NHL 09 Preview

[ianlast]

Quote: Originally Posted by baa7

I've been doing that with NHL 08. When I have an hour, I take one team and lower the ratings of most players all the way down to the minimum (50). The few stars on the team I lower ratings here and there, but not as much. HUGE difference in the gameplay. The thing is, it also fixes some aspects of the programming. For example, the CPU doesn't pass tape-to-tape all the time. Plus scrubs have a tough time scoring on the higher difficulty levels, which doesn't happen with default ratings. I'm thinking of doing this with NHL 09 and making a roster available, the game plays so much more realistically IMO.

Interesting...so does this make it possible to play 15-20 minute periods with realistic stats?

[ianlast]

Quote: Originally Posted by Splitter77

i remember there were players ranked in the 30s in nhl 92 and 93 for sega. Thats why those games were so damn good.

Haha, so true. Shawn Chambers rating of 1 overall in NHL 93 FTW.

Seriously, though, my guess is that fringe players being rated 70-75 overall (as opposed to 30-40 overall back in the day) is an NHLPA thing, they probably don't think it's great for the image of their members to have them rated that low. Just speculation, but it seems logical.

[bigwill33]

Quote: Originally Posted by ianlast

Haha, so true. Shawn Chambers rating of 1 overall in NHL 93 FTW. Seriously, though, my guess is that fringe players being rated 70-75 overall (as opposed to 30-40 overall back in the day) is an NHLPA thing, they probably don't think it's great for the image of their members to have them rated that low. Just speculation, but it seems logical.

I think it is just the way ratings work now. I mean a player that is a 62 and in the minors is pretty close to a 30 back then. Players that are about 70 and in the NHL on these games would probably be rated in the 50's back then.

So that means the gap between 95 and 62 is probably roughly equal to the gap between 99 and 30 back in the early days of the series. It is just how they have tweaked the ratings over the years that makes it look different.

On the scale they use now a player rated in the 30's couldn't even be on the same ice as the 90+ players, it would just be cheese city and no fun to anyone.

[ianlast]

Quote: Originally Posted by bigwill33

On the scale they use now a player rated in the 30's couldn't even be on the same ice as the 90+ players, it would just be cheese city and no fun to anyone.

True enough...but one of the things I loved about NHLPA '93 is that, if you had some plug rated in the 30s or 20s (the then-expansion Lightning and Sens had several in the 10s and single-digits ) out on the ice, you were forced to play more conservatively. You knew Mike Peluso and Link Gaetz would never score, so your best bet was to just hang back with these guys, and maybe pick some fights.

With NHL 08, for all its great gameplay, I just never get that feeling. I play with the Wild alot, and I never feel that having Derek Boogaard out on the ice is a liability (which it is in real life). Heck, I've even scored some goals with him, just parking his fat *** in front of the net and feeding him a one-timer. In real life, Derek Boogaard is too ungainly to even keep up with the play and get in a position like this, much less fire off a onetime shot.

[catcatch22]

See in my opinion ratings are not the problem, defense is. In all sports video games besides basketball and baseball. Defense in relation to time is not accurate. Defense is alot easier to play in Hockey for a NHL player than offense is. However in almost every hockey game I have played no one has made it that way for sake of keeping people from having to play 20 minute periods to score at a normal rate.

The only thing that needs to be adjusted for hockey games is to make the players play better defensively and be worst offensively. However it's offense that sells.

When you watch a game and see a highlight reel offensive move or pinpoint accurate pass lead to a scoring opportunity, it happens in a sea of several many possesions. In Football and Hockey games the possesions needed for success offensively is far less.

In the old days there just wasn't much moves offensively you could do and defense was much easier to play. Most players were rated strictly based on offense.

Now the games give the offense so high an advantage to give reaslistc results and scores in less time than a full 60 minute game in football or hockey.

Too many players are rated to high offensively and too low defensively.

[RealmK]

Quote: Originally Posted by catcatch22

See in my opinion ratings are not the problem, defense is. In all sports video games besides basketball and baseball. Defense in relation to time is not accurate. Defense is alot easier to play in Hockey for a NHL player than offense is. However in almost every hockey game I have played no one has made it that way for sake of keeping people from having to play 20 minute periods to score at a normal rate. The only thing that needs to be adjusted for hockey games is to make the players play better defensively and be worst offensively. However it's offense that sells. When you watch a game and see a highlight reel offensive move or pinpoint accurate pass lead to a scoring opportunity, it happens in a sea of several many possesions. In Football and Hockey games the possesions needed for success offensively is far less. In the old days there just wasn't much moves offensively you could do and defense was much easier to play. Most players were rated strictly based on offense. Now the games give the offense so high an advantage to give reaslistc results and scores in less time than a full 60 minute game in football or hockey. Too many players are rated to high offensively and too low defensively.

