Ratings system

by **twolvesguy** on Mon Sep 19, 2005 4:54 am

can someone explain them to me? I know they have changed

by **pierralban** on Mon Sep 19, 2005 4:59 am

yep, that's weird, Jerome Moïso is 68 !

by **CERVANTES** on Mon Sep 19, 2005 6:38 am

Well, the basic ratings have the same format, but the overalls have another formulas and another scale. Now they're 50-99, instead of 0-99. But don't try to convert new overals into old format, because now it gives more value to other aspects and all that.

by **D_George_3** on Mon Sep 19, 2005 8:31 am

Lets just say the ratings are like NBA Live 2003 of all the ESPN Games...

Which I dont...like...

by **hipn** on Mon Sep 19, 2005 8:44 am

yea...dotn get it

by **Air Jordon** on Mon Sep 19, 2005 8:46 am

hipn wrote:yea...dotn get it

THE PLAYERS ARE RATED 50-99 INSTEAD OF 0-99. WHAT DONT YOU GET???

by **hipn** on Mon Sep 19, 2005 8:49 am

so players cant be rated 49? that sucks...

by **Laxation** on Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:14 am

wats wrong with having 50-99? who gives a shit if you cant get 49... 49 sucks anyway

by **twolvesguy** on Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:38 am

Laxation wrote:wats wrong with having 50-99? who gives a shit if you cant get 49... 49 sucks anyway

That's the thing. It will be tougher to figure out who sucks and who doesn't.

by **Air Jordon** on Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:41 am

if you watch nba then you should probly know who sucks and who doesnt.

by **twolvesguy** on Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:46 am

True, True.....

by **hipn** on Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:47 am

Well do you want Arujo (from the Raptors) to be rated 55? or somewhere in the 50s, bcause to me he seems like a 30-40

by **Air Jordon** on Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:14 am

get this straigt....a 30-40 is a 50-60 in the new game.....just like most 62 are 72 in the new game and so on......it doesnt mean he is better in the new game.

by **Laxation** on Mon Sep 19, 2005 11:34 am

it will take no time at all to get used to it - just look at the rest of their stats to even it all out

will be weird having shaq with 50 3-point though lol

by **hipn** on Mon Sep 19, 2005 12:21 pm

i think the rating system is for overall ratings not shooting and steeling ratings...and etc

by **Laxation** on Mon Sep 19, 2005 12:34 pm

they must be related in some way though

by **Wormy10** on Mon Sep 19, 2005 1:03 pm

The 7th Number wrote:if you watch nba then you should probly know who sucks and who doesnt.

Yea if you watch the NBA you should know but not everyone watches it
I myself only watch highlights which is more than enough for me to figure out who is good and who isnt, but some people dont watch it at all and play the game, or at least dont watch it much

by **Laxation** on Mon Sep 19, 2005 1:47 pm

Wormy10 wrote:
The 7th Number wrote:if you watch nba then you should probly know who sucks and who doesnt.

Yea if you watch the NBA you should know but not everyone watches it
I myself only watch highlights which is more than enough for me to figure out who is good and who isnt, but some people dont watch it at all and play the game, or at least dont watch it much

its hard if you dont live in america... oh how i wish for nba tv in aus...

by **fgrep15** on Mon Sep 19, 2005 1:57 pm

I don't know why they changed it, 0-99 was the best, not everyone is 50 good at something, for example rebounding, many PG's have like 0-5 in something like offensive rebounding.

by **Anthony15** on Mon Sep 19, 2005 3:05 pm

I don't know if they did change it from 0-99 to 50-99, but the pics at operation sports is just a beta version, and nobody knows wether it will be 50-99 or 0-99. (I hope it will be 0-99)

by **Malfa** on Mon Sep 19, 2005 3:29 pm

hipn wrote:Well do you want Arujo (from the Raptors) to be rated 55? or somewhere in the 50s, bcause to me he seems like a 30-40

Rofl, he's rated like 63 in NBA Live 2006.

by **beau_boy04** on Mon Sep 19, 2005 3:48 pm

I think they should eliminate the overall rating and just based the players on the other categories. By doing so, it'd take care of all the people making thread about why player A is 98 and player B is 97 when B is better than A and such. I think they should have a Importance rating in replacement of the overall rating.

by **CERVANTES** on Mon Sep 19, 2005 5:09 pm

0-99 is for "inside ratings", like steal, block and all that.
50-99 system is for overalls.

by **Matt** on Mon Sep 19, 2005 7:02 pm

even if the ratings are 50-99 on everything then it doesn't matter. With a block rating of 50 you aint gonna block shit, you aint gonna make a shot and it'll take you half the day to move from one side of the court to the other.

those who played Live 2000 won't have any problems getting aclimated.

by **MaD_hAND1e** on Mon Sep 19, 2005 7:53 pm

man... this ratings stuff should just be taken at face value.... if anyone does economics here... its just the difference between nominal and real variables..... they will play crap if they have a low rating regardless if they are rated 30 in the 05 system, or 50 in the 06 system, means the same thing.

Ratings system

Ratings system

Who is online