EA Forums - Banner

"Just the same" guys?

Replies

  • jrago73 wrote: »
    I think to most people "just the same" means they still didn't address all the things you have wanted fixed over the years, such as glitch goals.

    'glitch goals' don't exist. Goals that come at the result of incorrectly playing the defensive meta can seem like 'glitch goals' but the reality is that good players know how to expose those who poorly play the meta and it can seem like you're getting the same goals scored on you all the time.

    That said, the NHL 21 technical test does feel 'just the same' with minor tweaks to poke check and the new dekes.

    I understand that it's not a true representation of the final build, but the lack of seeing anything new in terms of camera angles, menu style, EASHL lobby options, etc makes it seem so incredibly stale.
  • B_Bunny
    888 posts Moderator
    They want a revolutionary addition every year. The analogs moving your hockey stick. EASHL. HUT. To be fair, it's been a while since something brand new really stuck and wow'd everyone.
    PSN: B-Bunny
  • B-Bunny wrote: »
    They want a revolutionary addition every year. The analogs moving your hockey stick. EASHL. HUT. To be fair, it's been a while since something brand new really stuck and wow'd everyone.

    I agree, but this year with flat-footed players is really a wow- for me, but then again, I dont seem to be like other's.
  • B-Bunny wrote: »
    They want a revolutionary addition every year. The analogs moving your hockey stick. EASHL. HUT. To be fair, it's been a while since something brand new really stuck and wow'd everyone.

    That's just not true.

    People want things that have plagued this franchise for years to be fixed / brought back.

    It's not revolutionary to ask that we see something other than a helicopter or the very top of section 300 after every. single. whistle. It's literally been like this for 3 or 4 years now.

    It's not revolutionary to ask that in a game that involves 12 other people - 1 person should NOT be allowed to pause the game (even if it's only once and only for 30 seconds). When you play 4 or 5 games a night, that's potentially 5 minutes of just staring at a crowd with a black box that says 'waiting for users to resume'. When you combine the atrocity that is the menu system... it's painful to play more than 1 game.

    It's not revolutionary to ask that CPU players recognize basic plays such as 2-on-1 or 3-on-2 and get in to scoring position rather than blindly going to 'cover' for a player that's a few pixels out of the position they're supposed to be in.

    It's not revolutionary to ask for the ability to have teams in franchise mode controlled by remote humans. Especially considering it was built-in to a previous edition. (again, for those who want to parrot EA's line of 'nobody played it' - the popularity of a mode depends entirely on its usability; which the first GM Connected mode performed terribly)

    It's not revolutionary to ask that people who abuse mechanics such as LT have it nerfed without impacting other elements of the game; ie: Reducing backskating speed en masse versus reducing backskating speed if you have the puck.

    These aren't revolutionary asks. And anyone who's played the NHL21 technical test will likely tell you a lot of these changes are what you'd see from a patch - which makes you wonder why they would refuse to fix these things earlier in NHL20's release cycle.

    Now, I understand that some of the changes required work to be done on the engine - things that aren't easy (or damn near impossible) to 'patch' in. Of course, I also keep in mind that although some things could be fixed with a patch, marketing would rather the team hold on to those changes in order for them to market the next game - especially if the next game is lacking a real revolutionary feature.


  • jrago73 wrote: »
    I think to most people "just the same" means they still didn't address all the things you have wanted fixed over the years, such as glitch goals.

    'glitch goals' don't exist. Goals that come at the result of incorrectly playing the defensive meta can seem like 'glitch goals' but the reality is that good players know how to expose those who poorly play the meta and it can seem like you're getting the same goals scored on you all the time.

    That said, the NHL 21 technical test does feel 'just the same' with minor tweaks to poke check and the new dekes.

    I understand that it's not a true representation of the final build, but the lack of seeing anything new in terms of camera angles, menu style, EASHL lobby options, etc makes it seem so incredibly stale.

