Madden NFL 16 News Post

Donny Moore, the 'Madden Ratings Czar', Leaving EA

11:28 AM - July 2, 2015 by RaychelSnr

Donny Moore, aka the ‘Madden Ratings Czar’, is leaving Electronic Arts as he will be “pursuing other interests.”

In an official statement on Twitter, Moore said, “After much thought & consideration, I have chosen to step away from @EASports & announce my retirement as the Madden Ratings Czar as I have opted to pursue other interests. I am especially grateful of the opportunity to rate players for some of the greatest fans in video games today. After 16 years, it is finally time to hang up the czar's mouse pad! #Czartirement"

For Moore, this ends a long tenure as the guy running the ratings and updates for Madden. Moore’s tenure spanned 16 years at EA Tiburon, which means he was easily one of the most tenured at that studio. There is no word yet on who will be replacing Moore, but we do expect an announcement soon.

The ratings position occupied by Moore has been a staple of Madden’s internet presence for years. Moore’s ratings oftentimes drew criticism, but the weekly ratings updates were always hugely anticipated by fans, despite what ire they may have drawn.

The ratings this year will likely still come in the same pacing as previous years, and it will be interesting to see if any differences in how much players move up and down the scale happens without Moore at the helm. We’ll certainly be watching it going forward!

Game: Madden NFL 16Reader Score: 7/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3 / PS4 / Xbox 360 / Xbox OneVotes for game: 24 - View All

Madden NFL 16 Videos

Member Comments

# 201 4thQtrStre5S @ 07/06/15 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	Yes of course it could be. It does right now, in my opinion. Ask the people who have played with ratings and see if they work in the game as is. One thing Rex did say was that they are wanting to open up the separation in ratings more, ie: more variance in the elite players to average players - something I have already done with FBG Ratings.

This is good news..

# 202 DCEBB2001 @ 07/06/15 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeremym480


	I'm sure I know the answer, but was there any discussion on the ability to edit ratings within a CFM so that people who play offline can use ratings like FBG throughout the life of their CFM?

None. But I did tell them that I don't play the game because I am an offline franchise guy and because using my ratings would make the rookies come in over-inflated, I can't play with them but for one season.

I think that kind of gets them the message - that I donate so much time to rating players, but can't even play the game the way I want to because of the inability to re-rate my rookie classes.

# 203 MajorSupreme @ 07/06/15 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	None. But I did tell them that I don't play the game because I am an offline franchise guy and because using my ratings would make the rookies come in over-inflated, I can't play with them but for one season. I think that kind of gets them the message - that I donate so much time to rating players, but can't even play the game the way I want to because of the inability to re-rate my rookie classes.

Amazing, thanks for getting that out in the open, especially if it wasn't already an obvious want.

# 204 jpdavis82 @ 07/06/15 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gman 18


	Considering the community has been requesting the addition of practice squads for YEARS in these forums and on other sports forums/social media, I don't see how just one guy is gonna suddenly convince them to implement them into the game Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah that's true, one person can't convince them to change something, but one person can give good feedback and hopefully they take it to heart.

# 205 4thQtrStre5S @ 07/06/15 05:58 PM

IT would be perfect if the program could just take the ratings of the current roster used in CFM, for example and then auto generate new players within the averages of the players currently being used in game...Then anyone could create any set of player rating values and any auto generated players would match up...

# 206 Yukon46 @ 07/06/15 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	One of the first things that is apparent is that they are very open to taking in new methodologies for rating players in the game. Ideas like crowd sourcing via the Madden community came up. It looks like they want to do away with having one guy do all of the ratings. Questions?

I will say this, the main thing in Madden that has bothered me for years..
is the Speed Rating.

I think using a proper rating system... based on real data, to properly rate current players (and future players within a CFM)...is one of the major keys to the game.

You can really roll all Physical attributes into this... They all need to be rated properly.

Last years final Madden 15 roster update....

EA had 460 players rated over 90 for Speed.

Reality would have had about 160-175 rated over 90.

Then this also leads into CFM drafts... They pour another 50+ players into the game every year with a over 90 speed ratings.

Reality would be in the 15-20 range each year.

And having myself done re-ratings of Speed in numerous EA Football titles, it has never remotely came close to breaking the game.... it only improves them. As I think any players that have used such Re-Rated Rosters already know.

And I think FBG is on par with getting real physical attributes transformed into in-game ratings down to a science.

It seems like a good fit to me.

