NCAA Football 10 News Post

NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat

08:22 PM - March 24, 2009 by Russell_Kiniry_EA

Hey guys my name is Russell Kiniry and I'm one of the Designers on NCAA Football 10. I work in (and spend my free time in) game-play and Dynasty.

Going to cut right too it... this week’s blog (which I'm wrapping up now) pertains to game-play. So your concerns are being heard.

Another touchy topic right now: The screen shots from last week’s blog. They were bad; no getting around that... the goal was to show some extreme angles of the camera (not game-play). The offense line that Greg had running at the time was not even close to what the game represents. I actually plan on addressing this a little tonight on insideblog.easports.com (I’ll edit this post when it goes live as long as I’m allowed to post links

).

Really I just hope I can help clear up some of the misconceptions we have this year with features/additions we've already talked about.

-Russ

Edit: Here is the link to the Pocket Blog.

Game: NCAA Football 10Reader Score: 6.5/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3 / Wii / Xbox 360Votes for game: 61 - View All

NCAA Football 10 Videos

Member Comments

# 101 youALREADYknow @ 03/26/09 02:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BORN4CORN


	Alright, I haven't seen this mentioned on here yet: Preset Attribute Ratings (Create-a-Recruit) - let me explain While in dynasty I typically will create 3-5 players for the upcoming class. It is really annoying though when all of the sliders on the ratings are preset at 78 (I believe that is the number). No matter what position the player is, all of them are set at that default number. Example: When I create a QB for the upcoming class, I don't want to have to go all the way down the attribute list and lower ratings like Impact Blocking, Man Coverage, or Kick Return. These are irrelevant for that position. Instead, the ratings that correspond to that position should be the only ones preset highly, and the rest could be preset somewhere between 0-50. In the case of the QB, you would essentially see a 78 rating as the default number for the attributes that matter (Throw Power, Throw Accuracy, Awr, etc.). Of course though you would still have the ability to adjust any of the ratings to your liking. Any chance you guys can give this a look?

I mentioned this to Greg on the NCAA team months ago, but hopefully Russ sees this as well and can confirm that some changes are being made. The way this was done in NCAA 09 was horrific and completely ruined Create-A-Prospect/Player for me. It takes hours to create the 25 recruits for a class with the current system.

# 102 Madwolf @ 03/26/09 03:03 AM

Definitely agree on the pre-set attribute ratings. It should work like this:

Position: RB (just one example)
Type: Power/Balanced/Finesse
Star: 1/2/3/4/5

You're type would dictate what type of back they are of course, and what stats stand out, and then you could change how good of a back they are by the star ratings which would increase or decrease their ratings accordingly.

It was incredibly frustrating in 09 to allow everyone to create a player that could only be a 3 star player.

# 103 sportzbro @ 03/26/09 03:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by youALREADYknow


	I mentioned this to Greg on the NCAA team months ago, but hopefully Russ sees this as well and can confirm that some changes are being made. The way this was done in NCAA 09 was horrific and completely ruined Create-A-Prospect/Player for me. It takes hours to create the 25 recruits for a class with the current system.

No doubt...I usually just make 3 maybe 4-5 if I am in a good mood. Any more though and I feel like I am almost punishing myself.

Awesome..yea I had a feeling someone had already said something about it. I just haven't seen it brought up anywhere so I figured why not. Thanks for being on top of it really early in the process though. Hopefully its fixed or tweaked in some way.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Madwolf


	Definitely agree on the pre-set attribute ratings. It should work like this: Position: RB (just one example) Type: Power/Balanced/Finesse Star: 1/2/3/4/5 You're type would dictate what type of back they are of course, and what stats stand out, and then you could change how good of a back they are by the star ratings which would increase or decrease their ratings accordingly. It was incredibly frustrating in 09 to allow everyone to create a player that could only be a 3 star player.

This is also a cool way you could do it...I almost like it better than my idea.

