Discrepancy

Do you at least think it's possible that Phasto's answer is correct even though it isn't confirmed by EA?

Phasto's answer makes sense to me and I have no reason not to believe it. You seem to think that the answer could be more complicated than what Phasto said, but I don't believe it's any more complicated than that.

EA_Aljo​ Can you give an answer to the question since dogheels would like to get an answer from EA?

The game summary only counts hits that cause anything more than a light reaction. So, a stumble, making your player drop to a knee or causing them to fully fall to the ice would count as a hit in the summary.

Thanks for the answer. That's interesting. Do you know why the definition of a hit isn't the same for the game summary as it is for objectives?

Hits for the objective should be intentional and not just happening by incidental contact. 

That makes sense, but it doesn't explain the difference. Even though the objective requires intentional hits, it registers more hits than the game summary. So there has to be another reason for the difference.

The game summary should only be counting the hits where the player stumbles, drops to a knee or fully hits the ice. If you don't see an animation from a hit, it shouldn't count in the game summary. Which is why you can see less there since you're probably naturally running into players more often than throwing intentional hits.

Ok, thanks for the explanation. But that explanation implies that the objective doesn't require intentional hits unlike you said in your previous comment. But if you meant to say that the game summary requires intentional hits and the objective doesn't, then it makes sense. Anyway, you answered to the question of how the definition of a hit is different between objectives and the game summary, which is a good thing, but we still don't have an answer to the question of why it is different.

If you're hitting someone hard enough to make them stumble, chances are good it's intentional. Unfortunately, I don't have any other details other than you have to cause an animation to happen when hitting someone for them to count in the game summary.

Yeah that makes sense and I appreciate you taking the time to explain it. I'm just still not sure if it answers the original question since it doesn't explain why the decision was made that the word "hit" means one thing in objectives and another thing in the game summary instead of being consistent and meaning the same thing in every place in the game. But I also understand if you don't have any other details on it other than what you have already said.

dogheels​ What do you think? Did EA_Aljo give you the answer that you were looking for?

No. There is no definitive meaning to the word hit. Before this can be adequately resolved. A definition has to be established explaining why hits in the game are recorded differently than in the objective. They define shoulder checks as a variant of a hit. But in doing so. They are explicit in putting that requirement in text. As we have seen in different objectives. The same holds true for one timer shots. Definitive in the requirement. Make perfect one timer shots vs make one timer shots. One obviously has to be on goal. The other does not. It is so easy to put out a word. Such as hit. But without explanation, it becomes a quandary  regarding understanding. An assumption does not make the explanation valid. We have spent too much time debating this issue. An issue only EA or their developers can explain. And I won't hold my breath waiting for that explanation. If truth be told. I honestly believe the in game hit count involves only shoulder checks. Only way I can see any possible reason. And if so. Change the in game hit counter. To shoulder checks. As it stands now. The word Hit has two meanings. I appreciate the feedback from all.