only to be beaten by an untouchable deke, pretty much like the hold your stick out to the side bubble, that we all have learned to love ...?
Dekes are not untouchable. There is no bubble. If you feel this way, you're not lining up your hits right. I've seen plenty of guys get laid out mid-deke. The same goes for holding your stick out. Neither of those make you invulnerable.
Considering you're a forward playing D in this case, perhaps your pokes are less effective in the defensive zone? But I agree, the puck carrier should have at least fumbled the puck after that poke.
Until video games become so virtualized that we're actually playing with a stick in our living room instead of a controller, it's NEVER going to be exactly like real hockey. They are obviously limited to how real it can appear based upon current technology and the limitations of the code. Don't forget that it's just entertainment and meant to be a fun video game. That's a whole other discussion though because I had more fun playing much less realistic hockey games in the past.
I see there's a lot of good posts on how to play positional D and of course it would have been a more solid play to glide with the attacker in this specific situation.
And playing a game you do most certainly have to adapt to the way the mechanics of the game works.
But that is not my point.
Problem with this game is it leaves you feel somewhat cheated by the game like OP obviously does here.
So do a lot of other people and thats why they won't bother to play the game anymore.
I think the feeling of being cheated by the game, is what turns people away from it.
Since I am in desperate need of a daily hockey-fix, I am adapting as hard as I can and will not turn away from this game until 18 hit the shelves.
But I have no problem seeing why many people do.
Spillgal is the only one who gets it. To sum it up this game is not hockey. In real hockey that puck is knocked away 100% of the time. But this isn't real hockey, just some bastardized version that somewhat looks like hockey. The sooner people realize that the better.
But what spillgal stated was all true. It's only because of the way this game is designed that we have to play in a way that is often counter to what's true in real hockey.
This is the way it has always been and always will be. The game is getting better and is certainly more realistic than it has been in yesteryears, but it is never going to be like real life.
Video games have always been and always will be about learning what works and what doesn't and using that knowledge, plus 'video game skill', to your advantage, especially in competitive games like NHL.
In this case, buddy was the last man back, went for a big 'home run' poke check, was too close to the puck for that to work and got walked.
The sooner people stop trying to blame the game for plays like this and start blaming themselves the less angry you'll get and the better you'll become.
Think of it this way: Imagine you could loop this exact play over and over and over again inch for inch, but you would have free will to move your player and defend however you wanted each time.
Is there not multiple other ways, than what we see in the video, of controlling your player that would result in making a successful defensive play?
The answer is clearly yes.
Therefore, to conclude, how can you possibly blame the game on plays like this when it is you who made the wrong play?
The game's not perfect and there are certainly things that are out of your control, but stop blaming the game and start being accountable, eh buds'?
Until video games become so virtualized that we're actually playing with a stick in our living room instead of a controller, it's NEVER going to be exactly like real hockey. They are obviously limited to how real it can appear based upon current technology and the limitations of the code. Don't forget that it's just entertainment and meant to be a fun video game. That's a whole other discussion though because I had more fun playing much less realistic hockey games in the past.
I agree with you to an extent but I gotta call ****. The local Pittsburgh Dave & Busters opened up roughly around 2000. They have a multi-player racing game called Daytona USA Racing that was present on Opening Day. It's 2017 and Daytona Racing is still big part of D&B. Go crash your race car into the mountain. Now does the car physically pass through the mountain OR does the car sustain Damage and then react/drive according to the Damage it has sustained?
Yes Yes I know can't compare Racing game to Hockey game but to say that the Technology is limited is ****. The Technology is there, EA just won't ever implement that Technology. IF EA would code for FULL COLLISION Detection (according to them makes the game NO FUN...so it CAN BE CODED INTO THE GAME), you probably won't have sticks PHYSICALLY PASSING THROUGH OTHER sticks, etc etc etc!
How many game problems are caused by the fact that S**T is ALLOWED TO PHYSICALLY PASS THROUGH OTHER OBJECTS??
