@Jagavekov wrote:It seems like you're purposely not understanding what I am saying, and it is frustrating. I am not saying anything should be artificial.
Let me be as clear as possible:
If the skating, passing, receiving, puck handling, board effects, and defensive mechanics were altered to be even a little more realistic, players would be incentivized to ice the puck on the PK once in a while, along with many other benefits.
Nothing artificial about that.
LOL naw bruh, I'm proving my point over and over and you're coming back at me with some ambiguous "make the mechanics more realistic" comment.
The game is far from perfect when it comes to simulating the real sport. And something you continuously and purposefully ignore about what I'm saying is that EA - or ANY developer for that matter - has yet to accomplish the complete 1:1 simulation of any sport. Ever.
You want game mechanics that are "more realistic" so that players are incentivized to dump the puck on the PK. I'm not misunderstanding that. It makes perfect sense and I fully agree with you.
EA has attributes on each player that are folded into calculations that are playing out in any given scenario. It actually is quite amazing if you take a step back and really assess how the game engine works and the grueling slog that is compiling code that allows things to play out in such a way that feels realistic and balanced.
Combined with needing to take into account animations databases, the choices made by the game engine to select those animations, calculating the physics in the background and deciding what plays out with the added benefit of the puck itself and the physics they've programmed for it, etc - it's absolutely amazing that we have the games we have today. (again, a reminder for some of you: I'm not saying this game is perfect)
All of this is completely lost on sweaty HUT players who get a bad bounce here and there (or god forbid, a bad bounce that KEEPS happening to them) and then just rage that the "game is unrealistic", "broken" and my favorite, "EA (a company who was worked on an official NHL-licensed videogame for 30+ years) knows nothing about hockey"
So, circling back to your "make the mechanics more realistic" - how exactly do you propose EA does that without animation selection, attribute and physics calculations, folding into those equations synergies, X-Factors, etc? When you're calculating all of those elements, you have to take liberties with certain things. For example; the idea that a stick becomes 'muted' after it clips a player's leg to simulate the fact that that stick would've been otherwise deflected by the leg it went through in real life. This was done ON PURPOSE by EA because the having the engine calculate a stick reaction based on contact with the geo of another player model is something that would likely inhibit the ability for the game engine to tackle much more complex aforementioned calculations.
In saying that - there's definitely room for the engine to improve upon those things but those improvements take a TON of time and debugging. Again - this process is completely lost on your average player and I get that. But when confronted with this reality, gamers often dismiss the issues they see as the developers being 'lazy'. The reality is this stuff is intense and takes so much time to solve. I firmly believe the transition to Frostbite will allow things like this to be tackled with more granularity, providing more realism, but this takes time and things will be phased into the engine so as not to disrupt other elements.
"Making the mechanics more realistic" will look different for every player. What seems "realistic" to you (such as a nerf to puck possession, forcing players to feel more under pressure while holding the puck) may come across as "broken" to someone who thinks it's ridiculous that an NHL caliber player is bobbling a perfect pass and can't control a puck. Then EA needs to take that feedback into account and consider what needs to be done to strike a balance between SIM and FUN.
Ultimately, I think many of the 'realism' gripes come from the battle around this balance. The quicker you are to accept that reality, the less angsty you'll be towards the game overall and thus - you will improve your enjoyment.
With all that being said, I feel like I need to remind anyone who actually reads this; NHL 24 is not perfect. And @Jagavekov makes a great case for improving the realism, but some of the complaints are rooted in a dissatisfaction with losing and seeing outcomes play out that don't fit one's particular view of what hockey should be in the virtual world. There doesn't appear to be ANY concessions given to the development team surrounding the simple nature of game development, nor does there ever seem to be a willingness to admit that certain mistakes are being made by the people playing. When I give clips the Zapruder treatment, I'm trying to enlighten people as to mistakes being made in the clip so that people can learn how to get the best outcomes in the situation presented. What's funny is that people are willing to DM me and thank me for the tips, but unwilling to reply to threads thanking me in fear of backlash from other users who simply want to bash EA after taking an L.
@KidShowtime1867 wrote:
@Jagavekov wrote:It seems like you're purposely not understanding what I am saying, and it is frustrating. I am not saying anything should be artificial.
