EA Forums - Banner

Defining SIM

Juppo1996 wrote: »
Sinbin wrote: »
Juppo1996 wrote: »
VeNOM2099 wrote: »
CDBently80 wrote: »
Sinbin wrote: »
Everyone saying they aren't playing the beta anymore, that leaves less people to give feedback to EA, and what does that mean? It means less stuff gets changed. If you don't want the same game every year, then how about just play the freaking beta and report what changes you wanna see, WITHOUT insulting them and being douchebags

LOL

What other games need betas to figure out major game breaking issues? Most of the betas that are out there are the devs and close people to development team testing out bugs, glitches, connectivity issues.

It's not the job of the consumer to fix the game. To say what you are saying is that the game cannot be successful without user feedback from a beta. Bull crap. They're adults, programmers, hockey fans.... it's not that difficult

Almost every game released gets some form of closed/open public beta. They rely on the consumer because if it were up to developers to make their game, it would be vastly different. One you would probably hate more because they'd want it to be more sim and more hardcore. The fact is that most people can't handle that kind of game because it's more frustrating than fun for them. Not taking consumer feedback is a HUGE mistake.

If it wasn't that difficult, you'd see a ton of hockey games on the market. I'd love to see all the people here that think it's not that difficult to make a hockey game actually make one. You guys keep asking for someone else to make one. Do it yourselves if it's so easy.

No offense, but that's just not accurate! The reason you don't see a ton of hockey games on the market comes down to MONEY! And let me clarify- MONEY TO BE MADE! There is no money in NHL games or you would see such developers like 2k sports throwing their hat into the mix. It became clear after NHL 14's HUT when they eliminated the companion app for HUT and then nerfed the auction menus of HUT (which meant the only way to build a competitive team was to buy HUT packs online). That's example number one. Another person in this thread listed a slew of issues that I also agree on. One major issue is the Defensive AI with the puck behind the net. They just skate into the back of the net which is beyond ridiculous and not even remotely acceptable, but yet it has remained in all the games since last Gen for god sakes! The list of untouched issues goes on and on as well as arguments over the direction of certain modes (ahem EASHL). I often find myself imagining what the EA sports NHL office must look like. I envision one developer (possibly another intern-POSSIBLY) in a room the size of a janitor closet with a single flickering light bulb over his run down desk and 10 year old computer. On the outside of the door is a crooked sign that has pealed paint and dirt crusted to it that says EA Sports NHL Office. OOh don't forget about that developers pet rat that he feeds at lunch everyday! Listen, all jokes aside (and my smart a$$ comments) NHL will never compete with the likes of Fifa, Madden, NBA or MLB! Jeeze I bet even Nascar brings in more income! So with that said its like any other business model applied by all corporations today. Invest the least amount of resources and maximize profit! I give you NHL fans, HUT!

But there are other small dev teams out there making games. Take the F1 team at Codemasters. For a long time, their product struggled, until they realised that an Formula One game is basically a NICHE product that caters to a very narrow group of people. If you try to "dumb it down", not only do you alienate the core fans (who are mostly hard core Formula One fanatics) but you don't really generate any "new" sales. So after a few seasons of putting a shoddy product in store shelves (and online stores), they went 180 and started to listen to the hardcore crowd and actually worked on the foundations of the game; what makes a Formula One racing game a FORMULA ONE RACING GAME. Everything was overhauled, the physics, the controls, the presentation. Everything was made to feel more like a racing game where you are a formula one driver.

They didn't cater to the kids who wanted rocket boost racing or bumper cars. They build their game from the ground up a s a hard core simulation, with the OPTION to tone things down to your level if you like. Last year's game sold about the same numbers as NHL 17 did, and that's fine. Because they understand they are making a niche game, for a niche market.

The difference is that Codemasters is committed to cater to their hardcore audience first and foremost because they understand what makes an F1 game an F1 game.