*My poke check PHYSICALLY PASSES THOUGH the puck HOWEVER makes contact with your skate causing a tripping penalty....****?? Maybe...just MAYB, if Stick connected with puck in the First Place, I wouldn't have hit your skate and got a tripping penalty!
*You deke right in front of me, your stick and the puck PHYSICALLY PASSES THROUGH my players legs as you maintain control of the puck, you're now on the other side of me and pulling away and get a clean snipe goal....****?? Maybe...just MAYBE, if your stick and the puck would have REACTED ACCORDINGLY (collided with my body) to my body...you wouldn't have been given that chance to snipe that goal
See what I mean?? So how is it a Race game from 2000 can have Solid Object on Solid Object collision detection and the collision cause damage and react accordingly but we can't have that same type of collision in a Hockey game made in the year 2017??
The sooner people stop trying to blame the game for plays like this and start blaming themselves the less angry you'll get and the better you'll become.
And the sooner problems like this stopped being defended, and we all come together and say this isn't good enough EA, the sooner things like this are likely to be addressed.
Of course he could have played that differently.
You can always do something different. Insert a clip of a human goalie sitting in butterfly, square to a slow trickling shot, and the game initiates a kick save animation that moves the pad out of the way, or worse, the puck going through the goalie. Well, he could have tried to cover it up, or poke check it, or do a pad stack, or get out of position then dive back across the net. Doesn't make it right.
I've complained about this limitation to defense for years. The stick is a hologram until you hit RB, and even then, it's only a physical object at the maximum extension. That isn't acceptable anymore. We are past the point of a transition year where something like that gets fixed. Defenders need better tools, and this is a prime example why.
Ice read some comments , not all of them yet . I watched the video .
As someone who aggressively plays in the neutral zone and holding the blue line and has tremendous success doing so , I enjoyed watching that clip. Was very similar to what i would have done .
I'm pretty surprised you're this late into the year and are unaware of the shortcummings of the game . the cold hard truth is offence gets away with a ton of stuff and it's very forgiving compared to defence.
I believe a poster did say he lets incidental contact play out a lot on D . that is an extremely effective and boring way to play D but it yields the most consistent results . in Eashl if in don't pick defensive D and the winger I go up against picks dangler, playmaker I have to adjust my playstyle Becuase the puck control on those builds makes EVERYTHING involved with pokechecking and stick lifting a gamble (unless you picked defensive D or two way)
Anywho. Time to finish reading all the comments and laugh at the people who think they know what they are talking about .
*You deke right in front of me, your stick and the puck PHYSICALLY PASSES THROUGH my players legs as you maintain control of the puck, you're now on the other side of me and pulling away and get a clean snipe goal....****?? Maybe...just MAYBE, if your stick and the puck would have REACTED ACCORDINGLY (collided with my body) to my body...you wouldn't have been given that chance to snipe that goal
Ironcially, there is a slider that controls how much "incidental" contact to apply when your stick, skates and puck pass through another player's limb or stick.
However, it's conveniently set low for Preset 3 (Competitive) sliders which is what is used for all online modes.
And the sooner problems like this stopped being defended, and we all come together and say this isn't good enough EA, the sooner things like this are likely to be addressed.
I don't disagree that some contact with the stick or puck should have occurred in that clip. If that's what you and the OP are look in to hear then yes. Some disruption should have happened. But... and I've had it happen to me in real life in a simular scenario, whose to say if that disruption does occur that the puck clears the zone. Maybe that puck actually flips up and hits the puck carriers leg and still continues into the zone.
Look I get it. The problem I have with this whole thing is how he complains he got burned. Disruption or no disruption of the puck, he flew the zone and the puck carrier walked in untouched. To me personally, that's a bad play for last man back and it's his own fault. I'd state the same if it happen to me.
Look we're discussing two different things here.
1. Whether or not that was a risky play as the last man back.
2. How the physics of this game is coded.
I'd say that was a risky play, and this time it blew up in his face.
But then again with the direction and timing of this poke, it should have made contact with the puck.
Turn it around, would anyone feel bad if that poke made it?
