EA Forums - Banner

Winning 5 - 0 into a rage quit

Prev1
Here's 1st goal:

I make a bad pass, trying to force the play and gets rewarded for it.
OK. Here's goal no. 2:

See how I make a terrible pass in the D zone, but yet end up with the puck?
Rebound ends up right back to me, gifting me an easy one-timer.
Alright, let's look at no. 3:

Again, every loose puck is going my way. How that rebound even ended up lying in the crease is beyond me. I think it would've made more sense if the shot went directly in ...
No. 4:

I hate these goals, there's no skill to them whatsoever. Just game decided it's time for a goal, here comes an auto-redirect for ya. Almost makes me remove my goalie, only my opponent would take that as me mocking him at this point.
Nail in the coffin:

He finally had enough and I can't say I blame him.
In this game I couldn't do no wrong, in other games I just can't get it right.
I don't know what this is, but it sure feels predetermined.

Replies

  • sgiz1
    537 posts Member
    On the flipside argument, for each of these goals we have all played games where even if everything was clean none of them would have gone in.

    For example goal #1 - Nice cycle, tried to set up a nice back door one timer, not really a force because your vision/idea was to set this up, worth passing trying to connect/finish on a nice cycle play. It hits a defender and goes in, wow... but on that exact play what if the pass got thru clean? The answer is there was a good chance you would not have scored (whif on one timer attempt? miss the net on shot? goalie slides over and makes the save?).

    So now the argument is why does this game miss the clean opportunities so often and allows all of these broken plays to score?

    This is the argument that skill is not as important anymore, you don't have to get open clean shots to win.

    Refreshing to see someone win 5-0 and complain about winning, lol... I'm right there with you on that, I win a lot, our club is 64-4-2 and we complain even while winning ourselves.
  • sgiz1 wrote: »
    O
    Refreshing to see someone win 5-0 and complain about winning, lol...
    Ehhhrrr.. It has been known to go the other way .... at occasions ...

    sgiz1 wrote: »
    So now the argument is why does this game miss the clean opportunities so often and allows all of these broken plays to score?
    I guess that sums up what I was trying to say. It's all the randoms programmed into the game that decides the outcome, more than it is actual skill.
    And in this game, everything was clicking my way while my opponent just couldn't catch a break.
    I've been on the other side of that table too many times to mention.
  • Workin_OT
    469 posts Member
    edited November 2017
    This is what the game has become due to all the people over the years clamouring for the game to be more 'realistic' and for them to get rid of all the 'glitch goals', eh buds'? :kissing_smiling_eyes:

    Glitch goals required video game skill both to execute and to defend.

    As a competitive game NHL used to play more like rocket league does. To compete at high levels you had to learn what worked and what didn't. Looking at it as a competitive video game, 2 good players or 2 good teams would be like a chess match. **** goals were rare so you had to learn what worked and had to practice and acquire the skill to execute. If you weren't good enough or didn't put in the time to do that you would get destroyed. Just like what you see happen in rocket league and good competitive games alike.

    The skill gap was large. Hop into a drop in game and you could immediately tell who was a skilled player and who wasn't. Sure the game didn't look 'realistic' from a hockey standpoint but it was sure great from a competitive video game standpoint.

    Now, after years of attempting to appease the 'glitch goal' and 'realism' whiners the skill gap has been squashed right down, throwing crap shots from anywhere is a viable strategy to winning games and with all the loose puck and lucky bounces in the game now skilled players don't dominate the same way they used to. The same way that good competitive games allow them to.