# 104 baumy300 @ 03/26/09 08:06 AM

Don't remember hearing anything about this or maybe I missed it, but is that miserable, horrible, ridiculous "Jump the snap" feature going to be gone this year or at least have an "off" option?

# 105 Russell_Kiniry_EA @ 03/26/09 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BORN4CORN


	Alright, I haven't seen this mentioned on here yet: Preset Attribute Ratings (Create-a-Recruit) - let me explain While in dynasty I typically will create 3-5 players for the upcoming class. It is really annoying though when all of the sliders on the ratings are preset at 78 (I believe that is the number). No matter what position the player is, all of them are set at that default number. Example: When I create a QB for the upcoming class, I don't want to have to go all the way down the attribute list and lower ratings like Impact Blocking, Man Coverage, or Kick Return. These are irrelevant for that position. Instead, the ratings that correspond to that position should be the only ones preset highly, and the rest could be preset somewhere between 0-50. In the case of the QB, you would essentially see a 78 rating as the default number for the attributes that matter (Throw Power, Throw Accuracy, Awr, etc.). Of course though you would still have the ability to adjust any of the ratings to your liking. Any chance you guys can give this a look?

I doubt this year we'll make the ratings show up based on position, sorry. However I might be able to get the starting value to change, would it be better if all the attributes started as say 40?

-Russ

# 106 dubuque @ 03/26/09 02:38 PM

i would like to see teams like northern iowa

# 107 youALREADYknow @ 03/26/09 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russell_Kiniry_EA


	I doubt this year we'll make the ratings show up based on position, sorry. However I might be able to get the starting value to change, would it be better if all the attributes started as say 40? -Russ

Yes, 40 would be a better starting point if you can't make them position specific. It's still a terrible process to create prospects, but with the multitude of ratings in the game now it's easier to go up on the position specific ratings than to edit down the out-of-position ratings.

# 108 jbdeuce @ 03/26/09 02:53 PM

Starting all the ratings at 40 would be perfect! With this at least when I create a WR I could only edit the ratings that effect the WR position instead of worrying about kick power and kick acc and throw power and throw acc etc. Again, 40 would be perfect!

-OUT

# 109 canes21 @ 03/26/09 02:59 PM

You guys do realize you don't have to lower everything that does not corespond to that position. You can make THP 0 or 99 and it won't change the OVR of a K.

# 110 sportzbro @ 03/26/09 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russell_Kiniry_EA


	I doubt this year we'll make the ratings show up based on position, sorry. However I might be able to get the starting value to change, would it be better if all the attributes started as say 40? -Russ

Yes. I'm down with switching all of it to 40 instead of 78. I would only have to raise a few things, opposed to lowering almost all of them.

Thanks for responding Russ!

Quote:

Originally Posted by canes21


	You guys do realize you don't have to lower everything that does not corespond to that position. You can make THP 0 or 99 and it won't change the OVR of a K.

Yes i realize this, but having a kicker with 95 Kick Power & 90 Kick accuracy, along with a 78 rating for everything else is annoying and unrealistic. By Russ changing the preset to 40, it will take less time to increase the attributes that matter, instead of lowering all the ones that don't.

# 111 sportzbro @ 03/26/09 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by youALREADYknow


	Yes, 40 would be a better starting point if you can't make them position specific. It's still a terrible process to create prospects, but with the multitude of ratings in the game now it's easier to go up on the position specific ratings than to edit down the out-of-position ratings.

Ha, i missed this at first, but yes this is also my stance.

# 112 canes21 @ 03/26/09 05:16 PM

It bothers me some, but I don't lower them anymore. I use my Kicker as a Kicker only, so that 78 THP may be the best on my team, but I am able to control myself and be realistic with an unrealistic situation. But I do see your side of the argument and I just think Kickers need like 5 ratings. Kick Power, Kick Accuracy, Speed, Tackle, Strength.