I know I wouldn't, if I was going in on offence like that.
But it feels very unlogical that this poke doesn't do any harm.
The physics of this game needs a serious overhaul, to take away that feelin of being cheated, that are driving people away.
Of corse the poke should have dislodged the puck. The attacker is oblivious to the fact he's going to get stick checked but still comes away unscathed.
Poke mechanic is so stupid. It's overpowered when attacking from behind with skates in the poke line but weak and a penalty button when the forward skates close enough to kiss the defence.
There should newer be a tripping penalty if there is a clear shot at the puck.
Looks like OP was Rammed to me.
Of corse the poke should have dislodged the puck. The attacker is oblivious to the fact he's going to get stick checked but still comes away unscathed.
Poke mechanic is so stupid. It's overpowered when attacking from behind with skates in the poke line but weak and a penalty button when the forward skates close enough to kiss the defence.
There should newer be a tripping penalty if there is a clear shot at the puck.
Looks like OP was Rammed to me.
Again, this isn't the game's fault or Rammers fault, it is the users fault.
Set this exact play up inch for inch in a loop and give the defender free will to defend it however he wishes and there would be multiple different ways to defend it and actually be successful.
With that fact out of the way, it therefore becomes the users fault for making a play that was not successful, not the game's fault and not ice tilts fault (for the crazies).
And in no way am I trying to say that stick on puck/stick on stick collisions, like shown in the clip, shouldn't disrupt the puck carrier or that the current defensive tools are adequate or that there shouldn't be more added.
At least in COGS's clip his stick should've made contact with the puck carriers stick causing the puck to come loose but that's not EA physics.
I missed this earlier but you're absolutely right. Problem is that because there was no direct contact with the puck it is still sliding forward with the puck carrier and COGS has lost body position to do anything about it. Best he could hope for is that the guy drops his stick but we know that doesn't happen in this game like that.
I'm not telling you phantom pokes never happen. I'm just saying this clip is a bad example of it.
Of corse the poke should have dislodged the puck. The attacker is oblivious to the fact he's going to get stick checked but still comes away unscathed.
Poke mechanic is so stupid. It's overpowered when attacking from behind with skates in the poke line but weak and a penalty button when the forward skates close enough to kiss the defence.
There should newer be a tripping penalty if there is a clear shot at the puck.
Looks like OP was Rammed to me.
Again, this isn't the game's fault or Rammers fault, it is the users fault.
Set this exact play up inch for inch in a loop and give the defender free will to defend it however he wishes and there would be multiple different ways to defend it and actually be successful.
With that fact out of the way, it therefore becomes the users fault for making a play that was not successful, not the game's fault and not ice tilts fault (for the crazies).
And in no way am I trying to say that stick on puck/stick on stick collisions, like shown in the clip, shouldn't disrupt the puck carrier or that the current defensive tools are adequate or that there shouldn't be more added.
I have had this happen to me while backskating and trying to maintain a gap on the puck carrier, but oops, I was 4 pixels too close to the guy when I hit poke check, so instead of hitting a puck easily within my reach, I go through it and miss completely and then burned while my guy loses speed and comits to an animation, or worse, get a tripping penalty.
I hope the rumored defensive skill stick helps in these situations, but then again, I don't have much hope given how well new EA mechanics work. Anyone use stick lift tie up?
This is likely going to be the second game I skip in 4 years.
The sooner people stop trying to blame the game for plays like this and start blaming themselves the less angry you'll get and the better you'll become.
And the sooner problems like this stopped being defended, and we all come together and say this isn't good enough EA, the sooner things like this are likely to be addressed.
Of course he could have played that differently.
You can always do something different. Insert a clip of a human goalie sitting in butterfly, square to a slow trickling shot, and the game initiates a kick save animation that moves the pad out of the way, or worse, the puck going through the goalie. Well, he could have tried to cover it up, or poke check it, or do a pad stack, or get out of position then dive back across the net. Doesn't make it right.
