EA Forums - Banner

NHL 20 Patch Details April 3rd

image
Check out our April 3rd patch details here.

Do Endings of Games Every Feel Predetermined?

Replies

  • Sounds like you need a lead that is going to prioritize responsibility better. Funny how buying packs and new cards are released on time like clockwork but core gameplay issues present in 15 are still in 17.

    A yearly cycle is tough, and personally I wish it would be abandoned so they could finish their projects. But let's not pretend like they havnt been on the same build for three years now.

    There needs to be accountability from the publisher and developers. Only way they are going to change is if we as the consumer provides harsh criticism like you see so often on these boards.

    You can make as many excuses as you want but at the end of the day you need to provide a product that is worth the 60 dollar price tag. If you cant then accept that you are going to hear about the games short comings. And unfortunately there are many...more so than other games that are rushed.
  • We need a diaper mode...a napkin mode...for the poopy pants and cry babies.
  • Bmh245
    905 posts Member
    DeejNYLV wrote: »
    joefitz22 wrote: »
    DeejNYLV wrote: »
    Soft goals happen all the time in the NHL. Get over it.

    I agree soft goals happen IRL but we all know how bad collision detection is with this game/series. We all know how wonky/delayed the controls are with this game/series

    I agree there are definitely problems with collision detection in this game, but so many posts are b**thurt people who say things like "then my goalie let in a shot he totally should have had, clearly the game is working against me." Which is ridiculous. Soft goals should absolutely be part of the game. Everytime my AI goalie let's in some glass, I watch the replay frame by frame and most of the time, the goalie is off on the angle, takes the puck off the equipment wrong and it trickles in. Just like real life.

    How often is Carey Price "off on the angle" IRL? How often does he give up goals from outside the circles? Almost never. But in this game, 94+ goalies regularly give up goals from outside the circles, and myriad soft goals, even while they save point-blank one-timers with ease.

    In the real NHL, shots from outside the circles with no lateral movement go in just 3% of the time -- 1 in every 33 shots. And that includes clean slap shots, strong wristers, etc. The probability that a weak, bad-angle wrister -- like the one in the clip below -- will go in is therefore significantly lower, probably closer to 1 in 300. But soft goals happen a lot more often than that in this game, while slap shots and wristers from above the circles go in far more often than 1 in 20 or 1 in 10 times. People are absolutely justified in complaining about the goalies in this game -- the way they're tuned is unrealistic, and helps weak players at the expense of stronger ones.



  • Dixonyu
    649 posts Member
    When you are stuck relying on the game and it's mechanics as most of it is automated, it sure can feel predetermined, especially wether it's bad luck or just lag nothing goes your way, weak goals, no puck pick ups , whiffs or missing open nets and the mechanics seem to work well for your opponent, then well for you , then your opponent... Lots of game feel as if the first period is bad, 2nd mediocre, the the third everything goes your way, then the last couple of minutes are a crap shoot .
  • You should play against your friend hundreds of times and when you feel its predetermined tell them to pull their goalie. If you can't score then you would be correct.
  • bryta47
    373 posts Member
    edited March 2017
    B-Bunny wrote: »
    Game development ends up being a game of putting rugs over cracks in the floor and hanging paintings over holes in the wall. That's not with NHL in particular, that's VIDEOGAMES as a whole. They all do it. Some can do it better than others but it's not what makes the game, it's literally trying to cover your tracks.
    Yeah, but if you keep doing that, especially with a yearly release "copy+paste game" series like NHL, your house is inevitable going to come tumbling down on you. More so because every time EA is trying to cover up a hole i the floor with one of those old rugs, they accidentally smash the hammer through the window or tip over grandmas old vase, shattering it.