Let me be as clear as possible:
If the skating, passing, receiving, puck handling, board effects, and defensive mechanics were altered to be even a little more realistic, players would be incentivized to ice the puck on the PK once in a while, along with many other benefits.
Nothing artificial about that.
LOL naw bruh, I'm proving my point over and over and you're coming back at me with some ambiguous "make the mechanics more realistic" comment.
The game is far from perfect when it comes to simulating the real sport. And something you continuously and purposefully ignore about what I'm saying is that EA - or ANY developer for that matter - has yet to accomplish the complete 1:1 simulation of any sport. Ever.
You want game mechanics that are "more realistic" so that players are incentivized to dump the puck on the PK. I'm not misunderstanding that. It makes perfect sense and I fully agree with you.
EA has attributes on each player that are folded into calculations that are playing out in any given scenario. It actually is quite amazing if you take a step back and really assess how the game engine works and the grueling slog that is compiling code that allows things to play out in such a way that feels realistic and balanced.
Combined with needing to take into account animations databases, the choices made by the game engine to select those animations, calculating the physics in the background and deciding what plays out with the added benefit of the puck itself and the physics they've programmed for it, etc - it's absolutely amazing that we have the games we have today. (again, a reminder for some of you: I'm not saying this game is perfect)
All of this is completely lost on sweaty HUT players who get a bad bounce here and there (or god forbid, a bad bounce that KEEPS happening to them) and then just rage that the "game is unrealistic", "broken" and my favorite, "EA (a company who was worked on an official NHL-licensed videogame for 30+ years) knows nothing about hockey"
So, circling back to your "make the mechanics more realistic" - how exactly do you propose EA does that without animation selection, attribute and physics calculations, folding into those equations synergies, X-Factors, etc? When you're calculating all of those elements, you have to take liberties with certain things. For example; the idea that a stick becomes 'muted' after it clips a player's leg to simulate the fact that that stick would've been otherwise deflected by the leg it went through in real life. This was done ON PURPOSE by EA because the having the engine calculate a stick reaction based on contact with the geo of another player model is something that would likely inhibit the ability for the game engine to tackle much more complex aforementioned calculations.
In saying that - there's definitely room for the engine to improve upon those things but those improvements take a TON of time and debugging. Again - this process is completely lost on your average player and I get that. But when confronted with this reality, gamers often dismiss the issues they see as the developers being 'lazy'. The reality is this stuff is intense and takes so much time to solve. I firmly believe the transition to Frostbite will allow things like this to be tackled with more granularity, providing more realism, but this takes time and things will be phased into the engine so as not to disrupt other elements.
"Making the mechanics more realistic" will look different for every player. What seems "realistic" to you (such as a nerf to puck possession, forcing players to feel more under pressure while holding the puck) may come across as "broken" to someone who thinks it's ridiculous that an NHL caliber player is bobbling a perfect pass and can't control a puck. Then EA needs to take that feedback into account and consider what needs to be done to strike a balance between SIM and FUN.
Ultimately, I think many of the 'realism' gripes come from the battle around this balance. The quicker you are to accept that reality, the less angsty you'll be towards the game overall and thus - you will improve your enjoyment.
With all that being said, I feel like I need to remind anyone who actually reads this; NHL 24 is not perfect. And @Jagavekov makes a great case for improving the realism, but some of the complaints are rooted in a dissatisfaction with losing and seeing outcomes play out that don't fit one's particular view of what hockey should be in the virtual world. There doesn't appear to be ANY concessions given to the development team surrounding the simple nature of game development, nor does there ever seem to be a willingness to admit that certain mistakes are being made by the people playing. When I give clips the Zapruder treatment, I'm trying to enlighten people as to mistakes being made in the clip so that people can learn how to get the best outcomes in the situation presented. What's funny is that people are willing to DM me and thank me for the tips, but unwilling to reply to threads thanking me in fear of backlash from other users who simply want to bash EA after taking an L.
Nobody is asking for a 1:1 representation. We're asking for general hockey concepts to applied to the game. As far as your questions goes about the "how" we have like 56 posts here that outline some of the ways via sliders that this game should go towards online to get us to a better spot. No debugging required. There's like 50+ sliders at our disposal, maybe the gusy in charge of tuning should try a test "sim" setting out for people to play. That's the "start" people have been asking for since NHL 18...
