Yeah. Better make sure you really like your equipment before choosing your team.
Especially Number. I think it will be a good idea to check the available numbers for the team you select before you create your player. I dont know how it will go with selecting numbers if you have the same # as someone already on team. But, I wouldnt want to be in the situation of having the CPU pick my # for me.
I wouldnt want to be a HB and be stuck with #48 until I leave the team because I chose a # that was already taken
After playing the demo and reading the CC manual I am leaning closer toward buying the game but Im still going to wait for the reviews. I just can't justify spending another $60 on a product that continues to disappoint me year after year.
You'd all be surprised how easy it would be for EA to patch/dlc in a Player Editor option into CCM. Now before you hotheads say "No, you can't do that how do you know?". EA's lazy as hell, its 100% possible and anyone who says its not is a straight up liar.
If some of these games out their can be entirely changed or added upon through a simple patch, so can a simple football game. I don't know why you guys arn't complaining more about this. Remember that no accelerated clock option a few years back where they said "Yea we'll try for it on DLC" and never heard back? Thats the same EA you all love.
You'd all be surprised how easy it would be for EA to patch/dlc in a Player Editor option into CCM. Now before you hotheads say "No, you can't do that how do you know?". EA's lazy as hell, its 100% possible and anyone who says its not is a straight up liar.
If some of these games out their can be entirely changed or added upon through a simple patch, so can a simple football game. I don't know why you guys arn't complaining more about this. Remember that no accelerated clock option a few years back where they said "Yea we'll try for it on DLC" and never heard back? Thats the same EA you all love.
If you knew how hard these guys (not just EA but all developers) work you'd know how much of an assinine statement that is about being lazy.
But it's easy being a tough guy behind the PC screen.
Plus try reading up on CCM mode. It's been explained that it's a new system and not a simple cut and paste of old code and they want certain things added in themselves.
And really?? "Anyone who says so is a straight up liar" .....Really?
Plus try reading up on CCM mode. It's been explained that it's a new system and not a simple cut and paste of old code and they want certain things added in themselves.
And really?? "Anyone who says so is a straight up liar" .....Really?
You'd all be surprised how easy it would be for EA to patch/dlc in a Player Editor option into CCM. Now before you hotheads say "No, you can't do that how do you know?". EA's lazy as hell, its 100% possible and anyone who says its not is a straight up liar.
If some of these games out their can be entirely changed or added upon through a simple patch, so can a simple football game. I don't know why you guys arn't complaining more about this. Remember that no accelerated clock option a few years back where they said "Yea we'll try for it on DLC" and never heard back? Thats the same EA you all love.
You are 100% correct sir that it would be very easy for EA to put in a Player Editor option into CCM. However making sure all this editing doesn't cause huge stability issues and bugs in CCM is a different story and that's the reason it's not in. I hope I have releived you of your ignorance.
That jumped out at me yesterday so I did some digging and got some answers from EA guys on Twitter. It was a typo and the correct draft picks are in retail, they even sent me the Niners picks for 2013 that are in the game.
2013
1st
2nd
3rd
3rd
4th
5th
5th
6th
6th
7th
7th
Now while I got the 49ers picks verified, I can't confirm on other teams. But if there was a typo for the Niners, I'm sure the other teams that have their draft picks wrong in the guide are correct on retail as well.
I'm pretty sure the Bengals are supposed to have the Raiders 2nd round pick this year because of the Carson Palmer trade.
They dont have a clue because they only people that know anything about the game until its released are employees, specific media, and CE attendees. They aren't going to reveal inside info to some guy working a hotline in Pensacola anything.
Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk 2
Yeah, haha...and I wasn't even thinking they were in this country by later in the conversation. Anyway, it was just per the confusion of what we've been told, and now, how it's written in the manual. As soon as the game comes out, I'm likely going to write another blog on how hardcore, beloved feature loving mofo's can enjoy the game, should CCM not appeal to them. I'm seeing the light.