    On topic: Could reasons we see more weird stuff in the last minute be that it is longer and players, and ofc goalies, are more affected by fatigue at the end of the game?
    Post edited by bryta47 on
  • I've got exactly same feeling watching the real world game and the team that I want to win.
    Especially when my team is loosing.. suddenly every goal from the other side feels so cheap, unfair and just outcome of the icetilt :)
  • bryta47
    373 posts Member
    I've got exactly same feeling watching the real world game and the team that I want to win.
    Especially when my team is loosing.. suddenly every goal from the other side feels so cheap, unfair and just outcome of the icetilt :)
    Know that feeling!
  • You should play against your friend hundreds of times and when you feel its predetermined tell them to pull their goalie. If you can't score then you would be correct.

    Funny you should mention Play a Friend...cause starting with NHL08 and going up to mid 2011 (he's in the Air Force and got deployed overseas mid 2011) my best friend and I would always play a 7 game series against each other. Over the years the games have been all over the radar in terms of competitiveness NOT talking about our Individual compete level, talking about the Game itself....and yes he and I have both missed empty nets during that time (kinda learned not to aim with an empty net now....lol).

    I posted this Feb. 11th! My brother came over (my wife, our daughter, his wife, their son went to a indoor swimming Bday party). We played a few games (PLAY NOW). We both used the Pens (ALL THINGS EQUAL across the board...more individual skill based). Funny how you can tell by playing a game vs the same team at how lopsided the AI is for one team.
    First game: My Murray let up 2 goals on 5 shots, his Murray let up 0 goals on 11 shots (1st period). His Malkin (AI mind you) jumps up and catches a clearing attempt, my Malkin (AI mind you) can't even pick up a loose puck 1' to the left of him. Yes I know we can take control of the goalies here but: His Murray goes behind the net and stops my dump in, my Murray goes behind the net and stops his dump in, in the NO play Zone (I did not take control of him)
    Next game: My Hornqvist tips a point shot and it goes in (no review), his Crosby (almost mirrored what my Hornqvist did) tips a point shot and it goes in (waved off). My Letang makes a helluva play at the blue line to keep my PP alive, his Letang turns his back on a pass (which leads to a 2 on 0 and a goal/3-1 lead for me)

    Ok, it's offline and we didn't mess with the sliders, both teams (according to EAs attributes and such) are EQUAL in every category but the AI played differently for each team...WHY??
  • I've got exactly same feeling watching the real world game and the team that I want to win.
    Especially when my team is loosing.. suddenly every goal from the other side feels so cheap, unfair and just outcome of the icetilt :)

    Therein lies the problem DJ. IRL if a player holds RS to the side along the boards, the puck and stick DO NOT DISAPPEAR through the boards. IRL the puck doesn't magically physically pass through a leg and continue on it's path uninterrupted.
    I've played games where I lost because the GWG was a direct result of the puck physically passing through my players leg and went into the net. Where the tying goal gets poke checked through my goalies pads. I won a game because the puck physically passed through the goalies glove. I won a game (GMC13 game that I use as example all the time) where the goalie has a seizure (stand up, all 4s, sit on ****, lay on back) and despite the puck being underneath the goalie, still manages to find its way into the net. It "feels so cheap, unfair and just outcome of the icetilt" LOL

  • So those are bugs Joe.
    That's not something devs build in the engine intentionally.
    That's something that needs to be fixed for sure and It is annoying that it takes so long.
    Instead of solving tasks like this and improve the core HOCKEY engine, the devs are challenged to sell more copies to casuals that just "heard" about hockey.
    Now before we speak about their incompetence and how they should loose their jobs, imagine how frustrating it must be for them, knowing all the flaws from inside. Well, at least for some of them.
  • DeejNYLV
    317 posts Member
    Bmh245 wrote: »
    DeejNYLV wrote: »
    joefitz22 wrote: »
    DeejNYLV wrote: »
    Soft goals happen all the time in the NHL. Get over it.

    I agree soft goals happen IRL but we all know how bad collision detection is with this game/series. We all know how wonky/delayed the controls are with this game/series

    I agree there are definitely problems with collision detection in this game, but so many posts are b**thurt people who say things like "then my goalie let in a shot he totally should have had, clearly the game is working against me." Which is ridiculous. Soft goals should absolutely be part of the game. Everytime my AI goalie let's in some glass, I watch the replay frame by frame and most of the time, the goalie is off on the angle, takes the puck off the equipment wrong and it trickles in. Just like real life.