    This game is nowhere near as good as a competitive game as it used to be and these videos and 'glitch goal' whiners are the reason why.
  • Workin_OT wrote: »
    This game is nowhere near as good as a competitive game as it used to be and these videos and 'glitch goal' whiners are the reason why.
    Wow, you're the first one I see that actually want glitch goals to be programmed into the game, each to its own I guess...
    How these videos can be the reason to why this game "has some potential", I fail to see.
    What if they removed as many glitch goals as possible, using that wonderful patching function.
    Took away any artificial advantages to gliding, puck-screening and puck-carrying (or ANY other part of the game)
    Then made THE glitch goal of them all, to be finishing in the corner your passing play just made the goalie abandon. If that's the glitch goals you're referring to, I'm with you, all the way.
    If not, I think you're really lost.
  • SpillGal wrote: »
    Workin_OT wrote: »
    This game is nowhere near as good as a competitive game as it used to be and these videos and 'glitch goal' whiners are the reason why.
    Wow, you're the first one I see that actually want glitch goals to be programmed into the game, each to its own I guess...
    How these videos can be the reason to why this game "has some potential", I fail to see.
    What if they removed as many glitch goals as possible, using that wonderful patching function.
    Took away any artificial advantages to gliding, puck-screening and puck-carrying (or ANY other part of the game)
    Then made THE glitch goal of them all, to be finishing in the corner your passing play just made the goalie abandon. If that's the glitch goals you're referring to, I'm with you, all the way.
    If not, I think you're really lost.

    Well they never programmed 'glitch goals' into the game. People just figured them out. Techniques, tricks, etc. in a competitive game that players have to figure out and learn and use to their advantage is a great thing. It creates skill gaps and raises the skill ceiling.

    Since they have been programming these types of goals out of the game, throwing random **** shots on net has become a more and more viable strategy, which takes 0 game skill to execute.

    No one can deny the fact that the skill gap in this game has become smaller when compared to the 'golden era'. On average games are a lot closer and really good players are barely winning, or even losing, against pretty bad players. The videos in your op of **** goals that weren't 'earned' are an illustration of why.
  • Workin_OT wrote: »
    SpillGal wrote: »
    Workin_OT wrote: »
    This game is nowhere near as good as a competitive game as it used to be and these videos and 'glitch goal' whiners are the reason why.
    Wow, you're the first one I see that actually want glitch goals to be programmed into the game, each to its own I guess...
    How these videos can be the reason to why this game "has some potential", I fail to see.
    What if they removed as many glitch goals as possible, using that wonderful patching function.
    Took away any artificial advantages to gliding, puck-screening and puck-carrying (or ANY other part of the game)
    Then made THE glitch goal of them all, to be finishing in the corner your passing play just made the goalie abandon. If that's the glitch goals you're referring to, I'm with you, all the way.
    If not, I think you're really lost.

    Well they never programmed 'glitch goals' into the game. People just figured them out. Techniques, tricks, etc. in a competitive game that players have to figure out and learn and use to their advantage is a great thing. It creates skill gaps and raises the skill ceiling.

    Since they have been programming these types of goals out of the game, throwing random **** shots on net has become a more and more viable strategy, which takes 0 game skill to execute.

    No one can deny the fact that the skill gap in this game has become smaller when compared to the 'golden era'. On average games are a lot closer and really good players are barely winning, or even losing, against pretty bad players. The videos in your op of **** goals that weren't 'earned' are an illustration of why.

    The most common "glitch" goal of the past was that pullback wrister from the slot. You can still score a ton shooting from that spot too, but it does get saved on occasion, and defense is a little better suited to stopping it.

    But I do agree with you. Now random shots from the boards while your player isn't even facing the net has almost as good a chance of going in as does some beautifully orchestrated tic tac toe passing play where everyone on your team touches the puck at least once.

    It's super frustrating to set up a great chance in front of an open net only to have a goalie come flying across the crease for a miraculous save, but if you take a simple weak wrist shot from the exact same spot while the goalie is setup and square to you, he can just totally whiff on the save.