They didn't put in a 4 cars on the track mode. They didn't dumb down the physics. They didn't boost the speed of the game to make it "feel" faster. Everything in their game is Authentic. There is no other F1 game on the market. So the little kids who find it boring, well they can go play Mario Kart or they can play Call of Duty of whatever arcade game they want to play.

The devs know they can't afford to lose their hard core fans and it shows in their product and in the support they get from their HAPPY fans.

This is a great point. Talking about Codies, they also managed to revive the DiRT franchise by going sim and pleasing the hardcore group. The best marketing a video game can get is a positive buzz from the community and that always starts with the hardcore group being happy about the game. It keeps the game on the top seller/most played charts, and gets the game exposure online.

The thing that's different in racing games and sports games is that with racing games, I always have another game where I can get my simracing fix if the licensed F1 game doesn't provide it so they actually have to worry about completely loosing the hardcore group. EA doesn't really have this problem since there isn't any competition where the hardcore group could jump ship and they know this. The hardcore fans of NHL games are the type of people who just want to play something hockey related and will continue to do so even if the product is terrible.

The "hardcore" crowd thinks this game is too much of a sim as it is. The vast majority of you are asking for the skating from pre-TPS days where the limitations of the human body weren't so adhered to. The "hardcore" crowd wants a more arcade style of skating where everyone is fast, passes and shoots perfectly, can do any deke no matter the build and never gets tired. They want a more unrealistic game so the idea a hardcore game is going to get everyone to switch most likely wouldn't be true.

Dirt also has multiple years between releases. It took, what, 4 years for DIRT 4 to release? That doesn't happen with annual sports games.

That part of the hardcore crowd doesn't know what they want. Those people seem to be frustrated with TPS going nowhere and the fact that it's still an underdeveloped buggy mess causing most of the game's problems. I'm certain that if EA would release a game where it actually worked but still stayed within the limitations of the human body, people here would be all over it. At this point that seems highly unlikely so they would rather have the floaty skating that worked, and I understand that.

To be honest, NHL doesn't even need to go absolute hardcore 'sim' since I'm not sure if that's even possible in the same sense as a racing sim or a flight sim. With NHL it's more of a question of being consistent with physics and the game looking like a believable representation of hockey on all skill levels. At the moment the better the players are, the less the game actually looks like hockey because of all the exploits in the skating and physics which have become completely acceptable to use. It's baffling to me that some of the people I play 6's with doesn't even consider the 'curling away from a hit' an exploit, it has become so common that it's a legit way to play the game.

If EA actually took a year to just focus on the skating and the physics it would be a huge leap towards a better game. If they'd work to get rid of the glide bubbles, fix the pivoting and slow speed movement off the puck, get the puck pickups to an acceptable level and fix the hitting and players bouncing off of each other it would already make for a good game.

There was three years between Dirt: Showdown and Dirt Rally. Dirt Rally is the sim i was talking about, they managed to screw it up with Dirt 4 already but at least we got one proper rally sim, that seems to be a once in a decade type of thing. I only brought that up as another example of going sim but Venom's point about the F1 series still stands. F1 games are annual as well.

I think the issue is EA's interpretation of "sim" seems to involve the chance of something unexpected (read: RANDOM) occuring, when the hardcore crowd is calling for more consistency across the board. Consistency has always been considered "arcade-like" though I never understood why.

Because "RANDOM" is allowed to happen in the NHL series quite often, what ends up happening is it even affects the physics engine, making the entire game look like a buggy, unfixable mess. The same exact scenario with the same players on the ice played out multiple times could result in drastically different outcomes because the EA gods decide it to be so.

The most commonly complained about example is the RANDOM occurence of a stick maybe or maybe not being "live". This results in missed pokechecks, which weren't really missed, and horrible passing decisions being rewarded when your player does the right thing when you read the play perfectly, but the outcome is completely incorrect from time to time.

Do I even need to mention goalie problems? We have a whole thread for those.