    How often is Carey Price "off on the angle" IRL? How often does he give up goals from outside the circles? Almost never. But in this game, 94+ goalies regularly give up goals from outside the circles, and myriad soft goals, even while they save point-blank one-timers with ease.

    In the real NHL, shots from outside the circles with no lateral movement go in just 3% of the time -- 1 in every 33 shots. And that includes clean slap shots, strong wristers, etc. The probability that a weak, bad-angle wrister -- like the one in the clip below -- will go in is therefore significantly lower, probably closer to 1 in 300. But soft goals happen a lot more often than that in this game, while slap shots and wristers from above the circles go in far more often than 1 in 20 or 1 in 10 times. People are absolutely justified in complaining about the goalies in this game -- the way they're tuned is unrealistic, and helps weak players at the expense of stronger ones.



    Using the best goalie in the world is a bad example, but fine let's use that. In 2013 according to allhabs.com Price gave up 24 goals from 20 feet out or further, the longest being 48 feet. This in 39 games played. Roughly two long-distance goals every three games. That's not uncommon. Have you watched the Dallas Stars this year? Kari Lehtonen and Anti Niemi have let in scores of goals from outside the circles and sharp angles. Also, after a busy night in the NHL (usually Tues and Thurs) go to NHL.com and watch the highlights of every goal. A large % of them will hit off some part of the goalie on their way into the net.

    Also, how many times on these forums have people written about "I was in perfect position and it still went in!" without providing video? Confirmation bias is rampant in video games as players never see themselves at fault. Are there issues? Of course. Odds are though, when a goal goes in, it went in because the player played poorly.

    Goalies are off their angles due to screens fairly often but due to the prevalence of blocked shots it's not as noticeable. The EA NHL series, while incorporating shot blocks, doesn't have nearly the number of blocked shots and misses that the actual league does. If it did, players would riot about never getting shots through. So, despite a commitment to creating a "sim" style game, it is always going to be a slight bit more exaggerated than real life.

    Anyway, I enjoyed your post, and look forward to any response you have.
  • Instead of solving tasks like this and improve the core HOCKEY engine, the devs are challenged to sell more copies to casuals that just "heard" about hockey.
    Now before we speak about their incompetence and how they should loose their jobs, imagine how frustrating it must be for them, knowing all the flaws from inside. Well, at least for some of them.

    That's why you can never just put the blame on the devs. They are likely being told what direction to take this game into from higher ups. That's the real problem, though. The higher ups want a game made for casuals and that's never going to translate into a good, hockey title.

    For every casual you please you **** off 5 long-time, hardcore players. If the scales tip and you lose the hardcore crowd, the game is dead. No game survives off a casual fan base. Even MMOs, it's the few hardcore people who pump the real money into the games. And if you hope to turn a casual into a hardcore fan of the series then you need to make a solid title. Any game riddled with bugs is eventually going to wear on the fan base - both casual and hardcore.

  • Bmh245
    905 posts Member
    edited March 2017
    DeejNYLV wrote: »
    Bmh245 wrote:
    In the real NHL, shots from outside the circles with no lateral movement go in just 3% of the time -- 1 in every 33 shots. And that includes clean slap shots, strong wristers, etc. The probability that a weak, bad-angle wrister -- like the one in the clip below -- will go in is therefore significantly lower, probably closer to 1 in 300. But soft goals happen a lot more often than that in this game, while slap shots and wristers from above the circles go in far more often than 1 in 20 or 1 in 10 times. People are absolutely justified in complaining about the goalies in this game -- the way they're tuned is unrealistic, and helps weak players at the expense of stronger ones.


    Using the best goalie in the world is a bad example, but fine let's use that. In 2013 according to allhabs.com Price gave up 24 goals from 20 feet out or further, the longest being 48 feet. This in 39 games played. Roughly two long-distance goals every three games. That's not uncommon.

