Community Manager
@NeonSkyline21 wrote:
@KlariskraysNHL How would that be a bad thing, though? Having this information would only serve to make the game more rewarding, IMO.
Because you should be using the build that best supports your style of play. Not what the numbers say. If you find more success with the 36 build, that sounds like the one you should use.
@EA_Aljo wrote:
@NeonSkyline21 wrote:
@KlariskraysNHLHow would that be a bad thing, though? Having this information would only serve to make the game more rewarding, IMO.Because you should be using the build that best supports your style of play. Not what the numbers say. If you find more success with the 36 build, that sounds like the one you should use.
But, if a higher attribute number makes an aspect of the build better, why would we use a lower number if given the choice? And why even have attributes in the first place if they don't matter? You could argue they do, but I think I've shown in my test that it's quite clearly the ability that actually makes the difference, not the attribute number.
More clarity and information about the game for the players would help us in making our builds work best for our play style, not hinder us. For example, if there was an ability that specifically helped with 5 hole and had info about how much that ability increased saveability % on 5 hole shots, that would help me cause I'd be like, "I tend to stand up for as long as possible, so this ability could help me by buffing the cpu aspect of my goalie by going into butterfly automatically by 50%", or "Ehh, this ability only makes my goalie automatically go into butterfly 3% more. I don't think that ability would help me too much."
That bit of information about what the attributes affect and how much of a change they make would actually make it easier to choose builds that support our play styles.
I think what I'm most baffled by is how it seems like there's a plethora of animations that are simply locked behind abilities. Like, I could make a build completely maxed out at 99 across the board, and that build would somehow give me worse animations than a build capped at 36 in those same attributes because I equipped a few silver abilities. That's completely ridiculous. If you want the x-factors/abilities to make players a bit better at a specific skill, fine. But, the animations shouldn't be locked behind little icons. X-factors and abilities, if they must be in the game, should be the icing on the cake. They should take a build that's already good at something to the next gear. Abilities shouldn't make a build that sucks at something be as good or better than the theoretical highest attribute level in the game. That's silly.
Community Manager
I'll pass on the feedback. I don't see this happening for 24. Hopefully, we'll have more details for future games.
@EA_Aljo wrote:
I'll pass on the feedback. I don't see this happening for 24. Hopefully, we'll have more details for future games.
To be clear, I never intended this criticism, or even most of my criticism, to be made with NHL 24 in mind. I understand how crazy game development is and how little time developers have at their disposal, especially for yearly-release games where they basically have to get started on next year's title pretty quickly. This suggestion/criticism is very much intended for the franchise going forward.
Cheers.
Community ManagerAppreciate the clarification. I know the community wants more details on these and hope we'll see this happen down the road.