Great post Cat. and I agree 100%. I expect the focus on defensive tools this year should make it easier to play defense on the whole, but I suspect that if the devs did something along the lines of making passes connecting much harder, a more looseness of the puck that can hop over sticks and make passing less tape to tape on the whole. It would make getting quality scoring chances that much harder.

Its a fine line to cross trying to appeal to the casual base that makes up a majority of your sales who would hate the game that way, and us sim players who would relish it. I'd love to see them do it through sliders or at least have slider settings that really make a difference pending on which end of the bar its set to. Something like setting pass accuracy to zero would make it very difficult to make crisp passes when teammates aren't in open ice, as opposed to setting it on say 5 or 6 would add that magnetic puck to stick property for the casual guys that just want to play to score or what not.

Though you are right, its much more difficult to carry over all the neuance's of real life hockey to the video game equivalent than it is some other sports.

[ianlast]

Quote: Originally Posted by RealmK

Its a fine line to cross trying to appeal to the casual base that makes up a majority of your sales who would hate the game that way, and us sim players who would relish it. I'd love to see them do it through sliders or at least have slider settings that really make a difference pending on which end of the bar its set to. Something like setting pass accuracy to zero would make it very difficult to make crisp passes when teammates aren't in open ice, as opposed to setting it on say 5 or 6 would add that magnetic puck to stick property for the casual guys that just want to play to score or what not.

In this day and age of sports gaming, it still amazes me that there are no games that optimize the gameplay to suit period/quarter length.

I know that you can't capture all the nuances of a 20 minute hockey game in video game form...but it can't be that hard to create gameplay that will deliver realistic stats and a gameplay flow that is appropriate for the corresponding period length. In NHL 08, for instance:

5 minute periods: Basically, the default sliders. These tend to give very realistic stats for 5 minutes periods (save for the number of penalties called, they would have to make it much more sensitive in order to see the average 8-9 penalties called per game). Perfect for those who want a quick, arcadish style of game.

10 minute periods: Look no further than Catch's sliders. These give extremely realistic numbers and overall gameplay flow for 10 minute periods. Only problem is hits, which tend to be a bit overdone (I usually have an average of about 45 hits/game on these sliders, CPU about the same, it should be more like 25). Simply develop more ways to jar the puck loose and make puck battles a bigger part of the game, and this problem disappears. Also, penalties would have to be more sensitive than they are currently with the slider maxed out.

15 minute periods: Catch's sliders are good for overall game flow on 15. The tweaks would be in the areas that everyone has already discussed, namely: a) no more tape-to-tape passing b) no more insane puck retention by the CPU in the offensive zone, actually make it possible to engage the CPU in puck battles along the boards c) loosen up the overall puck retention by all but the very best stickhandlers.

20 minute periods are still very much a pipe dream, unless you consciously play a sim style on lower difficulty and purposely pass up scoring opportunities.

What frustrates me the most is that game developers obviously have the ability to work these nuances out. For instance, almost all NBA games nowadays, with minor slider tweaks, will deliver realistic FG%, FG attempts, and point scored on 12 minute quarters...why is it that we almost have to reprogram the game to get realistic foul totals and fewer dunks in traffic? Madden '05 delivered extremely realistic gameplay for 15 min quarters, accelerated clock...why did things as simple as a fatigue bug and non-existant PI calls have to mar this?

I realize sports game developers are always trying to pander to non-sport gamers as well as their harcore followers, so it's always a balance...but how many newbie sports gamers will reject a game for reasons like "there's not enough hits", or "there's barely any dunks"?

Anyway, my mini-rant is complete...all I can say is, it's great to be out of the dark days of NHL on the CG consoles

[Splitter77]

I understand the periods cant be changed by minutes again this year.
How about playoff and season mode?
Is that in the game this season?

[mkharsh33]

ea sports...if it's in the game its...

[Money99]

Quote: Originally Posted by ianlast

True enough...but one of the things I loved about NHLPA '93 is that, if you had some plug rated in the 30s or 20s (the then-expansion Lightning and Sens had several in the 10s and single-digits ) out on the ice, you were forced to play more conservatively. You knew Mike Peluso and Link Gaetz would never score, so your best bet was to just hang back with these guys, and maybe pick some fights. With NHL 08, for all its great gameplay, I just never get that feeling. I play with the Wild alot, and I never feel that having Derek Boogaard out on the ice is a liability (which it is in real life). Heck, I've even scored some goals with him, just parking his fat *** in front of the net and feeding him a one-timer. In real life, Derek Boogaard is too ungainly to even keep up with the play and get in a position like this, much less fire off a onetime shot.

That's one area that NHL2K8 blows 08 out of the water.
Skating with a no-talent goon, compared to someone like Gaborik is night and day. It forces you to play a completely different style when lesser players are on the ice.

And I believe I did read somewhere that the PA has blocked any NHL player from being rated a certain mark.