    Using Price is not a bad example. Price's base card in this game is a 92. My goalie -- the one that gave up the goal in the clip above, and the one that gets beat regularly from outside the circles -- is a 94. In other words, he's better than Price. So Price is the best comparison, only my goalie should be playing better in this game than Price does IRL.

    As for the substance, 20 feet out is not a "long-distance goal." The faceoff dots are 20 feet from the goal line. If you're shooting from there, that's prime scoring territory, and no one's complaining about goalies giving up goals from there. What I'm talking about is the fact that goalies are regularly beaten from twice that distance (or more). The blue line is 64 feet from the goal line. But high-rated goalies are beaten by clean slappers or cross-grain wristers from a few feet inside the blue line all the time in this game, even though someone like Price, by your account, gave up no goals from more than 48 ft. in 2013.

    I'll just say it again: if an average NHL goalie is facing a shot from above the circles (and that includes shots from the boards that are outside the circles), he's going to save that shot 97% of the time. If it's an exceptional NHL goalie (like the one on my team), he should save it 98-99% of the time. Even accepting that those percentages need to be adjusted downward in this game to account for shorter game time, it's simply unrealistic for goalies to be beaten as often as they are from distance on routine slappers and wristers.
  • Bmh245
    905 posts Member
    edited March 2017
    double post
    Post edited by Bmh245 on
  • Soft goals do happen IRL. Agreed. Personally I don't play goalie so I can't vouch but it must absolutely suck when you play the angle properly but your goalie animation lifts your arm too high and the puck goes into your 6 hole and there's literally nothing you could do because limb control doesn't exist.

    74f9c3_ab5036289eb5489289063e1948f4831b.gif


    That is the biggest problem with goalies is their terrible lack of limb movements. We don't have a blocker high, middle, low. We have blocker middle and that is that. Same goes for glove side. I'd ask that we have free range movement on the arms and such but knowing our luck it would create crazy animations looking completely unreal. But goalies seriously need about 15-20 new save animations for situations that should warrant better results.

  • Bmh245 wrote: »
    DeejNYLV wrote: »
    Bmh245 wrote:
    In the real NHL, shots from outside the circles with no lateral movement go in just 3% of the time -- 1 in every 33 shots. And that includes clean slap shots, strong wristers, etc. The probability that a weak, bad-angle wrister -- like the one in the clip below -- will go in is therefore significantly lower, probably closer to 1 in 300. But soft goals happen a lot more often than that in this game, while slap shots and wristers from above the circles go in far more often than 1 in 20 or 1 in 10 times. People are absolutely justified in complaining about the goalies in this game -- the way they're tuned is unrealistic, and helps weak players at the expense of stronger ones.


    Using the best goalie in the world is a bad example, but fine let's use that. In 2013 according to allhabs.com Price gave up 24 goals from 20 feet out or further, the longest being 48 feet. This in 39 games played. Roughly two long-distance goals every three games. That's not uncommon.

    Using Price is not a bad example. Price's base card in this game is a 92. My goalie -- the one that gave up the goal in the clip above, and the one that gets beat regularly from outside the circles -- is a 94. In other words, he's better than Price. So Price is the best comparison, only my goalie should be playing better in this game than Price does IRL.

    As for the substance, 20 feet out is not a "long-distance goal." The faceoff dots are 20 feet from the goal line. If you're shooting from there, that's prime scoring territory, and no one's complaining about goalies giving up goals from there. What I'm talking about is the fact that goalies are regularly beaten from twice that distance (or more). The blue line is 64 feet from the goal line. But high-rated goalies are beaten by clean slappers or cross-grain wristers from a few feet inside the blue line all the time in this game, even though someone like Price, by your account, gave up no goals from more than 48 ft. in 2013.

    I'll just say it again: if an average NHL goalie is facing a shot from above the circles (and that includes shots from the boards that are outside the circles), he's going to save that shot 97% of the time. If it's an exceptional NHL goalie (like the one on my team), he should save it 98-99% of the time. Even accepting that those percentages need to be adjusted downward in this game to account for shorter game time, it's simply unrealistic for goalies to be beaten as often as they are from distance on routine slappers and wristers.