The situation where "sim" players are asking for a less realistic skating engine eads me to this conclusion, we need to discuss what our expectations are for a SIM sports game is, and whether there should be certain variances considered from one sport to another...IE, "What is the bare minimum acceptable threshold players expect from a SIM game, and how much SIM is going too far? Is there really even a "Going to far" point to begin with? Are there differences to consider when making a SIM soccer/baseball/basketball/hockey/football game? Are there different acceptible threasholds based on the limitations of using a video game controller?"

We should talk about the good and bad of SIM, but we cannot mix up examples of good sim and the risks of taking too many or too few shortcuts to achieve that goal.

Replies

  • sgiz1
    537 posts Member
    Its a game, it should be static in commands.

    RNG % errors programmed into the game make it random and unfair. There are times you can take 5 or 6 perfect shots and all of them miss the net? ****? Then your opponent comes down and paints top corner on 3 shots in a row? ****? This is sim? RNG % errors programming? its not equal, based on your luck any given game could put one player at a disadvantage at the programming level.



  • MikeG73179
    278 posts Member
    edited August 2017
    I posted a longass reply to this and it disappeared after an edit. How great.

    edit: apparently it was the approval. Let's see how many double posts I ended up making
    Post edited by MikeG73179 on

  • Juppo1996 wrote: »
    I posted a longass reply to this and it disappeared after an edit. How great

    Did it say you need to wait for approval for the comment to appear? That has happened to me twice.
  • VeNOM2099
    3178 posts Member
    edited August 2017
    RANDOM is not SIM. Let's just get that out there.

    Life is NOT completely random. There is a cause and effect for everything. Not even a roll of a dice is RANDOM: you roll a six sided dice, so the chances that your number comes up after a single roll is always 16.6%. That NEVER varies. The problem with EA's NHL series isn't really that its' random, it's that it is INCONSISTENT.

    Like many have already pointed out, sometimes a stick hits a solid object, sometimes it doesn't. And it's always at the most opportune/inopportune time (depending on which side of the situation you're in). Sometimes a goalie stretches out a leg or a hand to stop the puck, sometimes he tucks his limbs in and lets the puck go by. Sometimes the AI completely levels you with the puck. Sometimes the AI just lets you waltz right into the slot to score a goal. And there's no reason for it. At least no reason other than the developer understands.

    As a user, you can't be hoping that the game WORKS as intended the entire time you're playing it. Yes we understand that there can be bugs and glitches in code. But when the core game mechanics become erratic... It's kind of like rolling a dice, but sometimes it's a 6 sided dice, sometimes it's a 3 sided dice, sometimes it's a 20 sided dice. You just don't know.
  • VeNOM2099 wrote: »
    RANDOM is not SIM. Let's just get that out there.

    Life is NOT completely random. There is a cause and effect for everything. Not even a roll of a dice is RANDOM: you roll a six sided dice, so the chances that your number comes up after a single roll is always 16.6%. That NEVER varies. The problem with EA's NHL series isn't really that its' random, it's that it is INCONSISTENT.

    Like many have already pointed out, sometimes a stick hits a solid object, sometimes it doesn't. And it's always at the most opportune/inopportune time (depending on which side of the situation you're in). Sometimes a goalie stretches out a leg or a hand to stop the puck, sometimes he tucks his limbs in and lets the puck go by. Sometimes the AI completely levels you with the puck. Sometimes the AI just lets you waltz right into the slot to score a goal. And there's no reason for it. At least no reason other than the developer understands.

    As a user, you can't be hoping that the game WORKS as intended the entire time you're playing it. Yes we understand that there can be bugs and glitches in code. But when the core game mechanics become erratic... It's kind of like rolling a dice, but sometimes it's a 6 sided dice, sometimes it's a 3 sided dice, sometimes it's a 20 sided dice. You just don't know.



    THANK YOU!! BMH posted a sheet ton of videos from NHL17 showing how horrible the collision detection / clipping was. SOMETIMES your stick is a solid object, SOMETIMES it is invisible

    #4 Red should have been able to collect that puck but the Game rendered his stick invisible...why??