    Oh, and look, I used that word again, frustrating. The first word that comes to mind when playing NHL on this gen.
  • Workin_OT wrote: »
    Well they never programmed 'glitch goals' into the game. People just figured them out. Techniques, tricks, etc. in a competitive game that players have to figure out and learn and use to their advantage is a great thing. It creates skill gaps and raises the skill ceiling.
    Hmm.. Interesting take on things. Personally, I would prefer this to be legit hockey plays.
    If I understand you correctly, you are saying that how "hockey-like" it is doesn't matter. That if the game has a flaw or maybe something like the wrap around into a waiting goalie that goes in more than it would in real life. You should play hard on that, in fact, this is what separates skilled players from scrubs?
    I'm not trying to be sarcastic here, just trying to understand where you're coming from, but for now, I don't think I agree with your perception of "skill".
    Workin_OT wrote: »
    Since they have been programming these types of goals out of the game, throwing random **** shots on net has become a more and more viable strategy, which takes 0 game skill to execute.
    Which is kinda what I'm trying to say. It should take some skill to score. Let the goalies eat up the weak wristers, let us chase down that gliding, puckscreening player. Put skill back in the drivers seat (But not what you refer to as skill, if I'm hearing you correctly)
    Workin_OT wrote: »
    No one can deny the fact that the skill gap in this game has become smaller when compared to the 'golden era'. On average games are a lot closer and really good players are barely winning, or even losing, against pretty bad players. The videos in your op of **** goals that weren't 'earned' are an illustration of why.
    I agree with you, as I said, in that game every puck bounce would go my way. I don't think weeding out the worst of the glitch goals is the reason behind it though.
  • Competitive and skill ceiling are two words/phrases I would never expect to see associated with this series.

    I say the "glitch" goals are the same vein as learning how to throw nades in CSGO.


    People in the lower ranks will say you are cheating if you use tactics like this because they can't comprehend someone better than them, same sort of thing that would happen in NHL.

    AAA games are designed so anyone can play them and do well at them because then there's more chance more people will buy them.
  • Maybe I'm slow, I'm getting old so that's not a maybe, it's more like a given. :'(
    But you mean throwing grenades that ricochets into where you want em, resembles doing a wraparound into a waiting goalie? Or throwing a floater onto a waiting goalie? Or charging your pass up so it goes through a defender, just waiting for that pass?
    This looks more like playing a bank pass off the boards, which is very much legit in my book.
    This game plays more like you are going into the open, packed with just a 9mm. None of your enemies can hit you, while you nail headshot after headshot. That was my try at lingo from a game I never play. Feel free to flame it! B)
  • I mean that game can play like that if you're playing at a skill far below yours. You can run in with anything and kill everyone but they cannot kill you. However it is all because of your pure skill or cheating in the case of aimbots and wallers.

    EA sports titles by rule have far more randomness for one due to the player ratings that try to differentiate the players based on their perceived skills irl. Then you add in trying to make it realistic which will make more random things happen.

    If you know anything about guns you will know the gun-play in cs is far from realistic. However it takes skill to learn the sprays and other tactics to excel.
  • Competitive and skill ceiling are two words/phrases I would never expect to see associated with this series.

    I say the "glitch" goals are the same vein as learning how to throw nades in CSGO.


    People in the lower ranks will say you are cheating if you use tactics like this because they can't comprehend someone better than them, same sort of thing that would happen in NHL.

    AAA games are designed so anyone can play them and do well at them because then there's more chance more people will buy them.

    This is the idea, yeah. In their purest form they are both skills learned in the gameplay that give you an advantage over other players.

    Good players will learn these nuances in the game and become better and better at executing them. These things create skill gap, and the more of them there are the higher the ceiling.
  • I mean that game can play like that if you're playing at a skill far below yours. You can run in with anything and kill everyone but they cannot kill you. However it is all because of your pure skill or cheating in the case of aimbots and wallers.
    OK I'm too old, but I just don't understand your english. If we try to relate this to hockey, it would be something like: You can play a soft play and win but they can never win. However it is all because of skill or cheating, but only if there is aimbots or wallers (I guess Wallers resembles blocks, still don't get half of it though)
    To this, all I have to say is "Don't cheat, not even when there's aimbots and wallers in the picture."
    EA sports titles by rule have far more randomness for one due to the player ratings that try to differentiate the players based on their perceived skills irl. Then you add in trying to make it realistic which will make more random things happen.
    **** are you talking about? I'm still not reading your english .....?
    If you know anything about guns you will know the gun-play in cs is far from realistic. However it takes skill to learn the sprays and other tactics to excel.
    This I understand though. I'm pretty good at excel and on spraying ****. Just never thought that would come up in a hockey discussion. Apart from that, all I read is jada jada jada jada jada ......
  • Workin_OT wrote: »
    This is the idea, yeah. In their purest form they are both skills learned in the gameplay that give you an advantage over other players.

