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

# 141 ODogg @ 03/28/09 02:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rivers17ncsu


	thing is im not trying to overlook the problems. You may think it was terrible, but I disagree. Only NCAA games ive had more fun playing than this one was 04 and 06.

I'm glad you had fun with it, I wish I could have. I really miss my college football man!! It used to be my bread and butter go-to game but now i'm.....lost. It's sad.

# 142 Niq54 @ 03/31/09 08:10 PM

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE

Please fix the player progression issues in NCAA. Player's progress way TOO much each year. Creating way too many top tier teams 2-3 years into a Dynasty. I agree that player's get better over time but with the new rating system being applied to MADDEN 10 I like to see this make its way to NCAA as well.

Top tier teams like FLA USC OSU should have top recruits but the recruits should not dramatically shoot up in rating without significant playing time or experience. Tebow's backup may be recruited as an 80 OVR but he shouldn't progress more than a 82 OVR with significant playing time and good performance. Also

# 143 Niq54 @ 03/31/09 08:12 PM

Along progression it should be based upon season performance as well as spring game performance. There have been 3 star recruits that have become stars and have gotten drafted in the first round of the NFL. With NCAA only the highest rated players can be drafted and only 5 & 4 star recruits ever progress to high enough ratings to get drafted. The whole ratings system and progression system needs to be re-evaluated.

# 144 mikeveli20 @ 04/09/09 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russell_Kiniry_EA


	We are working on the Recruits (with a close eye on ATH) to get a few more players that can play multiple positions. I have been looking at the position changes rating hits, and I agree that getting a negative 4 in speed does not seem right. The reason for this hit originally was to stop exploits, but I do not feel like that is a valid reason anymore and will likely be removing those penalties (AWR will stay for sure, but SPD, ACC, STR penalties are high on my chopping block). -Russ

As I stated in another thread,

I don't even think AWR should change at all. Because of the addition of the new ratings over the past couple of years, those are the things that should matter the most in an overall of a player. AWR should more or less represent the smarts or football smarts of a player. If a player has 20 AWR, he's going to be pretty dumb no matter what position he plays and it should affect his overall rating the same for every position. For example:

Say a CB has the following ratings:
Overall: 85
Speed: 90
Awareness: 80
Route Running: 60
Catching: 65
Man Coverage: 87
Zone Coverage: 85
etc. etc.

Now if that CB's position is changed to be a WR, things like route running and catching should play a factor in his overall, not the others:

Same guy as a WR
Overall: 72
Speed: 90
Awareness: 80
Route Running: 60
Catching: 65
Man Coverage: 87
Zone Coverage: 85

Just because he's at a different position, doesn't mean that he's all of a sudden going to become slower, or his football smarts are going to decrease, or he's going to forget how to cover in zone and man. Those things will still be there, it's just that things like Route Running and Catching are much more important to a WR than a CB, so they should be the major factor in his overall.

If you take away any hit to the ratings and just put more importance on certain ratings for specific positions, then it also solves the problem of Athletes only being able to play one position. With this approach, all of their individual ratings will always be the same, it's just that their overall would change depending on where you put them, but their abilities will still be there. Example:

ATH:
Awareness: 80
Throw Power: 90
Throw Accuracy: 90
Speed: 75
Catching: 90
Route Running: 90

So if you put that ATH at QB, he'd be a 90 overall or something. Then if you put him at WR, he'd be like a 82 overall. His ratings stay the same but speed is more important at WR than at QB so that's why the overall drops. His smarts stay the same, he's just not as good at that position because he's slow. It also doesn't affect his ability to throw the football. He's still got that skill no matter where he plays.

So to conclude, awareness should not be position related, it should be more of an overall intelligence or football smarts. With all the new ratings, there are so many others that can be the major factor in determining the overall rating instead of awareness and no ratings should change when changing the position of a player.

# 145 TrevJo @ 04/09/09 09:47 PM

Here's how I think it should work:

1. You start with a prospect, either a position or an Athlete. (No change here.)
2. Athletes do not have a default position. (This would be a change and would require a different way to scout them, since currently what you see are the main attributes for the athlete's default position.)
3. Athletes should generally be high-athleticism, low awr/skill guys. At best maybe a 5-star Athlete would have A AWR but never A+. 3-star Athletes should generally have C AWR or worse. (This is something the game does not do now. Makes no sense to me to see 3-star, C overall rated Athletes who have mediocre athleticism but A+ AWR or B+ THA or B+ CTH. That's not an Athlete, that's a position player!)
4. If the prospect has a position, and you change that position, the AWR should drop depending on how different the position is. (No change here.)
5. If the prospect is an Athlete, his AWR should not change for a position change, but per #2 his AWR should not have been all that high to begin with. (This would be a change.)
6. Prospects changing position should not ever lose physical attributes. (This is a change it sounds like they are already going to make.)
7. Offseason prospect training development should be more of a learning curve. A player's primary and secondary skills should increase very quickly if they are starting very low i.e. 40. They should increase slowly or not at all if they are above the norm for a player of that talent at that position.
So for example, you take a 4-star WR with 85 CTH, 40 MCV, 40 TAK and move him to CB. He never improves his CTH rating again, but his MCV and TAK ratings increase a lot faster than they would on a 4-star CB with 70 MCV and 55 TAK.
Another example, you take a 4-star HB with 90 SPD, 55 STR, 44 RBK and move him to FB. He never improves his SPD rating again, but his STR and RBK go up a lot faster than they would have if he had remained a HB.
(Currently, I think player progression is somewhat based on position, but I think it should be more pronounced. Right now players in the game have a very limited capacity to, over time, adapt physically to a new position and learn new skills, compared to real life.)