# 207 4thQtrStre5S @ 07/06/15 06:07 PM

As it is now..the game generates a certain range of ratings for players and it then requires anyone making the ratings to match what the program is going to generate...So really, no one has a right to blame Donny Moore for bad ratings, he had to fit the ratings to what the program was going to generate..

# 208 Yukon46 @ 07/06/15 06:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4thQtrStre5S


	As it is now..the game generates a certain range of ratings for players and it then requires anyone making the ratings to match what the program is going to generate...So really, no one has a right to blame Donny Moore for bad ratings, he had to fit the ratings to what the program was going to generate..

That's like the "which came first" question...

I personally dogged Donny for years about Speed..... but Madden never really changed.

# 209 jpdavis82 @ 07/06/15 06:16 PM

Dan,

I"m a little confused about what they said as far as not being as concerned about authenticity of team ratings. How does this desire for "competitive gameplay" coincide with their desire to create a sim football game, specifically Rex's?

# 210 Yukon46 @ 07/06/15 06:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4thQtrStre5S


	IT would be perfect if the program could just take the ratings of the current roster used in CFM, for example and then auto generate new players within the averages of the players currently being used in game...Then anyone could create any set of player rating values and any auto generated players would match up...

That is Brilliant ! I want this now....

# 211 ggsimmonds @ 07/06/15 06:19 PM

It confirms my beliefs about Madden.

Not saying this to knock the game or EA, but to me they are overly concerned with the user vs user reputation of Madden.

We can lament the game's present state as much as we want, but it is still the ultimate game to play another person. When someone says "get on the sticks" that means play me in Madden.

This is not a revelation; the scouting and confidence changes in CFM have the same reasoning behind it.

I'm not a fan of this focus, but it is a perfectly fine approach to take. My way (our way?) is no more valid than theirs.

# 212 4thQtrStre5S @ 07/06/15 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yukon46


	That's like the "which came first" question... I personally dogged Donny for years about Speed..... but Madden never really changed.

I also have had a huge issue with speed... BUt from what I understand from interviews, speed has been adjusted for M16...fingers crossed...

# 213 DCEBB2001 @ 07/06/15 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpdavis82


	Dan, I"m a little confused about what they said as far as not being as concerned about authenticity of team ratings. How does this desire for "competitive gameplay" coincide with their desire to create a sim football game, specifically Rex's?

I won't speak for Rex's desire to make a sim football game, but he did say that their number one priority is making the game competitive to play, with authenticity coming in after that top priority.

To me, I would make the ratings for each player as realistic as possible, then make the game fit those ratings. They are more concerned about the gameplay (making it competitive for anyone who picks up a controller) first, then the accuracy of their player ratings second.

# 214 jpdavis82 @ 07/06/15 06:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	I won't speak for Rex's desire to make a sim football game, but he did say that their number one priority is making the game competitive to play, with authenticity coming in after that top priority. To me, I would make the ratings for each player as realistic as possible, then make the game fit those ratings. They are more concerned about the gameplay (making it competitive for anyone who picks up a controller) first, then the accuracy of their player ratings second.

Disappointed to hear this, can't lie.

# 215 DCEBB2001 @ 07/06/15 06:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yukon46


	I will say this, the main thing in Madden that has bothered me for years.. is the Speed Rating. I think using a proper rating system... based on real data, to properly rate current players (and future players within a CFM)...is one of the major keys to the game. You can really roll all Physical attributes into this... They all need to be rated properly. Last years final Madden 15 roster update.... EA had 460 players rated over 90 for Speed. Reality would have had about 160-175 rated over 90. Then this also leads into CFM drafts... They pour another 50+ players into the game every year with a over 90 speed ratings. Reality would be in the 15-20 range each year. And having myself done re-ratings of Speed in numerous EA Football titles, it has never remotely came close to breaking the game.... it only improves them. As I think any players that have used such Re-Rated Rosters already know. And I think FBG is on par with getting real physical attributes transformed into in-game ratings down to a science. It seems like a good fit to me.

All they need to do is get real data and mimic the statistical distribution of that data. When you do that, you find out some very interesting things about your population of NFL players. Like how if you use the same methodology for every attribute, you find that NFL player have an average SPD of 68 (if you set the best to 99 and the worst to 1) and an average ACC of 65. Madden right now has an average SPD closer to 76 and ACC closer to 83. However, in their defense, I don't think they are using the data they need to use.

# 216 jpdavis82 @ 07/06/15 06:25 PM

If you have a lesser rated team, then let a more skilled player use them, don't make it where every team plays like the Packers/Patriots/Seahawks, that's FAR from simulation.