    Good players will learn these nuances in the game and become better and better at executing them. These things create skill gap, and the more of them there are the higher the ceiling.
    OK, I got that from your first post. And I think it's cool that we finally are discussing game mechanics rather than tactics. But I did ask you one question, that you somehow forgot to answer.
    Is it okay if the skill is found in something that has nothing to do with hockey?
  • SpillGal wrote: »
    I mean that game can play like that if you're playing at a skill far below yours. You can run in with anything and kill everyone but they cannot kill you. However it is all because of your pure skill or cheating in the case of aimbots and wallers.
    OK I'm too old, but I just don't understand your english. If we try to relate this to hockey, it would be something like: You can play a soft play and win but they can never win. However it is all because of skill or cheating, but only if there is aimbots or wallers (I guess Wallers resembles blocks, still don't get half of it though)
    To this, all I have to say is "Don't cheat, not even when there's aimbots and wallers in the picture."
    EA sports titles by rule have far more randomness for one due to the player ratings that try to differentiate the players based on their perceived skills irl. Then you add in trying to make it realistic which will make more random things happen.
    **** are you talking about? I'm still not reading your english .....?
    If you know anything about guns you will know the gun-play in cs is far from realistic. However it takes skill to learn the sprays and other tactics to excel.
    This I understand though. I'm pretty good at excel and on spraying ****. Just never thought that would come up in a hockey discussion. Apart from that, all I read is jada jada jada jada jada ......

    LMAO Poor Fella. Wallers for clarity are players who can see the enemy positions through all the walls in a first person shooter game.

    Randomness based on player ratings for example let's use shot accuracy. Two guys one with 90 accuracy and one with 70. Obviously the one with 90 will miss his mark less but he can still miss his makr while the one with 70 can still snipe corners just not as often. This incurs a sense of randomness to the game.

    Idk if I am gonna make sense to ya. Gotta keep up with the lingo of the "young"... I do not feel young. lol.
  • no, no ice tilt at all its a rumour.

    THE...Detriot Frenzy Alumni
  • no, no ice tilt at all its a rumour.
    I think the important part here is that there's no players saying they are enjoying that ice tilt, (that doesn't exist).
    Why keep it in the game?
  • SpillGal wrote: »
    Workin_OT wrote: »
    This is the idea, yeah. In their purest form they are both skills learned in the gameplay that give you an advantage over other players.

    Good players will learn these nuances in the game and become better and better at executing them. These things create skill gap, and the more of them there are the higher the ceiling.
    OK, I got that from your first post. And I think it's cool that we finally are discussing game mechanics rather than tactics. But I did ask you one question, that you somehow forgot to answer.
    Is it okay if the skill is found in something that has nothing to do with hockey?

    Yeah I'm fine with that. There is boundaries though. The 09 curve shot was a legit glitch, or the one on the goal line where the goalie would always stack pads.

    But things like in NHL 11 where you could manually toe drag around AI defenceman every time. It wasn't 'hockey realistic' but it added to the competitiveness of the game. It was another tool/mechanic/nuance to the game that good players learned and used to their advantage.

    I don't play NHL to roleplay and pretend that I am playing real hockey, it's a video game to me. My first EA NHL game was 94. Even back then, you learned what worked and what didn't, you learned easy ways to score. Then you practiced those mechanics/nuances/tools/glitches/techniques and learned how to execute them successfully.

    From a competitive perspective that is what these games have always been about. That is video game skill. This whole 'realism' bender that's been going on since probably NHL 13 has slowly been eroding the skill it takes to be really competitive at these games. Yes good players are still good players, but that ceiling has dropped dramatically and bad players with not very good 'NHL video game skill' are able to stay in games and 'compete' much more than ever before.

