Posted by graff on 4/1/2013 2:39:00 AM (view original):
I've gone through and re-read this thread and had responses for most of these posts, but in the end it's a waste of time. We're going to have to agree to disagree apparently.
It just sucks to see something with potential end up a hack job like it is.
I actually did an entire study on the average number of minutes played by real life NCAA starters vs. the amount of minutes played by WiS starters to show people, statistically, exactly how WiS is screwed up in this area, but posting it is pointless. Many seem to much rather enjoy the bliss of their ignorance or force themselves to suspend all concepts of reality and mold and shape themselves into this distorted WiS world until they can actually enjoy it.
You've got a game where height and positions DO NOT MATTER. That may be music to the ears of all the 5'8 computer programmer white guys out there, but it isn't based on ANYTHING resembling reality. I don't care how good your "LP" is, if you're 5'8 you're not posting up a guy who is 6'6. You're not even going to be able to receive a pass on the block. This is gameplay which can NEVER happen in real life.
You've got a game where Florida Gulf Coast is still D2. Notre Dame is in the Big 10. God only knows how many other incorrect teams/conferences there are. Is it the BIGGEST problem with the game? Far from it, but it just adds to the lack of realism. This is a part of the game which can NEVER happen in real life.
You've got a game where starters can only play 22-24 minutes a game unless you go slowdown/zone or they get too tired and play like crap, making 7-8 man rotations virtually impossible and forcing coaches to play 10 man rotations. Again I've got the data to back all this up. The fatigue/stamina system is jacked to crap and needs tweaked. Not thrown away. Not start over from scratch. Tweaked. As it is 99% of all coaches HAVE to play 10 man rotations. This is part of the game which can NEVER happen in real life (everybody having to have those types of rotations that is).
So no, I don't hate the game. This is my 4th go-round. I've tried it 3 times before and quit after 1 season each time because I just couldn't deal with it. We'll see if go #4 is any better, but judging by the tone of the forum responses I've gotten, probably not. So I'll probably be a 1 and done for the 4th time again.
Apparently some would rather stoop to calling me names or some weird attempt at looking at my WiS record (as if that means I understand the game of basketball or not) instead of just engaging in a dialogue with me about ways to improve the simulation so that's it's at least BASED on reality. Right now it isn't and I just gave 3 huge examples above (though there are more). If the game isn't going to be based on reality, then what's the point in even calling it basketball? It's all just a make believe numbers game with the word basketball in the title. Nothing more, nothing less. Could still be fun to play. Be my guest if that's all you want or what you enjoy. Just know that there ARE people like me out there who COULD enjoy this service if only it made some basketball sense.
It is based on
reality. I'm not sure based on means what you think it does. There have been, admittedly numerous, concessions to attempt to make the game fairer for all players. Height is already an aspect of the ratings*, so they claim, and as such I'm fine with it.
Not many 5'8" players have the LP skills to post anyone up that I am aware of (in HD I mean), and also, are you familiar with the bounce pass? And while 5'8 posting 6'6 might be exceedingly rare, shorter players sometimes can be successful posting larger players. I assume you have heard of Charles Barkley?
12 team conferences make scheduling much simpler and keep all coaches playing the same number and ratio of conference games (ie 2 vs division, 1 vs other division). It may not be perfect, but the majority of teams are in the right conferences. The constant shuffling of teams in real life makes the prospect of forcing strict adherence to reality a nightmare for this game, and I would have a very negative reaction to constant changes of HD conference makeup, especially if one or more of my teams were directly affected. Others have different opinions on this.
Teams can and do win national championships in HD with 8 man rotations. 10 man rotations are generally easier, and probably fairer, in that the elite teams (which have an advantage in recruiting, much as elite teams in reality do, although how it is expressed in HD is perhaps flawed) cannot just sign 8 great players and beat everyone else (at least not most of the time). It also adds an deeper level of team building as it is important not just to have 8-10 talented players, but 8-10 (or more) pieces that fit well together. A team made up of the best 8 SFs in a world might be pretty good, but I wouldn't expect them to win titles.
There are a number of issues with this game. It is unlikely that they will ever be fixed given what I have seen over my time playing it. I am willing to accept that, while still trying to push for improvement in key areas (I don't feel player height, conference affiliation or even fatigue are in the top 10 of things that are important to "fix"). While I do admire the passion with which you make your case I am put off by your overall tone. That is my opinion.
*From developer chat May 4, 2010
: Will a 7'0" C with 70 LP have an easier time scoring than a 6'4" C with a 70 LP? "With all other ratings being equal" I was told before that height didn't have an effect it was just the ratings. (utvol4life - All-Star - 2:37 PM)
I think the only adjustment that could be made is to account for extreme differences in height. In general, the rating accounts for their height. So you can look at your example like this: the 7'0" player may only be a 50 LP if he were 6'6" instead.