    The Goalie stick and #24 white stick BOTH physically pass through the puck all the while the puck carrier is able to maintain control of the puck (his stick remains Solid) as he scores the goal....why was #24 stick and the goalies stick rendered Invisible in that situation??


    Red players stick physically passes through puck carriers skate, then passes through the puck...HOWEVER the puck carrier stick hits the puck....why is one players Stick deemed SOLID while the other players Stick rendered INVISIBLE (all on the same play to boot)??

    But we are not supposed to believe that there is some code or game mechanic that Decides the outcome of a game
  • The word you're looking for is intangible.

    But your point stands.
  • I think this thread is spot on one of the main problems with this series.
    Online functionality would be no. 1
    “Hold your stick out to the side bubble” and its equivalents, no 2.
    And then the randoms, programmed in to the game.
    I do belive that random is the exact opposite of competitive and that you take away some of the competitive side, every time you introduce a random factor.
    That being said, it is really hard to tell if something is network related, bad luck with “the dices” or carried through by logics EA has decided on.
    You see how I left skill out of the equation?
    If it was purely skill that decided the outcome, you would be painfully aware of it, and it would happen every time, as in not being random.
    I know I would love a game like that, unforgiving as it may sound.
    It would almost resemble real life, where you could practice different aspects of the game, and come close to master it.
    Then to the question, “What is SIM”?
    I don’t think this community will ever find common ground to that question.
    Example: I would like gameplay to be a tad faster.
    Someone would instantly come on and tell me that the game is actually running faster than a normal NHL-game, and in the process, call me an idiot for wanting the game even faster than that.
    I would reply that we play the game from an overhead view, making it easier to see the plays earlier.
    Typical response would be, that I am an arcade fan who wants superhuman plays to be allowed, and since I am such a scrub, he won’t listen to another word from me.
    Now, that he has degraded my skills in public, I will have to respond by something similar and discussion has totally railed off.
    If an actual dev from EA was unlucky enough to read through that ****-contest, he wouldn’t get a bit more educated on what needs to be done to the game.

    For what it’s worth here’s my SIM factors.
    1. Full physical contact.
    Since Sean Ramjagsingh has stated that this is not possible, I’m adding “as possible”
    2. No “bubbles” like “hold your stick to the side”,
    “X to protect puck” (**** is a button to become harder to catch??),
    Goalie throwing puck through attackers, (the attacker is there to force a face-off, it’s infuriating how the game neglects that.)
    3. If there’s an open passing lane and you point your stick in that direction, the pass should connect.
    4. Cross-crease passes should be the best scoring chance in the world, which leads to ...
    5. If you’re in the passing lane, it should be an interception, but then again.….
    6. Saucer passes should be hard, but not impossible to stop.
    7. Slap shots should not be taken down to instant control … ever!
    8. Pokes from behind should be rewarded with a tripping penalty, not the puck.
    9. Harder fatigue effect.
    If you can keep an opponent in his zone for three minutes, I would love to see players that can hardly move.
    10. Goalies need to have the same speed on cross crease one timers, as on one-on-one’s
    OK, I’ll stop at ten points.
    Probably I’ve missed a few important ones, feel free to add in!
  • VeNOM2099
    3178 posts Member
    edited August 2017
    The problem with asking for more "speed" is that this game is using REAL physics calculations. But they're not being applied realistically. Let me explain:

    Mass x Acceleration (or speed) = Net Force. If you apply real world mass to real world speed, you get realistic FORCE applied to everything from shot speed, to hitting, to skating "momentum". But increase the speed and suddenly everything goes out of whack.

    Why do you think the game has such a hard time keeping up with its "realism"? It's because the devs have accelerated the game already. If you accelerate even more, even if it's just a little bit, you're going to throw the mechanics in this game in even BIGGER disarray.