I've complained about this limitation to defense for years. The stick is a hologram until you hit RB, and even then, it's only a physical object at the maximum extension. That isn't acceptable anymore. We are past the point of a transition year where something like that gets fixed. Defenders need better tools, and this is a prime example why.
Welcome to videogames in a nutshell. There's always going to be a case for stuff like this. Especially in sports titles. You adjust and learn to play with what you got, like everyone else has to...or you do what the title of the thread is.
The sooner people stop trying to blame the game for plays like this and start blaming themselves the less angry you'll get and the better you'll become.
And the sooner problems like this stopped being defended, and we all come together and say this isn't good enough EA, the sooner things like this are likely to be addressed.
Of course he could have played that differently.
You can always do something different. Insert a clip of a human goalie sitting in butterfly, square to a slow trickling shot, and the game initiates a kick save animation that moves the pad out of the way, or worse, the puck going through the goalie. Well, he could have tried to cover it up, or poke check it, or do a pad stack, or get out of position then dive back across the net. Doesn't make it right.
I've complained about this limitation to defense for years. The stick is a hologram until you hit RB, and even then, it's only a physical object at the maximum extension. That isn't acceptable anymore. We are past the point of a transition year where something like that gets fixed. Defenders need better tools, and this is a prime example why.
Welcome to videogames in a nutshell. There's always going to be a case for stuff like this. Especially in sports titles. You adjust and learn to play with what you got, like everyone else has to...or you do what the title of the thread is.
Ah, so, shutup and be happy with what you got or ****.
The sooner people stop trying to blame the game for plays like this and start blaming themselves the less angry you'll get and the better you'll become.
And the sooner problems like this stopped being defended, and we all come together and say this isn't good enough EA, the sooner things like this are likely to be addressed.
Of course he could have played that differently.
You can always do something different. Insert a clip of a human goalie sitting in butterfly, square to a slow trickling shot, and the game initiates a kick save animation that moves the pad out of the way, or worse, the puck going through the goalie. Well, he could have tried to cover it up, or poke check it, or do a pad stack, or get out of position then dive back across the net. Doesn't make it right.
I've complained about this limitation to defense for years. The stick is a hologram until you hit RB, and even then, it's only a physical object at the maximum extension. That isn't acceptable anymore. We are past the point of a transition year where something like that gets fixed. Defenders need better tools, and this is a prime example why.
Welcome to videogames in a nutshell. There's always going to be a case for stuff like this. Especially in sports titles. You adjust and learn to play with what you got, like everyone else has to...or you do what the title of the thread is.
Ah, so, shutup and be happy with what you got or ****.
I think when it comes to high level stuff like this, yeah pretty much. Being able to fluidly and accurately control how far to stretch a characters arm out from his body would be some next level **** in the industry.
The sooner people stop trying to blame the game for plays like this and start blaming themselves the less angry you'll get and the better you'll become.
And the sooner problems like this stopped being defended, and we all come together and say this isn't good enough EA, the sooner things like this are likely to be addressed.
Of course he could have played that differently.
You can always do something different. Insert a clip of a human goalie sitting in butterfly, square to a slow trickling shot, and the game initiates a kick save animation that moves the pad out of the way, or worse, the puck going through the goalie. Well, he could have tried to cover it up, or poke check it, or do a pad stack, or get out of position then dive back across the net. Doesn't make it right.
I've complained about this limitation to defense for years. The stick is a hologram until you hit RB, and even then, it's only a physical object at the maximum extension. That isn't acceptable anymore. We are past the point of a transition year where something like that gets fixed. Defenders need better tools, and this is a prime example why.
Welcome to videogames in a nutshell. There's always going to be a case for stuff like this. Especially in sports titles. You adjust and learn to play with what you got, like everyone else has to...or you do what the title of the thread is.
Ah, so, shutup and be happy with what you got or ****.
I think when it comes to high level stuff like this, yeah pretty much. Being able to fluidly and accurately control how far to stretch a characters arm out from his body would be some next level **** in the industry.
