Issues with the AI "balance"

247VIDEOGAMEcom​ I appreciate the input and can see what you're getting at and do agree in some regards. I wish EA could actually hone in on what the fans are wanting. I understand its a mix from the community on wanting certain aspects from both "simulation" and "arcade" perspectives, but I feel like both can be embraced in a way that doesnt ruin either, but with how deep this hole keeps getting dug with a yearly release structure for revenue, it can't be fixed without a significant restructure that the developers can't justify the cost of to shareholders🤷‍♂️. Bandaid fixes year after year are showing the decay front and center

EA_Aljo​  I feel like this comment deserves some attention

-The "simulation side" has significant potential, but I agree that it forces a player to play at a macro level for posession while also requiring a "micro-level" of precision when it comes to the actions and positioning required to gain it. Which, when forced to control 1 player at a time, always has you searching for the "sweet spot" of defensive positioning and aggressive play. But, combine this "required level of precision" with the fact that the AI effectively has full control of "how easily" you can execute actions that would hinder AI competitiveness and it creates a frustration point where you feel like you "have to fight the game" to get into the right position where "the magnet effect" I described earlier effortlessly pushes you out of that advantageous defensive position with what feels like the "slightest opportunity of us moving the wrong way". There's just no actual way to play traditionally in a position without having to constantly try and "plug the leaks" of your own sinking ship of a defense without the opposing AI "scripting its way through your defense like a master puppeteer". Which is where the "simulation aspect" of the game entirely falls apart. At some point, I should be able to trust top rated players to play their position effectively, not losing battles for posession to AI bias. But you genuinely cannot, which leaves you having to hop from controlling player to player(which also halts their movement momentarily if you don't select the right player by holding R2/RT+ RightStick, Which, if button passing is an option, I dont get why button selection on defense isnt a thing? If I can press RT+X to pass to the defenseman in posession, why can I not do the same to select him on the backcheck) hoping the constant streams of 65/35 puck battles go in your favour. I could literally get a PERFECT POKE and opposing AI posession bias just allows them to walk it right through(video evidence included for you EA_Aljo​)

Personally, I believe XFactors shouldnt be on the "simulation side" of the game. It's an arcadey emphasis on minor aspects of hockey that only contributes detriments to the video games competitive integrity when replicating their "real life counterparts".

- The "Arcade Side" also has significant potential, but "Threes" and regular play just don't hit the mark yet if that's the goal (which seems not to be the implication of the franchise, as EA sort of markets it as the Pinnacle of Hockey Video Game experiences, a laughable idea on just about every degree. As no amount of "tweaking sliders" fully lends to creating a competitive arcade or simulation experience. This is only worsened when playing with locked preset slider settings in the actual competitive modes. Which might also explain a lack of competitive scene for EA NHL titles too as its laughably pathetic and devolves into a "fighting for breakaways or cheesing movement with LT+Puck Protections" and completely abandons all ideas around strategic genuine hockey plays because people are just recreating the same predictable loops of gameplay, and you have to concede to a competitive disadvantage if you want to play the "proper way" or even if you play with lefties on left and righties on right, that alone creates a competitive disadvantage which is genuinely insane to me.) Threes was a laughable way to respond to a portion of the community wanting an experience reminiscent of MidWay's/BlackBox's NHL HITZ series with over the top arcadey 3 on 3 play, and admittedly, if it actually had gameplay in that same vein, it would be a riot with the addition of "Money Puck" as I genuinely love the way it changes the game. But sadly, it keeps itself different in every way that makes the gameplay loop frustrating and lacklustre when compared to the source inspiration. I won't even say it absolutely needs to be a carbon copy to be successful, but they likely "have to turn a blind-eye" to the "why HITZ was culturally successful and left a significant imprint" as it arguably "glorified violence within the sport" with the arcade over emphasis on big body checks and fighting. Presumably in part on the leagues behalf as well as it makes its own attempts to reduce these in the actual game in real life.

There was an update a while back that had fixed some button passing issues that had to be rolled back because it broke some other things, and the game hasnt felt worse since I bought it🤷‍♂️. Just kind of stuck having to cope with the fact that no game will scratch that "itch" for a good competitive game that doesnt have to feel tilted in someway to keep it even. If I have to have supernatural opponents to plug the gaping holes in their ship, and if the AI has to make it a "battle" just to stand in the right position, it ruins the spirit of competition or desire to get better at something that tilts the whole table on a whim🤷‍♂️

Anyways, here's the poke check video, genuinely have no idea how I shove my stick under the puck and stick of the opponent with literally 0 disruption to posession🤷‍♂️ but I'd be lying if I said the frustration of the marketing vs actual product didnt have me considering issuing a chargeback for false advertising. Which is jarring to me BECAUSE I EXPECT "JANKINESS" from a game.