EA Forums - Banner

BETA TUNER DETAILS + FEEDBACK THREAD

Replies

  • EA_Roger wrote: »

    I believe this is simply due to the proliferation of the 'beta was better' meme.

    Wow. Posts like these to offer you proof, provided by an EA employee no less, and the massive decision to roll back to a 5 month old tuner still isn't enough to convince you..... I think all this negates what you think otherwise no changes would be made, especially massive ones.
  • EA_Roger wrote: »

    Thanks Roger. Maybe you and I can have a bromance sticker? lol
  • However, I cannot help but remember when the game launched the feedback was unanimous. Almost every social media platform had people saying this was the best game in years. Even I was totally convinced and purchased the game even though 18 confirmed I was over and done with this series.

    The revamping of the skating system along with some other fundamental changes to the engine for NHL 19 levelled the playing field. All of the meta's from 15,16,17 & 18 were seemingly gone because the player base was adjusting to the new skating, hitting and DSS improvements - not to mention the massive adjustment to the poke check - trpping relationship.

    Once everyone adjusted and learned how to skate - the skill gap exploded. Of course, this adaptation took a while because the skating engine was built from the ground up.

    In the meantime - EA adjusted lots of little things that made things way better: DSS release no longer tripped, CPU A.I. was completely muted (vs 4 frames of initial reaction), smoothing of the blend on pivots.

    So everyone assumed that the changes to the game were due to these tuner adjustments, but in my opinion - it was simply the skill gap.

    Now - the offline stuff I can't speak to. Offline guys say 1.00 is better than 1.03 but I don't think those are for the same reasons that the HUT/OVP/EASHL community believes. One could say the adjustments to pivots introduced some kind of issue with skating that I don't see - and that may still be the case - but regardless - the meta will return online.
    Sure you can argue that people won't praise a 5 month old game anymore, but again, the fact that EA reverts back to the beta is more than enough to tell me that there was enough people clamoring for it. Almost everywhere I see comments that say the beta was better and more fun. Just check out twitter and facebook and see for yourself.

    The big wigs over at EA are making a massive change by reverting to a 5 month old tuner. Doesn't that say enough for you??


    It says a lot for me. EA is making a good HR move here. And the reality is that the beta tuner may just be what everyone says it is - i'll be wrong and everyone will be enjoying the hockey they love. That would be a good outcome for the betterment of the series.

    Yes it did take awhile. It took exactly 3 tuners, or, if you prefer, tuner 1.03. Your explosion happened withing more or less 3 days of that tuner. I also like to call it the NHL 18 tuner. Coincidence? Maybe.
  • EA_Roger
    1483 posts EA Community Manager
    EA_Roger wrote: »

    Thanks Roger. Maybe you and I can have a bromance sticker? lol

    I'm in!
    9d2lwef10b70.png

    As much as I like talking about myself, we should get back to the subject at hand!
  • KidShowtime1867
    1379 posts Member
    edited January 2019
    EA_Roger wrote: »

    I believe this is simply due to the proliferation of the 'beta was better' meme.

    Wow. Posts like these to offer you proof, provided by an EA employee no less, and the massive decision to roll back to a 5 month old tuner still isn't enough to convince you..... I think all this negates what you think otherwise no changes would be made, especially massive ones.

    The first and most common complaint from the 'beta was better' crowd was skating.

    Everyone said "The beta had more explosiveness, better skating, more agility etc". You can even see in the survey much of the criticism was about skating because of what questions they asked.

    Ben then had to come in these forums and explain that despite the claims 'skating reverted back to 18' - the skating engine was literally brand new and had to further explain tuner adjustments involving skating surrounded a pivot - and that was it.

    The tweet above says MORE people wanted the beta back than those who just wanted fixes for skating.

    So - if the original primary reason for the beta reversion is NOT the primary reason that a 'majority' want the 'beta' back - What does that mean?
  • EA_Roger wrote: »

    I believe this is simply due to the proliferation of the 'beta was better' meme.

    Wow. Posts like these to offer you proof, provided by an EA employee no less, and the massive decision to roll back to a 5 month old tuner still isn't enough to convince you..... I think all this negates what you think otherwise no changes would be made, especially massive ones.

    The first and most common complaint from the 'beta was better' crowd was skating.

    Everyone said "The beta had more explosiveness, better skating, more agility etc". You can even see in the survey much of the criticism was about skating because of what questions they asked.