    Video game skill doesn't matter as much anymore. Throwing crap shots on net from anywhere and crashing into the pile and hoping to get lucky is actually viable and wins games.. This is not good from a competitive perspective.
  • EA has completely catered to this new generation of last place ribbon recipient gamer.. learning hockey plays is no longer necessary. Someone said it earlier that games are becoming closer and closer despite the difference in player skill. That’s not fun. That’s a fixed carnival game.
  • joefitz22
    643 posts Member
    edited November 2017
    Workin_OT wrote: »
    SpillGal wrote: »
    Workin_OT wrote: »
    This is the idea, yeah. In their purest form they are both skills learned in the gameplay that give you an advantage over other players.

    Good players will learn these nuances in the game and become better and better at executing them. These things create skill gap, and the more of them there are the higher the ceiling.
    OK, I got that from your first post. And I think it's cool that we finally are discussing game mechanics rather than tactics. But I did ask you one question, that you somehow forgot to answer.
    Is it okay if the skill is found in something that has nothing to do with hockey?

    Yeah I'm fine with that. There is boundaries though. The 09 curve shot was a legit glitch, or the one on the goal line where the goalie would always stack pads.

    But things like in NHL 11 where you could manually toe drag around AI defenceman every time. It wasn't 'hockey realistic' but it added to the competitiveness of the game. It was another tool/mechanic/nuance to the game that good players learned and used to their advantage.

    I don't play NHL to roleplay and pretend that I am playing real hockey, it's a video game to me. My first EA NHL game was 94. Even back then, you learned what worked and what didn't, you learned easy ways to score. Then you practiced those mechanics/nuances/tools/glitches/techniques and learned how to execute them successfully.

    From a competitive perspective that is what these games have always been about. That is video game skill. This whole 'realism' bender that's been going on since probably NHL 13 has slowly been eroding the skill it takes to be really competitive at these games. Yes good players are still good players, but that ceiling has dropped dramatically and bad players with not very good 'NHL video game skill' are able to stay in games and 'compete' much more than ever before.

    Video game skill doesn't matter as much anymore. Throwing crap shots on net from anywhere and crashing into the pile and hoping to get lucky is actually viable and wins games.. This is not good from a competitive perspective.

    To the bolded part! I've been playing since NHL91and you're right those games had flaws as well but back then (I don't know about you) when we (my friends and I) gathered to play a NHL91 tournament, we forbid those glitches and flaws from being used! That was the GOOD SPOTSMANSHIP in us that made that rule! In today's competitive gaming, there is no such thing as GOOD SPORTSMANSHIP (except for a few of us).

    It's the WIN AT ALL COST (in order to make myself feel better about myself) attitude that make people abuse glitches and exploits in the game. COD, those people that found the glitch that took them OFF of the map and allowed them to just pick off people at will...what does that really say about a person that FEELS THE NEED to be stupid like that?? How is that even FUN, knowing the only way you can be good at the game is by repeatedly EXPLOITING glitches in a game?

    YES in real life, Goalies, Batters,etc have weaknesses that are exploited, difference is that Goalie or that Batter is not surrounded by INCOMPETENT teammates (AI teammates to be exact). 2x Stanley Cup winning goalie Matt Murray has a weak glove hand but his teammates help his cause out by helping cover up that weakness and minimizing the damage from said weak glove hand (they block shots, the clear the crease of bodies, the clear the puck out of the crease and or zone). **** AI teammates run into their own goalie causing a goal, AI teammates skate away from a loose puck
  • In regards to working OT and SpillGals discussion... I think it's important that we distinguish between an actual glitch/exploit goal and just a high percentage shot.

    Pull back wristers are just high percentage shots... They're fine. Leg-kick wraparound? Nah, that's an exploit and it's whack. Has no place in the game. Bacon-slapper? Same. Against the grain snapshots? You're giving up a high percentage shot. Not an exploit.

    Honestly, there haven't been that many legitimate "glitch shots" over the years to complain about and I can't really see how eliminating the few that existed took the competitiveness out of the game. Good shots are still rewarded for the most part (I mean cross ice one-timers are almost automatic this year) it's just that bad shots are rewarded WAY TOO OFTEN. That's the issue.

    I actually made a video similar to SpillGals except with me on the losing side that illustrates how all of my opponent's goals were real **** while mine were skill-based goals. I'll post it in a bit.
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!