The end results would be:
-ATH players that are more like real athlete prospects.
-Position changes that result in significant, realistic awareness loss (without the nonsensical physical nerfs).
-More realistic high learning curve for players learning a new position.

# 146 TrevJo @ 04/09/09 10:10 PM

BTW, I agree with those who suspect that the fundamental problem that caused things to be the way they are, is that it's too difficult to make the impact of AWR be realistic in the gameplay. I don't know if that's a problem they can ever solve.

# 147 canes21 @ 04/09/09 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikeveli20


	As I stated in another thread, I don't even think AWR should change at all. Because of the addition of the new ratings over the past couple of years, those are the things that should matter the most in an overall of a player. AWR should more or less represent the smarts or football smarts of a player. If a player has 20 AWR, he's going to be pretty dumb no matter what position he plays and it should affect his overall rating the same for every position. For example: Say a CB has the following ratings: Overall: 85 Speed: 90 Awareness: 80 Route Running: 60 Catching: 65 Man Coverage: 87 Zone Coverage: 85 etc. etc. Now if that CB's position is changed to be a WR, things like route running and catching should play a factor in his overall, not the others: Same guy as a WR Overall: 72 Speed: 90 Awareness: 80 Route Running: 60 Catching: 65 Man Coverage: 87 Zone Coverage: 85 Just because he's at a different position, doesn't mean that he's all of a sudden going to become slower, or his football smarts are going to decrease, or he's going to forget how to cover in zone and man. Those things will still be there, it's just that things like Route Running and Catching are much more important to a WR than a CB, so they should be the major factor in his overall. If you take away any hit to the ratings and just put more importance on certain ratings for specific positions, then it also solves the problem of Athletes only being able to play one position. With this approach, all of their individual ratings will always be the same, it's just that their overall would change depending on where you put them, but their abilities will still be there. Example: ATH: Awareness: 80 Throw Power: 90 Throw Accuracy: 90 Speed: 75 Catching: 90 Route Running: 90 So if you put that ATH at QB, he'd be a 90 overall or something. Then if you put him at WR, he'd be like a 82 overall. His ratings stay the same but speed is more important at WR than at QB so that's why the overall drops. His smarts stay the same, he's just not as good at that position because he's slow. It also doesn't affect his ability to throw the football. He's still got that skill no matter where he plays. So to conclude, awareness should not be position related, it should be more of an overall intelligence or football smarts. With all the new ratings, there are so many others that can be the major factor in determining the overall rating instead of awareness and no ratings should change when changing the position of a player.

A WR who just starts to play QB isn't going to be as smart as a QB who played QB through HS. So the AWR should go down, but it should steadily rise through the season as they learn more.

# 148 mikeveli20 @ 04/10/09 02:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by canes21


	A WR who just starts to play QB isn't going to be as smart as a QB who played QB through HS. So the AWR should go down, but it should steadily rise through the season as they learn more.

But who's to say the AWR isn't related to his awareness as a WR, not a QB? And if he's not as good at QB, it's not because he's less smart or less aware of his surroundings, it's because he lacks other fundamental skills that a QB would have over a WR such as throw power, throw accuracy, play recognition, etc. That's the whole point of what I'm saying.

There are many other attributes that relate to specific positions that should affect the overall of the player, not the awareness because awareness is too general. If the category was named QB awareness or something like that, then yes I would agree that the rating should affect that position as much as other categories such as throw power, throw accuracy, etc. but it's not called that, it's just awareness which is again too general.

This is particular important for ATH players because they don't start off with a specific position. For someone that starts of as an OT, yes you could possibly say his awareness rating ties specifically to that position if that's how you look at awareness, but for those that don't, it just doesn't work. If someone is an ATH that means they can play several positions, but the problem in the NCAA games up until this point is that it's practically pre-determined which position they actually play based on their awareness and other stat categories changing depending on which position you change them to.

It should be based off skills more specific to that particular position, and awareness should be made to mean football smarts or something similar and should stay the same regardless of the position just like everything else should except for overall.

# 149 fahrenheit @ 04/11/09 01:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikeveli20


	But who's to say the AWR isn't related to his awareness as a WR, not a QB?

Thats obvious, theres really no reason to further explain it. Awareness is about your intelligence at that position. Peyton Manning may be an incredible QB but his ability to judge where the ball is going based off of the offensive line's footwork might not be on par with Ray Lewis.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikeveli20


	And if he's not as good at QB, it's not because he's less smart or less aware of his surroundings, .