    Ben then had to come in these forums and explain that despite the claims 'skating reverted back to 18' - the skating engine was literally brand new and had to further explain tuner adjustments involving skating surrounded a pivot - and that was it.

    The tweet above says MORE people wanted the beta back than those who just wanted fixes for skating.

    So - if the original primary reason for the beta reversion is NOT the primary reason that a 'majority' want the 'beta' back - What does that mean?

    It mean EA got enough feedback to make the educated decision that reverting back to the beta (for a given time) was the best decision to make. That is all I need to know, and should be enough for you as well. After a week, EA will collect that info and make decisions/changes required and we will see from there.
  • EA_Roger wrote: »

    I believe this is simply due to the proliferation of the 'beta was better' meme.

    Wow. Posts like these to offer you proof, provided by an EA employee no less, and the massive decision to roll back to a 5 month old tuner still isn't enough to convince you..... I think all this negates what you think otherwise no changes would be made, especially massive ones.

    The first and most common complaint from the 'beta was better' crowd was skating.

    Everyone said "The beta had more explosiveness, better skating, more agility etc". You can even see in the survey much of the criticism was about skating because of what questions they asked.

    Ben then had to come in these forums and explain that despite the claims 'skating reverted back to 18' - the skating engine was literally brand new and had to further explain tuner adjustments involving skating surrounded a pivot - and that was it.

    The tweet above says MORE people wanted the beta back than those who just wanted fixes for skating.

    So - if the original primary reason for the beta reversion is NOT the primary reason that a 'majority' want the 'beta' back - What does that mean?

    It mean EA got enough feedback to make the educated decision that reverting back to the beta (for a given time) was the best decision to make. That is all I need to know, and should be enough for you as well. After a week, EA will collect that info and make decisions/changes required and we will see from there.

    It is enough for me. I mean, we have no choice now, right? lmao

    At the end of the day, we have a developer making a game for the sport we love - and they're doing their hardest to get it right.

    As gamers, that's all we can ask for and this move should be recognized across the industry as a sign that developers really do listen.
  • EA_Roger wrote: »

    I believe this is simply due to the proliferation of the 'beta was better' meme.

    Wow. Posts like these to offer you proof, provided by an EA employee no less, and the massive decision to roll back to a 5 month old tuner still isn't enough to convince you..... I think all this negates what you think otherwise no changes would be made, especially massive ones.

    The first and most common complaint from the 'beta was better' crowd was skating.

    Everyone said "The beta had more explosiveness, better skating, more agility etc". You can even see in the survey much of the criticism was about skating because of what questions they asked.

    Ben then had to come in these forums and explain that despite the claims 'skating reverted back to 18' - the skating engine was literally brand new and had to further explain tuner adjustments involving skating surrounded a pivot - and that was it.

    The tweet above says MORE people wanted the beta back than those who just wanted fixes for skating.

    So - if the original primary reason for the beta reversion is NOT the primary reason that a 'majority' want the 'beta' back - What does that mean?

    It mean EA got enough feedback to make the educated decision that reverting back to the beta (for a given time) was the best decision to make. That is all I need to know, and should be enough for you as well. After a week, EA will collect that info and make decisions/changes required and we will see from there.

    It is enough for me. I mean, we have no choice now, right? lmao

    At the end of the day, we have a developer making a game for the sport we love - and they're doing their hardest to get it right.

    As gamers, that's all we can ask for and this move should be recognized across the industry as a sign that developers really do listen.

    I totally agree. In fact, I am more than impressed with their decision and have convinced me they are committed to listening, providing, and improving the game. There might be growing pains, ie, those that don't agree to going back to the beta, but in the end, it should make for a better game. We should all win in the end, I would think. From NHL 18 and prior I was not convinced they were listening and instead were just sticking to an old formula. So just that alone tells me alot about their seriousness this year and that they just may end up making a game for the sport I absolutely love. I still have hope.
  • EA_Roger wrote: »

    I believe this is simply due to the proliferation of the 'beta was better' meme.

    No doubt in my mind that people talked themselves into it
  • jiajji wrote: »
    EA_Roger wrote: »

    I believe this is simply due to the proliferation of the 'beta was better' meme.