Agreed. We just have to work within the parameters of what the video game interpretation of hockey allows us to
Replies
Dekes are not untouchable. There is no bubble. If you feel this way, you're not lining up your hits right. I've seen plenty of guys get laid out mid-deke. The same goes for holding your stick out. Neither of those make you invulnerable.
And playing a game you do most certainly have to adapt to the way the mechanics of the game works.
But that is not my point.
Problem with this game is it leaves you feel somewhat cheated by the game like OP obviously does here.
So do a lot of other people and thats why they won't bother to play the game anymore.
I think the feeling of being cheated by the game, is what turns people away from it.
Since I am in desperate need of a daily hockey-fix, I am adapting as hard as I can and will not turn away from this game until 18 hit the shelves.
But I have no problem seeing why many people do.
This is the way it has always been and always will be. The game is getting better and is certainly more realistic than it has been in yesteryears, but it is never going to be like real life.
Video games have always been and always will be about learning what works and what doesn't and using that knowledge, plus 'video game skill', to your advantage, especially in competitive games like NHL.
In this case, buddy was the last man back, went for a big 'home run' poke check, was too close to the puck for that to work and got walked.
The sooner people stop trying to blame the game for plays like this and start blaming themselves the less angry you'll get and the better you'll become.
Think of it this way: Imagine you could loop this exact play over and over and over again inch for inch, but you would have free will to move your player and defend however you wanted each time.
Is there not multiple other ways, than what we see in the video, of controlling your player that would result in making a successful defensive play?
The answer is clearly yes.
Therefore, to conclude, how can you possibly blame the game on plays like this when it is you who made the wrong play?
The game's not perfect and there are certainly things that are out of your control, but stop blaming the game and start being accountable, eh buds'?
I agree with you to an extent but I gotta call ****. The local Pittsburgh Dave & Busters opened up roughly around 2000. They have a multi-player racing game called Daytona USA Racing that was present on Opening Day. It's 2017 and Daytona Racing is still big part of D&B. Go crash your race car into the mountain. Now does the car physically pass through the mountain OR does the car sustain Damage and then react/drive according to the Damage it has sustained?
Yes Yes I know can't compare Racing game to Hockey game but to say that the Technology is limited is ****. The Technology is there, EA just won't ever implement that Technology. IF EA would code for FULL COLLISION Detection (according to them makes the game NO FUN...so it CAN BE CODED INTO THE GAME), you probably won't have sticks PHYSICALLY PASSING THROUGH OTHER sticks, etc etc etc!
How many game problems are caused by the fact that S**T is ALLOWED TO PHYSICALLY PASS THROUGH OTHER OBJECTS??
*My poke check PHYSICALLY PASSES THOUGH the puck HOWEVER makes contact with your skate causing a tripping penalty....****?? Maybe...just MAYB, if Stick connected with puck in the First Place, I wouldn't have hit your skate and got a tripping penalty!
*You deke right in front of me, your stick and the puck PHYSICALLY PASSES THROUGH my players legs as you maintain control of the puck, you're now on the other side of me and pulling away and get a clean snipe goal....****?? Maybe...just MAYBE, if your stick and the puck would have REACTED ACCORDINGLY (collided with my body) to my body...you wouldn't have been given that chance to snipe that goal
See what I mean?? So how is it a Race game from 2000 can have Solid Object on Solid Object collision detection and the collision cause damage and react accordingly but we can't have that same type of collision in a Hockey game made in the year 2017??
And the sooner problems like this stopped being defended, and we all come together and say this isn't good enough EA, the sooner things like this are likely to be addressed.
Of course he could have played that differently.
You can always do something different. Insert a clip of a human goalie sitting in butterfly, square to a slow trickling shot, and the game initiates a kick save animation that moves the pad out of the way, or worse, the puck going through the goalie. Well, he could have tried to cover it up, or poke check it, or do a pad stack, or get out of position then dive back across the net. Doesn't make it right.
I've complained about this limitation to defense for years. The stick is a hologram until you hit RB, and even then, it's only a physical object at the maximum extension. That isn't acceptable anymore. We are past the point of a transition year where something like that gets fixed. Defenders need better tools, and this is a prime example why.
