now.
This way, you can have a guy like Wrestlemania-era Andre (1985 - 1992) have incredible power, incredible strength, but have virtually no stamina, very little recovery, and little agility and speed. This would mean that another guy could go over him who is more balanced, even if he has less power and strength.
Ultimately, because wrestling is a work and videogames (usually) treat it like a shoot, it's going to be problematic in some areas. For instance, if it's a simulation then you should never have 1994 Razor Ramon (86 or whatever) be defeated by 1994 1-2-3 Kid (65 or something, when Waltman was a jobber), yet that very famously happened as a way to put over 1-2-3 Kid and create a solid feud for the two. Pro wrestling is not a simulation, of course, and some guys should be booked better than other guys, so you almost need something like a "Booking rating" or something. Not that 2K should do this because it makes no sense given that they usually try to present their wrestling game as a simulation, which is ridiculous, but that's a digression. Otherwise, you can look at a guy like 1985-1991 Hogan and say... He has a lot of strength (slammed Andre, did press slams and power moves to lesser guys), but does not have a lot of power (none of his moves have ever been sold as devastating power moves, compared to a guy like say Lesnar or even 1995 Diesel), has great recovery (it's the essence of his character to get beaten up for a whole match and then win in 60 seconds with 3 moves), has no tactical ability, has average speed. These attributes shouldn't add up to a guy who is a world beater, and yet, for a 7 year run, Hogan lost cleanly with his shoulders on the mat only once or twice... So, obviously, there's an issue with using attributes in any wrestling game to determine the outcome of a match.
Last edited by Rebel10; 05-01-2017 at 05:30 PM.
|