    No doubt in my mind that people talked themselves into it

    Have a look at this quote from a user on Operation Sports the day trial access went live for NHL 19. He basically predicted how this would play out:

    dlKC2Ih.png
  • jiajji wrote: »
    EA_Roger wrote: »

    I believe this is simply due to the proliferation of the 'beta was better' meme.

    No doubt in my mind that people talked themselves into it

    Have a look at this quote from a user on Operation Sports the day trial access went live for NHL 19. He basically predicted how this would play out:

    dlKC2Ih.png

    Can we have a link and not something that looked edited?
    If you see Grammar or Spelling errors. I am starting to experience the long term effects of ten plus concussions.
  • KidShowtime1867
    1379 posts Member
    edited January 2019
    jiajji wrote: »
    EA_Roger wrote: »

    I believe this is simply due to the proliferation of the 'beta was better' meme.

    No doubt in my mind that people talked themselves into it

    Have a look at this quote from a user on Operation Sports the day trial access went live for NHL 19. He basically predicted how this would play out:

    dlKC2Ih.png

    Can we have a link and not something that looked edited?

    https://forums.operationsports.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2049514641&postcount=11


    Here's a link to the full thread: https://forums.operationsports.com/forums/ea-sports-nhl/938375-nhl-19-trial-ea-access-subscribers-available-now-post-your-impressions-here.html

    I think it's worth a read. It even opened my eyes to the changes reported after people got 1.01 for the first time.
  • jiajji wrote: »
    EA_Roger wrote: »

    I believe this is simply due to the proliferation of the 'beta was better' meme.

    No doubt in my mind that people talked themselves into it

    Have a look at this quote from a user on Operation Sports the day trial access went live for NHL 19. He basically predicted how this would play out:

    dlKC2Ih.png

    Can we have a link and not something that looked edited?

    https://forums.operationsports.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2049514641&postcount=11


    Here's a link to the full thread: https://forums.operationsports.com/forums/ea-sports-nhl/938375-nhl-19-trial-ea-access-subscribers-available-now-post-your-impressions-here.html

    I think it's worth a read. It even opened my eyes to the changes reported after people got 1.01 for the first time.

    Thank you...Man I need a new monitor those asterisks looked like quotation marks.
    If you see Grammar or Spelling errors. I am starting to experience the long term effects of ten plus concussions.
  • Operation sports used to be the place to go to talk about the game, youd get advice rather than demanding the game be tuned to your skillset
  • VeNOM2099
    3178 posts Member
    edited January 2019
    jiajji wrote: »
    VeNOM2099 wrote: »
    I don't believe the 1.00 tuner will eliminate the current meta. You're going to see more trips and and a more dangerous DSS (I believe the removal of tripping on the release of DSS will now be reverted) resulting in a slew of penalties that will initially come as a breath of fresh air to the beta crowd.

    However, once it's realized that the changes to skating were minimal (and we are giving up many quality of life improvements on defense to realize this) and the skilled players adapt to the reversion - the meta will return and you'll see the same complaints.

    The current meta does not revolve around poor poke checking/poke checking mechanics. The biggest issue most have with this game is the re-introduction of the hitting bubble which plays a huge determining factor in puck ragging. The other issue would be the inept ability of goaltenders to stop the SS "snipe" anywhere from the bottom of the circle to just inside the blue line in some cases and the backhand to forehand move that works 95% of the time with correct timing.

    Personally, I didnt even have a problem with the poke checking when the game was in beta - I used it in situations where the likelihood of a penalty was slim and in areas where I thought there was a chance for a penalty I was able to use physicality to my advantage. With the game in it's current state, physicality is non existent in areas when it should work as intended and with the inconsistency of poke at times it often leaves the D man no choice but incidental contact and body position (which is also hard as the puck carrier often has more agility than the D man without the puck).

    This will be the greatest week in gaming that I've had in months, to actually be able to play hockey again. AHHHH what a feeling :D

    I don't agree with this. Not completely. I feel the physical aspect of hockey for this game is just right. Defense is about positioning foremost, not body checks or poking or stick lifting. Where the d-men are losing against puck handlers is in their mobility, which was significantly nerfed (especially the bigger bodied d-men like the Defensive D-man). Another aspect of Defense that saw a drawback is in the DSS which was made more prone to cause a penalty than it was at first. As a Defensive Defender, I use my positioning and DSS exclusively to mitigate the offense and I have a lot of success doing that. Except when my opponent starts to spin around like a top with no penalty to his puck control or skating.

