06:46 PM - June 21, 2012 by Steve_OSNCAA Football 13 News Post
06:46 PM - June 21, 2012 by Steve_OS
NCAA Football 13 Videos
Member Comments
# 21
LionsFanNJ @ 06/21/12 09:18 PM
Yeah and they told us last year those gamestop unis would be DLC. Protip: they weren't.
I don't believe this stuff until I see it, and as of now there's no new uniforms.
I don't believe this stuff until I see it, and as of now there's no new uniforms.
|
|||||||||||||
|
# 24
PowerofRed25 @ 06/21/12 09:24 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
Please stop with the "these are all technically generic players" schtick. You and I both know that is false and all the lawsuits in the world will not prevent it from being the case. But hey, it's just coincidence that the quarterback for Michigan is a dark skinned, dreaded speed demon wearing #16, right?
And if I happened to go along with your little "generic players" pipe dream, I'd like to know your thoughts on this. We have already seen the current 2013 rosters in the game. There is a video that shows all the current rosters, being scrolled through on the console itself. We know they are authentic and updated for 2013, as any number of threads complaining about how bad the ratings are can attest to.
Nowhere in that video will you see a #94 DT for Nebraska. Nor will you see a #17 QB, #4 LB, #8 white DB. So how are guys that aren't on the new and already released and installed rosters somehow in the new screenshots?
Seems like a valid question. Either way, please don't insult the intelligence of the people here or yourself into thinking these are in any way generic rosters.
# 25
moylan1234 @ 06/21/12 09:28 PM
It's not schtick it's a fact and I'm sorry it's not to your liking
Which would seem to support the theory that they're not based on real players which EA has admitted several times. They rate out the rosters as a whole they don't go through individually rating each player in the default roster to attempt to match the real life counterpart. so all those threads complaining about the ratings are basically slamming their own heads into a wall
|
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
Christ dude, man up and admit that you're wrong
# 28
PowerofRed25 @ 06/21/12 09:37 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
# 30
PowerofRed25 @ 06/21/12 10:20 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
1) We know the new rosters are already in the game, we've seen the video of them on the console and presumably they had to be finished for the demo as the rosters in the demo are accurate.
2) Many of the players in these screenshots are not on the rosters that are confirmed to be updated. They just aren't there. Just for Nebraska, there isn't a QB #17, DT #94, LB #4, SS #8. Another very obvious one to me was Kirk Cousins, I mean, "QB #8" at Michigan State They just don't exist on the rosters we KNOW are in the game already.
So the question is, what are these screenshots from and what are they trying to show us? Because what they show me are old rosters, old uniforms and old conference alignments. It is very clear that the screenshots all come from conference and rivalry games, yet teams like Missouri are still playing Big 12 opponents. I am just at a loss of what these screenshots are supposedly showing, because it sure as heck is not what we're getting in July.
|
|||||||||||||
|
Your worries are extremely unfounded
# 33
kingsofthevalley @ 06/22/12 02:43 AM
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
Moylan, I am with you on this. The pictures they have posted are without the updated rosters, and as Moylan alluded to, it's this way every year. People freak out over the pictures every year about why #17 is still the QB for Something State University but as soon as the game hits the shelves, #17 isn't on Something State's roster.
A great example would be the picture of Nebraska at Iowa where we can clearly see #94,
, in the pictures. Now people are freaking out to why #94 is still in the game when he was drafted in April, but he is in the game because the game is built separately and then combined at the end for the finished product and rosters are always the last thing to be implemented in the game.
As you can see in this video of Nebraska's players (9:36 of the video), player #94 is nowhere to be found because he isn't on the NCAA 13 roster. These pictures were obviously taken from the game before the 2013 season roster was plugged into the game. It is not that big of a deal, but I know for a fact "new" people will be complaining about this very same thing in June 2013 for NCAA 14.
A great example would be the picture of Nebraska at Iowa where we can clearly see #94,
Spoiler
Jared Crick
As you can see in this video of Nebraska's players (9:36 of the video), player #94 is nowhere to be found because he isn't on the NCAA 13 roster. These pictures were obviously taken from the game before the 2013 season roster was plugged into the game. It is not that big of a deal, but I know for a fact "new" people will be complaining about this very same thing in June 2013 for NCAA 14.
# 36
PowerofRed25 @ 06/22/12 05:27 AM
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
Yes, it is these posts that bring it closer, not the actual lawsuits that have gone nowhere. Please.
# 37
PowerofRed25 @ 06/22/12 06:16 AM
|
|||||||||||||
|
You and Moylan seem to be glossing over what all of us are saying. We aren't arguing that these screenshots come from a pre-2013 roster build, that is obvious, we are wondering WHY they are from a pre-2013 roster build.
The 2013 default rosters have been definitely updated in the game for at least two weeks. I'm guessing the default rosters have been finalized for over a month. Combining that with the fact that no uniforms have been updated and Missouri and West Virginia are very clearly still in their previous conferences, we are wondering what these screenshots are supposed to be showing.
Of course the rosters will be updated for the retail version. I'm sure the uniforms will as well. That isn't what I'm concerned about. I'm concerned about why these screenshots exist and what they are showing? There is absolutely zero evidence in any of these pictures that they were even taken from NCAA 13. I am not doubting that they were, I am just baffled by what we're supposed to be looking at.
They don't show new gameplay, they don't show menus, they don't show atmosphere or presentation. They don't have updated rosters, they don't have updated uniforms, they don't have updated stadiums and they don't have updated conferences. What they do show is an out of date roster build with no attention to detail in any facet of the game.
I will leave the ridiculous "lawsuit preventing" rosters nonsense for another time, surely you all realize how ridiculous that argument sounds. This thread is about screenshots and I am looking at screenshots that could be NCAA 12 for all I know because they are showing a 100% 2012 version of the game.
# 39
moylan1234 @ 06/22/12 12:23 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
Now, if your after why they do it this way well it's already been said several times you apparently just don't like the answer.
# 40
SteelerSpartan @ 06/22/12 12:38 PM
I know Im going to be ticked if they try an charge for uniform packs
....
If they start trying to get profit from that then Teambuilder is never going to get any substantial updates
With Teambuilder by now we should have
-Ability to edit an NCAA Roster File just like we were playing on our consoles only with the convenience of a Keyboard/Mouse...maybe even expanded functionality to allow Global Rating Changes(See Flying Fynns 2k5 Roster Editor)
-Ability to create/add at least 3 Alt uniforms to current teams within the game
-Create your Intro/Run Out
....If they start trying to get profit from that then Teambuilder is never going to get any substantial updates
With Teambuilder by now we should have
-Ability to edit an NCAA Roster File just like we were playing on our consoles only with the convenience of a Keyboard/Mouse...maybe even expanded functionality to allow Global Rating Changes(See Flying Fynns 2k5 Roster Editor)
-Ability to create/add at least 3 Alt uniforms to current teams within the game
-Create your Intro/Run Out
Post A Comment
Working...