From what I understand, the UI is already their. It's exists for Play Now, unless what I heard is incorrect. The limitations would have to already be their, and it would already have had to pass QA. I think you are greatly overstating the effort involved.
And exactly what features would editing rosters break? XP? Goals? If you are editing a player, you can make adjustments for this, by editing the player/coach.
In speaking with my best computer savvy friend, it basically equates to this: If XP wasn't coded as optional (meaning we could turn it off) and/or if storylines wasn't coded as optional (meaning we could also turn them off), then editing (most likely editing ratings) would cause a freeze in the program/game because it could not recognize "not having to" trigger the code for XP and/or storylines. Essentially, with coding and computers all just being numbers, said numbers have to all line up or coding must be specifically done so that there's bypass algorithms. I hope that's not too technical. That's seriously the most general way he could explain it to me, too...haha.
But editing a player would have nothing to do with triggering XP since XP is tied to previously setup goals. It should not have anything to do with triggering XP code. As far as story lines go, the story lines should be parametrized and dynamic and should not be static. The changed position or abilities should just trigger a different story line reflecting the changes to the player. Goals should be just as dynamic.
I hear you. Something else I thought about, though, and I didn't get to ask him about...but let's say there's only one "open" algorithm in the game for CCM careers because honestly there's only one player or coach you can play as per career. That means only one open/customizable (by name - meaning, you can have any name) slot for XP and storylines to be triggered for...and then all the other players are set in stone algorithms - one same algorithm...it can't be changed at all. In that case, yes, fully editing just names alone of other players for your custom roster to use in CCM would likely freeze up the whole game, I think. When I can ask, I will...but this would be a solid inquiry to pose to a GC or EA dev, too. I bet this is the issue.
This could very well be true, but then I would question the design. Their really should not be SLOTS for editing. Everything, story lines, goals, should have been parametrized to reflect the player/coach and no SLOTS should be needed, just rosters with ratings on abilities. The key to the goals and story line database should not be by name, but should be by the players/coaches abilities. It should not be so static. It should be designed to be dynamic. So I would then question the design of the feature.
I'm thinking either they did it purposely because they knew they didn't have time (after trying already) to make it wide open for us to edit...or they seriously didn't figure it out until near last minute, and therefore still really did run out of time. Then again, the manuals do read vaguely that we "can" edit, supersim and use custom playbooks. Maybe they pulled it off...or they intend to..? We shall soon see.
I understand your frustration but really you couldn't be more wrong. It's not just "flipping a switch". There are dozens of protocolss to follow that were not able to be done for this year. The user interface has to be added on to, limitations have to be written, and then it has to pass QA.... You are talking about a couple months of work to ensure it is done correctly and plays well with the rest of the additions.
Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk 2
They've already HAD a couple of months since they broke the news and we flipped out on them. Should be fixed by now.
I honestly don't think it has anything to do with time. I think EA/Tib want to control the "funability/fun factor" of the game. That the game will be most enjoyable for us if they control what we can and can not control. That's just a design decision and nothing wrong with that. It's just not what I'm looking for. But that's just my personal opinion and I'm not stating this as fact.
If that is the case, though, we'll most definitely see no change from them this year via patch or next year via M14, and it will certainly take folks not buying the game and further outcry to get it through their heads. I'm sure enough of us will be able to oblige if that's the case.
They will include it in M14 so they can market it as a brand new game changing feature. By leaving out things like custom draft classes, roster editing, fantasy drafts etc they can offer them up in future games as "new" features. It is the classic EA model of operation. I find it next to impossible to believe that changing the name of a player would effect the game in a major way, especially since it already allows the player to have a custom name.
This argument is as old and false as 'every year is just a roster update'
Seems fair to me. I've seen many features be removed only to be brought back and touted as new a year or more later.
those things have only ever happened when they jump to the next gen of consoles. Name one feature they took out and brought back during the same console cycle.