    I think the speed is in a good place right now, even though it's obviously throwing the physics off kilter. Personally, I'd lower a tad, but then everyone would loose their fushluggenah minds...
  • MikeG73179
    278 posts Member
    edited August 2017
    When I'm thinking of sim, I'm thinking the opposite of random. In a sim, a certain input in a certain situation always results in the same outcome. Like Venom said it's just not the case with this game even though it should, especially with the skating. A player should always make the same maneuver with the same input, the only things that should change depending on the player's attributes is how long it takes to complete the move, how much space the player needs for the move and whether or not the player is able to keep possession.

    All the animations should be tied to control input rather than being automated. Here's a couple of things that would hugely improve the off puck skating.
    • Only using the LS should always result in the most basic move to the direction you want
    • L2/LT should always make the skater face the puck and the animations should change accordingly
    • If you want to do a spin, it should work by doing a quick circular motion with the LS but otherwise you should never get forced into a spinning animation
    • Holding L3 should always result in a hustle animation
    • If you want to cut into a hit while backskating it should work by releasing L2/LT and moving both sticks in the direction you want to cut, holding L3 should make the cut faster but less agile
    • A quick flick of LS to the side while backskating should do a single sidestep, holding should use crossover pushes
    • Flicking LS to the opposite direction you're going should result in a complete stop
    • While stationary (e.g. a dman on the offensive blueline or covering a passing lane) RS should control the direction you're facing. This could also be used to lean on the boards when you want to keep the puck in the zone
    • While next to the puck carrier by holding RS towards him, you should be able to lean on him to apply pressure and slow him down. A flick of RS should result in a pump on lower speeds and a proper hit on bigger speeds (a pump shouldn't result in the dman wildly over committing like it often does currently)
    • Slowing down the puck carrier to a complete stop should result in a board pin. That would release triangle/Y for other uses
    • A pump or a hit should always result in the puck carrier loosing balance and make him more vulnerable for pokes and stick lifts. If he tries to absorb the hit by gliding it should always result in a loose puck since in the gliding animation the skater isn't actively controlling the puck but just pushing it forward (The players' sizes and attributes should obviously play a part in this but this should be the general rule of thumb IMO) You see this in every single real hockey game, puck carrier absorbs the hit but lets the puck glide into the corner, throws it at the net or dumps it
    • While the puck carriers back is facing towards the dman, the dman should be able to swing his stick in front of the puck carrier and sort of hang with him by using the DSS and moving RS from the side towards the puck carrier. If the puck carrier starts getting away but you fail to take the stick away it should result in more interactive and skill based holding and hooking calls
    • Extending your stick with the DSS should allow for one handed puck pickups rather than the game deciding when to trigger the animation

    I think that's all I wrote previously. If the skating would work like this, we'd see a more faced paced game on all skill levels. If you'd want to maintain stable puck possession you'd have to avoid physical contact and the game would become more about getting away from the defense than luring it in to overcommit like it is now.
    Post edited by MikeG73179 on

  • The hardest part of playing hockey (imo )is accepting a pass,in this game you do nothing to accept a pass.
    THE...Detriot Frenzy Alumni
  • Just want to say that the top speed of skating and the game is fine it's the 0-10ft acceleration which is lagging and consequently making everything feel so sluggish
    All Comments pertain to 6v6 drop in unless otherwise stated..
  • I think this is all excellent points and I should clarify what I mean, as I think we all agree.
    When I say I would like the gameplay to be a tad faster, I don’t mean speed up everything.
    As Kriptical is saying, top speed of skating is fine, acceleration is not.
    However, on breakaways, defender will catch up to you too often.
    Which will mean (in that certain situation) that D has too high accel. Or A has too low top speed.
    Some of the passes are so slow, that players are catching up with them.
    Playing double cross-crease, will often make (A.I.) goalie to desperation move both ways, as he has no mass to change direction of.
    Play a slapper from behind the redline right in front your incoming attacker.
    D will turn on a dime and beat you to the puck, making sure the icing will get called.
    Play a pass to the same attacker, D will have a really hard time catching up with that exact same guy. These are just examples from the top of my head, but they all makes the game feel slow.

    Juppos examples for skating, all sound good IMO.
    I think they would all make the skating more intuitive and responsive.

Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!