# 217 ggsimmonds @ 07/06/15 06:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpdavis82


	Dan, I"m a little confused about what they said as far as not being as concerned about authenticity of team ratings. How does this desire for "competitive gameplay" coincide with their desire to create a sim football game, specifically Rex's?

My take on it is that the two are not incompatible. There is no inherent conflict in creating realistic gameplay while "compressing" or manipulating team ratings.

The more interesting bit was about increasing the spread of player ratings. That does seem to contradict the idea of competitive gameplay. I'm not sure how they could increase the gap while maintaining parity.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yukon46


	I will say this, the main thing in Madden that has bothered me for years.. is the Speed Rating. I think using a proper rating system... based on real data, to properly rate current players (and future players within a CFM)...is one of the major keys to the game. You can really roll all Physical attributes into this... They all need to be rated properly. Last years final Madden 15 roster update.... EA had 460 players rated over 90 for Speed. Reality would have had about 160-175 rated over 90. Then this also leads into CFM drafts... They pour another 50+ players into the game every year with a over 90 speed ratings. Reality would be in the 15-20 range each year. And having myself done re-ratings of Speed in numerous EA Football titles, it has never remotely came close to breaking the game.... it only improves them. As I think any players that have used such Re-Rated Rosters already know. And I think FBG is on par with getting real physical attributes transformed into in-game ratings down to a science. It seems like a good fit to me.

The fact that X amount of players were rated 90 in speed does not really matter. It is only about the scale.

If they take your advice and alter the scale there would be no changes in gameplay. That is, if they did it uniformly and without bias. They tend not to do that though, good players tend to become faster (or stronger, you get the idea) and underperformers drop speed.

The point is that we view 90+ as being great. Madden says 90+ is good/needed for positions.

What I would like to see, and Dan you may know the answer to this, is their ratings ordinal or interval? Is the difference in gameplay the same between 70-75 as it is between 90-95? Or does the difference increase exponentially?

# 218 4thQtrStre5S @ 07/06/15 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpdavis82


	If you have a lesser rated team, then let a more skilled player use them, don't make it where every team plays like the Packers/Patriots/Seahawks, that's FAR from simulation.

The issue would be getting the better skilled players to use a lesser team...

I am actually a life long Packer fan; parents born and raised in Wisconsin; so Badgers and Packers all the way...I will not play the Packers, often, because they are a top team that many people want to use..and I just find it hard to play the Packers for some weird reason...I would hate to be forced to play them, because honestly, I am not that good at the twitch controllers, so I would need a better team like them to compete...I have a very hard time with All-MAdden play, and even gets tough on All-Pro for me..

Though I see All-MAdden as ALL-Arcade...

# 219 jfsolo @ 07/06/15 06:51 PM

So every year when the game first releases and the overall team ratings basically range from 72-92, are they bumping up the lower teams when they really should be in the low 60's? or 50's? Are they making sure that every teams has a certain number of players with high ratings in every category? I'm trying to get a sense of what else "competitive gameplay" could entail.

# 220 Yukon46 @ 07/06/15 06:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ggsimmonds


	My take on it is that the two are not incompatible. There is no inherent conflict in creating realistic gameplay while "compressing" or manipulating team ratings. The more interesting bit was about increasing the spread of player ratings. That does seem to contradict the idea of competitive gameplay. I'm not sure how they could increase the gap while maintaining parity. The fact that X amount of players were rated 90 in speed does not really matter. It is only about the scale. If they take your advice and alter the scale there would be no changes in gameplay. That is, if they did it uniformly and without bias. They tend not to do that though, good players tend to become faster (or stronger, you get the idea) and underperformers drop speed. The point is that we view 90+ as being great. Madden says 90+ is good/needed for positions. What I would like to see, and Dan you may know the answer to this, is their ratings ordinal or interval? Is the difference in gameplay the same between 70-75 as it is between 90-95? Or does the difference increase exponentially?

Well it matters in the sense that to EA a 90 rating in speed equals a player running a 4.42 40 yard dash.

Having 460 players running under a 4.42 is not realistic, only about 175 players in the NFL have run under that time.

And the over inflation of speed goes beyond the 90 rated players.....

So when in reality you should have about 5-10 Running Backs with a 90+ speed rating.... you get 35.

I dont want them to alter the scale, I want the scale to be realistic.... this in itself will lead to more realistic gameplay.

« Previous 1 2…8 9 101112 13 14…26 27 Next »

More Links

Donny Moore, the 'Madden Ratings Czar', Leaving EA