    Not to mention screens and puck movement. I don't know what those goals the real life Price let in looked like, but I'd be curious to know if it was off a pass, or if there was someone standing right in front of him screening.

    You can see in the video you posted BMH, there doesn't need to be a screen for a goalie to flub a shot basically right at him. Meanwhile, I've seen an AI goalie buried behind 3 bodies so that you can barely see him still somehow reach his glove outside of the pile of bodies and snag a puck he could not possibly have seen
  • Bmh245 wrote: »
    DeejNYLV wrote: »
    Bmh245 wrote:
    In the real NHL, shots from outside the circles with no lateral movement go in just 3% of the time -- 1 in every 33 shots. And that includes clean slap shots, strong wristers, etc. The probability that a weak, bad-angle wrister -- like the one in the clip below -- will go in is therefore significantly lower, probably closer to 1 in 300. But soft goals happen a lot more often than that in this game, while slap shots and wristers from above the circles go in far more often than 1 in 20 or 1 in 10 times. People are absolutely justified in complaining about the goalies in this game -- the way they're tuned is unrealistic, and helps weak players at the expense of stronger ones.


    Using the best goalie in the world is a bad example, but fine let's use that. In 2013 according to allhabs.com Price gave up 24 goals from 20 feet out or further, the longest being 48 feet. This in 39 games played. Roughly two long-distance goals every three games. That's not uncommon.

    Using Price is not a bad example. Price's base card in this game is a 92. My goalie -- the one that gave up the goal in the clip above, and the one that gets beat regularly from outside the circles -- is a 94. In other words, he's better than Price. So Price is the best comparison, only my goalie should be playing better in this game than Price does IRL.

    As for the substance, 20 feet out is not a "long-distance goal." The faceoff dots are 20 feet from the goal line. If you're shooting from there, that's prime scoring territory, and no one's complaining about goalies giving up goals from there. What I'm talking about is the fact that goalies are regularly beaten from twice that distance (or more). The blue line is 64 feet from the goal line. But high-rated goalies are beaten by clean slappers or cross-grain wristers from a few feet inside the blue line all the time in this game, even though someone like Price, by your account, gave up no goals from more than 48 ft. in 2013.

    I'll just say it again: if an average NHL goalie is facing a shot from above the circles (and that includes shots from the boards that are outside the circles), he's going to save that shot 97% of the time. If it's an exceptional NHL goalie (like the one on my team), he should save it 98-99% of the time. Even accepting that those percentages need to be adjusted downward in this game to account for shorter game time, it's simply unrealistic for goalies to be beaten as often as they are from distance on routine slappers and wristers.

    Not to mention screens and puck movement. I don't know what those goals the real life Price let in looked like, but I'd be curious to know if it was off a pass, or if there was someone standing right in front of him screening.

    You can see in the video you posted BMH, there doesn't need to be a screen for a goalie to flub a shot basically right at him. Meanwhile, I've seen an AI goalie buried behind 3 bodies so that you can barely see him still somehow reach his glove outside of the pile of bodies and snag a puck he could not possibly have seen

    this...
  • It is called momentum interfering with player skill. Momentum controls how the AI reacts and it also controls your fate if you are going to win or lose.
  • So those are bugs Joe.
    That's not something devs build in the engine intentionally.
    That's something that needs to be fixed for sure and It is annoying that it takes so long.
    Instead of solving tasks like this and improve the core HOCKEY engine, the devs are challenged to sell more copies to casuals that just "heard" about hockey.
    Now before we speak about their incompetence and how they should loose their jobs, imagine how frustrating it must be for them, knowing all the flaws from inside. Well, at least for some of them.

    Well said and valid point, Yes I know the Devs don't put them in their intentionally but the fact that they haven't been fixed or are still alive and well in the game 2,3,4,5 years later is what annoys most of us. 'm not someone that calls for heads to roll...I did spend time in the Worlds Finest Navy....I understand there is a Chain of Command that goes UP and that sheet usually rolls DOWN hill....lol!
This discussion has been closed.

Howdy, Stranger!

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