As someone who aggressively plays in the neutral zone and holding the blue line and has tremendous success doing so , I enjoyed watching that clip. Was very similar to what i would have done .
I'm pretty surprised you're this late into the year and are unaware of the shortcummings of the game . the cold hard truth is offence gets away with a ton of stuff and it's very forgiving compared to defence.
I believe a poster did say he lets incidental contact play out a lot on D . that is an extremely effective and boring way to play D but it yields the most consistent results . in Eashl if in don't pick defensive D and the winger I go up against picks dangler, playmaker I have to adjust my playstyle Becuase the puck control on those builds makes EVERYTHING involved with pokechecking and stick lifting a gamble (unless you picked defensive D or two way)
Anywho. Time to finish reading all the comments and laugh at the people who think they know what they are talking about .
However, it's conveniently set low for Preset 3 (Competitive) sliders which is what is used for all online modes.
I don't disagree that some contact with the stick or puck should have occurred in that clip. If that's what you and the OP are look in to hear then yes. Some disruption should have happened. But... and I've had it happen to me in real life in a simular scenario, whose to say if that disruption does occur that the puck clears the zone. Maybe that puck actually flips up and hits the puck carriers leg and still continues into the zone.
Look I get it. The problem I have with this whole thing is how he complains he got burned. Disruption or no disruption of the puck, he flew the zone and the puck carrier walked in untouched. To me personally, that's a bad play for last man back and it's his own fault. I'd state the same if it happen to me.
1. Whether or not that was a risky play as the last man back.
2. How the physics of this game is coded.
I'd say that was a risky play, and this time it blew up in his face.
But then again with the direction and timing of this poke, it should have made contact with the puck.
Turn it around, would anyone feel bad if that poke made it?
I know I wouldn't, if I was going in on offence like that.
But it feels very unlogical that this poke doesn't do any harm.
The physics of this game needs a serious overhaul, to take away that feelin of being cheated, that are driving people away.
Poke mechanic is so stupid. It's overpowered when attacking from behind with skates in the poke line but weak and a penalty button when the forward skates close enough to kiss the defence.
There should newer be a tripping penalty if there is a clear shot at the puck.
Looks like OP was Rammed to me.
Again, this isn't the game's fault or Rammers fault, it is the users fault.
Set this exact play up inch for inch in a loop and give the defender free will to defend it however he wishes and there would be multiple different ways to defend it and actually be successful.
With that fact out of the way, it therefore becomes the users fault for making a play that was not successful, not the game's fault and not ice tilts fault (for the crazies).
And in no way am I trying to say that stick on puck/stick on stick collisions, like shown in the clip, shouldn't disrupt the puck carrier or that the current defensive tools are adequate or that there shouldn't be more added.
I missed this earlier but you're absolutely right. Problem is that because there was no direct contact with the puck it is still sliding forward with the puck carrier and COGS has lost body position to do anything about it. Best he could hope for is that the guy drops his stick but we know that doesn't happen in this game like that.
I'm not telling you phantom pokes never happen. I'm just saying this clip is a bad example of it.
I have had this happen to me while backskating and trying to maintain a gap on the puck carrier, but oops, I was 4 pixels too close to the guy when I hit poke check, so instead of hitting a puck easily within my reach, I go through it and miss completely and then burned while my guy loses speed and comits to an animation, or worse, get a tripping penalty.
I hope the rumored defensive skill stick helps in these situations, but then again, I don't have much hope given how well new EA mechanics work. Anyone use stick lift tie up?
This is likely going to be the second game I skip in 4 years.
Welcome to videogames in a nutshell. There's always going to be a case for stuff like this. Especially in sports titles. You adjust and learn to play with what you got, like everyone else has to...or you do what the title of the thread is.
Ah, so, shutup and be happy with what you got or ****.
I think when it comes to high level stuff like this, yeah pretty much. Being able to fluidly and accurately control how far to stretch a characters arm out from his body would be some next level **** in the industry.