    Argue semantics all you want, in the NHL there isn't a shot that has 80%-100% success rate and there are plenty of people who play the game that don't like it. Call it whatever you want.
  • VeNOM2099
    3178 posts Member
    edited September 3
    B-Bunny wrote: »
    They want a revolutionary addition every year. The analogs moving your hockey stick. EASHL. HUT. To be fair, it's been a while since something brand new really stuck and wow'd everyone.

    Actually, I find that's the furthest from the truth. Hockey fans just want something that's as close to actual Hockey as possible.

    We understand that, unlike other videogames like "Halo" or "God of War", you can't just make up a new story or add more weapons, or more magic spells and call it "new". Often times, sports don't change very much from year to year. Even 100 years ago, Hockey was pretty much the same at it's core than it is now. So we get that it's hard for a company to innovate in that sense.

    But at the very least, since you can't just add things, make the effort to bring the game as close to the real thing as possible, not just graphically (because that's easy), but gameplay wise.

    Other Game Developers do that, like 2K Sports and Codemasters. Their games are not 100% true representations of the actual Sport, but every year they try to bring the gameplay closer and closer. EA seems to be the only ones that every year try to move AWAY from what makes the core sport interesting to the fans of said sport in a mad dash to grab as much coin from their users as they can. And it's not just Hockey with EA, it's all their sports. Madden plays NOTHING like actual NFL Football. Fifa plays NOOOOOOOOOOTHING like actual Futbol.

    Just make a game that plays like Ice Hockey and the fans will be happy.
  • B-Bunny wrote: »
    They want a revolutionary addition every year. The analogs moving your hockey stick. EASHL. HUT. To be fair, it's been a while since something brand new really stuck and wow'd everyone.
    At this point only people who are very out of touch with the state of the franchise are looking to be "wowed", the rest of us simply long for a hockey game that

    - is balanced between offense and defense
    - is easy to pick up and play but difficult to master - in all 3 positions (F,D G)
    - has reliable tools for each position that are easy to understand
    - has player, puck and stick physics and interactions that are a reasonable approximation of reality
    - is fun to play rather than simply mostly "work"

    Dad. Gamer. Rocker. Geek.
  • B-Bunny wrote: »
    They want a revolutionary addition every year. The analogs moving your hockey stick. EASHL. HUT. To be fair, it's been a while since something brand new really stuck and wow'd everyone.

    AI D-men that don't just stand there when someone is charging them and goalies that don't explode out of the crease for no reason isn't revolutionary...

    Why haven't you advocated more for simple things like this?
  • KidShowtime1867
    1145 posts Member
    edited September 3
    jrago73 wrote: »
    there are plenty of people who play the game that don't like it. Call it whatever you want.

    It's because they have a hard time defending it.

    Skilled players know how to pull you out of position defensively to get a high % scoring chance.

    Also - a goal is more than the shot accuracy. A goal is a culmination of a number of events, good luck and good decision making.

    So to say that there's no shot in the NHL that has an 80-100% success rate is technically true, I would argue that there are certain plays that if pulled off in succession (as the result of poor defending) result in 80-100% success rate in real life.
  • jrago73 wrote: »
    there are plenty of people who play the game that don't like it. Call it whatever you want.

    It's because they have a hard time defending it.

    Skilled players know how to pull you out of position defensively to get a high % scoring chance.

    Also - a goal is more than the shot accuracy. A goal is a culmination of a number of events, good luck and good decision making.

    So to say that there's no shot in the NHL that has an 80-100% success rate is technically true, I would argue that there are certain plays that if pulled off in succession (as the result of poor defending) result in 80-100% success rate in real life.

    I understand you but I would also counter argue with a simple "show me the real nhl player who scores with the same move on every penalty shot throughout his entire career". Yeah he drew a penalty, yay for them, but now there are no more bad plays to be made because the ice is wide open. Real life % nowhere close to the success rate of the 1 hand tuck "not glitch goal".
  • KidShowtime1867
    1145 posts Member
    edited September 3
    jrago73 wrote: »

    I understand you but I would also counter argue with a simple "show me the real nhl player who scores with the same move on every penalty shot throughout his entire career". Yeah he drew a penalty, yay for them, but now there are no more bad plays to be made because the ice is wide open. Real life % nowhere close to the success rate of the 1 hand tuck "not glitch goal".

    I agree that the one-handed tuck's success rate is too high, but I'm also of the belief that if you've allowed a skilled player to get that much open ice - it's fair game.

    It's also not exactly easy to pull off because otherwise everyone would be doing it. Although you see it a lot in 'high level' players, it's not as prominent for a majority of the games being played.
  • jrago73 wrote: »

    I understand you but I would also counter argue with a simple "show me the real nhl player who scores with the same move on every penalty shot throughout his entire career". Yeah he drew a penalty, yay for them, but now there are no more bad plays to be made because the ice is wide open. Real life % nowhere close to the success rate of the 1 hand tuck "not glitch goal".

    I agree that the one-handed tuck's success rate is too high, but I'm also of the belief that if you've allowed a skilled player to get that much open ice - it's fair game.

    It's also not exactly easy to pull off because otherwise everyone would be doing it. Although you see it a lot in 'high level' players, it's not as prominent for a majority of the games being played.

    Thats all fine and dandy unless you're playing 3's and get a questionable trip or you have a spam happy window-licker for a teammate. A bigger issue in certain game modes for sure.

  • I agree that the one-handed tuck's success rate is too high, but I'm also of the belief that if you've allowed a skilled player to get that much open ice - it's fair game.

    It's also not exactly easy to pull off because otherwise everyone would be doing it. Although you see it a lot in 'high level' players, it's not as prominent for a majority of the games being played.

    But you don't need to give a lot of room and because shafts don't count as solid objects, who really cares of there is a defender? It's always about offense offense offense, and every year defenders fall further behind

    The team needs to focus less on adding animations and moves, and put more effort into physics and ai pathing/logic
  • VeNOM2099
    3178 posts Member
    edited September 4
    jrago73 wrote: »
    there are plenty of people who play the game that don't like it. Call it whatever you want.

    It's because they have a hard time defending it.

    Skilled players know how to pull you out of position defensively to get a high % scoring chance.

    Also - a goal is more than the shot accuracy. A goal is a culmination of a number of events, good luck and good decision making.

    So to say that there's no shot in the NHL that has an 80-100% success rate is technically true, I would argue that there are certain plays that if pulled off in succession (as the result of poor defending) result in 80-100% success rate in real life.

    As a defenseman yourself, you know it's not that simple. The AI in this game has be be babysat constantly because they always want to chase the puck and get out of position.

    This is a "Standard" man to man Defensive position:

    ugtcecbooisy.jpg

    This is a "Collapsing" Defensive position:

    pt11w1hlcgjq.jpg

    And this is what EA thinks a "Collapsing" Defense is:

    kcxv8p03rrg1.jpg

    That last one is actually a representation of a screenshot of how the AI is playing defense in a "Collapsing" Strategy and "Contain" defensive pressure. The Green X is the player I'm controlling. See how I'm near the player with the puck (the Red Circle with the Black dot). So what in the "H" are my two AI teammates doing rushing him when I'm already there? So what I need to do now, is let the AI do its thing, because as you can see, the entire RIGHT side of the ice is completely open. That's not me playing bad defense, that's EA's "smarter" AI doing what it always does which is to chase the puck all the time and create "chances" to score.

    And it's not just on Defense, here's a "screenshot" of what the AI did on Offense, when I had a powerplay and set to OVERLOAD:

    yluxho6snepx.jpg

    The setup to that particular spot in time: I won the face off in the offensive zone by tying him up. My winger grabs the puck and goes to the corner. The opponent tries to rush me and hit me, so I send the puck up to the point (Green X). Now that I have possession with the D-man, I want to try to set up a cycle and try to OVERLOAD the defense as the strategy's name implies. But what does the AI of the Winger i was just controlling do? He skates up to me at the point and then just stands there for 30 seconds. He doesn't even go back to the corner where I can set up a cycle. He just stands two feet away and now I have no passing lanes. The opponent is waiting for me to try to pass to the other point man so he set up his strats to be aggressive on my point guys and I'm not risking a pass so that he can get a chance at an easy breakaway from an intercepted D2D pass. The AI has effectively locked our team's own offense.

    THIS is the smarter CPU teammates EA wants us to believe they "worked" on for NHL 21?? LOL!!

    I've seen "smarter" things covering sewer accesses. :wink:
    Post edited by VeNOM2099 on
  • jmwalsh8888
    1092 posts Member
    edited September 4
    jrago73 wrote: »

    I understand you but I would also counter argue with a simple "show me the real nhl player who scores with the same move on every penalty shot throughout his entire career". Yeah he drew a penalty, yay for them, but now there are no more bad plays to be made because the ice is wide open. Real life % nowhere close to the success rate of the 1 hand tuck "not glitch goal".

    I agree that the one-handed tuck's success rate is too high, but I'm also of the belief that if you've allowed a skilled player to get that much open ice - it's fair game.

    It's also not exactly easy to pull off because otherwise everyone would be doing it. Although you see it a lot in 'high level' players, it's not as prominent for a majority of the games being played.

    I don't like the term "glitch" goal. But you are not being fair with your assessment of the situation. Its not just the 1h tuck that is 100% (and no its not a high rate its 100% if you know what you are doing). There are MANY situations where scoring the goal against an AI goalie is 100% if you know what you are doing. In real life there is nothing even close to that. Even in open ice with all the time and space hand picked NHL stars score less than 33% of the time on a goalie.

    That being said I just kind of accept it. For one thing it equally affects both teams. Secondly its a video game. In general its all just coding to do certain actions in certain situations. Its not true learning AI. Play enough and you should learn what those things are. Its the same with AI defense. If you play enough you learn how to exploit their limitations and then all the sudden they can become easy to play against. A factor many here seem to forget. Watch elite players play against AI defense and you will see them almost never get touched.

    I don't like to call them glitch goals, they are exploit goals. but its part of the game, comes with territory of playing with AI.

    That being said, its atrocious how little improvements have been done to the AI over the past few years. In many ways its worse than ever. Although I think right now the AI offense is the best I've ever seen and finally after I've been saying this for years you can demand the AI passes in almost any situation. Used to be once you gave them the puck across the blue line they were skating it in and doing whatever they wanted regardless of what you did. Now on 2 on 1s, rather than let them skate in and put a marshmallow into the goalies stomach, I call for it last second and they pass it for easy 1timer goals in open nets.

    On defense they are about the same as always. Midway through 20 they made an update that improved how they behaved against the rush somewhat. That still seems the same.


    Back on original topic ... this is essentially the same exact game as 20. A few little tweaks. I'll say it every year until I'm proven wrong. People like to defend it and say "they have a small dev team, they don't have much time, what do you expect?".

    I expect them to give what we pay for or charge appropriately for what they do. Patches should not be full price.

    Its WAAYYYY past time for EA to see the light. Stop yearly releases on their sports titles. Full price game once, half price expansion packs each year. Work in the background to develop innovative improvements for full priced new releases every 4-5 years. I wonder if their overall revenue would even go down. How many more people would by it at release each year when its half price?

  • B_Bunny
    888 posts Moderator
    edited September 4
    B-Bunny wrote: »
    They want a revolutionary addition every year. The analogs moving your hockey stick. EASHL. HUT. To be fair, it's been a while since something brand new really stuck and wow'd everyone.

    That's just not true.

    People want things that have plagued this franchise for years to be fixed / brought back.

    It's not revolutionary to ask that we see something other than a helicopter or the very top of section 300 after every. single. whistle. It's literally been like this for 3 or 4 years now.

    It's not revolutionary to ask that in a game that involves 12 other people - 1 person should NOT be allowed to pause the game (even if it's only once and only for 30 seconds). When you play 4 or 5 games a night, that's potentially 5 minutes of just staring at a crowd with a black box that says 'waiting for users to resume'. When you combine the atrocity that is the menu system... it's painful to play more than 1 game.

    It's not revolutionary to ask that CPU players recognize basic plays such as 2-on-1 or 3-on-2 and get in to scoring position rather than blindly going to 'cover' for a player that's a few pixels out of the position they're supposed to be in.

    It's not revolutionary to ask for the ability to have teams in franchise mode controlled by remote humans. Especially considering it was built-in to a previous edition. (again, for those who want to parrot EA's line of 'nobody played it' - the popularity of a mode depends entirely on its usability; which the first GM Connected mode performed terribly)

    It's not revolutionary to ask that people who abuse mechanics such as LT have it nerfed without impacting other elements of the game; ie: Reducing backskating speed en masse versus reducing backskating speed if you have the puck.

    These aren't revolutionary asks. And anyone who's played the NHL21 technical test will likely tell you a lot of these changes are what you'd see from a patch - which makes you wonder why they would refuse to fix these things earlier in NHL20's release cycle.

    Now, I understand that some of the changes required work to be done on the engine - things that aren't easy (or damn near impossible) to 'patch' in. Of course, I also keep in mind that although some things could be fixed with a patch, marketing would rather the team hold on to those changes in order for them to market the next game - especially if the next game is lacking a real revolutionary feature.


    I honestly believe if all those things were fixed and or adjusted, we'd still be given loads of people posting that it's the same game. So I'll need to respectfully disagree.
    PSN: B-Bunny
  • B_Bunny wrote: »
    B-Bunny wrote: »
    They want a revolutionary addition every year. The analogs moving your hockey stick. EASHL. HUT. To be fair, it's been a while since something brand new really stuck and wow'd everyone.

    That's just not true.

    People want things that have plagued this franchise for years to be fixed / brought back.

    It's not revolutionary to ask that we see something other than a helicopter or the very top of section 300 after every. single. whistle. It's literally been like this for 3 or 4 years now.

    It's not revolutionary to ask that in a game that involves 12 other people - 1 person should NOT be allowed to pause the game (even if it's only once and only for 30 seconds). When you play 4 or 5 games a night, that's potentially 5 minutes of just staring at a crowd with a black box that says 'waiting for users to resume'. When you combine the atrocity that is the menu system... it's painful to play more than 1 game.

    It's not revolutionary to ask that CPU players recognize basic plays such as 2-on-1 or 3-on-2 and get in to scoring position rather than blindly going to 'cover' for a player that's a few pixels out of the position they're supposed to be in.

    It's not revolutionary to ask for the ability to have teams in franchise mode controlled by remote humans. Especially considering it was built-in to a previous edition. (again, for those who want to parrot EA's line of 'nobody played it' - the popularity of a mode depends entirely on its usability; which the first GM Connected mode performed terribly)

    It's not revolutionary to ask that people who abuse mechanics such as LT have it nerfed without impacting other elements of the game; ie: Reducing backskating speed en masse versus reducing backskating speed if you have the puck.

    These aren't revolutionary asks. And anyone who's played the NHL21 technical test will likely tell you a lot of these changes are what you'd see from a patch - which makes you wonder why they would refuse to fix these things earlier in NHL20's release cycle.

    Now, I understand that some of the changes required work to be done on the engine - things that aren't easy (or damn near impossible) to 'patch' in. Of course, I also keep in mind that although some things could be fixed with a patch, marketing would rather the team hold on to those changes in order for them to market the next game - especially if the next game is lacking a real revolutionary feature.


    I honestly believe if all those things were fixed and or adjusted, we'd still be given loads of people posting that it's the same game. So I'll need to respectfully disagree.

    The reason a lot of people are saying that this is the same game is because they can't believe EA is charging $80 for a deluxe edition of it. Neither can I.

    When I first played the technical test, I went straight to 3's. The menu was 95% the same. The little music melody is the same. The way it loads is the same. The outdoor rink looks the same. The crowd looks the same. The opening of loot bags is the same. The mid-game stats are the same. I can go on and on.

    It feels like you're mocking people that think it's the same, but it is literally that. Like, it's right in front of your eyes.
  • VeNOM2099
    3178 posts Member
    edited September 4
    B_Bunny wrote: »
    B-Bunny wrote: »
    They want a revolutionary addition every year. The analogs moving your hockey stick. EASHL. HUT. To be fair, it's been a while since something brand new really stuck and wow'd everyone.

    That's just not true.

    People want things that have plagued this franchise for years to be fixed / brought back.

    It's not revolutionary to ask that we see something other than a helicopter or the very top of section 300 after every. single. whistle. It's literally been like this for 3 or 4 years now.

    It's not revolutionary to ask that in a game that involves 12 other people - 1 person should NOT be allowed to pause the game (even if it's only once and only for 30 seconds). When you play 4 or 5 games a night, that's potentially 5 minutes of just staring at a crowd with a black box that says 'waiting for users to resume'. When you combine the atrocity that is the menu system... it's painful to play more than 1 game.

    It's not revolutionary to ask that CPU players recognize basic plays such as 2-on-1 or 3-on-2 and get in to scoring position rather than blindly going to 'cover' for a player that's a few pixels out of the position they're supposed to be in.

    It's not revolutionary to ask for the ability to have teams in franchise mode controlled by remote humans. Especially considering it was built-in to a previous edition. (again, for those who want to parrot EA's line of 'nobody played it' - the popularity of a mode depends entirely on its usability; which the first GM Connected mode performed terribly)

    It's not revolutionary to ask that people who abuse mechanics such as LT have it nerfed without impacting other elements of the game; ie: Reducing backskating speed en masse versus reducing backskating speed if you have the puck.

    These aren't revolutionary asks. And anyone who's played the NHL21 technical test will likely tell you a lot of these changes are what you'd see from a patch - which makes you wonder why they would refuse to fix these things earlier in NHL20's release cycle.

    Now, I understand that some of the changes required work to be done on the engine - things that aren't easy (or damn near impossible) to 'patch' in. Of course, I also keep in mind that although some things could be fixed with a patch, marketing would rather the team hold on to those changes in order for them to market the next game - especially if the next game is lacking a real revolutionary feature.


    I honestly believe if all those things were fixed and or adjusted, we'd still be given loads of people posting that it's the same game. So I'll need to respectfully disagree.

    IF... If wishes were fishes, the World would be an Ocean.
  • jrago73 wrote: »
    jrago73 wrote: »
    I think to most people "just the same" means they still didn't address all the things you have wanted fixed over the years, such as glitch goals.

    'glitch goals' don't exist. Goals that come at the result of incorrectly playing the defensive meta can seem like 'glitch goals' but the reality is that good players know how to expose those who poorly play the meta and it can seem like you're getting the same goals scored on you all the time.

    That said, the NHL 21 technical test does feel 'just the same' with minor tweaks to poke check and the new dekes.

    I understand that it's not a true representation of the final build, but the lack of seeing anything new in terms of camera angles, menu style, EASHL lobby options, etc makes it seem so incredibly stale.

    Argue semantics all you want, in the NHL there isn't a shot that has 80%-100% success rate and there are plenty of people who play the game that don't like it. Call it whatever you want.

    exactly. Finding a way to prevent an opponent from giving a glitch goal is no hockey. Unfortunately, EA itself promotes it as a great team of sports that can completely defend these situations. In that case, it's not hockey, but just another arcade called "how not to get out of the glitch goal E-sport" and that's unfortunately to be seen and 50% of the player for that reason EA loses every year.
  • Same responses from everyone as usual as per every year since god knows when.


    And as I say to everyone every year, if you dont like it go back and play 19, or 18 or 17 etc etc but no one does. Your expectations are through the roof every year.


    Gameplay is smoother, passing requires even more skill with your player more realistically having to pass the puck with more accuracy.

    Passing requires you to be facing or have very high probability for passes to more accurate. In the real nhl passing isnt very high and in this game it can get crazy.

    Everyone comes here to complain. Its better all ready then 20, I loved 20. Best game to date and Im sure 21 will continue the trend.

    Everyone forgets your also part of the top 15 active NHL users, take it down a few points and stop being so karenish.
    You must unlearn what you have learned!
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!