Actually it is. Just because a person is smart at one position it doesn't mean theyre smart at another.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikeveli20


	but it's not called that, it's just awareness which is again too general.

Unfortunately thats true, because aside from running backs and defensive players who have some sub categories for awareness, awareness has cover a wide array of unmeasurable things such as instincts and reaction time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikeveli20


	and awareness should be made to mean football smarts or something similar

There really is no such thing as football smarts, as much as football experience when it comes to all positions.

# 150 mikeveli20 @ 04/11/09 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fahrenheit


	Thats obvious, theres really no reason to further explain it. Awareness is about your intelligence at that position. Peyton Manning may be an incredible QB but his ability to judge where the ball is going based off of the offensive line's footwork might not be on par with Ray Lewis.

I know the definition of the word awareness, I just don't like how NCAA uses it. By just calling it awareness and having it relate to how smart you are at your current position can cause problems. Say you have a QB with 99 awareness meaning this guy is a natural at QB, and then switch him to a WR where his awareness goes down to say 75. Now since it's using the same placeholder for the rating, where does his QB awareness go now?

So if I then switch him back to a QB after a year, how is the game going to know that he's supposed to have 99 awareness at that position? Since the game now see's him as a WR and we are now changing him to a different position, it's going to act as if he's just starting out there and his awareness would be like 75 or something as a QB and his overall rating will take a serious hit. Madden handles this properly by keeping the awareness rating the same regardless of what position you change a player to. It acts more of a player's overall awareness of football.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fahrenheit


	Actually it is. Just because a person is smart at one position it doesn't mean theyre smart at another.

I meant less smart and aware in general. If a 70 overall moron QB moves to FS and becomes to a 50, he's still going to be a moron in general, but he'll be worse at that position because his play recognition rating at QB won't matter as much, not because he's still a moron. He's a moron regardless of where he plays.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fahrenheit


	There really is no such thing as football smarts, as much as football experience when it comes to all positions.

I'd have to say it's a mix of both. I just don't like the way NCAA handles awareness when it comes to changing player's positions. Madden does it proper, at least when it comes to awareness.

# 151 FOREST007 @ 04/30/09 10:45 PM

Has anybody else had the problem where there are not enough 5 or 4* at a position? After I go 2 or 3 years into my dynasty, I always notice that i only have 3* Centers to choose from. So sometimes if i have enough good Tackles, i would change them to Center, but of course an 88 LT would some how drop to a 72 Center (maybe that's an over-exaggeration, but close enough). I also get 1 5* kicker every 4 years.

I only care so much because I play NCAA until Madden comes out, getting in as many good years as possible with a low rated school to: 1. build a power house and 2. export them. But once the rookies in madden are...let's say 6 years pro...i get no good Centers out the draft and everybody has at least two 90+ rate QBs and HBs because they were all 5* players.

Oh yeah, sometimes i only get like 2 5* MLBs every 7 years. I'm thinking it was just my copy since nobody else seems to have this problem.

# 152 WolverinesFinest @ 04/30/09 10:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FOREST007


	Has anybody else had the problem where there are not enough 5 or 4* at a position? After I go 2 or 3 years into my dynasty, I always notice that i only have 3* Centers to choose from. So sometimes if i have enough good Tackles, i would change them to Center, but of course an 88 LT would some how drop to a 72 Center (maybe that's an over-exaggeration, but close enough). I also get 1 5* kicker every 4 years. I only care so much because I play NCAA until Madden comes out, getting in as many good years as possible with a low rated school to: 1. build a power house and 2. export them. But once the rookies in madden are...let's say 6 years pro...i get no good Centers out the draft and everybody has at least two 90+ rate QBs and HBs because they were all 5* players. Oh yeah, sometimes i only get like 2 5* MLBs every 7 years. I'm thinking it was just my copy since nobody else seems to have this problem.

This is everyones problem, supposedly it's being fixed for 2010

# 153 Gossennator @ 04/30/09 11:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IndyColts2


	Where has Russ been? If your still here can you tell us anything new about Dynasty or Campus Legend? (other than Campus Legend being changed to Road to Glory). Also, can you give us the base of what Teambuilder is? Please be CAS

I am guessing Road to Glory is going to be like NHL where you can take it online.

# 154 Solidice @ 04/30/09 11:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gossennator


	I am guessing Road to Glory is going to be like NHL where you can take it online.

honestly, that would make me want to play it. at least for a while. eventually, i'll go back to dynasty mode only like always though.

last year, I played Campus Legend only because of the glitched roster issue. i played Campus Legend until good rosters came out, then started dynasty. then found out how bad the game was(except OD was fun).

# 155 rudyjuly2 @ 05/01/09 09:30 AM

The new dynasty blog talked a lot about how they toned down the number of big recruits but also spread them out better. They talked about a ton of stuff. Really good read.

# 156 WolverinesFinest @ 05/01/09 12:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gossennator


	I am guessing Road to Glory is going to be like NHL where you can take it online.

What do you mean take it online?

« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 78Next »

More Links

NCAA Football 10 - Designer Chat