# 113 yanks26ngoin @ 03/26/09 05:41 PM

Russ, was anything added to Dynasty mode this year? Was recruiting fixed, and will there be an AD mode like Madden has an owner mode?

# 114 dubuque @ 03/26/09 05:44 PM

any info on create a school

# 115 acts238shaun @ 03/26/09 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by youALREADYknow


	Only one or two players each year are truly good enough to be rated in the 80's at 3+ positions on opposite sides of the ball. I agree that ATH's need to be a little more flexible, but some of the suggestions I've seen would lead to major exploitation of the recruiting system as it stands today.

I totally agree...I was being very general in that example. One COLLEGE player I believe would have fit the bill would have been Mike Vick, as he would have been great at HB, CB, WR, S as well as QB. Who knows, with time and weight training maybe even a LB? He was a rarity, I admit. Michael Bush was another, though he was no Vick as far as speed goes. There are/have been HB/WR/LB/DB's on BCS teams that probably would have as good or better at one of the other positions, but the depth chart influenced their move to the posion they play/played. Could you have imagined Bo Jackson as a LB or S? I shudder for the ball carrier if he laid into them like he did the Boz on Monday night...

Quote:

Originally Posted by youALREADYknow


	There is no reason for 3 star ATH's to be equally rated between two positions unless we're talking about WR/CB or OL/DT or OLB/DE. If they were truly that good to be equally rated at 3+ positions, then they wouldn't be 3 star prospects.

I agree...I would love to see in 2010 recruiting be LB, S, CB, DB, WR/DB, RB/LB, etc...stating all the position they can play. Let a player be recruited as a Safety and his overall be determined by which one you play him in (Free or Strong) and the system you use him. A Cover 2 SS is different than a typical SS. That's one thing I liked about MVP 05, it had multiple position for each player.

Quote:

Originally Posted by youALREADYknow


	All of this debate seems tied around the OVR rating and will likely be a moot point in NCAA 10 anyways. They are re-working how the OVR rating is calculated in NCAA 10. The only reason most players suffer such a huge drop between positions is that the AWR rating takes a hit. AWR is the progression rating.

Ditto on that as well. Brian Toal was highly rated as a RB and LB in high school. His awareness rating should pertain to a position, but not drop dramatically if he moved to ILB or TE. The other skill sets should come into play.

# 116 MMAsterkillah @ 03/26/09 06:08 PM

Wow, I had to chime in when I saw the Toal reference.

That guy is my hero, what can I say, I'm from Boston.

# 117 acts238shaun @ 03/26/09 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MMAsterkillah


	Wow, I had to chime in when I saw the Toal reference. That guy is my hero, what can I say, I'm from Boston.

Being from a small town, having guys play two positions are common in high school, but for a guy to do it in college effectively is amazing. On top of that he played LB AND RB at BC? Respect...I see Toal goint to the Pats, lol.

# 118 MMAsterkillah @ 03/26/09 06:31 PM

I don't want to get too far off topic, but he recently ran a 4.6 at his pro day, fresh off some serious injuries. He was only 228 pounds, which was surprising considering he weighed in around 250 at one point. Supposedly, teams were evaluating Toal's skillset in regards to whether he should play FB, or less likely, SS.

I think every player should have specific ratings in even the most irrelevant (to his position) attribute ratings. Nearly every player is a legit ATH, and could be used in different ways or situations to fit a teams needs. Certainly players are best suited at specific positions, but they don't turn into a different physical specimen when switching spots.

# 119 Potatoes002 @ 03/26/09 07:23 PM

Any chance on accelerated clock or sim quarter length Russ?

# 120 youALREADYknow @ 03/26/09 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Potatoes002


	Any chance on accelerated clock or sim quarter length Russ?

99% sure we're getting some sort of accelerated clock. It was brought up by Greg on the NCAA team months ago when addressing the length of games.

« Previous 1 2 3 4 567 8 Next »

More Links

NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat