EA Forums - Banner

Alienating the Long-term Fans

Replies

  • sgiz1 wrote: »
    "Isnt the FEEL of skating without the puck almost entirely bad because of lack of proper vision control?"

    Indeed that is a big part of it, classic vision control was key to always being able to correct yourself and maintain control over your skater. Classic vision control is key to controlling your skater without the puck. We need to remove backwards skating and put classic vision control back in, classic vision control is much more important and is used way more often than backwards skating is anyways, people hardly use backwards skating anymore, its a wasted button/action, bring back classic vision control.

    I'd sign that petition. We've been saying it ever since VC got removed that it made skating without the puck a pain in the ****. Instead of bring the old VC back to make it easier, we got one touch and stride dekes!
  • sgiz1
    537 posts Member
    edited November 2016
    This is the best topic and conversation I've seen in many years on this board, we need to keep this one going as long as possible discussing pre TPS vs. post TPS.

    Realism/sim just doesn't work well in a video game, video games by nature playing with small characters on a tv screen with minimal spacial awareness requires jamming the thumb stick in the desired direction when needed based on reaction, etc.

    In theory it sounds good to make decisions/moves well in advance of doing it to allow for momentum and realism, but its just not possible to be consistent because its small characters on a tv screen, you can't judge timing and spacing like you can in real life first person, a game makes you react in a split second with little planning, read and react, this = momentum cross ups with TPS. And this doesn't even consider how sensitive all this is to any kind of latency/lag from server issues which only magnifies the problems.

    By now all the proof you need is to take a snapshot from NHL 09,10.11,12 of EASHL excitement, community, leagues, opinions, fun factor, competition, and dedication from then and compare it to post TPS. The EASHL community is dead in comparison, there is no buzz anymore, few people play EASHL and those who do play fewer hours and fewer games due to frustration levels of how the game feels and plays, its stressful and frustrating to play, period.

    Doesn't EA want that fan fare back they once had? It all comes down to TPS, with TPS the game is meh? Without it the game is fast paced and fun as heck!!!

    Let's get the fun back in hockey, remove TPS and put back in classic vision control, just do these two things and leave everything else the way it is and we will have a great game again, not just great but more importantly, FUN!
  • EVerk81 wrote: »
    We all wish we had Cogs skill with the game :smiley:

    fixed
    You must unlearn what you have learned!
  • Single most important thing they can do to make the game fun again is to remedy the clunky mess that is skating without the puck.

    Nail that and make it FEEL good again and you have a pretty damn good game again (gameplay wise).
  • NHLDev
    1680 posts EA NHL Developer
    kezz123 wrote: »
    NHLDev wrote: »
    VeNOM2099 wrote: »
    I'm seriously done with these **** that think they now the sport simply because they play a video game of the sport which doesn't even represent the sport accurately. The physics in this game are a joke (at best), rebounds that go in directions that make absolutely no sense scientifically are routinely the cause of bad goals, for the sake of appeasing these type of "hockey fans" that think games that end 1-0 or 2-1 are "boring".

    In an NHL game, scoring per game on average should be around 2.00 to 3.00, not 4.00 to 5.00 like it is now. Scoring percentage should be around 10%, not 20% like it is now.

    Ben said that the game settings are set so that a game in NHL 17 that has 15 shots fired in 4 minute periods is like having 30 shots fired on net in full 20 minute periods. That's fine.

    But shouldn't the goals scored also follow this percentage? Why are we seeing 5-6 goals scored per game if the shots per game represented in the video game are halved? Shouldn't we be seeing 2-3 goals scored at most??

    NHL 17 could use having 2 or 3 goals per game lower on average. It won't kill the game. On the contrary it'll make things more exciting.

    There are a few things that come into play when tuning the game. We look at the real world of hockey, we listen to feedback from people playing the game and we learn from the recent and past history of hockey videogames. We take all of that into account when looking at authenticity, game balance, fun factor, etc.

    When I say fun factor, we also consider both sides of the puck. People often say that we cater to players that want to score easily but we spend just as much time on offense and defense when looking at game balance -- updating and tuning mechanics to get the right balance. As you have said yourself, we have shown in our offline tuning that we are aware of the different levers needed to tune the current games mechanics to get more arcade or more full simulation experiences. However, as you mentioned, the time of the periods is a big factor in that as well.

    Our aim for online games is to get over 40 combined shots in a game. Looking at the real world of hockey, we know that we could aim for 60 but then we probably wouldn't be able to have incidental contact on and/or defensive tools like the pokecheck as effective since a lot of the extra minutes in hockey are spent in the corners and battles for loose pucks in congested areas. Having those puck battles and loss of puck when you play good defense, keeps shot totals lower and thus the shot averages go down.

    That said, we still aim for about 6-7 combined goals per game. Pass reception ability is a bit more forgiving than it should be and shot accuracy when fully in control is probably a bit higher as well (you can refer to our full sim settings for what we would do if the period times were double what they were for online defaults at the moment). Other sim communities have found good settings for longer periods as well.

    So with that, we know our shooting percentages have to be 15+ percent.

    Right now, our online averages are 5.96 combined goals per game, 39.71 shots per game and 15 percent shooting. So they are all on the bottom end of what we are aiming for, which we see as a good thing because we have made a choice to give people the tools to contain on defense.

    That said, it all depends on how people play. There are people out there that shut teams out consistently and there are others giving up 7+ goals.

    NHL 13 was the first game I was the gameplay producer for and we often had 1-0 games online. I am sure many of you remember that. I learned from feedback that this wasn't going to work overall. We also listened to the core EASHL community last year when players felt they were missing open nets too often and that bobbling pass receptions was really hurting the team game. As we improved defensive control in skating, pokechecking, improved incidental contact, low relative speed hitting, adding net battles and extended stick lifts, etc., it opened the door to tune some of the offensive pieces so that if you were open and have found space, you weren't as physically accountable for perfect facing for clean pass receptions and would have an easier time hitting open nets when shooting compared to games like NHL 13 and 16. With good defensive coverage though, you can shut teams down fairly well.

    So many questions....so many things irritate me with this response. But all these things I knew deep down. And I also appreciate you taking time to have a dialogue. Once the frustration is out of the way, perhaps solutions can be found.

    I think however that you are over-analyzing and its leading to problematic design.

    Reaching your "target stats" can be done in 2 ways...the right way or the bad way. I can promise you its done the wrong way right now. And the amount of hardcore players leaving the game is a statement to this. if your game was more fun or better balanced or more of a simulation, your hardcore players would stick around. My team and most of my friends who all quit playing your game all play real hockey weekly. So we are not just couch potatoes who do not understand hockey or fun.....we are not the type to stop playing the game we love because we moved on to another game. its our passion and not a month goes by where we dont talk about how much we miss playing the NHL game together and then jokingly ask each other if we should buy it and then just laugh the joke off. That may sound harsh but if you look past that, its a painful truth about your current product.

    Despite all your good intentions.... I Sincerely believe your heart is in the right place when developing the game, its just not working the way you intend it to.

    Its no coincidence that TONS of people always praise nhl94 or nhl 10-11 and not NHL 98 or nhl15. Its because those games did many things right. the "feel" of the game. Not sure what the "stats" were back then but the game was truly fun.

    There is also the fact that people come in with different skill level. One team may have all "nhl level human players" while another may have 1 nhl level player and 2 peewee level players. Your matchmaker will never be good enough to account for all that and the scores should vary greatly based on skill level, not on some artificial build in systems that makes it harder to score.

    I do understand looking at stats and trying to balance around it but again, there are different ways to interpret stats. I do not believe you guys are doing it right. For instance, I asked you before to pull the stats from 11 on how many goal difference in average there were each game and how many in say 16. Why are the goal difference between teams so much lower now? Is that healthy? Does it mean that all teams just happened to get better at the game or does your game system now reward good players less for being good and bad players more for being bad? We all know the answer to this by now but those stats would have helped you see this sooner. And make changes accordingly.

    I guess im just rambling now and I could go on and on but i hope this helps


    I actually answered you back then when you brought up the stats of previous games. I understand your theories but it isn't a 1:1 scenario.

    For a different perspective, think of this scenario:

    - An arcade basketball shooting game such as this one:


    vs

    - An NBA 3 point competition

    A good player vs a brand new player in each scenario getting 20 shots is most likely going to see the good player win in both contests. The good player may go 20 for 20 in the arcade game but only go 8 for 20 in the 3 point shooting. Looking at the stats, you could see the lower differential as less of an advantage and lowering the skill gap but we all know the good player has a way bigger advantage in a 3 point competition than an arcade game (except for maybe that guy in the clip I posted, haha)

    A score of 12-0 vs a score of 4-0 doesn't mean much without context.

    You also take our stats metrics too seriously. When I am tuning the game, it isn't just with numbers flying by the screen putting a plus or minus on something and seeing what the next dice roll says until I get a combined 6 or 7 goals a game. Those numbers are there as a sanity check and can only really be looked at after millions of games. Most times, I am in practice mode trying quick snap shots on breakaways, deking forehand or backhand, tucking pucks back 5 hole on more and less elaborate moves to the backhand or forehand first. I am coming in on 2 on 0s, 2 on 1s, etc. and seeing how the players are playing the shot vs the pass. We are looking at the impacts of screens, deflections with and without traffic, how often a player is open when a defender is trying to tie them up, etc. etc. the list goes on. We also evaluate videos we get sent form the community, have QA calling out issues they see and they also spend time to look at issues form the community as well and that is just around shooting. We do the same for all mechanics and pick our battles for what we can improve in a given year.

    We tune mechanics, add new code, etc. until we have what we need to get things to work as expected. There are still many issues we want to resolve but it is tuned based on what we currently have. The different game styles and difficulty levels are a small indication of what we know make some of the biggest differences in how the game plays, the chances you get, etc. but that is just a surface level glimpse at it.

    The game isn't random but it is less 2 dimensional than it once was with more factors and increased weights on factors.

    Remember the days when people said attributes don't matter in the game? (and there are still people that do) and then you have people in this thread complaining that they can't deke all the time unless they have the builds that are capable of it. Not sure what else to say there if the evaluation for success is different.

    We get that everyone always wants the game to be more fun for them. We are listening. Changes we make are never off the cuff, they are always with intent -- there are just a lot of factors that go into those decisions so it isn't a surprise when we don't please everyone with every change we make.

  • sgiz1 wrote: »
    This is the best topic and conversation I've seen in many years on this board, we need to keep this one going as long as possible discussing pre TPS vs. post TPS.

    Realism/sim just doesn't work well in a video game, video games by nature playing with small characters on a tv screen with minimal spacial awareness requires jamming the thumb stick in the desired direction when needed based on reaction, etc.

    In theory it sounds good to make decisions/moves well in advance of doing it to allow for momentum and realism, but its just not possible to be consistent because its small characters on a tv screen, you can't judge timing and spacing like you can in real life first person, a game makes you react in a split second with little planning, read and react, this = momentum cross ups with TPS. And this doesn't even consider how sensitive all this is to any kind of latency/lag from server issues which only magnifies the problems.

    By now all the proof you need is to take a snapshot from NHL 09,10.11,12 of EASHL excitement, community, leagues, opinions, fun factor, competition, and dedication from then and compare it to post TPS. The EASHL community is dead in comparison, there is no buzz anymore, few people play EASHL and those who do play fewer hours and fewer games due to frustration levels of how the game feels and plays, its stressful and frustrating to play, period.

    Doesn't EA want that fan fare back they once had? It all comes down to TPS, with TPS the game is meh? Without it the game is fast paced and fun as heck!!!

    Let's get the fun back in hockey, remove TPS and put back in classic vision control, just do these two things and leave everything else the way it is and we will have an great game again, not just great but more importantly, FUN!

    Yes. Dude, as much as I love "realism" it seems like too much realism is costing this game the fun factor.
  • Controls are a huge part of most games. Games with terrible controls tend to die a miserable death. Games with crisp responsive and tight controls tend to live longer or end up as masterpieces.

    Pre-tps, the game had great controls
    post-TPS the controls feel clunky and forced.

    There are other issues to address but the controls probably rank at the top of the list. And some issues like defense vs offense vs goaltending can only truly be addressed once the controls are addressed.

    When you hear people talk about hockey....do you hear them talk about OMG did you see how well I skated? or did you see how well I deked or shot or passed the puck or hit that guy?

    Skating is a huge part of hockey...its the first thing you need to learn before learning hockey. BUT its not what people think of when they think about hockey. Its not what people want to do in the game. They want to shoot, hit, pass, score, deke, save, block. etc. There should be limitations in skating but just enough to not make the game into a joke but not too much to distract from the actual sport.
  • "Changes we make are never off the cuff, they are always with intent"

    I would hope these decisions with intent involve case studies, say... comparing the community and gamer excitement from 09/10/11/12 pre TPS vs. 13/14/15/16/17 post TPS? At some point EA has to stop thinking more is better, higher tech is better, you can go too far too fast with good intentions but get un-intended results.

    You have more than enough evidence at this point (a controlled case study/experiment) to compare pre TPS games to post TPS games and how the communities react/enjoyed/play one vs. the other.

    I know since they redesigned this message board it no longer says my number of posts and join date, but I've been on this board since 2011/2012 and been playing since 09 (technically since Sega Genesis NHLPA 94 but who's counting). So I've lived both pre TPS and post TPS, been buying and playing NHL every year, when NHL 13 came out I was frustrated on the lack of control and each year since I've had high hopes the control and skating would be fixed but it never does. TPS is the problem for me and many others.

    You aren't going to lose customers by removing TPS, I am confident the opposite would happen, once the word got out FUN is back in this game, it will spread like wildfire and the old EASHL community will come back in full force again and the buzz will be back, bigger and better than ever.

    Please consider this...
  • sgiz1 wrote: »
    "Isnt the FEEL of skating without the puck almost entirely bad because of lack of proper vision control?"

    Indeed that is a big part of it, classic vision control was key to always being able to correct yourself and maintain control over your skater. Classic vision control is key to controlling your skater without the puck. We need to remove backwards skating and put classic vision control back in, classic vision control is much more important and is used way more often than backwards skating is anyways, people hardly use backwards skating anymore, its a wasted button/action, bring back classic vision control.

    I'd sign that petition. We've been saying it ever since VC got removed that it made skating without the puck a pain in the ****. Instead of bring the old VC back to make it easier, we got one touch and stride dekes!

    Yea no kidding. VC allowed you to move around while CONSTANTLY facing the puck. Now, pfft, not even close. Want to move 2 feet over? Well, how about having to turn sideways to do it instead of using lateral movement while FACING THE PUCK?
  • kezz123 wrote: »
    Controls are a huge part of most games. Games with terrible controls tend to die a miserable death. Games with crisp responsive and tight controls tend to live longer or end up as masterpieces.

    Pre-tps, the game had great controls
    post-TPS the controls feel clunky and forced.

    There are other issues to address but the controls probably rank at the top of the list. And some issues like defense vs offense vs goaltending can only truly be addressed once the controls are addressed.

    When you hear people talk about hockey....do you hear them talk about OMG did you see how well I skated? or did you see how well I deked or shot or passed the puck or hit that guy?

    Skating is a huge part of hockey...its the first thing you need to learn before learning hockey. BUT its not what people think of when they think about hockey. Its not what people want to do in the game. They want to shoot, hit, pass, score, deke, save, block. etc. There should be limitations in skating but just enough to not make the game into a joke but not too much to distract from the actual sport.

    It's not the "controls" per se, it is the FEEL.

    The controls are fine, we don't need new buttons or anything.

    When you have the puck, performing a 45 or a 90 cut FEEL good. You can do them on command, they respond well and they FEEL good.

    Skating without the puck, trying to square up on defence, trying to open up and get in position for a 1 timer FEEL clunky as ****. We don't need new controls for this stuff, the buttons used are fine, they just need to nail vision control and the FEEL of maneuvering when you don't have the puck.

  • sgiz1 wrote: »
    "Changes we make are never off the cuff, they are always with intent"

    I would hope these decisions with intent involve case studies, say... comparing the community and gamer excitement from 09/10/11/12 pre TPS vs. 13/14/15/16/17 post TPS? At some point EA has to stop thinking more is better, higher tech is better, you can go too far too fast with good intentions but get un-intended results.

    You have more than enough evidence at this point (a controlled case study/experiment) to compare pre TPS games to post TPS games and how the communities react/enjoyed/play one vs. the other.

    I know since they redesigned this message board it no longer says my number of posts and join date, but I've been on this board since 2011/2012 and been playing since 09 (technically since Sega Genesis NHLPA 94 but who's counting). So I've lived both pre TPS and post TPS, been buying and playing NHL every year, when NHL 13 came out I was frustrated on the lack of control and each year since I've had high hopes the control and skating would be fixed but it never does. TPS is the problem for me and many others.

    You aren't going to lose customers by removing TPS, I am confident the opposite would happen, once the word got out FUN is back in this game, it will spread like wildfire and the old EASHL community will come back in full force again and the buzz will be back, bigger and better than ever.

    Please consider this...

    I honestly have a hard time believing they don't realize this themselves. Maybe the devs/mods posting can't really discuss it, but there has to be some kind of internal discussion about the direction the game tried to take after NHL 12.

    The issue started with TPS and has just become worse since the current generation started. If this isn't something being discussed at all then there probably isn't much hope for the series, at least as far as EASHL is concerned.
  • NHLDev
    1680 posts EA NHL Developer
    edited November 2016
    This discussion got lost in the old forums but comparing the old skating is a bit tough as VC back then wasn't realistic at all. There was no commitment in pivots because you could skate at almost full speed horizontally across your skate blades. I get the argument that this should just be fun and who cares about realism but that was the choice made when TPS was introduced to advance the product and fix a lot of other things missing from the game (for example, accountability when skating, reasons for pivots to matter, etc.). It is fine to want a more arcade game but VC wasn't removed, it just has some limitations based on how players can skate at speed.

    I actually think the updates to skating this year and the VC on defense gives you fairly good control to retain facing. I worked closely with an engineer on it calling out peoples issues with accidental pivots on the rush due to puck prediciton and how it was trying to keep facing the puck, angles that back cross overs were allowed at, etc.. The changes there plus the ability to exit out of animations early when your player has the ability so you aren't forced to a pivot if you change your mind early enough are all helpful changes.

    We understand that it is possible to strafe and we have had these discussion the forums. That was the intent of Precision skating, trying to find a way to give that control at slower speeds -- could it be better, certainly, but there is a different between execution and intent. It is easy for all of us to say this should be better and it is another thing to do it while preserving the other pieces that have a good impact.

    In these clips, there is a reason why the defender isn't just strafing across the ice facing the puck. They skate forward or backwards keeping the puck in front of them the best they can but they can't face it at the exact angle if they want to be above a certain speed really. In the Nyquist goal, he gets the opening for the final shot purely because the defender has to choose where to skate and has to pivot. If he could just defend by strafing back and forth and still contain him, why wouldn't he?




  • NHLDev wrote: »
    kezz123 wrote: »
    NHLDev wrote: »
    VeNOM2099 wrote: »
    I'm seriously done with these **** that think they now the sport simply because they play a video game of the sport which doesn't even represent the sport accurately. The physics in this game are a joke (at best), rebounds that go in directions that make absolutely no sense scientifically are routinely the cause of bad goals, for the sake of appeasing these type of "hockey fans" that think games that end 1-0 or 2-1 are "boring".

    In an NHL game, scoring per game on average should be around 2.00 to 3.00, not 4.00 to 5.00 like it is now. Scoring percentage should be around 10%, not 20% like it is now.

    Ben said that the game settings are set so that a game in NHL 17 that has 15 shots fired in 4 minute periods is like having 30 shots fired on net in full 20 minute periods. That's fine.

    But shouldn't the goals scored also follow this percentage? Why are we seeing 5-6 goals scored per game if the shots per game represented in the video game are halved? Shouldn't we be seeing 2-3 goals scored at most??

    NHL 17 could use having 2 or 3 goals per game lower on average. It won't kill the game. On the contrary it'll make things more exciting.

    There are a few things that come into play when tuning the game. We look at the real world of hockey, we listen to feedback from people playing the game and we learn from the recent and past history of hockey videogames. We take all of that into account when looking at authenticity, game balance, fun factor, etc.

    When I say fun factor, we also consider both sides of the puck. People often say that we cater to players that want to score easily but we spend just as much time on offense and defense when looking at game balance -- updating and tuning mechanics to get the right balance. As you have said yourself, we have shown in our offline tuning that we are aware of the different levers needed to tune the current games mechanics to get more arcade or more full simulation experiences. However, as you mentioned, the time of the periods is a big factor in that as well.

    Our aim for online games is to get over 40 combined shots in a game. Looking at the real world of hockey, we know that we could aim for 60 but then we probably wouldn't be able to have incidental contact on and/or defensive tools like the pokecheck as effective since a lot of the extra minutes in hockey are spent in the corners and battles for loose pucks in congested areas. Having those puck battles and loss of puck when you play good defense, keeps shot totals lower and thus the shot averages go down.

    That said, we still aim for about 6-7 combined goals per game. Pass reception ability is a bit more forgiving than it should be and shot accuracy when fully in control is probably a bit higher as well (you can refer to our full sim settings for what we would do if the period times were double what they were for online defaults at the moment). Other sim communities have found good settings for longer periods as well.

    So with that, we know our shooting percentages have to be 15+ percent.

    Right now, our online averages are 5.96 combined goals per game, 39.71 shots per game and 15 percent shooting. So they are all on the bottom end of what we are aiming for, which we see as a good thing because we have made a choice to give people the tools to contain on defense.

    That said, it all depends on how people play. There are people out there that shut teams out consistently and there are others giving up 7+ goals.

    NHL 13 was the first game I was the gameplay producer for and we often had 1-0 games online. I am sure many of you remember that. I learned from feedback that this wasn't going to work overall. We also listened to the core EASHL community last year when players felt they were missing open nets too often and that bobbling pass receptions was really hurting the team game. As we improved defensive control in skating, pokechecking, improved incidental contact, low relative speed hitting, adding net battles and extended stick lifts, etc., it opened the door to tune some of the offensive pieces so that if you were open and have found space, you weren't as physically accountable for perfect facing for clean pass receptions and would have an easier time hitting open nets when shooting compared to games like NHL 13 and 16. With good defensive coverage though, you can shut teams down fairly well.

    So many questions....so many things irritate me with this response. But all these things I knew deep down. And I also appreciate you taking time to have a dialogue. Once the frustration is out of the way, perhaps solutions can be found.

    I think however that you are over-analyzing and its leading to problematic design.

    Reaching your "target stats" can be done in 2 ways...the right way or the bad way. I can promise you its done the wrong way right now. And the amount of hardcore players leaving the game is a statement to this. if your game was more fun or better balanced or more of a simulation, your hardcore players would stick around. My team and most of my friends who all quit playing your game all play real hockey weekly. So we are not just couch potatoes who do not understand hockey or fun.....we are not the type to stop playing the game we love because we moved on to another game. its our passion and not a month goes by where we dont talk about how much we miss playing the NHL game together and then jokingly ask each other if we should buy it and then just laugh the joke off. That may sound harsh but if you look past that, its a painful truth about your current product.

    Despite all your good intentions.... I Sincerely believe your heart is in the right place when developing the game, its just not working the way you intend it to.

    Its no coincidence that TONS of people always praise nhl94 or nhl 10-11 and not NHL 98 or nhl15. Its because those games did many things right. the "feel" of the game. Not sure what the "stats" were back then but the game was truly fun.

    There is also the fact that people come in with different skill level. One team may have all "nhl level human players" while another may have 1 nhl level player and 2 peewee level players. Your matchmaker will never be good enough to account for all that and the scores should vary greatly based on skill level, not on some artificial build in systems that makes it harder to score.

    I do understand looking at stats and trying to balance around it but again, there are different ways to interpret stats. I do not believe you guys are doing it right. For instance, I asked you before to pull the stats from 11 on how many goal difference in average there were each game and how many in say 16. Why are the goal difference between teams so much lower now? Is that healthy? Does it mean that all teams just happened to get better at the game or does your game system now reward good players less for being good and bad players more for being bad? We all know the answer to this by now but those stats would have helped you see this sooner. And make changes accordingly.

    I guess im just rambling now and I could go on and on but i hope this helps


    I actually answered you back then when you brought up the stats of previous games. I understand your theories but it isn't a 1:1 scenario.

    For a different perspective, think of this scenario:

    - An arcade basketball shooting game such as this one:


    vs

    - An NBA 3 point competition

    A good player vs a brand new player in each scenario getting 20 shots is most likely going to see the good player win in both contests. The good player may go 20 for 20 in the arcade game but only go 8 for 20 in the 3 point shooting. Looking at the stats, you could see the lower differential as less of an advantage and lowering the skill gap but we all know the good player has a way bigger advantage in a 3 point competition than an arcade game (except for maybe that guy in the clip I posted, haha)

    A score of 12-0 vs a score of 4-0 doesn't mean much without context.

    You also take our stats metrics too seriously. When I am tuning the game, it isn't just with numbers flying by the screen putting a plus or minus on something and seeing what the next dice roll says until I get a combined 6 or 7 goals a game. Those numbers are there as a sanity check and can only really be looked at after millions of games. Most times, I am in practice mode trying quick snap shots on breakaways, deking forehand or backhand, tucking pucks back 5 hole on more and less elaborate moves to the backhand or forehand first. I am coming in on 2 on 0s, 2 on 1s, etc. and seeing how the players are playing the shot vs the pass. We are looking at the impacts of screens, deflections with and without traffic, how often a player is open when a defender is trying to tie them up, etc. etc. the list goes on. We also evaluate videos we get sent form the community, have QA calling out issues they see and they also spend time to look at issues form the community as well and that is just around shooting. We do the same for all mechanics and pick our battles for what we can improve in a given year.

    We tune mechanics, add new code, etc. until we have what we need to get things to work as expected. There are still many issues we want to resolve but it is tuned based on what we currently have. The different game styles and difficulty levels are a small indication of what we know make some of the biggest differences in how the game plays, the chances you get, etc. but that is just a surface level glimpse at it.

    The game isn't random but it is less 2 dimensional than it once was with more factors and increased weights on factors.

    Remember the days when people said attributes don't matter in the game? (and there are still people that do) and then you have people in this thread complaining that they can't deke all the time unless they have the builds that are capable of it. Not sure what else to say there if the evaluation for success is different.

    We get that everyone always wants the game to be more fun for them. We are listening. Changes we make are never off the cuff, they are always with intent -- there are just a lot of factors that go into those decisions so it isn't a surprise when we don't please everyone with every change we make.

    Funny video and I understand the analogy.

    I also remember you answering me before and I thank you again for taking more time to have this dialogue.

    I think at the end of the day, I really want to go back to playing NHL but I just cant enjoy the product. I dont know how else to voice it but I feel like doing so is impotant nonetheless because it is the only game I have ever looked forward to each year and my hiatus of playing it is growing heavier with each year. I played the beta again this year and i REALLY loved the new EASHL customization and I think this is a HUGE step in the right direction....it was in fact what made it painfully difficult to not buy the game again this year because I really wanted to go unlock that stuff and have fun with the eashl league. BUT...the gameplay...just felt horrible again. At least on defense....It felt better on offense but still not that great.

    Maybe all that weight and factors play too heavy a role and leaves the user with a sense of lack of control over the outcome of the game. Some of the same things come up from various users including users who previously could not agree on anything. The TPS is heavy. The TPS without rhe puck especially. The older games felt better. Whatever that feeling was based on is hard to pinpoint with accuracy but I feel like despite its more 2 dimensional nature...it felt more natural to play it using a controller. Games like flappy birds are as 2 dimensional as they can be yet they are super fun and addictive. The physics are probably not that realistic if you ask a scientist but the FEEL was good.....thats my analogy.

    I also get that some users love the current direction of the game. I dont get it frankly, and I am amazed when I check comments on facebook and see some people praising just how great the game is. So I get that different strokes for different folks and I dont envy your decision making process.

    I also understand that we tend to oversimplify your job with the coding and testing aspects of it. The reason I have been more serious about numbers is I always felt like your team had access and used these numbers to make decisions while the users trying to express concerns are told to come up with video proofs which is not always easy. There is also the fact that no video can "explain the feel" of a game and its controls. How many times have you watched a video of an upcoming game and think it would be crap yet played it and it just felt so good....or vice versa.

    I am not lying when I say that all my friends stopped buying the game and all the other guys I have on my friend list who used to play almost nothing but NHL are no longer ever playing NHL (dont know if they buy it or not) I can only assume that my sample is no coincidence and that this phenomenon occurs more broadly.

    What are the solutions? Clearly you believe in your product and design and I dont think you seem too intent on doing a 180 on major features like TPS. I can respect that. However, I still hope that at some points, your stats will show that its time for a change and that you will recall those of us who have been proposing a different type of flow to your game.

    I think that a proper Vision control would go a long way in improving the flow of the game. Multiple dressing rooms would help restore some popularity in clubs. Perhaps tweaks to attributes would also be in order. I do notice that playing offline always seems so much smoother than in EASHL. I assume because the players have higher skating stats, unless its purely connectivity related.

    Thanks again for sharing your views and opinions and keeping the dialogue going.

  • Workin_OT wrote: »
    The game controls well and FEELS good when you have the puck. 45 cuts, 90 cuts, stride dekes, RS deking all FEEL good to control. You have complete control over those things, they require specific inputs and respond well.

    I actually don't think the game feels good or controls well when you have the puck at low speeds. Starting and stopping is still clunky. Players turn the wrong way, or weirdly shift their weight in one direction before moving in the direction you're telling them to. Just doesn't feel smooth at all, and certainly doesn't feel like you're controlling NHL-level skaters.
  • NHLDev wrote: »
    This discussion got lost in the old forums but comparing the old skating is a bit tough as VC back then wasn't realistic at all. There was no commitment in pivots because you could skate at almost full speed horizontally across your skate blades. I get the argument that this should just be fun and who cares about realism but that was the choice made when TPS was introduced to advance the product and fix a lot of other things missing from the game (for example, accountability when skating, reasons for pivots to matter, etc.). It is fine to want a more arcade game but VC wasn't removed, it just has some limitations based on how players can skate at speed.

    I actually think the updates to skating this year and the VC on defense gives you fairly good control to retain facing. I worked closely with an engineer on it calling out peoples issues with accidental pivots on the rush due to puck prediciton and how it was trying to keep facing the puck, angles that back cross overs were allowed at, etc.. The changes there plus the ability to exit out of animations early when your player has the ability so you aren't forced to a pivot if you change your mind early enough are all helpful changes.

    We understand that it is possible to strafe and we have had these discussion the forums. That was the intent of Precision skating, trying to find a way to give that control at slower speeds -- could it be better, certainly, but there is a different between execution and intent. It is easy for all of us to say this should be better and it is another thing to do it while preserving the other pieces that have a good impact.

    In these clips, there is a reason why the defender isn't just strafing across the ice facing the puck. They skate forward or backwards keeping the puck in front of them the best they can but they can't face it at the exact angle if they want to be above a certain speed really. In the Nyquist goal, he gets the opening for the final shot purely because the defender has to choose where to skate and has to pivot. If he could just defend by strafing back and forth and still contain him, why wouldn't he?




    On the :19 second mark of the Nyqvist goal I would like to make an observation.

    Stopping on a dime. I get what you are saying about trying to create an environment where there has to be some kind of pivoting balance between actually moving on ice and kind of just gliding around without physics.

    Why is the stopping on a dime and restarting the other way so nerfed?
  • NHLDev wrote: »
    This discussion got lost in the old forums but comparing the old skating is a bit tough as VC back then wasn't realistic at all. There was no commitment in pivots because you could skate at almost full speed horizontally across your skate blades. I get the argument that this should just be fun and who cares about realism but that was the choice made when TPS was introduced to advance the product and fix a lot of other things missing from the game (for example, accountability when skating, reasons for pivots to matter, etc.). It is fine to want a more arcade game but VC wasn't removed, it just has some limitations based on how players can skate at speed.

    I actually think the updates to skating this year and the VC on defense gives you fairly good control to retain facing. I worked closely with an engineer on it calling out peoples issues with accidental pivots on the rush due to puck prediciton and how it was trying to keep facing the puck, angles that back cross overs were allowed at, etc.. The changes there plus the ability to exit out of animations early when your player has the ability so you aren't forced to a pivot if you change your mind early enough are all helpful changes.

    We understand that it is possible to strafe and we have had these discussion the forums. That was the intent of Precision skating, trying to find a way to give that control at slower speeds -- could it be better, certainly, but there is a different between execution and intent. It is easy for all of us to say this should be better and it is another thing to do it while preserving the other pieces that have a good impact.

    In these clips, there is a reason why the defender isn't just strafing across the ice facing the puck. They skate forward or backwards keeping the puck in front of them the best they can but they can't face it at the exact angle if they want to be above a certain speed really. In the Nyquist goal, he gets the opening for the final shot purely because the defender has to choose where to skate and has to pivot. If he could just defend by strafing back and forth and still contain him, why wouldn't he?




    I agree Ben with the bold part. However, I simply fail to see how VC cannot be implemented with the current TPS. VC does not equal automatically floating sideways in an unrealistic fashion. Pivots, weight and momentum can still easily function along with VC. All it does is allow a player to move around while still facing the puck. Don't see why you think VC has to negate physics to be implemented. A player can rotate his lower body to allow movement while the upper body is still facing the puck. Goalies do it all the time, why can't defenders?
  • NHLDev wrote: »
    This discussion got lost in the old forums but comparing the old skating is a bit tough as VC back then wasn't realistic at all. There was no commitment in pivots because you could skate at almost full speed horizontally across your skate blades. I get the argument that this should just be fun and who cares about realism but that was the choice made when TPS was introduced to advance the product and fix a lot of other things missing from the game (for example, accountability when skating, reasons for pivots to matter, etc.). It is fine to want a more arcade game but VC wasn't removed, it just has some limitations based on how players can skate at speed.

    I actually think the updates to skating this year and the VC on defense gives you fairly good control to retain facing. I worked closely with an engineer on it calling out peoples issues with accidental pivots on the rush due to puck prediciton and how it was trying to keep facing the puck, angles that back cross overs were allowed at, etc.. The changes there plus the ability to exit out of animations early when your player has the ability so you aren't forced to a pivot if you change your mind early enough are all helpful changes.

    We understand that it is possible to strafe and we have had these discussion the forums. That was the intent of Precision skating, trying to find a way to give that control at slower speeds -- could it be better, certainly, but there is a different between execution and intent. It is easy for all of us to say this should be better and it is another thing to do it while preserving the other pieces that have a good impact.

    In these clips, there is a reason why the defender isn't just strafing across the ice facing the puck. They skate forward or backwards keeping the puck in front of them the best they can but they can't face it at the exact angle if they want to be above a certain speed really. In the Nyquist goal, he gets the opening for the final shot purely because the defender has to choose where to skate and has to pivot. If he could just defend by strafing back and forth and still contain him, why wouldn't he?




    I agree Ben with the bold part. However, I simply fail to see how VC cannot be implemented with the current TPS. VC does not equal automatically floating sideways in an unrealistic fashion. Pivots, weight and momentum can still easily function along with VC. All it does is allow a player to move around while still facing the puck. Don't see why you think VC has to negate physics to be implemented. A player can rotate his lower body to allow movement while the upper body is still facing the puck. Goalies do it all the time, why can't defenders?

    Also, why is tight turning at low speed nerfed as well?

    I'm asking out of general curiosity not to be a jerk.
  • sgiz1
    537 posts Member
    edited November 2016
    All responses seem to be geared towards proving realism, but.. nobody is questioning what you are trying to accomplish, we understand you are after realism.

    The issue is realism has had an unintended consequence, it's less fun to play.

    Of course this depends on game modes heavily, offline gamers in particular aren't affected.

    HUT and VS are to some degree.

    However EASHL/OTP are the most affected as that is server based online gaming. This realism is less fun, and more frustrating. Again, much support criteria has been presented to show this to be true, another would be many good players who win a lot at this game complain as well, when did that ever happen? pretty much never! Winning fixes all problems doesn't hold true in this game, many who win are fine with the game as is and claim themselves masters of TPS and the universe (doesn't take many post reads to identify those individuals). However top players in all online modes are expressing frustration and all signs point to TPS and realism.

    Are you saying it is EA's official position that regardless of public/customer opinion EA is rigid on their stance that TPS and realism is here to stay regardless, end of story?

    If that is the case be forewarned, we tried to help bring this game back to life.

    However, please consider more is not better in this case, you had a fun game pre TPS, now its a frustrating simulation (notice I didn't call it a game) games are fun, this realism sim is not fun. (of course I'm speaking in generalities, I'm sure there are plenty who enjoy it) but you know that isn't the point, the point is fewer enjoy it today than pre TPS, that is what we call thru review of the case study, we are taking this game in the wrong direction, something is wrong when it's losing fan fare when it should be atleast maintaining it ( or increasing).

    Please consider a move back to a fun game, what are the possibilities of an EASHL only game mode using pre TPS mechanics?

    Call it NHL11 EASHL remastered!!!
  • NHLDev wrote: »
    This discussion got lost in the old forums but comparing the old skating is a bit tough as VC back then wasn't realistic at all. There was no commitment in pivots because you could skate at almost full speed horizontally across your skate blades. I get the argument that this should just be fun and who cares about realism but that was the choice made when TPS was introduced to advance the product and fix a lot of other things missing from the game (for example, accountability when skating, reasons for pivots to matter, etc.). It is fine to want a more arcade game but VC wasn't removed, it just has some limitations based on how players can skate at speed.

    I actually think the updates to skating this year and the VC on defense gives you fairly good control to retain facing. I worked closely with an engineer on it calling out peoples issues with accidental pivots on the rush due to puck prediciton and how it was trying to keep facing the puck, angles that back cross overs were allowed at, etc.. The changes there plus the ability to exit out of animations early when your player has the ability so you aren't forced to a pivot if you change your mind early enough are all helpful changes.

    We understand that it is possible to strafe and we have had these discussion the forums. That was the intent of Precision skating, trying to find a way to give that control at slower speeds -- could it be better, certainly, but there is a different between execution and intent. It is easy for all of us to say this should be better and it is another thing to do it while preserving the other pieces that have a good impact.

    In these clips, there is a reason why the defender isn't just strafing across the ice facing the puck. They skate forward or backwards keeping the puck in front of them the best they can but they can't face it at the exact angle if they want to be above a certain speed really. In the Nyquist goal, he gets the opening for the final shot purely because the defender has to choose where to skate and has to pivot. If he could just defend by strafing back and forth and still contain him, why wouldn't he?




    The thing is some defenders in the NHL succeed much better than others at skating backward, strafing and getting in a better position. Mind you that the defense in those videos would have the option to strafe and I bet they could but as soon as they commit the offensive player would cut in against them and leave them flat foot. its the whole mind game and I think the player is doing what is the safest by keeping the player to the outside or in the 2v1s to prevent the pass / deke across the middle of the net and instead just give the goalie a clean shot with lower angle.

    I feel like these small plays become a chore in the nhl as the player can literally just come straight at you instead of being forced to the outside. because you have little tools to deal with a forward coming closer to you while in the nhl this would be a garanteed puck loss as id just push against your body and force you off the puck or kick the puck etc. Not having these tools force me to awkwardly try to poke (risking a trip) or lift stick(risking a high stick due to bad angle) or a hit (risking to bounce off or just miss because going from backward to forward to hit is super awkward)
  • NHLDev wrote: »
    This discussion got lost in the old forums but comparing the old skating is a bit tough as VC back then wasn't realistic at all. There was no commitment in pivots because you could skate at almost full speed horizontally across your skate blades. I get the argument that this should just be fun and who cares about realism but that was the choice made when TPS was introduced to advance the product and fix a lot of other things missing from the game (for example, accountability when skating, reasons for pivots to matter, etc.). It is fine to want a more arcade game but VC wasn't removed, it just has some limitations based on how players can skate at speed.

    I actually think the updates to skating this year and the VC on defense gives you fairly good control to retain facing. I worked closely with an engineer on it calling out peoples issues with accidental pivots on the rush due to puck prediciton and how it was trying to keep facing the puck, angles that back cross overs were allowed at, etc.. The changes there plus the ability to exit out of animations early when your player has the ability so you aren't forced to a pivot if you change your mind early enough are all helpful changes.

    We understand that it is possible to strafe and we have had these discussion the forums. That was the intent of Precision skating, trying to find a way to give that control at slower speeds -- could it be better, certainly, but there is a different between execution and intent. It is easy for all of us to say this should be better and it is another thing to do it while preserving the other pieces that have a good impact.

    In these clips, there is a reason why the defender isn't just strafing across the ice facing the puck. They skate forward or backwards keeping the puck in front of them the best they can but they can't face it at the exact angle if they want to be above a certain speed really. In the Nyquist goal, he gets the opening for the final shot purely because the defender has to choose where to skate and has to pivot. If he could just defend by strafing back and forth and still contain him, why wouldn't he?




    You've definitely tried to improve it the last couple years, but it still is not close to where it needs to be.

    It still FEELS clunky as ****.

    A feeling of clunkiness in a video game is probably one of the worst things possible.

    There is still a lot of physical mobility that one can do IRL on skates that is absent from your current models or require clunky controller inputs such as constant tapping on the joystick.

    Allow for easier strafing/facing and make it FEEL as good/smooth/responsive as 45 and 90 cuts and the fun factor of this game goes up tenfold.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.