Posted by mccarthyizm on 11/16/2013 5:05:00 AM (view original):
What possible benefit was there to changing the core attributes for some of the positions? As somebody trying to get back into this game, I find these changes arbitrary and confusing, especially since I'm already deep into recruiting. What was the reasoning behind changing these?
I have found that most of the attributes we have are "arbitrary and confusing". Why they came up with traits such as "Athleticism, elusiveness, technique, hands" initially and not used something a little more straightforward as - "passing, catching, running, defending (as for the pass)" to go along with blocking and tackling - is amazing to me. They wouldn't need to worry about position changes because if you have a player who can't run or catch or tackle etc in one position, he wouldn't be able to do that in another position. The plain ol' speed, strength, stamina attributes are self explanatory. Game instinct and formation IQ are important for everyone across the board and easy to apply as + / - to attributes in different situations.
Really, if they wanted to develop a game where the outcome was dependent on the outcome of differences of player attributes, they could have done it very easily. Instead we have had to endure almost 5 years now of game programmers, who really have no clue on how to create a game that is scaleable, easily understood by the novice, but can be sophisticated enough for the true in-depth gamer. (Oriole - you get a partial punt because the jury is still out for you, but the longer you take the more this fits you also).