    I get upset when defenders are running around, mashing poke check or looking for a big hit all the time. Not only does it take you out of position, but now your defensive partner is left in the lurch trying to cover for YOU and his position as well.

    The #1 problem I see with people playing defense in this game is they have no idea how to play without the puck. So they go around chasing the puck; poking, stick lifting, hitting. My coach always said: "if you cover your zone, if you cover the open man, you limit the offense. And then the puck comes to YOU, you don't have to chase it."

    This is why a lot of good d men are using smaller builds to compensate for the skating, and because with good positioning you still can play physical.

    From what a lot of defensemen in LG told me, it's because they hate how sluggish they skate and can't keep up with puck handlers dipsy-doodling all over the ice. Again, their view of defense is aggressive, 1 on 1 tight man play. Which is why often, at the lower tiers, they allow so many open man chances in front of the net. At the higher LG tiers, the better teams are very good at 5 man or "trap" defense where they just clog the ice as much as possible near their own neutral zone to cause turnovers.

    No one wants to play positional defense because "it doesn't work against top players". Which is partially true. Especially considering how much aggressive defense works in this game if done right by the entire team. Also positional defense is "boring"... :/
  • NHLDev
    1680 posts EA NHL Developer
    jiajji wrote: »
    EA_Roger wrote: »

    I believe this is simply due to the proliferation of the 'beta was better' meme.

    No doubt in my mind that people talked themselves into it

    Have a look at this quote from a user on Operation Sports the day trial access went live for NHL 19. He basically predicted how this would play out:

    dlKC2Ih.png

    One other side note from that quote is that one of the things in the tuning was to adjust fatigue recovery at play stoppages to be more realistic. Proper use of 4 lines is in a pretty good spot with the most recent tuners. Players will see that the fatigue recovery in the rollback will allow less realistic use of lines.

    That change is also something that would have impacted players thoughts on skating if they don't manage both their offensive and defensive lines very well.
  • jiajji wrote: »
    Operation sports used to be the place to go to talk about the game, youd get advice rather than demanding the game be tuned to your skillset

    And this is nothing more than your opinion.
  • jiajji wrote: »
    EA_Roger wrote: »

    I believe this is simply due to the proliferation of the 'beta was better' meme.

    No doubt in my mind that people talked themselves into it

    Have a look at this quote from a user on Operation Sports the day trial access went live for NHL 19. He basically predicted how this would play out:

    dlKC2Ih.png

    I can see why he would think that, at that particular time. However, D were more agile than they are now which IMO is more than enough to keep up with carriers and play D. Defense is much more than poke checking and nowhere does he talk about how physical play was a very viable option as well a stick lifts (which were insanely op) at the time. He doesn't mention how moving the puck was more essential than previous years either. Not much to convince me in his post. He also specifies it is for HUT, which is not a global norm for every mode. Pointless for EASHL imo.

    I don't see how any of what he said was a prediction though.
  • NHLDev wrote: »
    jiajji wrote: »
    EA_Roger wrote: »

    I believe this is simply due to the proliferation of the 'beta was better' meme.

    No doubt in my mind that people talked themselves into it

    Have a look at this quote from a user on Operation Sports the day trial access went live for NHL 19. He basically predicted how this would play out:

    dlKC2Ih.png

    One other side note from that quote is that one of the things in the tuning was to adjust fatigue recovery at play stoppages to be more realistic. Proper use of 4 lines is in a pretty good spot with the most recent tuners. Players will see that the fatigue recovery in the rollback will allow less realistic use of lines.

    That change is also something that would have impacted players thoughts on skating if they don't manage both their offensive and defensive lines very well.

    I agree, but isn't that less relevant for EASHL? Or was EASHL fatigue not properly adjusted at release? From what I remember, EASHL fatigue/stamina was ok and seemed fine.

  • I don't see how any of what he said was a prediction though.


    "I do fear though once players adapt to the game it's going to be stupidly hard to stop them defensively as they will be able to dance around you, as you have to be set up in very good position to poke check"

    Many of the complaints (not all) surrounded players being able to 'rag' the puck, 'dangle' their way through the neutral zone, 'curl' to the forehand/backhand and maintain control of the puck without being poked - "immune to hitting" is the term I believe you used yourself.



Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

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