Quote:
Originally Posted by REDVAN
It's because average Joe's like you and me would be on the lower end of the scale. I'd be a 16/100 based on real life skillz.
But I agree that I haven't found a usefulness to the player type classification, other than it making coloured green/yellow/red bars for line combos!
|
i assume they got pressure from people that felt insulted by the low ratings they used to use. nhl 94 is still a great example of how big the scale used to be:
http://nhl94.com/html/teamprofile.php?team=OTT
the senators highest player was only a 61! and guys went all the way down to the 30's and 40's!
the player type is actually the most frustrating. i say that, because it allows EA to use it as a cop out. they have been parroting the talking point a lot this year about how your overall rating is based on the top rating someone can have for the player type. that sounds great as a b.s. way to differentiate between guys like crosby and ovechkin, but it doesn't hold up in general. goalies and D really don't have the widely varying types. and if they truly were using it, mike green would have to be a 99 OFD because of how he plays. but instead they still just deflect criticism and go on putting out these awful ratings.
i apologize again for the rant. this is something that has bothered be for a long time and it never changes.