Nhl 24 the game for everyone and anyone.
This used to be a game that took skill to be good at. Many of us have spent decades trying to master the skills to get where we are now. It's more than obvious that EA have given up on us loyal fan...
Forum Discussion
@KlariskraysNHL wrote:
@MasterB89Because you aren't play real life hockey you are playing a hockey video game. When LT-ing existed it was a very unrealistic thing that wasn't changed for the longest time. If you wanted to compete at the highest of levels you had to master it.
And yes I had already written up a giant thing on the flip dump and how it could have been tied to stamina and whatnot. But sure we can all complain about how it should be but if it isn't in the game you got to use what is given to you to use. I play defense probably 70%, goalie 29%, and forward 1% of the time. I know that my positions are extremely extra tough and that I need to play a very solid position game with little to no mistakes because my mistakes are going to be super costly compared to forwards. I also get more joy shutting down teams defensively knowing my job is harder than theirs.
We don't say adapt because people are bad. We just say adapt because if things aren't changing what you gonna do? I mean making forum post after forum post every week to month isn't gonna make things speed up. They see the complaints about various things and my guess is if nothing gets "fixed" then it's either A.) Something they are OK with B.) Something they want to fix but it's going to take a bunch of work.
You have to stop thinking real life hockey when you are playing a video game adaptation. It's like watching your beloved anime then they make a live action version of that anime. You know you want to expect things to be just like the anime but they gonna change things for their vision.
^^^best analogy ever
So is this the same "just a video game" that I'm being told has 100% perfect AI executing 100% real life concepts and the only possible shortcoming is due to human error?
Which is it guys? is this "just a game for fun" or is this a "simulation" because you can't keep dismissing feedback because for being "too unrealistic" or "too realistic" at the same time. So lets all decide now what this game is. If its an arcade game, I expect to be able to provide AI improvement suggestions without being told that the issue must lie with the user because that really wouldn't align with an arcade game would it? A "for fun" game probably is missing some real life stratagies dont we think? Can we agree NFL Blitz maybe didn't perfectly execute real life football?
Otherwise if this is a simulation, I expect to be able to provide feedback on things like game speed, shot accuracy, pass receptions, goalie animations, etc. without a ton of "skill issue" rebuttals as this is a simulation and should be based semi-close to reality.
We gotta pick though, because this is why we cant all decide on thedirection of this series. Its a perfect middle ground which makes it equal parts unrealistically frustrating and realistically frustraing depending on the sitatuion/feature/position.
@Limp_KidzKit wrote:I'm being told has 100% perfect AI executing 100% real life concepts and the only possible shortcoming is due to human error?
Nobody ever said that.
@KidShowtime1867 wrote:
@Limp_KidzKit wrote:I'm being told has 100% perfect AI executing 100% real life concepts and the only possible shortcoming is due to human error?
Nobody ever said that.
You're right. It's been heavily implied rather than explicitly stated.
@Limp_KidzKit wrote:
@KidShowtime1867 wrote:
@Limp_KidzKit wrote:I'm being told has 100% perfect AI executing 100% real life concepts and the only possible shortcoming is due to human error?
Nobody ever said that.
You're right. It's been heavily implied rather than explicitly stated.
No it's not. You're taking criticism of your claims as an implication that the ai is perfect. We might just be implying that you're not taking all factors into consideration when critiquing the forecheck and other a.i. anomalies.
If you could actually provide an in-game example of what you see as egregious ai activity, then maybe we could get somewhere.
@KidShowtime1867 wrote:
@Limp_KidzKit wrote:
@KidShowtime1867 wrote:
@Limp_KidzKit wrote:I'm being told has 100% perfect AI executing 100% real life concepts and the only possible shortcoming is due to human error?
Nobody ever said that.
You're right. It's been heavily implied rather than explicitly stated.
No it's not. You're taking criticism of your claims as an implication that the ai is perfect. We might just be implying that you're not taking all factors into consideration when critiquing the forecheck and other a.i. anomalies.
If you could actually provide an in-game example of what you see as egregious ai activity, then maybe we could get somewhere.
No, you're just failing to understand my argument. There isn't a proper FC to execute here. That's been my argument from the start. I don't know why this hasn't been understood yet. I've made this abundantly clear that my issues with the forechecks is that they are for the most part fictional. How do you judge "mistakes" while executing a flawed and fictional forecheck lol?
@Limp_KidzKitTheir argument is more it's how the game is designed adapt when you and I are saying the way it is designed is not congruent with hockey.
100% which is why I don't get why we have to review this every time someone like us posts. We're not here to discuss skill-based issues with the game. We're here to offer our opinion on how the game is played and why the game is played the way its played.
I don't think many appreciate being told how to play the game or why you're "wrong" for posing a question like "why are my two AI forwards on top of each other on the post during a 3-on-2?" as that's an extremely valid question and is an easy example of the AI failing to execute simple hockey plays that should be corrected for the betterment of the game regardless of skill level.
It's actually one of the bigger fallacies of the "video always helps" mantra because discussions naturally devolve into "skill issue" nitpicking and we lose the focus of the main point of the thread or video. Video SHOULD help us discuss topics, but many times it ends up leading to less than constructive conversations to no fault of anyone really. It's just what happens when you're able to break everything down frame by frame. That's why I always prefer to keep discussions as high-level as possible. If we can agree on high-level approaches to offense vs defense, or implementing correct forechecks, or how (insert feature here), then video might be able to be used to supplement a point but too often it becomes the main point of the video and turns into a "thumb trial" than simply an additional piece of context.
@Limp_KidzKit wrote:100% which is why I don't get why we have to review this every time someone like us posts. We're not here to discuss skill-based issues with the game. We're here to offer our opinion on how the game is played and why the game is played the way its played.
I don't think many appreciate being told how to play the game or why you're "wrong" for posing a question like "why are my two AI forwards on top of each other on the post during a 3-on-2?" as that's an extremely valid question and is an easy example of the AI failing to execute simple hockey plays that should be corrected for the betterment of the game regardless of skill level.
It's actually one of the bigger fallacies of the "video always helps" mantra because discussions naturally devolve into "skill issue" nitpicking and we lose the focus of the main point of the thread or video. Video SHOULD help us discuss topics, but many times it ends up leading to less than constructive conversations to no fault of anyone really. It's just what happens when you're able to break everything down frame by frame. That's why I always prefer to keep discussions as high-level as possible. If we can agree on high-level approaches to offense vs defense, or implementing correct forechecks, or how (insert feature here), then video might be able to be used to supplement a point but too often it becomes the main point of the video and turns into a "thumb trial" than simply an additional piece of context.
You are stating it much better than my caveman hockey brain can. A game of sixes doesn't make it any better either. You don't have to adapt to an AI that doesn't get open. However you still have to deal with the terrible way the puck interacts with sticks especially when it is controlled by someone players should not be able to tank pokechecks and stick lifts while standing still which they currently can.
