UFC Undisputed 2010 News Post

UFC 2010 Undisputed Overall Ratings Revealed

10:19 PM - May 4, 2010 by Steve_OS

Gamezone has posted the overall ratings for all of the UFC 2010 Undisputed fighters.

I'll list the heavyweights here. Check the link to see the rest of them.

Quote:


	Brock Lesnar � 77 Frank Mir � 77 Cain Velasquez � 77 Shane Carwin � 76 Minotauro Nogueria � 76 Junior Dos Santos � 75 Gabriel Gonzaga � 74 Andrei Arlovski � 74 Fabricio Werdum � 74 Antoni Hardonk � 74 Cheick Kongo � 74 Brandon Vera � 73 Todd Duffee � 73 Mark Coleman � 72 Pat Barry � 72 Stefan Struve � 72 Mirko Cro Cop � 72 Heath Herring � 72 Justin McCully � 71 Eddie Sanchez � 69 Mostapha Al Turk � 69 Kimbo Slice � 67

Game: UFC Undisputed 2010Reader Score: 6/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3 / Xbox 360Votes for game: 17 - View All

UFC Undisputed 2010 Videos

Member Comments

# 21 DJ @ 05/05/10 03:48 PM

How is Rumble the lowest-rated WW? That's nuts.

Can CAF achieve ratings in the 90's? If so, I'm sure you'll be seeing tons of CAF'ers online this year as they'll wind up being more powerful than the actual fighters.

# 22 Stumbleweed @ 05/05/10 04:07 PM

If they have the best fighters in the game set to 79, I highly doubt you could make a CAF higher than that unless you got extra points or something beyond the initial creation allocation. No way they allow CAFs online rated higher than the best real fighters... Plus, I assume that ranked matches won't accept CAFs regardless, so I don't think we'd see a ton of them online anyway except in custom matches.

But yeah, hopefully these overalls don't mean all that much and the fighters are well-differentiated by their skillsets and move lists. I just really don't want guys like Anthony Johnson reversing good ground fighters at-will just because the timing on the flick was right. I've been able to reverse Shogun/Machida with Rampage a few times, but it was rare and required perfect timing... hope that's the case in the full game.

# 23 sportznut02 @ 05/05/10 05:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stumbleweed


	If they have the best fighters in the game set to 79, I highly doubt you could make a CAF higher than that unless you got extra points or something beyond the initial creation allocation. No way they allow CAFs online rated higher than the best real fighters... Plus, I assume that ranked matches won't accept CAFs regardless, so I don't think we'd see a ton of them online anyway except in custom matches. But yeah, hopefully these overalls don't mean all that much and the fighters are well-differentiated by their skillsets and move lists. I just really don't want guys like Anthony Johnson reversing good ground fighters at-will just because the timing on the flick was right. I've been able to reverse Shogun/Machida with Rampage a few times, but it was rare and required perfect timing... hope that's the case in the full game.

Interesting ratings to say they least but agree with everything you just said.

# 24 EHSheadhunter09 @ 05/05/10 05:27 PM

If this is what it seems like, where overall plays in very little and specific skills decide more... EA needs to take notes for their football series...

# 25 mikenoob @ 05/05/10 08:36 PM

Why does it matter, does it make them any better to have an 90 overall rating? If they decided to put say GSP at 90, they would scale everyone up to 80+. You end up with the same situation where the range of ratings are +/- 10. Does it really matter? Overall rating is just a number.

# 26 mikenoob @ 05/05/10 09:16 PM

A fighter is only as good as the user. Also, who said Silva can't dominate a guy in the upper 60's? Look at NBA Live, their ratings are pretty low with not much guys in the 90s or 80s. A 79 rated player is MUCH better than using a guy at like 69. Their scale isn't as small as UFC so that must mean the top end fighters with the higher overall number will fight much better than the lower numbers.

# 27 Gotmadskillzson @ 05/05/10 09:48 PM

maybe their goal was to have people to really get to know the fighters and actually play with them to determine who was clearly the best. It is a lot harder to determine that if everybody is separated by a handful of points.

So in a way it could be looked at a good marketing strategy by THQ. Because you know casuals will always flock to the highest numbered person anyway. They do that with every sports game. So being the highest is only a 79 which is GSP and BJ Penn, and they only one number higher then a dozen other fighters, it will force in a way for even the casuals to truly learn the in's and out's of each fighter.

Because even though GSP for example is 79 over all, his striking might only be average, wrestling superior but BJJ average as well. So therefore instead of over all mattering the most, individual skill set ratings matter the most.

# 28 DJ @ 05/06/10 12:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gotmadskillzson


	maybe their goal was to have people to really get to know the fighters and actually play with them to determine who was clearly the best. It is a lot harder to determine that if everybody is separated by a handful of points. So in a way it could be looked at a good marketing strategy by THQ. Because you know casuals will always flock to the highest numbered person anyway. They do that with every sports game. So being the highest is only a 79 which is GSP and BJ Penn, and they only one number higher then a dozen other fighters, it will force in a way for even the casuals to truly learn the in's and out's of each fighter. Because even though GSP for example is 79 over all, his striking might only be average, wrestling superior but BJJ average as well. So therefore instead of over all mattering the most, individual skill set ratings matter the most.

That, and I think by having the ratings so close it helps give the game that real-life sense of parody that the UFC has. Outside of a couple of fighters (GSP, A. Silva), there really haven't been a lot of "dominant" fighters. Guys will win a few fights in a row, then lose a fight or two, then win one or two etc.

It gives guys a chance to beat Brock with a Cro Cop. Yes Brock will have an edge but Mirko will always have that 1-strike chance and I think the ratings do help reflect that.

# 29 denverbro89 @ 05/07/10 11:26 AM

I guess the lower rating is to reduce the flash KO for the elite fighters, but the ratings make sense because no fighter is the best at all fighting styles, they have their style they excel at, and the other ratings take a hit, which results in a lower OVR.

« Previous 12Next »

More Links

UFC 2010 Undisputed Overall Ratings Revealed